Romance is over
13/2/20 20:02![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
fridi posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsThe latest escalation in Syria puts some important questions. Idlib is again a bloody battlefield, and this time Turkey is heavily involved, funding the Syrian rebels very generously, while Russia is firmly behind Assad. And we thought these two regional powers were supposed to be friends now?
While Putin's buddy Assad is pressing hard on Idlib, Erdogan has sent dozens of trucks and other vehicles to the nearby keypoint of Saraqib. Turkey already has 12 outposts around Idlib, but had remained mostly passive while Assad's forces were advancing north. All Erdogan did was rant that Russia wasn't honoring their agreement to avoid escalation. But earlier this week the inevitable happened, and Assad's forces reached the Turkish positions, and opened fire. A few Turkish troops were dead and injured, then the Turks returned fire.
Now, exactly how many casualties the two sides have given, is a matter of debate. The Turkish minister of defense says they've "neutralized" 76 Syrian troops, while Erdogan earlier mentioned 35. The official Syrian media denies any casualties. You never know with that "Truth" at war-time. What matters is, Turkey is no longer passive. Erdogan, in his typical belligerent style, is promising Assad's forces will "pay a heavy price" of their impudence. One'd think Syria had invaded Turkey, not the other way around.
All of this is putting the Putin-Erdogan relations in another hot spot. These two are geostrategic partners (for the time being), but they're also supporting opposite camps in this fight. Their partnership was doomed to come to this point. So far they've mostly shared desire to avoid direct confrontation, and limit the US influence in the region. Also, their military and energy cooperation (military trade deals, the S-400 systems purchase, and the joint gas pipelines).
As for this particular incident, there's some discrepancy in the two sides' reports. While Turkey claims they had warned the Russians about their takeover of Saqarib, the Russians deny this. Erdogan insists again and again that Russia should honor their part of the deal, and that Idlib is part of the deal too. He also says Putin should stop supporting Assad, which I'm sure you know is not gonna happen.
Still, it'd be premature to conclude the dialogue is broken, since the two foreign ministers are apparently still keeping their line open. Negotiations about regulating the Syrian conflict are still ongoing, and Idlib of course takes a central part in those talks.
The way I'm reading the situation, Turkey seems kinda willing to accept the takeover of Idlib by the Assad-loyalist forces, but I only mean the city of Idlib, not the entire province. That area is key to Erdogan's plans for controlling his souther borders, in part because the local population won't have any other option but to flee north, towards the Turkish border. And Turkey has already accepted over 3.5 million Syrian refugees, whom it wants to return to Syria. Erdogan is now talking of resettling at least 1 million of those Syrians back south.
In turn, Russia has always pursued the same strategy about Turkey. As Assad's forces advance, they'll then negotiate a ceasefire so that Turkey won't quit the negotiations process, then a bit later Assad will resume the offensive, and push Turkey back behind the initial line. But now that Russia is treading on a thin line, trying to balance between Turkey and Syria, and de-escalate things between them, this plan may not work. The Russian and Turkish intelligence services are sharing intel between themselves. Turkey has pressured the Kurdish militias in North-East Syria, ultimately making Russia and Turkey decide to split up the region between themselves. So Assad may not regain control over the entire Syrian territory after all. Not that he'd insist on it, come to think of it.
So the Russian-Turkish partnership still looks necessary for the two sides, and we shouldn't fully discount it. Syria is just a showscreen for a wider alliance that was initiated between Putin and Erdogan in January, starting with the launching of the Turk Stream. Still, Russia will have to work with silk gloves here, and de-escalate the situation quickly enough if it doesn't want things to get out of control and its plans to fail. Russia seems split between their desire to quickly take over the Idlib province, and to maintain friendly relations with Turkey.
It's notable that almost half a decade has passed since the last serious incident between Turkey and Russia. Remember the Su-24 jet that was downed by two Turksh F16s back in November 2015? Months of tensions followed, and then, a quick warming-up. These two have a lot in common, like their hostility to the West. But things are never as simple as they seem. Let me just remind you that a few days ago, Erdogan reiterated that Turkey will not recognize the "illegal annexation of Crimea". All the while, his troops essentially occupying a broad strip inside a neighboring sovereign country. So there are lots of chess pieces at play here, and not all of them are moving in the same direction.
While Putin's buddy Assad is pressing hard on Idlib, Erdogan has sent dozens of trucks and other vehicles to the nearby keypoint of Saraqib. Turkey already has 12 outposts around Idlib, but had remained mostly passive while Assad's forces were advancing north. All Erdogan did was rant that Russia wasn't honoring their agreement to avoid escalation. But earlier this week the inevitable happened, and Assad's forces reached the Turkish positions, and opened fire. A few Turkish troops were dead and injured, then the Turks returned fire.
Now, exactly how many casualties the two sides have given, is a matter of debate. The Turkish minister of defense says they've "neutralized" 76 Syrian troops, while Erdogan earlier mentioned 35. The official Syrian media denies any casualties. You never know with that "Truth" at war-time. What matters is, Turkey is no longer passive. Erdogan, in his typical belligerent style, is promising Assad's forces will "pay a heavy price" of their impudence. One'd think Syria had invaded Turkey, not the other way around.
All of this is putting the Putin-Erdogan relations in another hot spot. These two are geostrategic partners (for the time being), but they're also supporting opposite camps in this fight. Their partnership was doomed to come to this point. So far they've mostly shared desire to avoid direct confrontation, and limit the US influence in the region. Also, their military and energy cooperation (military trade deals, the S-400 systems purchase, and the joint gas pipelines).
As for this particular incident, there's some discrepancy in the two sides' reports. While Turkey claims they had warned the Russians about their takeover of Saqarib, the Russians deny this. Erdogan insists again and again that Russia should honor their part of the deal, and that Idlib is part of the deal too. He also says Putin should stop supporting Assad, which I'm sure you know is not gonna happen.
Still, it'd be premature to conclude the dialogue is broken, since the two foreign ministers are apparently still keeping their line open. Negotiations about regulating the Syrian conflict are still ongoing, and Idlib of course takes a central part in those talks.
The way I'm reading the situation, Turkey seems kinda willing to accept the takeover of Idlib by the Assad-loyalist forces, but I only mean the city of Idlib, not the entire province. That area is key to Erdogan's plans for controlling his souther borders, in part because the local population won't have any other option but to flee north, towards the Turkish border. And Turkey has already accepted over 3.5 million Syrian refugees, whom it wants to return to Syria. Erdogan is now talking of resettling at least 1 million of those Syrians back south.
In turn, Russia has always pursued the same strategy about Turkey. As Assad's forces advance, they'll then negotiate a ceasefire so that Turkey won't quit the negotiations process, then a bit later Assad will resume the offensive, and push Turkey back behind the initial line. But now that Russia is treading on a thin line, trying to balance between Turkey and Syria, and de-escalate things between them, this plan may not work. The Russian and Turkish intelligence services are sharing intel between themselves. Turkey has pressured the Kurdish militias in North-East Syria, ultimately making Russia and Turkey decide to split up the region between themselves. So Assad may not regain control over the entire Syrian territory after all. Not that he'd insist on it, come to think of it.
So the Russian-Turkish partnership still looks necessary for the two sides, and we shouldn't fully discount it. Syria is just a showscreen for a wider alliance that was initiated between Putin and Erdogan in January, starting with the launching of the Turk Stream. Still, Russia will have to work with silk gloves here, and de-escalate the situation quickly enough if it doesn't want things to get out of control and its plans to fail. Russia seems split between their desire to quickly take over the Idlib province, and to maintain friendly relations with Turkey.
It's notable that almost half a decade has passed since the last serious incident between Turkey and Russia. Remember the Su-24 jet that was downed by two Turksh F16s back in November 2015? Months of tensions followed, and then, a quick warming-up. These two have a lot in common, like their hostility to the West. But things are never as simple as they seem. Let me just remind you that a few days ago, Erdogan reiterated that Turkey will not recognize the "illegal annexation of Crimea". All the while, his troops essentially occupying a broad strip inside a neighboring sovereign country. So there are lots of chess pieces at play here, and not all of them are moving in the same direction.
(no subject)
Date: 13/2/20 19:27 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 13/2/20 20:41 (UTC)If you looked at my Twitter feed, and it was the only source of news you had, you would quickly come to the conclusion that the UK and the US had been victims of a coup d'etat accomplished through the ballot box. But, alas, this is the nature of democracy. Given that we've lost, we have to hold on to those things which are important. In the UK's case Human Rights (the agreement for which we were instrumental in drafting) and in the US's the Constitution.
The Yanks have already thrown the bits of the Constitution that Trump didn't like under a bus. What's an emolument clause or two between chums, after all. And in the UK, we are about to repudiate the Court of Human Rights.
We know where we are; and if we don't we're deluding ourselves. The best place to be now is sitting next to a huge pile of money in a stable banking environment. It helps if you are definitely white and male, obvs. Otherwise we just plough on; the furrow getting deeper.