Turkey, Syria and Reality
Some geostrategic basics.
1) Syria has one of the largest ballistic missile forces in the Middle East, has had a chemical weapons program for years, and a biotechnical infrastructure capable of supporting bioweapon development.
2) There's a 900-km border between Turkey and Syria. This little-reported news item makes it perfectly clear why Turkey has no interest in a breakdown of state authority in Syria:
Seven suspected members of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, were killed in clashes with the Turkish military and explosives have been seized in a southern province on Friday, Anatolia news agency quoted officials as saying.
Acting on a tip-off that members of the PKK had sneaked in from neighboring Syria, the soldiers confronted the group in a rural area in the eastern Mediterranean province of Hatay, the agency reported.
3) There are 1.4 million Kurds in Syria. There have been severe Kurdish uprisings in Turkey lately.
4) Bilateral trade between Syria and Turkey expanded 43 percent last year. It's now worth 2.5 billion dollars.
5) The AKP's power base does not like losing money.
6) Turkish investments in Libya have just been incinerated.
In other words, the only potential upside, for Turkey, to instability in Syria exists in a fairy-tale world in which Foreign Minister Davutoğlu manages to persuade Assad to enact "reforms" and everything just sort of works out happily ever after. That won't happen. It's far too late. It's either the continuation of this monstrous Hama-rules crackdown (which will lead to some kind of immiserated stability for a little while) or that whole state is going to go centrifugal. The latter is incredibly dangerous for Turkey. So is the former, but the danger can be pushed into the future a while longer. Which leads to:
7) There's an election coming up on June 12. A danger that can be pushed into the future is vastly preferable, to a party trying to win reelection, to an immediate one.
In other words, the idea that Turkey would work seriously, at this point, against this crackdown just makes no sense.
However, if it really wished to do so, it has a weapon no one else has. It's completely within Turkey's power to choke off the water from the Euphrates. The weapon has been used to great effect before.
In 1989, when President Assad increased his support for the PKK, Turkey turned off the water flow to Syria and Iraq under the pretext it needs 30 days to fill the Ataturk Lake and test the dam. The move prompted urgent meetings in London between high level Baghdad and Damascus officials to take urgent measure to confront Turkey. ... On the advice from Foreign Office officials who spoke to the Iraq and Syrian officials and backed by the Americans, Turkey let the water flow again after two weeks in fear of war breaking out with Syria and Iraq uniting to confront the water threat.
But don't hold your breath. No one doubts that a dying regime like Assad's is a dangerous one, and it has enough missiles to turn Ankara into a parking lot.
- Comment (14)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: Turkey, Syria and Reality
And yet, in this case shooting missiles at Ankara results in a real show of NATO blow back, something NATO esteem may need with that ongoing bungle-rama in Libya.
With a little luck, Iran would intercede on behalf of Syria, and then the only ingredient missing to this 32 year in the making showdown is the American people hiring a competent President. (I learned that whole respect for the Presidency thing from the Teddy during the W years.)
Edited on Apr 26, 2011 at 12:45amRe: Turkey, Syria and Reality
Speaking as someone who lives in range of those missiles, I'm praying for the news that a drone has picked off Qaddafi. Never has NATO needed at least that much credibility more.
Re: Turkey, Syria and Reality
Sisyphus: And yet, in this case shooting missiles at Ankara results in a real show of NATO blow back, something NATO esteem may need with that ongoing bungle-rama in Libya.
With a little luck, Iran would intercede on behalf of Syria, and then the only ingredient missing to this 32 year in the making showdown is the American people hiring a competent President. (I learned that whole respect for the Presidency thing from the Teddy during the W years.) · Apr 26 at 12:40am
Edited on Apr 26 at 12:45 am
Did you mean, "a little bad luck?" Because otherwise, you're salivating a bit too much at a scenario that would in all likelihood see millions of people in this region killed (including two Ricochet contributors and no doubt hundreds of thousands of American troops). What you've outlined is pretty close to the worst-case scenario.
Jun '10
Re: Turkey, Syria and Reality
It's fascinating, that for a nation like Syria, or Iran, being well-armed against other nations, with missiles and WMD, is also the best way to guarantee that your brutal suppression of popular domestic revolts (using rifles and clubs to kill protesters) can proceed without interference. "Move along World--nothing to see here." They make the price of military interference just too high.
Jun '10
Re: Turkey, Syria and Reality
I recently read about an open commemoration of the 1915 round up of Armenians, something of a difficult subject in Turkey, I believe. Adding this to their Kurdish troubles, how likely are these groups and others to take advantage of the events in West Asia and North Africa to violently advance their causes?
Re: Turkey, Syria and Reality
Exactly.
Feb '11
Re: Turkey, Syria and Reality
Re: Turkey, Syria and Reality
There was a lot of open commemoration and discussion, interesting to see.
I can't imagine any group other than the PKK posing a sustained, violent challenge to the state--but that threat is very real.
Mar '11
Re: Turkey, Syria and Reality
It seems to me that any successor regime to the Assads will need Turkey more than he did, if it distances itself from Iran, at least in the short term, because of Iran's support for the present Syrian regime. As long as Turkey does not appear to be supporting Assad, that is. It's certainly tricky but possible for Turkey not to intervene too openly in favor of the Syrian rebels so that Assad does not end up lobbing his missiles towards Ankara (which I don;t think he would do unless Turkey invades militarily) and still reap the benefits if a regime less friendly towards Iran assumes power in Syria.
Re: Turkey, Syria and Reality
Wait wait wait ... how are you getting from here to that successor regime? There are so many flashpoints between "here" and "successor regime" that no one can contemplate it without ... what's the word in diplomatic language? "Concern?" And don't forget, the alternative to Assad is not necessarily a regime "less friendly to Iran." Iran has already pretty much declared that its border extends to the southern border of Lebanon; it's not as if it hesitates to take advantage of instability in this region on the grounds that it respects democracy and self-determination, is it?
Don't construe this, by the way, as my offering any kind of support for Assad's regime. Nothing would give me more pleasure than to see Assad squeezed like a mouse in a python's grip from every side. I'm just pointing out the constraints and the risks.
Mar '11
Re: Turkey, Syria and Reality
Syria, unlike, say, Egypt or Tunisia, has been decidedly anti-Western, which offers a ray of optimism that any successor regime may be a more agreeable one. Same as Libya, although the situation there is sufficiently muddled to be unreadable.All I am saying is that Turkey has an opportunity to assert its dominance as a regional power, with Iran being the other main contender for the title, by supporting, albeit not openly, the Syrian rebels.
Aug '10
Re: Turkey, Syria and Reality
Wonder what Saad Hariri is thinking about now ..pretty sure he is in Europe buying something,being safe, and wondering whether a world without Assad will better or worse for Lebanon. What do you think, the devil we know.....?
Mar '11
Re: Turkey, Syria and Reality
Hopefully, Jimmy Carter 1.0 and the Elders will follow the road to Damascus, on their way back from North Korea - then Ricochet contributers and hundreds of thousands of American troops will be safe.
If that fails, we have Jimmy Carter 2.0 leading from the rear.
Oh, and that Python around Assad's neck is Monty Python.
Edited on Apr 26, 2011 at 5:13amJul '10
Re: Turkey, Syria and Reality
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
Did you mean, "a little bad luck?" Because otherwise, you're salivating a bit too much at a scenario that would in all likelihood see millions of people in this region killed (including two Ricochet contributors and no doubt hundreds of thousands of American troops). What you've outlined is pretty close to the worst-case scenario.
First point, like any civilized person, I would like things to shake out peacebly.
Second, I don't see it playing out quite as bloodily as you make it, largely because the history of the region is brinksmanship and backstabbing. Israel and Kuwait have been the exception because they are small. And the Iran-Iraq War was a Cold War freak where local tensions combined with weak global power alignments.
Third, it may be the best possible outcome in the current climate assuming 1) Iran cannot do worse than a dirty bomb yet and 2) Israel is not pressed into actually exercising their nuclear option. It could give the West an opportunity to take decisive action against Iran's nuclear program and forestall a far greater catastrophe down the road.
Premature hostilities are not the worst case we are facing.
Edited on Apr 26, 2011 at 6:26pm