According to Kurdpress, more than a century after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the drawing of new borders in the Middle East, Syria has once again become the scene of Türkiye's geopolitical competition. Analytical article written by "Lezghin Yaqoub", reviewing the historical developments from the end of World War I to the fall of Bashar al-Assad's government, argues that Ankara's current policy in Syria is not a product of the country's civil war, but rather an extension of a historical project whose roots go back to the Turkish National Pact (Misak-ı Milli), the Adana Agreement and even the Sykes-Picot Agreement.

The author believes that today Turkey has been able to achieve what it has been looking for in the past century, in the form of political, security and military influence in Syria; However, this perception is an analytical interpretation of historical trends and is not the consensus of all researchers.

According to the author, the end of the First World War and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire was the starting point of the formation of the new order in the Middle East. During this period, the victorious powers, especially Britain and France, drew the borders of new countries in the region.

In the meantime, Syria, which was a part of the Ottoman Empire for centuries, became a country under the French protectorate. The author emphasizes that the Arab areas of Syria were mainly controlled by British military power, while the Kurdish areas of northern Syria were mostly separated from Turkish territory through political and diplomatic agreements.

The article then deals with the last days of Ottoman presence in Syria; When Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was in command of the Ottoman forces in the Battle of Aleppo after the fall of Damascus.

According to the author, although the Ottoman Empire was defeated in the war, the resistance of the Turkish forces in northern Syria formed the basis for the formation of an idea that was later known as the "National Covenant" or Misak-ı Milli; A document that defined the desired borders of Turkish nationalists and placed parts of northern Syria and Iraq in Türkiye's historical domain.

The author believes that this document has always been one of the sources of inspiration for Türkiye's foreign and security policy during the past century.

One of the sections of the article is dedicated to the temporary cooperation of Turkish nationalists and Syrian Arabs against France.

According to this narrative, after Britain handed over control of Syria to France, a number of Syrian Arab leaders and forces loyal to Faisal joined forces with Mustafa Kamal to prevent the consolidation of French rule.

Even agreements were signed for military cooperation between the two sides, but this cooperation did not last with the defeat of Faisal's government against the French army in 1920.

Next, the article describes the Syrian civil war as Türkiye's most important strategic opportunity in the past century.

Critically criticizing the policies of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's government, the author believes that Ankara supported the opposition groups of Bashar al-Assad's government from the very beginning of the Syrian crisis and gradually expanded its influence in various political, military and economic fields of Syria.

Turkey's military operations in northern Syria since 2016 are also mentioned, and it is argued that Ankara has justified these operations by citing the provisions of the Adana Agreement and the need to deal with security threats, especially the presence of PKK-affiliated forces and the People's Protection Units (YPG).

In the end, the author considers the fall of Bashar al-Assad's government at the end of 2024 to be the culmination of a process that started since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

According to him, Türkiye has now gained unprecedented influence in the political and security structure of Syria and has become the main player in the equations of this country. A situation which, from the author's point of view, is considered to be a practical realization of the ideals of the "National Covenant".

He also points to the recent statements of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who did not consider Turkey's security limited to the borders of Hatay and linked it to the developments in Aleppo, Damascus and even Beirut; The words that, from the author's point of view, show the continuation of Türkiye's geopolitical view of its historical sphere of influence. The article tries to introduce Turkey's current policy in Syria not just as a reaction to the developments of recent years, but as a continuation of a historical project that began at the end of the First World War. In this narrative, concepts such as the National Covenant, the Ankara Agreement, the Hatay Agreement, the Adana Agreement and the Syrian Civil War are links in a chain that have ultimately led to the increase of Turkish influence in Syria.

German Kurdish Studies Center