Turkey is Losing Its Geostrategic Position Day by day

 

 

        Turkey is losing its geostrategic position day by day in the last two decades of the twenty-first century. What are the underlying reasons behind this? Why do the United States, Western countries, and Israel no longer consider Turkey as important today as they did in the twentieth century, even though Turkey was considered their spoiled child? Can the expansionist positions and policies of the Justice and Development Party and its leader Erdogan be considered reasons for the loss of this strategic position, or are there other reasons behind it? What are the changes that have occurred between the twentieth and twenty-first centuries? This is what we will analyze and evaluate in this analytical study.

Since Turkey connects Europe with Asia and serves as a transit point for energy resources to Europe, and is considered a model country to be emulated according to the claims of Western countries, the geo-economic importance of Turkey has emerged during the past century. This has allowed Turkey to maintain its geopolitical and geostrategic position over the past century, as well as has emerged its role as a key player that can be relied upon in spreading Western culture in the region.

Amid the discussions about opening an economic corridor between India, the Middle East, and Europe, Turkey’s opportunities of maintaining its geostrategic position in the 21st century may diminish. Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Salman officially announced this project in September 2023 during the G20 summit in India (India-Middle East-Europe Economic corridor (IMEC)). This corridor starts from India, passes through the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Israel, and from Israel across the sea reaches Europe. Turkey and Iran have been excluded from this project, and the war raging in Gaza is a result of this project. Turkish President Erdogan stated during the announcement of this project that it is impossible for this project to succeed without us. Additionally, Khalid Meshaal’s pray in Turkish mosques on October 7 during Hamas’ attack on Israel carries many meanings related to this issue.

If this corridor is opened between Israel and the Arab countries, it means that Israel and the Arab countries have reached an advanced level of reconciliation. There is no doubt that this reconciliation does not serve Iranian interests, because Israel’s reconciliation with the Arab countries means Iran losing the Palestinian card, which bothers Iran and causes it concern.

When one closely examines the positions and interactions of Western powers and America with Turkey, especially in the Syrian crisis after 2011, he will easily notice that the importance previously given to Turkey by those countries has significantly decreased in the second decade of the 21st century. Put aside the strong relationships and support that Turkey used to receive from those countries, because in recent years a large gap and rift have opened up between Turkey and the mentioned countries. Matters did not stop there, but reached the point of imposing sanctions on Turkey at times and declaring boycotts at other times.

To understand the changes that have occurred and are happening today, it is necessary to go back a little to the beginnings of the 20th century and the establishment of the Turkish Republic, and to understand the conditions of that period, and the role assigned to Turkey.

Why was Turkey given importance during the 20th century?

The Union and Progress, many of whose members were of Jewish origin, played a prominent role in the establishment of the Turkish Republic, with Jewish lobbies playing a major role in the founding of the republic. The newly established Turkish Republic was assigned some tasks and duties, including the responsibility of protecting the security of Israel, which would be established later. It is no secret that Turkey was among the first countries to recognize Israel, and afterwards Israel did not hesitate to provide Turkey with financial and moral support, starting from providing advanced weapons, military advice, intelligence, and more. It is worth mentioning that Israel has provided significant support to Turkey in its war against the Kurdistan Workers’ Party for four decades, and Israeli officials did not hide their involvement in the arrest of the leader Abdullah Ocalan through a covert operation involving several countries, led by America.

Israel was in a war with the Arabs, so it was necessary to have some powers and countries that protect Israel, and both Turkey and Iran are considered examples of protecting Israel and its security. But in recent years, Israeli relations with the Arabs have developed positively, with Israeli embassies and consulates opening in many Arab countries. With the announcement of the 2023 economic corridor project that starts from India and includes Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Jordan, Israel, and reaches Europe, relations have reached an advanced level for the Arabs to reconcile with Israel. However, the Gaza war, in which both Iran and Turkey had a hand, contributed to reducing the pace of this reconciliation.

We know that the Republic of Turkey was founded by the Allied forces that emerged victorious in World War I at that time (Britain and its allies) on the principle of exterminating and denying the nationalities of the Kurds, Armenians, Syrians, Greeks, and others. The Republic of Turkey drew its principles from the French Revolution, adopted Western culture and values as its foundation, and secularism was one of the fundamental principles of the state, ignoring the Islamic principles and culture that the Ottoman Empire relied on.

This modern state worked to serve the policies and agendas of Western powers, both politically and economically, and served as a gateway to open the Middle East at that time. This state, built on the culture and values of Western countries, was considered a modern state and a model that was supposed to be generalized in the region. One of the most prominent duties and responsibilities of the newly founded Republic of Turkey, as we mentioned earlier, was firstly to protect the security of Israel, secondly to prevent the spread of socialist ideology led by Russia in the Middle East, and thirdly to implement the agendas and policies of Western powers that are aimed against the region.

During the 20th century, especially after the October Revolution and the First and Second World Wars, one of the main concerns for the global superpowers was Russia – the Soviet Union, and the spread of socialist and communist ideas in the Middle East countries. However, after the collapse of the Soviet Union and its transformation into a capitalist state, and the world being dominated by the United States as a single pole, the situation changed. The ideological and intellectual differences turned into disputes over wealth and sharing dominance over the world.

Israel, America, and Western powers did not hesitate to provide continuous financial and moral support to Turkey since its establishment until before the Syrian crisis. They also turned a blind eye to the policies, violations, and massacres committed by Turkey against its Kurdish citizens and other peoples. In short, the mutual interests between Turkey and the other countries are what led to this level of importance to Turkey.

The Western powers’ labeling of the Republic as the Turks did not come out of nowhere. Those powers have delved into history a lot, knowing that the Turks would provide them with clear services. Those powers have also extensively researched the rough, harsh, and exterminating Turkish personality that has been committing massacres since it entered into service during the Islamic Caliphate. In fact, Turkey did not hold back in this field, as it committed massacres and genocides against indigenous peoples such as Kurds, Armenians, Greeks, and Assyrians. It also eliminated socialist and leftist parties and organizations after the sixties of the last century.

After the Syrian crisis in 2011, Turkey turned into a training ground for ISIS and Islamic groups:

At the beginning of the twenty-first century, especially after the Syrian crisis, the danger of extremist Islamic movements like ISIS and others increased. America and Western powers felt the danger of the expansion of Islamists, despite the fact that political Islam in the broader Middle East was an American project being prepared for a long time. In the eighties, the way was opened for components with Islamic origins in Turkey. In the nineties, the Welfare Party led by Necmettin Erbakan took power according to the model of the Islamic nation. Then, in 2002, the Justice and Development Party was given the opportunity to take power in Turkey. There is no doubt that all of these changes were happening under the watchful eyes of Britain and America.

Fethullah Gulen emerged as an influential figure within the Justice and Development Party, organizing his ranks both inside and outside of Turkey effectively. He established hundreds of religious schools outside of Turkey in more than 100 countries, in addition to those within Turkey. He presented himself as a social Muslim, not showing hostility towards Israel, America, and Western powers, unlike Necmettin Erbakan, even if it was just superficial. On the contrary, he was tasked with playing the role of moderate and non-extremist Islam.

However, Recep Tayyip Erdogan (a disciple of Fethullah Gulen) – who was from the same party – rose up against his mentor. Erdogan, who adopted the same political Islamic orientation that embraces the concept of the nation – and was from the same party (the nation) – seized power by rebelling against his mentor, taking control of all the religious and legal schools, as well as the media affiliated with Fethullah Gulen. After assuming power, he gradually organized himself within the state institutions, claiming that he would save Turkey from the economic crisis it was going through at the time, and that he would solve all crises with foreign countries. He granted himself full powers to change laws that touched on secularism in the country, such as in the field of education, changing curricula, and opening schools for preachers, and so on.

Erdogan did not hide his Islamic goals and ambitions, as he had stated on many occasions: “The secularists ruled Turkey for a hundred years – referring to the Republican People’s Party – and now it’s our turn, we will declare our Islamic state.” It is worth mentioning that his statements coincided with the centennial of the Treaty of Lausanne.

Until 2010, Western powers and America were still hoping that Erdogan would meet their demands, especially since Erdogan had promised to take serious steps towards change and building democracy in the country by solving the Kurdish issue, stopping human rights violations, and entering the European Union. But after Erdogan made an agreement with the Nationalist Movement Party with its racist nationalist orientation and its leader Devlet Bahceli, the gap between him and the Western powers and America widened.

After that, two trends emerged in Turkey: the first one aims to revive the Ottoman dreams, expand, and play a role as a nationalist state like Iran. As for the second trend, it seeks, through Islamic factions, to build Islamic dominance regionally and globally. None of what the Western countries and America wanted was achieved. After 2011 and the start of the Syrian crisis, Turkey turned into a training ground for ISIS, Al-Nusra Front, Al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, and all other Islamic groups.

Just as Turkey did not support the American intervention in Iraq and did not allow them to use the Incirlik base, the same goes for the Syrian war. Despite Turkey being formally part of the international coalition forces against ISIS, it did not actually fight ISIS, and it didn’t stop at just not fighting ISIS, but it also protected ISIS.

It’s no secret to anyone that Turkey has used Islamic factions to serve its agendas in Syria and other countries. They provided all the facilities for ISIS and other factions to enter Syria, from passports to opening training centers for them in Gaziantep and the bordering areas of Syria. They also supported them with logistical support, weapons, and more. Russia, through satellite images, showed a series of oil-loaded trains entering Turkey. By inciting the armed Islamic factions against the Kurds and to commit massacres against them. Erdogan wanted to strike the Kurds and Arabs against each other and ignite an endless religious and ethnic war between the Syrian components, while he remains a bystander. All of this was done under the supervision of the Turkish intelligence agency and Erdogan personally. On the other hand, we saw how the coalition forces with the Syrian Democratic Forces managed to kill Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and Abu Ibrahim Hashemi al-Qurashi in 2022, as well as killing Abu Hassan al-Muhajir and many ISIS leaders in areas under Turkey’s control, some of whom were arrested.

In general, Erdogan and his party benefited personally from harnessing the capabilities of human resources for Islamic groups and Syrian refugees in official Turkish government departments such as intelligence, media, strategic studies centers, religious schools, and others. According to Turkish officials, the number of Syrians who obtained Turkish citizenship reached 200,000. Erdogan and his party may have personally benefited from injecting new blood into their party, but they harmed Turkey in general, especially in terms of dividing Turkish society and its foreign relations.

After both parties, the National Movement Party and the Justice and Development Party, formed a strategic alliance and occupied areas in Syria and Iraq, intervened in Libya, Nigeria, Somalia, Karabakh and other countries in the region, Erdogan and Bahçeli were overcome with the ecstasy of victory and their mouths watered. They began to dream of reviving the new Ottoman Empire, thinking about expansion and occupying more territories of neighboring countries. Turkey then occupied areas of Rojava (northern Syria) and southern Kurdistan (northern Iraq). Erdogan wanted to tweet outside the flock and the plan drawn up for him by America and Western countries, where he emerged himself as a dominant force at the regional level. On the other hand, Turkish movements and its rapprochement with Russia, especially Turkey’s circumvention of US sanctions on Russia, was what increased the severity of American disagreements with Turkey. Turkish violations of rights have been met with harsh criticisms from Western powers, and the reasons we mentioned have played a role in fueling Western-American disputes with Turkey.

Instead of “zero problems”, Erdogan has put Turkey in front of “a thousand problems” with no weightiness or status left:

Turkey went through a suffocating economic crisis from 2000-2002, and politically, it did not have good relations with foreign countries. Erdogan’s political side emerged during these years. Erdogan, along with his team including Ahmed Davutoglu and others, claimed to be working on improving Turkey’s economic and living conditions. At the beginning of his rule, Erdogan promised to base Turkey’s standards on the European Union and democracy, as well as to solve the Kurdish issue. As for foreign relations, Erdogan worked according to Ahmed Davutoglu’s theory of “zero problems.” At that time, Erdogan resorted to some temporary solutions, such as economic reforms – removing 6 zeros from the Turkish currency through a special law. In this way, Erdogan deceived the people for a few more years until he solidified his power until 2008.

If we take a look at the last two decades and do a general review of the statistics available from when he took power until today, we will see whether Erdogan has actually developed Turkey or if he has taken it backwards. With the start of economic reforms and removing 6 zeros from the Turkish currency, the value of the dollar against the Turkish lira became (1 dollar = 0.7 Turkish lira), but this situation did not last long. In 2006, the dollar became (1 dollar = 1.42 Turkish lira), and after the Syrian crisis in 2014, the dollar became (1 dollar = 2.27 Turkish lira), but after the years 2016-2018, the Turkish lira lost its value against the dollar significantly. Over time, today in early 2024, the value of the Turkish lira against the dollar is (1 dollar = 32 Turkish lira). Also, in the issue of financial inflation in Turkey, where the inflation rate in December 2001-2002 in Turkey reached 5.32%, and in April 2012, the percentage increased to 11.14%, and in January 2024, the percentage increased to 64.86%. These are the official numbers declared by the Turkish state itself, knowing that the actual inflation rate may have exceeded 100%.

During Erdogan’s era, politically speaking, it was supposed to be “zero problems” internally and externally, but the opposite happened. It reached “a thousand problems.” Internally, at the beginning of his rule, Erdogan pledged to the deep state to eliminate the Kurdish movement, especially the Kurdistan Freedom Movement. He worked based on this dream, and in parallel with the existing army, Erdogan built another army from police formations and formed a “counter-Kurdish” force (against guerilla), along with Syrian mercenaries linked to him, where he gives them direct orders. He dealt with the Kurds with all his brutality to exterminate them and eliminate them, but he also failed in this area and was unable to eradicate the Kurds and their movement. Guerilla’s operations at the beginning of winter 2024 against the Turkish army and the devastating losses inflicted on its army worried Erdogan and his army.

As we mentioned, on the external front, things have gone from “zero problems” to “a thousand problems”. When it comes to the issue of Khashoggi’s murder, Erdogan did not leave out a nasty word and did not describe it to Saudi Arabia, leading to almost a complete break in relations between the two countries, with Saudi Arabia even launched a boycott of Turkish goods. On the other side, Sadiq Bakr has exposed the truth about Erdogan’s authority and his direct connections with mafia gangs and drug dealers, causing a complete break in relations between Turkey and UAE. This prompted Erdogan to use vulgar words against UAE and its leader.

Turkey’s relations with Egypt have worsened because of Erdogan’s interest in the Muslim Brotherhood movement and their sheltering in Turkey, especially since Abdul-Fattah Al-Sisi’s win in the Egyptian presidency greatly upset Erdogan, leading him to describe Sisi as a coup leader and a dictator. Erdogan’s interference in Libya’s internal affairs has caused chaos in the country, as he directly provided logistical support, weapons, and all forms of support to the opponents of Khalifa Haftar. In Arab countries like Tunisia, Erdogan tried hard to establish a foothold through movements like the Muslim Brotherhood (Rachid al-Ghannouchi and others). Additionally, Turkey’s relations with Greece have soured due to gas exploration operations in the Mediterranean Sea. In short, as a result of Erdogan’s erratic policies and actions, Turkey has become a pariah state.

The strange thing is that it’s as if nothing happened. After all the insults and vulgar words that Erdogan described to the leaders of Egypt, UAE, Saudi Arabia, and others, he bowed to these leaders and presidents seeking forgiveness for what he did and asking to open a new page in improving relations with them. This sudden turnaround made Erdogan and his government completely lose credibility, and Turkey also lost its role and status regionally and globally. Perhaps some may justify Erdogan’s position and describe it as political and pragmatic, but in reality, this turn came at the expense of Turkey. Erdogan is the one who backed down, not Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Egypt. He backed down on many issues, such as stopping the meddling in Libya, expelling the Muslim Brotherhood from Turkey, closing its channel (Orient), and other topics.

When did Erdogan’s disagreements with America and Western powers emerge?

If we track the path of the Turkish state’s relations with Western countries and America from 2000-2002 until the Syrian crisis in 2011, we will find it to be a strong and active relationship. Everything was going according to plan with Turkey. In other words, the way was paved and facilitated for political Islam in Turkey and regionally within the framework of the Greater (New) Middle East. Turkey drew its support and strength from global hegemonic powers, led by America and then Britain, and Erdogan was moving according to the plans laid out for him.

The real Turkish invasion or intervention (the invasion of minds) of Arab countries culturally happened after 2000 through Turkish TV series that were translated from Turkish into Arabic by Emirati, Syrian, and other dubbing companies. If anything, this indicates a form of cultural invasion, gradually imposing moderate Islamic culture on the region through these series, making Turkey a strong country in the eyes of the common people, as well as Southern Kurdistan (the Kurdistan Region) also getting its share of this cultural invasion through media and television channels.

It is not wrong to call it the first step towards occupation and invasion, meaning Turkish intervention in the affairs of the region’s countries. After creating a fertile ground for his project among the Arab community, Erdogan visited Syria and met with Bashar al-Assad, where a strategic cooperation agreement was held between the two countries, but the situation suddenly changed. Several years later, we found the invasion and occupation in its military form in Syria and Iraq, as well as its interventions in Libya, Qatar, South Africa, Somalia, and many other regions. Therefore, we can say that Turkey played a negative, destabilizing, and instigating role in the region by activating its drones over the past decade to achieve Its ambitions in the “Milli Charter” and revive neo-Ottomanism.

The widespread and oppressive spread of political Islam culture in the region was done with the approval of both Britain and America. So, when did the disagreements between Turkey on one side and America and the West on the other emerge? These disagreements arose when Erdogan began to act according to his own interests and agendas, with the aim of expanding the revival of the New Ottoman Empire and not according to the plans drawn up for him by his masters. Also, Turkey’s purchase of the S-400 system from Russia and its close relations with Russia angered America, NATO, and Western countries in general.

The American President Joe Biden stated in this context: “If I win the elections, I will remove him from power, he is a dictator.” He means Erdogan here. The truth is that Turkish-American relations began to deteriorate after the years 2014-2015, especially with the coup that took place in Turkey where America was accused of being involved in that coup. On the other hand, that period coincided with the cessation of the peace process and negotiations that were ongoing with the leader Abdullah Ocalan in Imrali, and at the same time, it coincided with the formation of the alliance against ISIS in Syria and Iraq. Turkey was eager to join the war against ISIS during the liberation of Mosul and Raqqa, not because it wanted to join the campaign in Mosul and Raqqa to fight ISIS, but because it wanted, under the pretext of ISIS, to reach those areas as it considered those lands its own according to the “Milli Pact”. America was aware of Turkey’s intentions, so it prevented Turkey from participating with a large force and did not allow it to play a major role, because America was sure that if the Turkish state entered a certain area, it would not leave it.

America and Western powers do not allow the formation of an Islamic state with extremist and radical ideas, whether regionally or globally, as they see it as a threat to them. The Muslim Brotherhood movement, which is basically a British project, claims to be a moderate movement, but when given the opportunity, it showed its true colors as it does not differ much from other extremist movements in terms of violence, hate speech, and incitement.

During the Syrian war, it became clear that the Muslim Brotherhood movement had put itself at the service of the Turkish state’s agendas, and it showed its hostility towards the Kurds openly through its media platforms, especially Al Jazeera, which aired two programs (“Zero Distance” and “The Kurds are Building a State in Northeast Syria”) through these two programs, Al Jazeera was inciting Turkey and pushing it to attack the self-administration of northeastern Syria. Additionally, the Orient channel, the mouthpiece of the Muslim Brotherhood, during the events of Deir Al-Zor, wanted to stir up strife between the Kurds and the Arabs, starting a fierce misinformation campaign against the Kurds. Furthermore, religious scholars and clerics, through mosques, television channels, and in the streets of Afrin, they were issue fatwas calling for the killing of Kurds.

During the Syrian crisis, especially in the last ten years, Western countries and America felt the danger of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood, which claimed to represent moderate political Islam, quickly joined forces with extremist factions and resorted to violence when given the opportunity. As a result, the Brotherhood was excluded from power in several countries, starting from Egypt and then one after the other.

We saw how Mohamed Morsi won the first round of the Egyptian elections in 2012 and became the president of Egypt, but he was later removed from office, arrested overnight, and died in prison. In Tunisia, a lawsuit was filed against Rachid al-Ghannouchi, leading to his arrest and removal from power. Similarly, the head of the Government of National Accord, Fayez al-Sarraj, a close ally of Erdogan in Libya, was excluded. Omar al-Bashir was also removed from power in Sudan, along with other countries where the Brotherhood ruled.

Erdogan, who shares the same ideas and beliefs, embraced the Muslim Brotherhood in Turkey and provided them with various forms of support after 2011. Erdogan himself faces pressure from Israel, America, and Britain, especially regarding his support for Hamas, which he described as a “resistance movement”. The repercussions of the Gaza war led to a redefinition of extremism. Discussions among British ministers emphasized the need for new laws against those who “promote violence, hatred, or bigotry”. In mid-March, the Minister for Local Communities, Michael Gove, warned that the rise of extremism since the war between Israel and Gaza poses a “real threat” to the United Kingdom. The discussions among British ministers about “violence, hatred, and bigotry” and who incites them apply to the Muslim Brotherhood movement.

The policies of the Muslim Brotherhood movement and its positions during the past years, especially in the Syrian crisis, have been disgraceful and provocative to some extent, especially towards the Kurds. Since the beginning of the crisis, the main goal of the Muslim Brotherhood has been to seize power in Syria. Will the Muslim Brotherhood movement work to democratize Syria? No, their mentality is sectarian and doctrinal, just like Erdogan’s thinking when he says, “Secularists ruled Turkey for a hundred years, and now it’s our turn.” The Muslim Brotherhood also says that “the Alawites ruled Syria for fifty years, and now it’s our turn”. So, there is no difference in mentality. History has proven that whoever opposes and fights the Kurds will meet their demise, the experience of ISIS is still vivid in front of us. ISIS, which controlled Iraq and Syria, could not be stopped, but when it made the mistake of attacking the Kurds, it lost its territory and was defeated by the SDF forces. Similarly, the Muslim Brotherhood movement, which Erdogan uses to serve his interests, harms itself when it opposes the Kurds because the Kurds will not forget what the Muslim Brotherhood is doing to them. They are now struggling with themselves, stripped by the forces of hegemony.

Erdogan has two options: first, to act according to his personal agenda without caring about America and the West, and second, to act within the goals and lines drawn for him before, as per the model prepared by America and Western powers (acting as a moderate Islamic political force) without aspiring to expand and interfere in the affairs of the region’s countries, working under the control of America and the West. If Erdogan adheres to these conditions, he will be allowed to stay in power and play a regional role as a competitor to Iran.

In fact, Erdogan did not succeed with the voters’ voices in the 2023 official elections, but through pre-filled ballot boxes. He succeeded through agreements between him and Western powers and America. Erdogan’s approval of Sweden’s accession to NATO a few days after the elections was part of these agreements. It appears that this is his last chance. If Erdogan does not seize this opportunity, he will be removed from power as they did with other Muslim Brotherhood leaders in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, and Sudan. They will bring in people who align with their policies, here we meant the Western powers and America. Erdogan’s recent statement before the elections “this is my last election” confirms what we are saying, Erdogan has realized this and is working hard to repair his relationship with both America and Europe to be given the green light and stay in power longer. In our view, this is Erdogan’s last chance.

Kurds have a future role in governance in the Greater Middle East:

The Kurds will be taken into consideration and will have a role and a position in governing the project of rebuilding the new Middle East in the twenty-first century, perhaps not exactly as the Kurds aspire to, but the important thing is that they will have a place in it.

After 40 years of war in which America and NATO provided all kinds of support to Turkey, Turkey still could not eliminate the Kurdistan Freedom Movement in northern Kurdistan. Now that it has become clear that Turkey could not defeat them militarily, negotiations with the leader Ocalan on Imrali Island must be resumed, and Turkey must stop its policy of denial and recognize the legitimate rights of the Kurds.

The developments and changes in American policy over the past two years towards Syria, including halting the withdrawal of its troops from Syria, as well as recent shuttle visits by senior American military leaders to northern and eastern Syria, if this indicates anything, it’s occurring a change in American strategy towards its foreign policy, especially regarding Syria. It seems that America has benefited from its alliance with the SDF in confronting ISIS, so it wants to continue this alliance until the Syrian situation is clarified and practical steps are taken towards a solution.

Today, the Kurds are in an enviable position, they are the most organized and trained in the four parts of Kurdistan (Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria), whether politically or militarily. There is no intention for conservative nationalist countries to change their policies towards the Kurds and they must initiate changes towards democracy themselves. This is where the importance and role of the Kurds in democratizing these countries come in, because Kurdish society is civilized, advanced, politically organized, and militarily organized. The women’s revolution in northern and eastern Syria has proven this. The Kurds are not nationalist racists like some Turks, nor are they religious extremists like some Arabs. The Kurds can create a strategic balance between these peoples in the four countries.

So, America is in desperate need of the Kurds, especially in need of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) because it is the most organized in the countries we mentioned (Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria). America needs to take serious steps towards resolving the Kurdish issue. America’s interest in this is to have the Kurds by its side, as it can pressure Turkey to reconcile with the Kurds, recognize their rights, and thus solve the hundred-year-old dilemma and stop the bloodshed.

Regarding this issue, if the door is opened for the leader Abdullah Ocalan to play his role and be released, forget about solving the Kurdish issue, as he can solve all the outstanding issues in the Middle East. There has been a significant change in the situation of the Kurds, especially Kurdish women, who have made great strides in leadership and advancement. We saw this in the uprising of Iranian women and their slogan “Women, Life, Freedom,” inspired by women from northern and eastern Syria. The Kurdish situation is not as it was during World War I; but has changed a lot.

We will see how the Kurds are who will determine the future of Syria’s fate, as well as the candidates who will lead the change and democracy in the Middle East in the future. It is worth mentioning that a British reporter in World War I reported to his government: “The Kurds are narrow-minded, tribal and religious fanatics, they are not the rulers and administrators of the state.” The Kurds have learned lessons from the uprisings and wars they have fought, identified their weaknesses and strengths, today, they have formed an army of over a hundred thousand fighters fighting under the banner of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). Also, the self-administration based on the idea of democratic nation manages a third of Syrian territory with its Arab, Kurdish, and Syriac components, which exceed five million in number.

The Kurds fought ISIS and extremist Islamic factions on behalf of all humanity, sacrificing their dearest where they offered twelve thousand martyrs and twenty thousand wounded, thereby stopping the expansion of ISIS in Syria and Iraq. It is time for the international community to recognize the legitimate rights of the Kurds in the four parts of Kurdistan. Today, the Kurds have reached a stage where they can govern themselves. Despite the Turkish state occupying three areas in northern and eastern Syria and the almost daily attacks and unjust siege by countries hostile to the Kurds, the self-administration in northern and eastern Syria has managed to politically, economically, and militarily run this region over the past 12 years. This in itself is considered a miracle in the midst of this chaos and the escalating crisis in Syria and the prevailing instability.

The new Middle East and the strategy of power balance:

In the context of the New Middle East rebuilding project, it appears that global hegemonic forces will rely on a strategy of balancing between Islamic, secular, leftist, socialist, and other powers in managing the region. They will follow a policy of power parity so that no one power exceeds another, in order to keep the situation under control and easy to lead.

Despite the fact that the moderate political Islam project is somewhat British and American, embodied in the Muslim Brotherhood movement to some extent in spreading its control over the Middle East, there has been a change in strategy in the last decade. The situation became clearer after the Arab Spring, with the arrest of Mohammed Morsi, one of the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood who succeeded in the elections as the president of Egypt, and his imprisonment, as well as the intervention against the Muslim Brotherhood in other countries where they were excluded from the political scene. This indicates that within the project of rebuilding the New Middle East, there is no place for extremist Islamic movements, including the Muslim Brotherhood, which claims to be moderate. There will be a place for moderate Islam that does not contradict the values of Western countries. There are also attempts to domesticate and hybridize leftist and socialist forces and integrate them into the new formula for the Middle East by hegemonic powers.

In the future New Middle East that is planned to be formed, both America and Western powers seek to achieve a balance between the existing powers on the ground. We do not expect the Muslim Brotherhood, which sometimes leans towards moderation and other times towards extremism, to play a role in the New Middle East. Erdogan, with his Muslim Brotherhood inclinations, who incites violence and hatred as he did in the events of Deir Al-Zor and the case of Ahmed al-Khubeil (Abu Khaula), stirring up conflict between Kurds and Arabs, as well as his open support for violence during Hamas attacks on Israelis on October 7th, is also targeted. If Erdogan does not decide to change his positions, his fate will be like that of other Muslim Brotherhood leaders who were uprooted.

Turkey cannot launch a military campaign in Iraqi territory without the approval of America or Iran:

The American-led economic corridor project will definitely be implemented, and as a result, all the countries mentioned will benefit from it. Opening such a corridor is not in Turkey and Iran’s interest, so both Turkey and Iran will try to hinder it. As a preemptive step, Turkey is trying to open an economic corridor from Turkey through Basra to the Persian Gulf in an attempt to sabotage the American-Saudi-Israeli economic corridor and alleviate the economic burden and suffocating blockade on Turkey. The diplomatic visits and movements of Turkish officials (foreign, interior, and intelligence) to America, Iraq, and the Kurdistan region fall within this framework. Under the pretext of national security of Turkey and combating the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, Erdogan is trying to obtain America’s approval to occupy other areas in southern Kurdistan (northern Iraq) and implement a security belt, as he claims. On the other hand, Turkey is seeking to persuade Iraq to participate in its planned military campaign.

In this regard, there are indications of Barzani’s participation in the campaign as he provides all the support and backing to Turkey in its attacks on the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, but this alone is not enough in light of the debate on the occupation of vast areas of Iraq reaching hundreds of kilometers deep. In this case, Turkey needs either American or Iranian approval to start the military campaign, and if neither country agrees, Turkey will not launch a military campaign on its own.

The situation is very complicated and intertwined. It’s not in America’s interest to end the PKK, because America needs the PKK in Syria, Turkey, and Iran. Without the PKK, achieving balance in Syria would be impossible. Whether America likes it or not, most of the Kurds in Rojava sympathize with the thoughts and philosophy of the leader Ocalan, so America must take this into consideration. On the other hand, if the field in Syria is left to them, the Brotherhood, ISIS, and the extremist factions affiliated with Turkey (meaning Turkey) will take over Syria, which is something America does not want. Therefore, America needs the PKK in Syria, Turkey and Iran because it has a large popular base in these countries. It is also impossible for the historical ideological hostility between Iran and Turkey to end overnight, so Iran also does not want the PKK to be completely eliminated. Why? Because they also benefit from the presence of the PKK. If the SDF is not present in northeastern Syria, extremist Islamic movements like ISIS, Al-Nusra, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the factions affiliated with Turkey will fill this void, as happened in northwestern Syria and the areas occupied by Turkey.

On the other hand, the presence of the PKK is like a sword hanging over Turkey’s neck and making it bleed for years, which certainly serves Iran’s interests. Turkey exploits the water card and pressures Iraq to accept its agendas. Iraq does not need the economic corridor that Turkey proposes because this corridor primarily serves Turkey’s political, military, and economic agendas. Iraq’s oil is exported through the Gulf countries, so the final word on this matter is with Iran. Iraq understands that Turkey has ambitions and is trying to take over Iraq through Barzani and the Sunnis, as it did in Syria through armed mercenary factions. Iraq joining such a process and allowing additional Turkish forces into its territory is not in its interest. On the other hand, through his continuous threats to the Kurds in Syria and Iraq, Erdogan is trying to export his internal crises abroad.

We don’t believe that Turkey will be allowed to carry out a large-scale operation on Gare and Qandil, which are located in areas controlled by the Kurdistan Democratic Party near the Iranian border as planned, especially since Erdogan did not achieve the desired results in the municipal elections on March 31, where his popularity declined and he lost the elections to his opponent, the Republican People’s Party (CHP). However, with the aim of weakening and breaking the will of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, Turkey will carry out limited operations in some areas or at some points they see as important. Will this operation achieve results? Previous operations have proven their failure to eliminate the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, and this operation will not be different from its predecessors.

On the other hand, the commander of the People’s Defense Forces, Murat Karayılan, delivered good news to the Kurdish people on the occasion of Newroz, announcing that they now possess anti-aircraft weapons (drones). This could change the equation on the ground. Another point is that going to Qandil and Gare is not a walk in the park. Entering these areas may be easy, but getting out of them is impossible due to the rugged mountainous terrain and the underground cities built by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party in those areas. Tunnel warfare is not as easy as some may think. We have seen over the past two years how Turkey has been hovering around these caves and tunnels for months and could not easily control them until they used internationally banned chemical gas.

Conclusion:

After Israel reconciled with the Arabs and opened the economic corridor connecting India and Europe, Israel will no longer have any need for Turkey to play a role as it did in the past century. This is because there will be no Arab threat to Israel anymore. This equation also applies to America and the West, and there won’t be a need to give Turkey the same importance as before. With America present in Iraq and Syria as well, Turkey no longer plays the same crucial role it did before. Erdogan’s approach and his focus on Hamas and expansion towards neighboring countries have disturbed America, Western countries, and Israel, leading to strained relations between Turkey and Israel after a strong relationship over the past fifty years.

Israel’s disagreements are not with Turkey, but with Erdogan himself, who tends towards extremist Islamic movements. Erdogan’s positions are becoming more radical over time, as seen when he made a point in favor of himself at the Davos Economic Forum by interrupting the Israeli Prime Minister, said “one minute”, and sending ships to Gaza to break the blockade, resulting in the killing of some crew members by Israel. Erdogan also recently referred to Hamas as a “resistance movement” and used provocative language against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. All of these actions have strained relations with Turkey, especially Erdogan’s actions outside of NATO and his defiance of US sanctions against Russia. These reasons, among others, are causing Turkey to lose its strategic position in the region over time.

In recent years, Turkey has faced isolation politically and economically due to its strained relations with various countries such as Syria, Iraq, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Libya, Greece, Armenia, and others. Even with Iran, despite some agreements, there are disagreements, especially on ideological matters.

The opening of the India-Europe economic corridor will significantly impact Turkey’s energy line negatively. Erdogan has realized this and is trying to rebuild and correct his relationships with these countries, despite his previous confrontations and insults towards their leaders. Erdogan is now seeking a meeting with the Syrian president.

Key words: Turkey – Erdogan – Political Islam – Geostrategy – ISIS – Greater Middle East.

Sources:

1. inflation.eu
2. Aljazeera.net
3. bbc.com/arabi/articles/c28zddp8dko.amp

Munzer Shiyar

Rojava Center for Strategic Studies