North-Press Agency
Dr. Ahmad Yousef
The Syrian-Turkish relations remained of a problematic nature dyed by discord factors which are stemming from the contradictions generated by the different political trends and the views of the two sides on various regional and international issues, those relations witnessed an increase in their severity to reach multiple peaks of discord, perhaps the first of which was the process of taking of Liwa Iskenderun with a French collusion at the end of the 1930's of the last century. The accelerating events resulting from the Turkish threats of war on Syria was a result of the latter's attitudes towards the Kurdish issue in Turkey, which resulted in Adana Security Agreement that changed the course of relations between the two sides, from a state of discord and contradiction in attitudes to a state of formal rapprochement, which the Syrian side convinced itself of its seriousness during the years of the Syrian-Turkish honeymoon, especially between 2000 and 2010.
The course of events and the nature of relations during the first decade of the current century suggested that the form of discord in the relations between the Syrian and Turkish sides has become something from the past. On the basis of that formula, they were able to build a system of relationships that began to move gradually towards strategic levels despite the effectiveness of the strength of the contradictions between them. These relations started from the peak of the tension, which almost ended in a war of unknown results in 1998 to the Strategic Cooperation Council in 2009. This amazing development in the form of Syrian-Turkish relations among its followers, has generated a conviction that the contradiction contracts are over and they have been replaced by pages of convergence and sharing interests.
What is missing from the optimists' views of the development of the Syrian-Turkish relations is the deep nature of the international relations in general and their subjection to many considerations which control the size of their development among the sides, and if those relations have a streamlined characteristic when the matter is related to countries located in similar or close political, economic or military axes, they will undoubtedly be subject to the serious obstacles if it attaches to countries belonging to different axes and alliances. The reality of the state of the Syrian-Turkish relations has never been consensual, and the data indicates that it won't be so due to its being subject to stronger discord considerations in its impeding effects of the development of the relations than the weak attraction factors. What led to the emergence of the optimistic situation in the relations between the two sides, despite its establishment on fundamental contradictions in their view of the various issues, in addition to the stemming discord from the issue of taking the Syrian Liwa Iskenderun?
The region witnessed dramatic changes after the collapse of the socialist bloc, the main support of the Syrian regime, and casted a shadow on the political systems in the region and made them vulnerable to pressures which didn't constitute a heavy burden on them in the pre-collapse stage. The Syrian political system was undisputedly one of the most vulnerable to foreign pressures, which was imposed on it by a set of pressures that led to its compliance and acceptance of Madrid Conference in 1992 to normalize relations with Israel, followed by its submission to the Turkish terms in Adana Security Agreement in 1998. No matter how that agreement puts pressure on Syria, the latter saw in it a ray to end the isolation that it is experiencing after losing its protective umbrella. Therefore, Syria hanged on developing relations with Turkey, the northern neighbor which possesses sources of relative strength, basing in it, on its developed relations with the Western countries and the United States of America.
The matter was different for the other side, which felt empowered after being able to impose Adana agreement without being matched by making specific concessions that helped in developing interrelations, but it was quite the opposite. It has adopted a gradual methodology in developing its relations with the Syrian side in a manner that is commensurate with its economic and security interests. It took advantage of its decision to prevent the U.S. forces from using its lands to attack the Iraqi regime in 2003 in developing its commercial activities across the Syrian territories, after Syria applauded the move, especially as it was afraid of events similar to the Iraqi ones on its territories.
As a result of its emergence as strong, Turkey hasn't made any new balances in its foreign relations, unlike the other side, so there were no changes in its attitudes regarding the crises that Syria was exposed to, during the development of its relations with Turkey. Regarding the Turkish stance about the accusation of Syria in killing the Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, Abdullah Gul announced that Turkey doesn't sympathize with Syria, although Syria has taken positive positions towards Turkey in the recent years. Nor did it refrain from presenting condemnation of the Israeli aircraft attack on what was said to be nuclear installations in Deir ez-Zor in September 2007, but it also opened its airspace for Israel in order to carry out its operations, and it took a pro-Israel stance in the July 2006 war. All these stances and events confirm that Turkey remains in the orbit of its previous relations, which are necessarily contradictory to the Syrian interests. If this has a political indication, it indicates the absence of the Syrian considerations in the Turkish calculations and balances.
Despite all the negative Turkish stances in the era of the development of its relations with Syria, it enjoyed economic and trade agreements through which it almost controlled the capital of the Syrian economy, the city of Aleppo which is closest to Gaziantep, which gradually turned into a consumer market for the Turkish products, in addition to the creeping of the Turkish investment establishments towards it. All its economic behaviors towards Syria are crowned with the signing of 30 memorandums of understanding which covered all fields starting from defense and security reaching to health, and this was at the first meeting of the Strategic Cooperation Council held in October 2009.
The nature of the Syrian-Turkish relations, during the period between Adana Agreement in 1998 and the Syrian crisis in 2011, emphasizes the fact that Syria saw these relations as a lifejacket from external pressures, so it was coupled with its presentation of economic and political concessions, and was met by a Turkish vision which confirms that Syria is a party subject to its compliance, a market for its products and a gateway to its southern borders, without affecting these relations on its regional and international political balances.
The Syrian crisis in 2011 confirmed on that Turkish vision towards Syria, the state and the regime, so its announcement of its standing alongside the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood opposition forces was nothing but an announcement of its affirmation of commitment to the factors of discord in its relations with Syria, where it took two steps backward for each one forward in its relations with it, and its eagerness to control the entire Syrian geography, albeit it is impossible in light of the balances set by the international powers by completely interfering in the Syrian file.