Syria, long a symbol of resilience and complexity in the Middle East, has become a theater where global and regional powers jockey for influence. Over the last year and a half, the geopolitical landscape has shifted dramatically, with nations reassessing their strategies in light of changing realities. This article delves into the renewed interventions by great powers in Syria, shedding light on Turkey’s recalibration under President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Russia’s strategic maneuvers, Iran’s delicate balancing act, and the evolving posture of the United States.
Turkey’s “2030 Vision” in Question
For nearly two decades, Erdoğan’s vision for Turkey’s geopolitical ascendance has been a cornerstone of his domestic and foreign policies. His “2030 Vision,” aimed at regional dominance and stability, has faced mounting challenges as realities on the ground evolve. Members of the younger generation within the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), particularly those in their 40s and 50s, have increasingly questioned the viability of this strategy.
In the last 12-18 months, AKP insiders reportedly urged Erdoğan to rethink his approach to Syria and Iraq. They highlighted the growing strength of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and its Syrian affiliate, the People’s Protection Units (YPG), both of which Turkey views as existential threats. Adding fuel to their concerns is the persistent involvement of U.S. proxies in the region, which Ankara perceives as an effort to counterbalance Turkish ambitions.
Iran’s Cooperation and Constraints
To address these issues, Erdoğan turned to Tehran, engaging Iran in high-stakes diplomacy. The message was blunt: Turkey demanded that Iran rein in its proxies, who Ankara believes exacerbate instability in northern Syria. Tehran, recognizing the potential for escalating tensions, showed willingness to cooperate but reminded Turkey that its leverage over Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad is limited. Assad’s alignment with Moscow adds another layer of complexity, reducing Iran’s capacity to unilaterally dictate Syrian policy.
This interaction underscores the intricate web of alliances and rivalries in the region. While Turkey and Iran share a mutual interest in countering U.S. influence, their divergent agendas in Syria reflect the limitations of their cooperation.
Moscow’s Calculated Engagement
Following his discussions with Tehran, Erdoğan turned to Moscow, seeking Russian support to weaken Assad’s autonomy. Turkey proposed that, without Russian intervention, it would back a renewed Free Syrian Army (FSA) offensive, potentially reigniting conflict across Syria. This move aimed to pressure Moscow into curbing Assad’s power while ensuring that Turkish-backed factions retained a foothold in the north.
Russian President Vladimir Putin, however, is a master of calculated engagement. Rather than conceding outright, Putin demanded guarantees from Erdoğan that Russian interests in Syria would be safeguarded. Moscow also facilitated the creation of a joint task force with Turkey, ostensibly to ensure that U.S.-aligned proxies would not destabilize the “allied rebels.” This arrangement reflects Russia’s strategic pragmatism: maintaining its influence in Syria while avoiding overextension in a volatile region.
The U.S. Stance: A Shift Toward Isolationism
Three days before Turkey launched its latest offensive in Syria, Ankara informed Washington. To Erdoğan’s surprise, the U.S. response was notably muted. Within the Trump administration’s inner circle, there was little appetite for further entanglement in the Syrian quagmire. Trump’s isolationist tendencies and reluctance to confront Ankara signaled a significant shift in U.S. policy.
Despite this, the U.S. established red lines, primarily centered around the safety of its troops and the security of Israel, its key ally in the region. The outgoing Biden administration also acknowledged a changing tide: Russian and Iranian support for Assad has waned, and the regime’s collapse now seems increasingly plausible. However, for Trump, Syria remains a conflict to avoid rather than resolve.
Turkey’s Gamble and Its Implications
Turkey’s assertiveness in Syria reflects a broader recalibration of its foreign policy. By engaging with Tehran and Moscow, Erdoğan has sought to exploit rifts among Syria’s key backers. Simultaneously, Turkey’s actions underscore its determination to neutralize threats posed by the PKK and YPG, even if that means alienating Washington.
Yet this strategy carries significant risks. A resumption of hostilities could destabilize northern Syria, exacerbating the humanitarian crisis and undermining prospects for a political solution. Furthermore, Turkey’s reliance on Russian cooperation places it in a precarious position, as Moscow’s priorities may shift in response to changing dynamics.
The Role of Great Powers in Shaping Syria’s Future
The renewed meddling of great powers in Syria highlights the enduring significance of the country as a geopolitical chessboard. Each actor has its own agenda:
- Turkey aims to secure its southern border, weaken Kurdish factions, and assert its influence over the remnants of the Syrian opposition.
- Russia seeks to preserve its foothold in the Middle East while maintaining Assad’s regime as a strategic ally, albeit on Moscow’s terms.
- Iran remains focused on leveraging its proxies to project power, though its influence over Assad appears to be diminishing.
- The U.S. has retreated into a more isolationist posture, prioritizing narrow security concerns over broader engagement.
The Road Ahead: Toward a Hopeful Resolution
Syria’s path to peace may be fraught with challenges, but there is room for hope, particularly if key actors prioritize stability and the well-being of the Syrian people. Among these actors, Turkey deserves recognition for shouldering much of the burden. Hosting over 3.5 million Syrian refugees, Turkey has provided a haven for those fleeing violence, often at great economic and social cost. Despite its complex motives in the conflict, Ankara’s commitment to ensuring stability and security in northern Syria stems not only from strategic interests but also from a desire to see its neighbors return to peace. By continuing to emphasize humanitarian solutions and seeking political reconciliation, Turkey can play a pivotal role in Syria’s recovery.
In stark contrast, the roles of the United States and Russia paint a grimmer picture. Both powers, consumed by their geopolitical rivalry, have treated Syria as a chessboard with little regard for the immense human suffering wrought by their actions. Russia’s cold pragmatism and military interventions have sustained a regime complicit in atrocities, while the United States’ often inconsistent and isolationist policies have emboldened proxies without ensuring long-term stability. The cynical calculus of these superpowers has come at an unbearable cost to ordinary Syrians, who deserve better than to be pawns in a global power struggle.
Amid these dynamics, hope also lies in the potential leadership of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) under Mohammed al-Jolani. Once a controversial figure, Jolani has worked to distance HTS from its extremist roots, positioning it as a pragmatic force advocating for governance and stability in opposition-held regions. Under his leadership, HTS has shown a willingness to engage with international actors and has demonstrated a focus on governance, public services, and securing the safety of the population.
For any lasting peace to take hold, Syria must embrace an inclusive government that protects its diverse population, including minorities who have long lived under fear and repression. HTS and other local actors have an opportunity to rise to this challenge by creating a framework of inclusion, fairness, and respect for human rights. Such a government would need to prioritize reconciliation, rebuild trust among communities, and address the root causes of the conflict.
While challenges remain, the resilience of Syria’s people and the potential for leadership grounded in fairness and inclusion provide a glimmer of hope. The international community must support initiatives that empower Syrians to rebuild their nation on a foundation of justice and peace, free from the exploitative agendas of foreign powers.
4o
