Turkey is a major player in the Middle Eastern geopolitical arena. Its pivotal role in the region is multifaceted and complex. Turkish involvement in the Syrian War reflects its clear-cut policy of proactive engagement in the Syrian warzone. It successfully launched several military operations in Northern Syria aimed at pushing ISIS militants away from the Turkish border and also preventing the Kurdish militia from gaining substantial control in the area. At the same time, it kept warm relations with Russia, another important player on the ground.
By Adnan Nasser & Hiba Abdulwahab
By launching Operation Euphrates Shield (August 2016), the Turkish Forces further enhanced their military involvement in the Syrian conflict when Operation Olive Branch in 2018 was launched, whereby the Turkish forces entered the Afrin region of Northern Syria to destabilise the military footprint and strategic hold of the Kurdish militants. Turkey’s involvement continued beyond 2018 when Operation Peace Spring was initiated in Northern Syria to create a zone free of Kurdish presence.
Turkey has also been proactively engaging in the Syrian conflict through "Soft Power." This humanitarian gesture to host over 3.5 million refugees and provide humanitarian aid to the Syrian people in the form of food, shelter, and medical assistance, alongside the diplomatic peace efforts through the Astana Process and Geneva Talks, strongly indicates Turkey's intent to stay relevant in the conflict's core.
Strategic Leverage Over Iran and Its Allies
In light of recent political developments in Syria, the Turkish government has pursued the policy of strategic intervention within Syrian affairs to the point of compromising the political, economic, and strategic relevance of other countries like Iran and its allies. Turkey exploits Iran's weaknesses to advance its interests further.
Some of Iran’s weaknesses are geographical, while others are strategic. For example, Turkey’s 877-kilometer-long border with Syria is a significant geographical leverage, as it controls the flow of people, goods, and services, while Iran does not share a border with Syria. Furthermore, while Turkey engages in military interventions in Syria through its possession of advanced F–16 fighter jets, Iran is heavily dependent on Russian support due to its limited airpower and its proxies, Hezbollah and Shia militias in Iraq.
These proactive military and strategic interventions aim to enhance Turkey’s leverage in negotiations with the Syrian regime at Iran’s expense, positioning Ankara as the principal decision-maker in any future dialogue with Damascus. As Turkey’s regional influence grows, Iranian interests and stakes are increasingly compromised.
Favourable governing bodies within the Syrian territory are vital for any country, including Turkey and Iran, to achieve far-reaching economic and strategic gains. For example, Iran plans to initiate a grand railway connection project with Iraq, extending to the Mediterranean via Syria.
Recently, the changing strategic landscape in the area following the onslaught of rebel forces in Hama rendered the project almost unviable. As Iran recedes, Turkey has moved forward with its “Development Road Initiative” with Iraq, a massive infrastructure project designed to create a trade corridor from Basra, Iraq, to Turkey and eventually to Europe.
This project aims to establish a high-capacity transportation route for greater regional accessibility. If Turkey succeeds in wresting control of Manbij from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), its position in the region will strengthen further. This would allow Turkey to influence PKK activities in northern Iraq, isolating the group from the Syrian border and paving the way for broader agreements with Iraq.
Reshaping Security Dynamics in Northern Syria and Iraq
Recently, the global political and strategic community watched as the Assad regime’s defence stronghold in Northern Syria crumbled when the Syrian rebels entered Aleppo and Hama. This was a significant blow to Assad’s authority as well as to the strategic foothold of Iran and Russia. It marks the continuation of changing military and political dynamics in Syria, with the rebels led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) THIS IS THEIR OLD NAME and the Syrian National Army (SNA) advancing geographically and strategically.
Turkey’s involvement in multiple military operations has primarily focused on combating Kurdish militant groups, such as the People's Protection Units (YPG), to push ISIS militants away from the Turkish border. This changing security landscape has placed Iran and its allies in a precarious position. Hezbollah and Shia militias are continuously losing territory as the rebels advance, and the influence of Assad’s regime continues to dwindle.
As Iran loses its strategic stronghold in the region, it fears losing critical trade routes, especially for the export of Iranian oil and gas through Syria.
Turkey’s intention to ensure its position as a dominant force while undermining the influence of Iran and its allies has led Ankara to support extremist groups, such as the al-Nusra Front, which is affiliated with al-Qaeda. However, Turkey has denied these allegations, claiming to support only the moderate opposition groups.
These developments have put the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a predominantly Kurdish-led militia, under significant strain, forcing them to reconsider their alliances with regional players. The Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), under pressure from Turkish military actions in Northern Iraq, is on the verge of collapsing.
Turkey’s ‘Safe Zone Narrative’
The Turkish government has been actively engaged in the Syrian conflict in support of the rebel groups under the pretext of establishing a safe zone between the Turkish border and the Syrian warzone. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has recently stated that Turkey is contemplating the establishment of a Safe Zone extending from the Iraqi border to the Mediterranean.
This safe zone narrative serves multiple strategic purposes. It allows Turkey to justify its military actions and regional ambitions on humanitarian grounds, making it more palatable to the international community. The proposed safe zone is intended to prevent Kurdish militant groups, particularly the YPG, from infiltrating Turkey while also offering a place for Syrian refugees to return to Syria and resettle in a safe area.
As of now, Turkey hosts the largest number of Syrian refugees, totalling around 3.5 million. Erdogan has proposed that, following the establishment of the safe zone, one million Syrian refugees could return and resettle there. This would alleviate the economic and social burden of hosting such many refugees within Turkey.
Turkey's intentions appear more strategic than humanitarian in the larger context of the regional dynamics and ongoing war. Turkey seeks to support rebel militias to expand its territorial control in Syria and undermine Kurdish autonomy in the region. The refugee resettlement plan may also demographically re-engineer the region by resettling refugees from various areas of Syria rather than allowing them to return to their original homes.
This demographic strategy, under the guise of refugee rehabilitation, is one of many diplomatic tactics employed by Turkey to ensure its continued dominance in the region. This has led to international scepticism regarding the true nature of Turkey’s “Safe Zone Narrative,” with more substantial support for a more inclusive approach to addressing the Syrian refugee crisis.
“Russian Appeasement Policy”
Turkey’s tacit understanding with Moscow has also been crucial to its strategic success. By factoring in Russia’s interests in Syria, Turkey has leveraged Russia’s entanglement in Ukraine to its advantage, securing a more favourable position in the region.
Erdogan has pursued a policy of appeasement with Russia, cooperating on issues such as establishing de-escalation zones and combating extremist groups. Despite tensions arising from their conflicting interests, Turkey and Russia have managed to maintain a delicate balance in their relationship, avoiding confrontation and focusing on areas of cooperation. By doing so, Turkey avoided a potentially disastrous conflict with Russia.
Turkey has a history of launching military interventions in northern Syria to prevent the establishment of an autonomous Kurdish entity. If the Kurds in north Syria gain autonomy, Turkey would likely intensify its diplomatic efforts to delegitimise Kurdish self-rule internationally.
Such tactics may work with allies like Russia and Iran, through platforms such as the Astana Process, to oppose Kurdish autonomy while lobbying the U.S. to withdraw its support for the SDF, a key partner in the fight against ISIS. In post-Assad Syria, Turkey would aim to maximise its influence while preventing the establishment of a Kurdish statelet along its southern border.
Turkey has emerged as a decisive player in the Syrian conflict, skilfully navigating regional dynamics to amplify its strategic influence, not just in Syria but also in Iraq and the wider Middle Eastern region. Despite its involvement in the Syrian crisis, it will be wise for Ankara to use its influence responsibly by laying out its security concerns and conditions for good relations with any future government in Damascus without meddling in its internal affairs.
Adnan Nasser is an American Lebanese journalist based in Beirut. He is skilled in cultural diplomacy and international affairs research.
Hiba Abdulwahhab is an independent researcher specialising in regional politics and society. She is the founder and executive director of the Middle Eastern Women’s Organization, a DC-based NGO.
I concur, Turkey stole the thunder of Egypt leaving Iran as a loser and Saudi standing by!
The Arabs had chances of leadership from Egypt or Saudi, both lost the leadership to ottomans