No scenario in Syria is possible without Ankara’s approval: Tensions with the US escalate – INTERVIEW

The geography of Western Asia has turned into a dynamic region in recent years, where the interests of global powers and regional actors intersect. Conflicts, military operations, and diplomatic tensions in this region—particularly around Syria and Türkiye—have intensified even further.

Currently, there is active discussion about the U.S. military strategy in Syria, the construction of a new military base in Kobani, and how these developments will affect relations with Türkiye. In his interview with News.Az, Professor Dr. Mahmut Yardımcıoğlu, Director of the Institute of West Asia Studies, assessed the impact of U.S.-Türkiye tensions on regional stability, the long-term consequences of establishing military bases in Kobani, and how this tension might affect such players as Russia and Iran. Professor Yardımcıoğlu also shared his views on how the potential beginning of a new era in Türkiye-Syria relations could change the regional situation.

- What is the purpose of building a U.S. military base in Kobani? How might this step influence regional tensions?

- The geography of northern Syria is now effectively a new “chessboard” where major powers are contending with Türkiye. Since 2018, the United States has been actively supplying weapons to this region, known as Kobani, which is the northern part of Syria. We can see the idea of connecting northern Iraq, northern Syria, and southeastern Türkiye into a single entity, with the eventual goal of transforming these three autonomous zones into one unified state-like formation. The United States is taking every necessary step to turn these theoretical ideas into practice.

To date, Türkiye’s resolute stance has prevented such aims from being achieved and blocked their implementation. This has led to a covert struggle between Türkiye and the United States. By acting against Türkiye in the region, the United States has completely contradicted the principles of NATO partnership, which, unfortunately, is behavior unworthy of such an alliance.

For more than ten years, American military advisers have actively supported ethnically separatist groups in this region that are hostile to Türkiye. Türkiye has repeatedly raised this issue at the levels of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the presidential administration, yet the United States continues to ignore all concerns and refuses to retreat even one step, which is regrettable. At this point, diplomatic struggle is unavoidable. As long as the United States does not abandon its intention to give statehood to the separatist structures labeled by combinations of the letters PKK or YPG, and does not stop supporting them, conflict with Türkiye will continue. This conflict could escalate into a much harder-line confrontation, including armed clashes.

Moreover, we might soon witness France—having been pushed out of Africa and long interested in this region—joining the United States in Kobani by deploying military units that operate jointly with PKK/YPG and SDF militants. France also has its own scores to settle with Türkiye.


- How will the U.S. decision affect relations between Türkiye and Syria?

- If we talk about how this will impact relations between Türkiye and Syria’s new leadership, we can assume that Syria will still take Türkiye’s side. If there is a so-called new Syrian leadership today, it exists largely thanks to Türkiye’s serious and selfless support. We’ll have to see how events unfold.

I believe there will be no major disagreements between the new Syrian leadership and Türkiye on issues related to Kobani and these separatist groups. For both Syria and Türkiye, these armed groups are forces that undermine territorial integrity.


- Why are the United States supplying the YPG with air defense systems, armored vehicles, and other equipment?

- U.S. support for the YPG did not begin yesterday. The terrorist organization PKK was simply renamed YPG, and then SDF, in order to formally remove it from “blacklists” and give it a semblance of legitimacy. That is why the United States has long been able to freely supply these groups with air defense systems, drones, heavy weapons, and other military equipment. Military advisers were sent in to train and equip these units. According to general estimates, the total number of these groups reaches about 120,000. They are being trained to form a quasi-state entity in northern Syria, supported by the United States and some Western countries.

When it comes to Türkiye, all structures hostile to it can act in unison. We have seen that the United States and Russia or, for example, the U.S. and Iran, can behave like close friends if it means acting against Türkiye. This has been observed many times.

Türkiye is well aware of and evaluates these processes with a sober mind. As long as the United States supports various separatist formations in the region—whether YPG, SDF, or PKK—Türkiye may find itself in a real, heated conflict with Washington. Türkiye has no intention of turning a blind eye. For Türkiye, this is a matter of its own existence. No talk of an “alliance within NATO” or diplomatic formalities will stop Türkiye from eliminating these entities.


- How serious is Türkiye’s warning about carrying out a military operation if “Kurdish self-defense forces” do not lay down their arms?

- If the terrorist groups calling themselves “Kurdish self-defense forces” in northern Syria do not lay down their arms, Türkiye will continue to press them with an “iron fist.” Türkiye will definitely act in concert with Syria’s new leadership. At the moment, Ankara is tired of constant threats and is prepared to take any necessary steps, regardless of possible losses or consequences. We will see these steps in the near future.

If, for some reason, the new Syrian leadership headed by Ahmed Ash-Sharan is unable or slow to take the necessary measures against the YPG and SDF, then Türkiye will eliminate these formations through the Syrian National Army (SNA), which it openly supports. Türkiye has sufficient strength to push these groups back to the eastern bank of the Euphrates. We are already seeing the first signs of such developments.

There is information that, in battles between the Syrian National Army and the YPG/SDF, the latter are suffering significant losses. In certain areas, the YPG/SDF indeed has tanks and other armored vehicles, but the Armed Forces of Türkiye and the Syrian National Army are maintaining control of the situation and taking appropriate measures.

We are also seeing a certain division of roles. In Syria’s coastal areas and near Damascus, actions have been carried out by the HTS (Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham) group, while the PKK issue is being addressed on a diplomatic level. Meanwhile, the Syrian National Army is conducting fierce battles on the ground, and these clashes could intensify in the future.

The United States pretends not to understand how resolute Türkiye is on this matter. But they are perfectly aware and simply choose to feign ignorance. One way or another, the initial goal is to push the YPG/SDF back across the Euphrates to the east, then completely clear them out of that area. If the U.S. is looking for a partner, its only truly reliable ally in the region can be Türkiye.

Trying to control the region with a 120,000-strong armed group without Türkiye’s consent is a pointless move doomed to fail. In the medium- and long-term, no project can be implemented in this region without Ankara’s agreement.


- Why, despite trusting the new Syrian leadership, is Türkiye opposed to building a military base? What is the message here?

- Türkiye’s position is a serious warning that Ankara intends to protect its interests and prevent any loss of strategic advantage in the region. Although the new Syrian leadership was formed largely through Türkiye’s support, Ankara realizes it does not fully control it and that it could potentially fall under the influence of outside forces. By opposing the establishment of U.S. and other foreign players’ military bases on Syrian territory, Türkiye aims to maintain regional balance and safeguard itself against national security threats.

In this way, Ankara is sending a clear signal that “no external power can pursue long-term plans in this geography without coordinating with Türkiye.” Türkiye understands that the permanent military presence of any external actor could destabilize the region and weaken its own position.

It is also a message to the new Syrian leadership: despite having been established with Türkiye’s assistance, any activities contradicting Ankara’s interests will not be tolerated. This firm stance reflects Türkiye’s desire to ensure long-term stability and security in the region. By continuing to support the YPG and SDF, the United States is essentially crossing Türkiye’s “red line,” as Türkiye believes Washington should remain on its side as an ally. All of this amounts to a veiled warning to the U.S.: Türkiye is prepared to take all necessary actions to protect its interests and will not bow to external players’ plans.

Ultimately, this shows that Türkiye maintains its military and political strength in the region and will not risk its own security.


- How could the U.S. decision to leave its base in Iraq and build a new one in Kobani change how global actors view the region? How might it affect Russia and Iran?

- Türkiye’s influence in forming the new Syrian leadership has already caused alarm among many countries, primarily Russia and Iran. No one expected Türkiye to make such far-sighted and quiet moves—coordinating military, diplomatic, and other structures. But today, we are seeing quite a successful result of this strategy.

Naturally, Russia and Iran are not pleased with this, nor was there any reason to expect otherwise. States do not have eternal enemies or friends—only interests. The Republic of Türkiye, drawing on its historical identity and responsibility for nearly ten million Syrian refugees under its protection, took what it believes is a just step.

The fact that Russia, Iran, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Israel do not approve of Ankara’s actions is overall understandable.


- What might be the ultimate outcome of the current tensions between Türkiye and the U.S. over the Syrian issue? And how will the base construction in Kobani affect long-term stability in the region?

- If the goal is to ensure peace in the region, the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union must understand that Türkiye holds the key. The existing tension between Türkiye and the U.S. over Syria cannot end as Washington wants unless Türkiye gives its consent. In Syria, it is impossible to implement any scenario without Ankara’s approval—and certainly not against its will.

American strategists grasp this, although they try to take steps in the hope of getting results. These attempts, however, are doomed. The United States has never behaved like a reliable ally: looking at history, when things get difficult, they often make a 180-degree turn and leave their allies to face problems alone. The same could happen in Kobani. The PKK fighters (now called the SDF and YPG), who are hiding behind America, really have no chance of achieving their goals. Most likely, they will come to realize this—although too late and at a high cost.

News.Az