What can Assad guarantee?

Yeni Şafak · YASİN AKTAY - What can Assad guarantee?

In international relations, major policy changes, whatever the purpose for which they are made, disrupt relations that have for a long time become habitual and established a routine, even a comfort, so it is impossible for them not to create discomfort. Especially in the Syrian question, which has behind it wounds that are still bleeding, and in which the pains of the rear and the pains of children are still fresh, it is impossible for Türkiye's initiative for a new policy not to be met first of all with astonishment on all sides. Yet to propose talking and trying another way in a matter that has gone on for 12 years and in which, if it continues along these lines in the near future, no horizon of change to anyone's benefit is visible, is, for all its astonishing character, let us admit, an initiative that also requires courage.

We can follow clearly from the course of events that the one taking this initiative is Türkiye, and that on the side of Syria, Russia, Iran and the USA there is no intention at all of changing the situation. Indeed, the USA's statements expressing discomfort with this initiative of Türkiye were not late in coming.

Assessing the first talks between Türkiye and Syria in Moscow, US State Department Spokesman Price said, "All I can say is that our policy has not changed. We do not support countries that improve their relations with or give support to the brutal dictator Bashar Assad in order to bring him back to his former state. We call on states to take into account the Assad regime's horrific human rights record of the last 12 years, which continues to oppress the Syrian people, and its continuing to block the access of the long-suffering Syrian people to humanitarian aid," thereby revealing not only the USA's stance toward these talks but also the hypocrisy of the Syrian policy it has followed up to now by this means.

The USA, which at every opportunity puts forward "the brutal dictator, the 12-year horrific human rights record and the suffering Syrian people," has done nothing to change the situation in Syria in a real sense. For 12 years in Syria, besides giving this brutal dictator more room to swell his entire human rights record, it did one more thing: it itself became a partner in this record. With the terrorist organizations it supports it made the matter far more inextricable. Do nothing to change the situation, make the situation even more inextricable, and also stand against initiatives that would change this situation: this is, up to now, the most important reason for the continuation of the Syrian problem.

Let it not be misunderstood: it is not only the USA that stands in the way of a solution; Russia, Iran and the Syrian regime itself have not approached any solution either. Let it not be thought that the continuation of the present situation in this way, that is, the continuation of the crisis, disturbs these parties. In the Syrian context, concepts like "creative, productive, profitable chaos" were not produced for nothing. Although the source of these concepts is US strategic think tanks and they were produced to propose a political model to the USA, they fit the reality of all these parties all too well.

For all the actors in question, the current situation produces more political profit. All of them hope for some benefit from the situation continuing in this way. The situation's moving in the direction of any solution disturbs the comfort of all of them.

Apart from the Syrian people above all, who do not want the situation to continue this way and who suffer from it, there is only Türkiye. For Türkiye is a party that has a 900 km border with Syria, to which all the problems there send a wave of refugees, and which receives a terrorist threat from instability. That is why, in spite of all the pains of children and of the rear, Türkiye shows the courage to make an initiative for a new policy, to open the blocked situation, for a solution.

However, it is impossible not to be astonished at the minds of those who, from the very first moment, try to present this initiative as virtually a capitulation in Türkiye's Syria policy, an abandonment of and turnaround from its whole policy. In this problem, which has gone on for 12 years, Türkiye has from the beginning taken the moral and real positions that the situation demanded. Were the film rewound, developments occurred such that it could not be seen how it could have acted otherwise.

Today, however, there is no point in loading the expectations from this rapprochement with more meaning than is due.

For example, to think that with this initiative Türkiye will cooperate with the Syrian regime against PKK-PYD terror is a waste of the mind. For the PYD-PKK is not a structure under the control of the Syrian regime. On this matter, it cannot be expected that, as a result of a possible rapprochement, the Syrian regime would, at Türkiye's request, wage an effective struggle against these terrorist groups or cooperate with Türkiye. If the regime had the capacity to fight the PYD, the situation in Syria would already be much different. At present Syrian territory is occupied by the USA, and the Syrian regime has no capacity at all to conduct an operation on these occupied lands. That is why the party to any negotiation against the terror danger directed at Türkiye can be not the Syrian regime but the USA, and perhaps Russia.

Meanwhile, Türkiye is the only party that can give Syria a guarantee of territorial integrity in the long term. It would be far more fitting for the Syrian regime, which expresses sensitivity about territorial integrity, to be concerned about the US and PYD occupation in its own country before it gets to Türkiye.

As for the return of refugees as a subject of direct talks with Syria, it is also unnecessary to expect a solution in the near term. Refugee Syrians' trusting Assad, whose only attitude toward the opposition for 12 years has been an excessive massacre, and returning to their country, whatever kind of guarantees Assad may give: neither Türkiye wants this nor can anyone want it.

Neither Russia nor Iran can give confidence regarding a guarantee against their killers for those who want to return. Besides, the other actors in the massacre are not merely the patrons but the partners of those who carried out the slaughter. What value could a guarantee have from one who is an accomplice in the massacre that he will not do the same thing to the other again?

However, the only party that can give confidence on a cooperation that could be made for a return can be Türkiye, and a safe zone to be provided by increasing and recognizing Türkiye's zones of protection and control inside Syria could even motivate Syrians to return voluntarily. For example, as Mukhtar al-Shanqiti, writing on aljazeera.net, says, expanding the safe zone under Türkiye's control inside Syria so as to include Aleppo until the crisis comes to an end could be a very good solution. Considering that Aleppo is one of the biggest sources of the refugees in Türkiye, this could be the most reasonable subject in the negotiations, and most important, for the benefit of all parties and of the solution.