Hamas attack on Israel from the Gaza Strip on October 7 have turned the regional and world agenda upside down. After the attacks, which revealed a very deep vulnerability in the triangle of government, army, and intelligence, the Israeli administration, after overcoming the initial shock, adopted into a “state of war” and launched intense bombing activities against the Gaza Strip. Israel’s reactionary and disproportionate bombardment, which has caused the death of thousands of Palestinian civilians so far, has deepened the division in global politics while putting all parties on alert against the possibility of a regional war in the Middle East.
The U.S. sending multiple aircraft carrier strike groups to the Eastern Mediterranean to support Israel’s operations and create deterrence against possible attacks by Hezbollah, the most important pillar of what Iran calls the “Axis of Resistance,” through Lebanon became a concrete output of this state of alert. While U.S. military presence in the region, particularly in the Eastern Mediterranean, Red Sea, and Persian Gulf, has shown tremendous increase with recent developments, it’s necessary to open a separate parenthesis for possible developments in northern Syria.
On October 5, Turkey’s Anka Armed Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) being shot down in northern Syria was reflected in open sources. The U.S. Department of Defense, making a quick statement, noted that the UAV was shot down by one of their F-16s. Pentagon spokesman Pat Ryder characterized the downing of the UAV as an “unfortunate incident,” stating that Turkey was conducting an air operation in the region and was considered a threat due to its proximity to U.S. forces. In the statement made from Turkey, it was conveyed that “a UAV was lost in northern Syria due to different technical assessments in the de-confliction mechanism operated with third parties.”
Although the parties made measured statements about the incident, the dispute between Turkey and the U.S. regarding the presence of the terrorist organization YPG/PKK in Syria has maintained its heat enough to cause the U.S. to shoot down a NATO member country’s UAV for the first time in history. The YPG/PKK, which has long been protected by Washington under the pretext of the possibility of another terrorist organization, ISIS, becoming active again in the region, is currently one of the most important threats against Turkey. The bomb terror attack carried out by YPG/PKK terrorist organization members in the heart of the capital Ankara just four days before October 5 reveals the extent of this threat.
Discussions continue about how much longer the U.S.’s protective attitude toward the terrorist organization YPG/PKK and its military presence in northern Syria, which lacks a legal foundation, will continue. It’s worth noting that these discussions are taking place not only in Turkey but also in U.S. domestic public opinion. In this context, an analysis prepared by Myles B. Caggins III and Carolyn Moorman at the Washington-based think tank New Lines Institute contains important information.
The analysis titled “Preparing to Withdraw from Syria: Creating a Migration Program for U.S. Partners in Operation Inherent Resolve” states that the U.S. should start preparing a program for Syria now to avoid repeating the failures and loss of prestige experienced in the Afghanistan withdrawal operation. The analysis emphasizes that the U.S. will have to withdraw from Syria in a not-too-distant future and needs to prepare a coherent roadmap that will secure the safety of its partners in the region during this withdrawal.
The most striking and only concrete suggestion for this roadmap is the “visa program.” The “Syrian Partner Protection Act,” which was presented as a draft in the 117th House of Representatives and would provide special immigrant status to Syrians who helped U.S. activities against ISIS after January 1, 2014, thus making these partners eligible for “Green Cards,” forms the basis for this visa program that will ensure partners in the region can safely migrate to the U.S. during the final withdrawal.
The analysis also notes that U.S. public and political opinion is increasingly favoring the initiation of the withdrawal process from Syria. While remembering that in March, House Representative Matt Gaetz submitted a resolution to simultaneously withdraw all U.S. forces from Syria on the grounds that “Congress never authorized activities in Syria,” it’s noted that although it failed in the house, receiving 103 yes votes against 321 is quite remarkable in terms of its effects on the field.
There is no clear consensus on the issue of military presence in Syria among U.S. domestic public opinion and politicians. The terrorist organization YPG/PKK, which was armed uncontrollably under the name of fighting ISIS, was adapted to a new apparatus role for U.S. interests in the region after ISIS’s disappearance. From the U.S. perspective, unlike what happened in Iraq, it is maintained as a proxy force against Iranian and Russian influence in Syria as a useful tool without endangering U.S. soldiers’ lives. Again, this U.S. perspective should not be evaluated as monolithic. The factionalization in the triangle of the White House, Pentagon, and U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) on this specific issue must certainly be taken into consideration.
It is a concrete reality that the U.S., which uses the terrorist organization YPG/PKK as a proxy force in the region, cannot continue to ignore Turkey’s legitimate national security concerns, which it sees as an important ally and unshakeable NATO member at every opportunity. This picture, as mentioned above, is seen to be concretized in the views and suggestions of domestic public opinion, think tanks, and politicians.
Clearing northern Syria of the terrorist organization YPG/PKK and ending the organization’s ethnic cleansing and demographic change activities in the region is vital for Turkey’s internal and external security. The complete clearing of the Turkey-Syria border from terrorism stands before us as a great necessity for addressing the Syrian refugee problem in Turkey and ensuring internal peace.
The strategic policy recommendations that Turkey should follow in light of regional and global developments can be evaluated as follows:
Turkey’s continuation of air operations against terror targets in Northern Syria and Iraq with the same patience and determination is critical for ensuring national security. In this process, diplomatic efforts need to be increased to prevent the Hamas-Israel conflict from turning into a regional war. Being vigilant against Iran’s activities, particularly through militia organizations in Syria and Iraq, is vital for regional stability.
There is a need for careful evaluation of discussions regarding the lack of legal basis and unnecessary nature of U.S. military presence in Syria. An information campaign should be conducted for U.S. public opinion about how Marxist-Leninist extreme left terrorist organizations within the Peoples’ United Revolutionary Movement (HBDH), organized as an umbrella organization affiliated with the terrorist organization YPG/PKK, are being financed by U.S. taxpayers.
It is important to avoid ideological discourse that increases fragility in foreign policy for the sake of scoring points in domestic politics. Strengthening economic and diplomatic relations with Gulf countries stands among the priority steps that will increase Turkey’s regional effectiveness. Addressing these policies with a holistic approach and implementing them in a coordinated manner is of great importance for protecting Turkey’s regional and global interests.
