الخميس , 17 أكتوبر 2019

العدد:2268 تاريخ:17/10/2019
Home » Article » Iran – Turkey & Syria – Iraq bilateral

Dotting the I’S & Crossing the T’S Iran – Turkey & Syria – Iraq bilateral  

يناير 10, 2017 نقاط على الحروف تكبير الخط + | تصغير الخط -

Written by Nasser Kandil,

After the decisive battle of Aleppo in the history of the Syrian war and maybe in the wars of the region, the Turkey – Iranian bilateral has met, but the victory was achieved by Iran. It is true that the Syrian army in the field was the basis in making victory with the participation of the allies at their forefront Hezbollah and the partners of the alliance with Syria and Iran. The Russian aircraft has played a decisive role in making the victory of Aleppo, but the conflict has reached to a point where there is no progress without resolving the regional critical front in the war of Syria, either Turkey or Iran, after the international critical resolving was in favor of Russia. When Turkey wins the Syrian country loses along with Hezbollah which the Turks want to put it in the opposite bank to the bank of Al Nusra front in order to make a barter between them in any forthcoming political solution, but when Iran wins the Syrian country wins by ensuring that the Syrian President is a red line in any settlement, and Hezbollah wins by making the legitimacy of its presence in Syria at the hand of the Syrian country not any other else.

Turkey tried to compensate the defeat in the war of Aleppo by making a victory in the settlement of Aleppo where it has played a role in withdrawing the militants from the city to the areas of Al Nusra or to the areas under the Turkish dominance, it has facilitated the access to an understanding that starts with a truce and ends with a political solution by presenting to Moscow an offer that includes its ability to grant the first international status of Moscow a legitimacy that cannot be presented by any other country in exchange of its moving to the position of the reference, not to be involved in the war or settlements, on the basis of resolving a Turkish position toward Al Nusra front as toward ISIS, and making the dispute over the Syrian presidency a Syrian Syrian affair, where Moscow is a neutral force. Tehran and Ankara are dividing on supporting a team and a logic, but making the dispute on the role of the Kurds a Turkish American dispute where Moscow is just observing it, but not taking a side in it, and making the dispute on Hezbollah a Turkish Iranian dispute that is proposed by Turkey under the title of the exit of the foreign militants.

Moscow has other considerations than Turkey, it waits taking over the responsibility of the administration by Donald Trump, so it needs this time to devote its status in the region, it is aware of Turkey’s deadlock and its readiness to do so, as it is aware of futility of the truce and Astana meeting regarding the two files of the war on terrorism, and the political settlement which Moscow has repeatedly said to forces as America, France, Turkey , and Saudi Arabia together that they cannot be achieved but under ensuring the leadership of the Syrian President. Ankara will not dismantle its relation with Al Nusra before the end of its role in Syria and resolving the Kurdish issue, both of these two issues are desired by Ankara from Washington and under its acceptance, so it will disable the search in the future of Al Nusra and raise the issue of Hezbollah till the start of the US Turkish search. It will keep a negative position toward the Syrian President in order to have a control over the widest gathering of the opposition as a powerful card; which it uses when the image becomes clear. Moscow is aware that Turkey will make use of the Kurdish title once, and the issue of ISIS many times as a plea for the incursion of its troops inside the Syrian territories, because having control on geography grants the force to negotiate. Moscow is sufficient with the outcomes resulted from leading the solution after leading the front of war, it keeps away from the debate but when a false speech is attributed to it that it did not say or did not approve, as joining Al Nusra to the truce or the acceptance to talk about the abandonment of the Syrian President or the legitimacy of Hezbollah, it responds, it has responded only once.

Turkey has accepted the defeat in Aleppo as an entry to determine its size, it is no longer has the desire to confront Russia as in two years ago, but now it wants to confront Iran. When there will be a serious search in the settlements after few months, it will find itself confronting Egypt and Saudi Arabia, because the first status in the region has been resolved in favor of Iran among the international players by America and Russia through signing the Iranian nuclear program, when Turkey was thinking of the Ottoman dreams and the Muslim Brotherhood’s illusions. Therefore the place which Turkey has to compete for is the seat of a parallel player to Iran in making the settlements from the Gulf to Syria, however it is a partner that Turkey cannot meet all of its requirements in Syria alone, so how in the confronting arenas ? Contrary to the Turkish intentions the position of the Kurds will be resolved as a partner in the coming settlement, as the issue of Al Nusra will be separated from any attempt of rapprochement by putting it in front of Hezbollah, after America which classifies Hezbollah as a terrorist organization said that it cannot deny the status which it occupies in the war on terrorism. As for the Syrian presidency the US Russian understanding before the arrival of Trump was clear from Kerry’s leaked words in New York Times when he was addressing the opposition to accept an electoral competition with the Syrian President as an only way for the settlement, while Trump is talking about the coordination with the Syrian country.

Syria, Iran, and Hezbollah put their importance in another place, they are alternating on recording the Turkish statements, the time which precedes the new US movement till Spring must witness resolving the exhausting areas in the Syrian geography especially the countryside of Damascus, the southern of Syria, and some rural areas of Hama and Homs especially Palmyra, as well as keeping the truce in the north to behold Turkey every violation directly. Moreover the preparation for a Syrian Iraqi bilateral that forms the Arab depth of the Levant and the Turkish neighborhood at the same time, where it consolidates in confronting the terrorism, coordinates its steps, and deals with the Turkish dimension according to common visions of the Muslim Brotherhood project and the Turkish tampering with ISIS and Al-Qaeda and their effect on the two countries, as well as the Turkish tampering in the Kurdish file by turning it into a Trojan horse for the military intervention once, and for threatening the unity of the two countries once again.

Syria and Iraq are a bilateral that based on facts; it develops whenever the interests meet, while Turkey and Iran are a bilateral that based on interests, it develops whenever the facts meet.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

 

Iran – Turkey & Syria – Iraq bilateral Reviewed by on . Written by Nasser Kandil, After the decisive battle of Aleppo in the history of the Syrian war and maybe in the wars of the region, the Turkey – Iranian bilater Written by Nasser Kandil, After the decisive battle of Aleppo in the history of the Syrian war and maybe in the wars of the region, the Turkey – Iranian bilater Rating:
scroll to top