The civil war in Syria has profoundly affected ethnic and religious structures in the region, creating both opportunities and threats for the Kurds. With the end of the Baath regime, Kurds have taken important steps towards both preserving their gains and achieving status in North and East Syria. However, these developments continue to be perceived as a “threat” by the AKP-MHP government, which insists on its anti-Kurdish policies. International powers, on the other hand, are not taking a clear stance against Turkey's policies and its attempts to occupy Kurdish rights and territory through paramilitary groups. 

 

The opportunities and threats the Kurds face in the complex balance in the region will shape the future of not only Syria but the entire Middle East. Journalist Engin Yurtsever spoke about Syria and the developments in North and East Syria. 

 

Yurtsever stated that the collapse of the Baath regime is a situation that harbors both historical opportunities and dangers, and that the Kurds can take advantage of the opportunities by looking at their policies. Stating that the Kurds have an important military and political power in the region, Yurtsever said: “We can say that they have been able to use this power partially effectively so far. I say 'partially' because the Turkish state is constantly putting a barrier in front of them. Therefore, it would be appropriate to say 'partially'. The current way of securing it seems to be as follows; to cooperate with the states that are decisive as military and political powers in the region to the extent of their interests, while at the same time not leaving the roots of its own freedom and giving the other nationalities and beliefs in the region the assurance of being able to live and exist together. This is a policy in line with both the democratic nation paradigm and the reality of the region.”

 

 

Yurtsever stated that Turkey's updated understanding of the Misak-ı Milli (National Pact) does not have any equivalent and said that there is no Ottoman heritage left in the region. Stating that jihadist understandings have developed, Yurtsever said: “International states are waging a power struggle and Israel has weight. Even if they seem to be playing an active role in Syria defacto due to the circumstances, they will learn that this is not valid and that these gangs will definitely be liquidated. Syria has already lost the characteristic of being a single state. The name of the form of government is not decisive. Reality shows that the Kurds are now a force there waiting for international recognition, and there are also Alawites and Druze. We also know that they are under the threat of genocide by the current regime. They need protection and a government where they can see themselves as free, even if their influence on the equation is small. This can be considered as a suggestion: These structures can establish relations with the Kurds and demand status through international agreements.”

 

Noting that there are three threats in Rojava on the axis of state, nationality and faith, Yurtsever said that for this reason, the Kurds constitute the focal point of the maps to be drawn and added: “The new administration to be formed in Syria lacks the power to contain threats for now, but we can see where it will evolve towards by looking at the developments within a year. Based on the available data, we can say that the HTS and the SNA have no intention of establishing relations with the Kurds, and even if they do, it will remain at the level of a relationship that will soon deteriorate, which would mean a declaration of war against the Kurds in the future. The remaining obvious dangers naturally develop in the context of the states that colonized Kurdistan. Of course, we should also briefly mention the states with military and political weight in the region: the US, the UK, the EU countries and Russia. Historical opportunity appears in this equation. Since all of these states have their own contradictions with each other and cannot eliminate these contradictions, at some point they have to establish an official relationship with the Kurds. Such a situation would not only leave it to the Kurds to bear the brunt of the threats, but would also involve other states. The threats from Turkey are the ones that must be stopped and eliminated. Because the others are the ones that can change according to self-interest. But Turkey has an irreconcilable contradiction in that it bases its existence on the destruction of the Kurds or the silencing of their voices.”

 

'DEMOCRATIC NATION PARADIGM IS ESSENTIAL'

 

Yurtsever stated that Turkey has taken the second step of the Neo-Ottomanism understanding by supporting the barbaric gang organisations called HTS and SNA. Yurtsever stated that the first step of this understanding was to bind the Southern Kurdistan administration to itself and that Turkey has reached this stage by taking advantage of the political turmoil in the region. Yurtsever said: "In my opinion, Russia has agreed to give up having a say in the region by withdrawing its support to Syria and Iran in return for the partial granting of this region to Russia from the quagmire in Ukraine. While imposing their own interests, imperialist states give imperial states the role of extras at most. They do the dirty work and stay in the background and hold the imperial states to account by using the concepts of 'democracy, justice and human rights'. Turkey is an imperial state, lacking the cultural, historical and economic powers to be imperialist. This can also lead to the disintegration of Turkey. Apart from this, it also paves the way for Turkey to be judged at the ICC for violating 'the sovereign rights of another state'. If we look at the shaping as a result; perhaps after a period of two years, which will require heavy costs for the Kurds, these strategies will be broken and Turkey will be shaped as having evolved to a very different point from its current state."

 

Noting that they do not know how and when a government will be formed in Syria, "Political Islam inevitably includes jihadism. This should be stated from the beginning. The threshold for political Islamists to be able to show that political Islam can be in harmony with democracy in the Middle East has already been passed. The jihadist understanding of governance, which has been dipped in the sauce of religion, inevitably poses a threat to other governments, beliefs and nationalities, and seeks to eliminate them. This is not a choice, but a necessity. This is a threat to the democratic nation paradigm, of which the Kurds are the backbone, and which proposes that all identities, nationalities and beliefs live together. Because it does not accept pluralism and democratic understanding; it imposes a monist understanding. In addition, their attitude towards Alevis, Druze, Armenians, Circassians is not unknown. There is no guarantee that they will not turn towards them after standing on their feet. We go back to the beginning again: It is essential that they organise and take part in the democratic nation paradigm, not only for their own future but also for a more modern social and political change in the region," he said.

 

TURKEY'S PLANS

 

Stating that Turkey has never made peace in its history, Yurtsever said that Turkey wants to spare the Kurds in the new process in a way similar to the Lausanne process. For this reason, it is misleading to see MHP leader Bahçeli's statement on Abdullah Öcalan as a step towards democracy, Yurtsever said that Bahçeli's statement needs concrete steps.

 

Stating that HTS's political Islam and jihadist understanding could cause problems in Syria, Yurtsever noted that the SNA was excluded from the government formation process because it is run by Turkey. Yurtsever said: "We do not know what kind of a relationship the government will establish with the Kurds, who are the most organised in Syria and have broad popular support. Although M. Kobane made a press statement on this issue, the lack of response and clarity from the other side is clearly the sound of a danger. In my opinion, the new power and government can only protect itself against the dangers on the basis of co-operation with the Kurds. For this, it needs to take a clear position against the impositions of the SNA and Turkey. Time will determine this. It is not a reading of intentions, but HTS must first turn towards the SNA for its own sphere of power. There cannot be two powers with the same goals. HTS, which is both strong and has international support, has to liquidate the SNA. Turkey's resistance is also in question here. Because the SNA is the 'lead soldier' in the region. Nevertheless, we will see that the SNA will be liquidated and Turkey will be excluded from the region."

 

 

Yurtsever said: "Turkey has clearly shown in practice that it is outside the Russia-Iran front. This will have its repercussions and Turkey is also characterised by the other front as an 'unreliable state with a jihadist mentality'. Unfortunately, the policy does not consist of immediate steps, but of long-term steps. Turkey clearly wants to realise the unfinished Kurdish genocide of this century. Thus, it intends to continue on its way with an updated version of the Misak-ı Milli. However, the developing Kurdistan Freedom Struggle has thrown this intention into the dustbin of history. No other state, not Turkey, can erase the Kurds, who have a reliable, secular and serious organisation. Kurds have to take every step in their interests. They should walk with every state in line with their interests, without having a dogmatic understanding of 'he is an imperialist, she is an economist'. This is what is being implemented now. The political understanding called the third way is an attitude that hails the future already. One of the short answers to this question is that Turkey lacks the wisdom to develop a long-term strategy."

 

'THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE KURDS HAS A RISING VALUE'

 

Stating that the developments will be a difficult process for the Kurds and other groups in the short term, Yurtsever said: "The Kurds have a fragmented stance. Unfortunately, the KDP administration, formed with Barzani's understanding, has tied its fate to Turkey. Political and economic separation is not possible for now. The only condition is that a developing popular movement says 'stop' to this dishonour and evolves to a national point. We can say that Russia has left Syria for now in exchange for dominance in Ukraine, but of course it will want to return. In any case, we can no longer talk about Syria as a unity. It will be governed in a federal, confederal, autonomous or other way. In this chaotic period, there will be heavy attacks, we can already see the signs. But the Kurdish understanding of freedom, justice and equality, which is developing and based on solid foundations, has a rising value against the jihadist understanding in the region. The war will move towards Iran, Iraq will also be attacked, and Iran and Turkey will also get their share. While this period of history is being written, we will read the following; 'Kurds have broken the chains of slavery of a thousand years as a result of their struggles in the last century, in which they did not step back. They changed the destiny of both themselves and the region. We owe this development in human history to them.'"

 

'SDF IS NOW THE INTERLOCUTOR'

 

Stating that Mazlum Abdi's statements caused different interpretations, Yurtsever stated that Abdi's statements were peace-orientated and said the following: "Mazlum Abdi announced that they are in contact with Turkey, which is indirectly conducting the Syrian war, through various channels, especially with the USA, and that they have reported their demands. When we look at these demands, we can state that the desire to live in good communication with everyone in their region is a reality for every nationality and belief in general.

 

Turkey's lack of response stems from two reasons; Firstly, not seeing Turkey as an interlocutor, and secondly, not having a clear policy. SDF is now an interlocutor even if it does not want to be. It has a paradigm that has sovereignty in the east of the Euphrates and establishes an economic-political life. Turkey acts from the logic of 'the more territory I acquire, the more powerful I will be'. However, it is worth remembering that the Ottoman Empire ruled over larger territories and collapsed. The proposal and the constructive words expressed in a diplomatic language regarding Bashûr are both a friendly warning to the Bashûr administration and its people, and a pioneer on what it takes to be a nation. Probably, a relationship between Rojava and Bashûr will be born in the new equation and will develop over time. It should be noted that it would be more constructive for the Bashûr administration to re-evaluate its relations with Turkey and to develop an attitude aiming at a national interest and not to neglect to think about its honour. The statement made to the Kurdish formations in the autonomous region is appropriate and constructive. In a step towards a general unity, why is it wrong to invite Kurds to recognise past mistakes and to take a position for the future from the right place? For example, when it comes to the Kurdish question, why should Kurds not be united despite their differences, while Turkish parties are strung together like rosary beads? In conclusion, the statement is an example of constructive language and respectable political behaviour. It immediately stands out from other political statements. Its value will be recognised in a short time, if not today."

 

MA / Fırat Can Arslan