In an interview with an American media outlet, Lavrov said that "Russia has repeatedly burned its fingers in its relations with the West". But a number of Russian observers maintain the opinion that in fact Moscow has often "stepped on the hoe" in its relations with Turkey as well. Without forgetting about the 12 victorious wars waged over the centuries with the Ottoman Empire.
These days, the question is often asked why, with so many differences and "stab in the back" policies, as they express in Moscow for Erdogan's positions against Moscow's interests, there is no move to "set things straight".
Is it because of an effort not to make Erdogan unnecessarily nervous so that he can have "Turkish Stream"? Or are steps being refined because the time has not come to deliver a stunning blow in response to non-compliance with agreements reached, such as those from Astana, for example? Moreover, the war with Ukraine is not over and it is not at all expedient to break the thin thread of trade and economic relations without sanctions against Russia. As the West often insists.
But the situation in Syria today has exacerbated relations between Ankara and Moscow to the point of intemperance. Especially after the “genocide”, as they called it in Moscow, in connection with the murders of thousands of citizens among the Alawite and Christian communities in Assad's former country. Blood is being shed in abundance, and only 8 thousand have found refuge in the Russian Hmeimim base to save their lives. More than 10 thousand have died, according to Russian information. Driven by radical Islamists, whom Turkey has been supporting and nurturing for years, in order to remove Assad and lay hands on Damascus.
Erdogan is playing a complex chess game on the territory of Syria, where players from near and far are in abundance. The country is de facto in disarray, and the radical Islamization of the previously secular Syria is in full swing. Videos of repressions against innocent citizens, robbed, humiliated, with bombings of villages where people from minorities live, and women being kidnapped as in barbaric times, are circulating on the networks. All in the name of destroying “Assad's supporters”.
In Brussels, they claim that the latest case of the so-called “Alawite uprising” is by forces supporting Assad and express confidence that the “respected partner” in Damascus will stop the pogroms against civilians, against minorities in the name of rebuilding the country and integrating the population within the borders of an “independent Syria”. Of course, the attacks and violence against civilians are condemned, but not a word is said that the so-called ”moderate opposition”, which overthrew Assad with the support of Turkey, are actually radical Islamist jihadists with leader Sharaa, former Joulani, who comes from the ranks of Al Qaeda, Al Nusra, i.e. ”Islamic State”.
Now from the ”initiators of the genocide”, as they say in Moscow, a ”successful transition of power” is required and agreements are concluded, the goal of which is rather the final expulsion of Russia and Iran from the region in order to have their own role and influence. Including on the pipelines from the Persian Gulf to Europe through Syria, which have been prepared for a long time. Competition of Russian pipelines for Europe. Which Assad did not allow and sided with Moscow. The civil war was tied up in a towel. After Assad left Damascus, Russia's main goal remains to preserve at least the two military bases in Syria, key for influence in the Middle East and a refueling ground for the countries of Africa, where the Russians have their presence and role. Not only through “Wagner” fighters.
This is precisely the main reason for Putin to talk on the phone with Sharaa, to allow the return of Syrian assets in local currency in Russian banks and to call for the protection of minorities and Russian forces in Syria. At first, Moscow clarified the concepts regarding the ruling jihadists in Damascus, often called “silovac” instead of terrorists, which they are by origin. Then the Russians publicized the actions of the pro-Turkish fighters of the “Damascus regime”, who, encouraged by impunity, numerical superiority and Western support, began mass killings of representatives of ethnic and religious minorities, mainly Alawites and Christians.
It is more impressive that Russia and the US came up with a joint initiative for closed consultations in the UN Security Council regarding the situation in Syria. In practice, there is a common understanding about the pogroms committed against minorities and there are even reports that Moscow has “tested the waters” with the idea of creating separate states for Christians and Alawites in Syria, to protect them from the actions of the current rulers in Damascus. There is a general understanding that the crisis in Syria will not resolve itself, and fears of a new civil war are growing.
They even say that without a doubt “Syria is being Iraqiized”. They are referring to what happened in Iraq in 2003 as a result of the intervention of the “coalition of the willing” and the consequence was the creation of an autonomous Iraqi Kurdistan. Which makes Erdogan's hair stand on end. In the UN Security Council, Russia and the US have called on Sharaa to seek responsibility for the pogroms of “radical Islamist terrorists, including foreign jihadists, who massacred the population in Western Syria. They have categorically stood behind the ethnic and religious minorities in the country.
The assessment is that “violence, especially against the Alawites, has weakened Sharaa, who already has problems not only at home, but also with the US”. The Russians, on the other hand, speak of “terrorist scum from Central Asia”, which was used for the pogroms. The connection with Turkey's policy in Transcaucasia and Central Asia is transparent. In Syria, Ankara undoubtedly supports these groups in every way, whose members often record videos in Russian to boast about their bloody deeds.
In most cases, they have relatives who are migrants in Russia and create huge problems for the Russian special services. Even the fact that the brother of one of the terrorists who carried out the brutal attack in Crocus in 2016 is fighting on the side of the extremists against Assad is recalled.
It is no coincidence that the Israeli Foreign Minister says that “The Joulani regime is dangerous. Alawite and Christian civilians are being killed. It is right for Europe to raise its voice against these atrocities and draw the appropriate conclusions”. The fact is that Israel has not only annexed the entire Golan Heights to its country, but also annexed the Druze, another ethnic group in Syria, to Tel Aviv. It not only protects them, but also gives them the right to work in Israel, including in structures such as the fire department, militias, and state institutions. This southern part of Syria is practically not controlled by Damascus.
That is why it is claimed that Syria may break up into 4 independent entities if Sharaa fails to unite and integrate the different ethnicities and religious communities into a single whole. Which, according to Tulsi Gabbard /head of US intelligence services/, with all their shortcomings and negativity towards them, Assad - father and son - managed to do. And they preserved Syria as a secular state.
In this particular case, Russia and Israel have similar positions. They say that Tel Aviv is lobbying Washington to give approval to keep Russian military bases in Syria and not to withdraw the US from the areas where the Syrian Kurds live. Because they are in danger from Ankara's policies regarding the so-called Kurdish issue.
And here comes the topic of Turkey's interests and its neo-Ottoman policies in the Middle East, specifically in Syria. The country, which is a “keystone” for the region and if it moves, collapse is inevitable. Turkish military units are not only stationed in Syria, but Ankara's latest statements are in the spirit of “Turkey's military dominance in the regions of “Euphrates Shield”, “Olive Branch” and “Peace Spring” will continue until the completion of the process of liberating Syria from the PKK.”
Therefore, efforts are being made to include the Syrian Kurds in the government in Damascus and to sign an agreement to integrate their armed forces into the so-called Syrian army, but without the right to have their own weapons. Ankara's main goal is to preserve Syria in the territories it had under Assad, but it is aware that this is a “delicate process that will have its ups and downs and will require the elimination of opposing factors at each stage”. Without specifically mentioning the “factors”. But first of all, the PKK/YPG leadership must be “completely removed from the system”.
The mechanisms for implementing policies for “disarming the PKK and the self-disbanding of this Kurdish military organization in order to finally solve the so-called Kurdish issue” are not new. For months, Erdogan's coalition partner, the nationalist Bahçeli, has been negotiating with the Turkish Kurds and the pro-Turkish parliamentary party HDP for “disarming” in exchange for the promise of his release from the Imrali Ocelan prison.
He has been in prison for more than 20 years, but he was in Syria from 1979 to 1999. Hafez Assad used him to keep the Syrian Kurds under control in the name of Damascus. Back then, Öcalan had an undeniable influence on the Kurds in general – in Syria, Turkey, Iraq. But today? Hardly after, they say, decades in prison and there are reports that he is often under the influence of drugs. The Syrian Kurds have described the agreement in Turkey to release Öcalan as an “internal matter of Turkey” and have indicated that it does not concern them.
However, Ankara also made it impossible to reach an agreement between the Syrian Kurds and the "regime in Damascus", i.e. between their SDF with leader Mazloum Abdi and Sharaa. Turkey hopes that the agreement also includes a clause for "handing over weapons to the central administration". But there are concerns that the agreement may also include laying the foundations for a Kurdish autonomous region east of the Euphrates, somehow subordinate to the central government. Which is what Israel and Russia insist on, not to mention Iran.
They say that the division of Syria is impossible without US military support, and the information that Israel has allocated $ 1 billion for this purpose is accepted as Zionist propaganda. And whether the US provided Abdi with a helicopter to move to Damascus remains an unanswered question. It is speculated that such a policy of Washington is due to the desire to withdraw from Syria. And they are the main ally of the Syrian Kurds in Syria.
That is why they are forced to negotiate with Sharaa. And to insist that the political and cultural rights of the Kurds be included in the new draft constitution. That there should be an official status for the Kurdish language, a regional administration and the right to own weapons. There is no clarity on the issue.
But Ankara is asking itself questions such as “will a second Kurdish autonomous structure arise in Northeastern Syria”, something similar to the one in Iraq? If this is a threat, will it have to be “tolerated like in Iraqi Kurdistan”? Will this process also affect Turkey? Or will the agreement in Syria affect the current process in Turkey itself? And what if it leads to new bloodshed? Topics that are on the agenda of all the media in Ankara, which indicates that the concern is there.