None of Ankara and Damascus welcome Kurdish actions in northern Syria: expert

<p style="text-align:left">Dr. Nickolas Panayiotides believes both Ankara and Damascus are against Kurdish achievements in the north of Syria and there is convergence of interests between the two sides in regard with Kurdish actions in the region and neither country wanted the &amp;ldquo;Rojava democratic experiment&amp;rdquo; to succeed.

He stated that the Assad regime, regards such a development as a threat to the Syrian sovereignty-integrity and Ankara as a threat for its security that can become also a threat for the unity of the Turkish state.
Kurds in Syria were in the control of the northern part of the country but they lost the control of over a fourth of the region till October 2019. They are now controlling some regions in the east and they are not allowed, withing two separate deals between Russia and Turkey on one side and the S and Turkey on the other side, to be in control of a bordering region of 30 kilometers. The Kurds have lost over 11000 fighters in fight against the IS to save the region from the control of theterrorist group.
Both Syria and Turkish forces, along with Russian troops, cruise the region occasionally.
The developments have complicated the situation in the region. To shed light on the situation snd the developments, Kurdpress made an interview with Dr. Panayiotides, Head of the Middle East and Eastern Mediterranean and a visiting Assistant Professor of international politics at American College (Nicosia) and Research Associate at the Center of Eastern Studies at Panteion University.
What follows is his full answers to Kurdpress questions;
We saw three agreements between different players in Syria in October: Turkey-Russia, U.S -Turkey, and Russia- Syria which all of them focused on Kurds. Who is the winner and who is the loser?
If one looks carefully at the agreements can detect two key words present in both texts, territorial integrity and security: These two words represent the main concerns for the two regional powers, Turkey and Syria. On the one hand the security of Turkey and on the other the territorial integrity of the Syrian State. Undoubtedly, the course of the developments in October is a victory for Ankara, albeit a limited one since it did not gain 100 % of what it sought. Specifically, it now controls only 20% of the border- but even now it is in a position to obstruct any Kurdish plan in Syria for deepening autonomy and self governance. Apart from a limited &ldquo;safe zone&rdquo; Ankara disrupted the military capacity of the YPG, an offshoot of the PPK according to her view. YPG gained global attention after the fight but according to me this is insignificant compared to its plans and what it lost on the ground.
Do you see a possible agreement between the U.S and Russia regarding October Developments? And if there is an agreement, what is the main idea about it?
No, I do not see any essential agreement between the two countries. What I can see it is possible coordination on issues arising there on the tactical level because there is still some American presence there in the oil -rich Deir El Zour area. Definitely, Moscow has the upper hand in Syria. Russia has dictated the terms of the game there. Assad survived and his survival safeguarded Russian strategic interests and influence in the Eastern Mediterranean as the last bastion of Russian control in the Eastern Mediterranean. The fact that the American administration fulfilled its plan to withdraw its forces from the region is indicative that Syria is left in the Russian orbit of influence, leaving regional players such as Turkey and Israel to intervene only if their primary interests are at stake and as long as Russia permits such actions.
Is there any agreement between Turkey and Syria, especially regarding Kurds?
As far as I know, no. However, there is convergence of interests between the two sides in regard with Kurdish actions in Northern Syria. As we already noted, neither country wanted the &ldquo;Rojava democratic experiment&rdquo; to succeed. The Assad regime, regards such a development as a threat to the Syrian sovereignty-integrity and Ankara as a threat for its security that can become also a threat for the unity of the Turkish state, if the 20 million Kurds of Turkey express their will to imitate this democratic paradigm. Also, what can be added is that the two countries may decide to activate the Adana Agreement of 1998 that regulates many issues regarding the Kurds. There is a mention in this regard in the memorandum of understanding between Russia and Turkey. The Adana Agreement became a dead letter after the eruption of the Civil War in Syria in 2011 and the Turkish support of the anti-Assad rebels. However, the agreement must be updated in accordance with the latest developments in Syria.
How do you see Kurd's position in Syria? Which one has more benefits for Kurds: relying on Syria and Russia, making a mutual agreement with Damascus or relying on U.S presence in Syria?
Starting from the latter, no one Kurd can rely on the Americans… What happened there in October with Trump&rsquo;s decision must be considered as a betrayal for every Kurd. American President&rsquo;s effort to reverse the course by threatening Turkey does not convince anybody. I thing that the events as unfolding will push Syrian Kurds to the Syrian regime and Russia in order to safeguard a minimum level of self-governance there as soon as the Syrian Conflict is over. Until then, however, there are many other factors that must clarify. For example, Turkish presence in Northern Syria and Ankara&rsquo;s plans to transfer thousands of Syrian refugees there perhaps contrary to their will.
Reporter's code: 50101

News Code 47284

Your Comment

You are replying to: .