Turkish President, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan inspecting troops © Alraimedia
In the schoolyards of my youth, I remember it was the boy with the biggest stick who got the most attention. And fear, of course. In today’s world, Russia seems to have the biggest sticks by far, and quite a few of them, too. They’re called “oil” and “gas”, of course, and there’s no gainsaying their value to any country. It pays to be nice to Vladimir Putin; or at least it’s best not to annoy him. That explains why Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan would never strongly criticise Russia’s action in Ukraine, even though he doesn’t actively support what President Putin has been doing there, nor the staunch objections of his western opponents. He never will: the prosperity of Turkey itself takes precedence over international issues which don’t directly affect the country. After all, Turkey is already working towards its next tourist season, with blanket coverage in television advertisements for holidays, knowing (quite correctly) that Turkey is a beautiful and interesting country with much to recommend it, historically and aesthetically, to vacationing visitors. I’ve only ever been there as part of my job, but I certainly liked what I saw: the sun-kissed beaches and ancient ruins, along with the many good restaurants. The potential multifarious dangers that Russia poses to less warlike parts of the world have been stressed at NATO by Secretary General Mark Rutte, who gave examples of such activities as acts of sabotage and cyberattacks by Russian agents, as well as energy blackmail, carried out by Russia and its like-minded pals, including China, North Korea and Iran. They’re not all on Russia’s side over every issue, of course, which makes them less of an alliance of friends and rather more like a potential nest of vipers. Putin must tread carefully, but he always does. Pointing out such Russian-originating dangers to the rest of NATO will hardly cause shock and horror; everyone knows what Russia does and why. Rutte warned his allies that Russia is supporting the missile and nuclear programmes of North Korea, which could destabilise the whole Korean peninsula, but short of actually going to war (an outcome President Vladimir Putin appears to favour, even if no-one else does) there’s not a lot the West can do to end it. At least, not as long as the man dubbed by one British newspaper “Mad Vlad” remains in charge at the Kremlin. Incidentally, when I was in Moscow I found the Kremlin itself to be imposing, handsome, even impressive, but unlike much of Moscow, it lacks warmth and charm.

Turkey, however, is quite a long way from the bombing and killing that afflicts Ukraine. Nevertheless, Turkey has become involved because Syrians – an estimated three-and-a-half million of them – have sought refuge in Turkey to escape the civil war in their own country. Most of them now live in Şanlıurfa but are going home to Syria under the “Voluntary Return” project, via the Akçakale border gate. Looking at the world as a whole, there are some six million refugees altogether, many in need of ,medical aid as well as food and shelter. Turkey has become deeply involved in what’s happening there, despite the risks of openly backing the Syrian opposition’s territorial advances. Those advances have been sustained, and Aleppo has been captured, putting Turkey in a powerful position in any forthcoming negotiations, when it comes to framing the country’s future. It’s been suggested by expert observers close to the conflict that the rebels themselves have been capitalising on the shakiness of Bashar al-Assad’s now defeated regime, completely changing the dynamics of the region. Bashar al-Assad presumably hoped for help from its ally, Russia, but with the on-going conflict in Ukraine, Russia was never likely to be in a position to oblige. It’s strange how conflict in one part of the world can so easily raise tensions elsewhere. Incidentally, Turkey has not been officially involved in the Syrian conflict, although it is deeply affected by it and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is certainly a wily politician.
| DANCING OR PRETENDING?
One observer noted that, despite Turkey not playing an acknowledged or official part in the conflict, it is bound to take advantage of what’s been happening there, especially in any future “normalisation talks” – long desired by Ankara – that should nullify previous agreements between Russia and Turkey. Don’t count on it.

Turkey has requested cooperation from Damascus in tackling the Kurdish PKK/YPG groups and facilitating the return of more than three-million Syrian refugees. Damascus had demanded that Turkey should withdraw its forces from northern Syria and end its support for various opposition groups, but Ankara now has the whip hand, so perhaps it can now really get the Syrians to help in getting matters back to something approaching normal. Much depended on Bashar al-Assad’s determination to block negotiations, although he’s no longer there, of course, so he wields no power at all. His departure and his current position as a refugee enjoying political asylum in Moscow means a complete change in the Middle East’s balance of power. The current developments have surprised even the rebels themselves; after all, it means that the rebel offensive, led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham – the Sunni Islamist militant group formed in January 2017 in a merger between Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, the Ansar al-Din Front, Jaysh al-Sunna, Liwa al-Haqq, and the Nour al-Din al-Zenki Movement – have out-flanked and out-fought the Syrian Army, along with its allies, Russia, Iran and Hezbollah. The defeated forces will no doubt be perplexed by the way an apparent cross-border raid by some 30,000 rebel fighters has since then captured Aleppo and Homs, whose loss (together with its communication hub) has led to the end of the regime itself. Russia continues to drop bombs on the infrastructure while elite Hezbollah units have crossed the border from Lebanon to take up positions in and around Homs, while the Syrian army and the militias that favoured Assad continue their corrupt extortion businesses and protection rackets along the major roads. It must be a little like travelling along the bandit-haunted turnpike roads of 18th century Europe, only with the bandits brandishing more effective rapid-fire weapons than their front-loading, flintlock predecessors. In any case, al-Assad’s long, tough rule is over with rebel forces having seized Damascus.

As for al-Assad, whilst leaving Syria in a great hurry, his aeroplane disappeared off the radar, prompting some to suggest he’d been shot down. As we now know, of course, he hadn’t; he’d been landed in Moscow for asylum and a warm welcome from his old pal Vladimir Putin. Al-Assad and his associates, including family members, had ruled in Syria for 13 blood-soaked years during which he had won Putin’s support and backing, even speaking favourably about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to earn his meal ticket.
Turkey’s position is strange, to say the least, but the conflict itself is extremely confusing: who is on which side? Is there even a “side” to be on? Al-Assad’s family originally came from Qardaha in Latakia and are members of the Kalbiyya tribe. Hezbollah is written in Kurdish as حیزبوڵڵای کورد and the name al-Assad was adopted by its current user’s father. It is an “invented” name and means “the lion”. It would seem that his roar has lost its hard edge while Ankara’s position remains somewhat ambiguous. After all, Turkey helped to finance a network used by Iran’s Quds Force, as well as by Hezbollah. There has been much speculation about what rôle Turkey is likely to play in the ongoing conflict. Looking at the picture altogether, Ankara has traditionally been opposed to allowing Tehran to expand its influence in the region, its policies in general being unpredictable. Turkey has circumvented US sanctions on Iran, even though it remains a member of NATO and an important ally in the continuing struggle there. In telephone calls with the former Iranian president, Ebrahim Raisi, Erdoğan has called for Islamic unity in facing down Israel’s hostility and in criticising its attacks on Palestine, Erdogan is believed to have considered committing Turkish forces to the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon. They could serve as a buffer along the Israeli-Lebanese border. The move could go down well with Syria and Iran and could result in the freeing and return of the millions of Syrian refugees in Turkey, allowing them to return home to Syria, which President Erdoğan would certainly like. Indeed, it’s what largely lies behind Erdoğan’s support for Hamas in Gaza.

| PLAYING POWER GAMES
Turkey has also helped to sustain the Idlib (إِدْلِب in Arabic) enclave, while Hezbollah’s losses strengthen Turkey vis-a-vis Iran. Erdoğan has been careful in his criticism of Israeli strikes against Iran’s Shiite militants, even after the group’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, was killed. A Turkey expert at the US think tank, the Brookings Institution, Asli Aydintasbas, believes that the removal of Nasrallah has weakened Turkey’s biggest regional rival, although Erdoğan has been very critical of Israel’s assault on Gaza, which followed a very bloody attack by the Palestinian group, Hamas. It may turn out to have been to Turkey’s advantage, according to Gonul Tol, the Director for Turkey at Washington’s Middle East Institute. He is quoted by Sky News as having said: “If it translates into a longer-term weakening of Iran and allied Shiite groups, including Hezbollah, that will really pave the way for Turkey to play a more prominent rôle”. He means specifically “in Syria and Iraq”, of course, not across the entire Middle East. Erdoğan has accused Israel of the genocide of Palestinians by attacking Gaza, even branding Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “a war criminal”, a charge Netanyahu firmly denies, of course. He said that Israel is obliged to crush the Islamic Hamas group in Israeli territory, both to deter further attacks and to free Israeli hostages that Hamas had – somewhat unwisely – seized.
However, there is a new dynamic that we should take into account now. With Donald Trump returning to the White House, his friendship (or otherwise) with important Arabs and other key Middle Eastern figures becomes a matter of significance. Now, his fourth child, Tiffany, has married Massad Boulos, a relatively little known but wealthy Lebanese-American businessman. He comes from a family of Maronite Christians from the far north of Lebanon. If you think that doesn’t matter you would, it seems, be wrong.

News of the impending nuptials helps account for Trump’s electoral gains among his Arab-American voters. How does that affect the political landscape? It’s too early to say for sure, but Boulos was a childhood friend of Suleiman Frangieh, a Christian politician in Lebanon who fervently supported Syria’s now absent Bashar al-Assad. Or at least, he did at the time of al-Assad’s mysterious departure for Moscow. He has sought to reassure his American friends that he doesn’t blindly back Frangieh in all his views. Boulos is said to understand that Washington is not over-fond of Hezbollah’s Shiite friends in Iran, nor their views on Middle East politics. After all, Hezbollah is a Shia militia. Today’s Shia, with their various sub-sects, comprise some 20% of the world’s Muslim population, although that proportion rises to around 40% in the Middle East (especially in Iran) where they are concentrated. The Shia are the majority in Iran, Yemen and Azerbaijan, and make up around 50% in Iraq, with large minorities elsewhere. The Shia have always been warlike, having formed the partisan army of Ali ibn Abi Talib, the fourth and final Caliph to choose to follow Muhammad. In fact, Shi-ite Islam is older than its Sunni cousin, it seems, and its followers accuse the Sunnis of having murdered Ali. It’s been argued that Shia is also closer to the political practices of Muhammad himself and the original four caliphs. They have been waging a war on-and-off for 1,300 years to overthrow “the usurper”. They want to see Ali’s descendants back on the throne of a united Islamic empire. Back to the present day and Hezbollah has been moving its forces north of the Litani river, some 30 kilometres from the Israeli border, which is being overseen by the Lebanese army to ensure the ceasefire holds. This fragile “peace” will also be watched by a group of five countries, although Israel insists on retaining the right to tackle any “immediate threats” it detects. This fighting has continued for a year, which has placed the Israeli army under immense strain. For its part, Hezbollah has not got much to celebrate either, having lost much of its leadership. Even Netanyahu says his army needs a break from the fighting. Most people in Lebanon never wanted a war in the first place and are keen to see it end. It’s been described as “a game of alliances”, meaning it’s hard to see who is on whose side.

Certainly, Erdoğan isn’t trying to turn his back on Russia, but as one commentator remarked, Erdoğan doesn’t just play the game with one card, he plays with an entire deck, all held hidden behind his back, and he has “consistently used his advantages over the past two decades in an increasingly destabilised region”. His goal has been the creating of a “greater Turkey”, firmly under his control “to the detriment of his neighbours, particularly the Kurds”, as one journalist put it. Erdoğan has explained his curious balancing act as merely “expanding the volume of trade”, according to the excellent and hitherto reliable Moscow Times, whose independence and excellent journalism is now threatened as a result of the newspaper’s new designation by Moscow as being “undesirable” and placing its journalists at risk of persecution, or even prosecution. Putin and his team really have no notion of trust or honesty, it seems, or if they do, they don’t care. They’re certainly opposed to free speech, claiming that whatever they say, however provably incorrect, is the only real truth. We must not forget that Sergey Lavrov, Putin’s mouthpiece and his country’s Foreign Minister, has said that the only way the Ukraine war can be ended is with Kiev’s “unconditional and total surrender”. He seems to believe that the killing can only stop if Ukraine simply gives in, forgetting that it was Russia that invaded Ukraine, not the other way round. But this doesn’t help us in addressing the issues that most deeply concern Erdoğan.
| SAFE AS HOUSES? CERTAINLY NOT!
The fall of al-Assad may not be the end of the strange power shifts throughout the region, largely driven by greed. It’s thought likely that the United States and Israel will be increasingly obliged to work together to safeguard Western interests in the region and prevent the chaos currently gripping Syria from spilling over the borders into neighbouring states, like Jordan. One expert has written that the Houthis in Yemen should follow al-Assad into exile in Moscow (or some other suitably large and sympathetic place) and another suggests that Rojava, a self-governed Kurdish area of Syria, should be recognised as an Autonomous State of Kurdistan (as if the region needs yet more quarrelsome states). Another expert suggests that with the help of the Saudis, an Arab uprising could even take place in Iran, although that takes a stretch of the imagination. However, the fall of al-Assad arguably highlights the vulnerability of Iran to a possible collapse like the one seen in Syria, with its background of large-scale corruption and an unpopular conscript army (the conscripts don’t like it, either).

If Erdoğan was ever viewed as “a mediator” who could resolve a crisis, he has consistently demonstrated that he is not. While suggesting to some that he likes to keep a distance from Putin, he negotiates trade deals with Moscow to Turkey’s advantage, buying Russian military ordnance to help keep Turkish airspace safe from intruders. At the same time, he has established useful diplomatic ties with Israel, despite accusing Jerusalem of acts of genocide. If he was playing football with you you’d never be too sure at which goal he was aiming his shots. Certainly, he has used vitriolic language in describing Netanyahu’s policies. Erdoğan has some natural geopolitical advantages, with his country positioned as a handy bridge between Europe and Asia. As a result, his acts have made others sit up and take notice, including China, Russia and – of course – Iran. Europe has not really commented. Washington has warned some Turkish companies of the dangers they face from Russia’s alleged attempts to “use Turkey” to evade sanctions. Erdoğan is no stranger to playing the game to Turkey’s long-term advantage, but when one is playing against an opponent as vicious and unyielding as Vladimir Putin, it pays to be cautious.
Certainly, hostilities are not yet over. America ‘s Wall Street Journal foresees a “cross-border” operation of some sort. There are fears that Turkey, along with its allied groups in Syria, may be getting geared up for a full-scale military invasion of those parts of the Arab Republic still under the control of US-backed Kurdish forces. Intelligence services report that there is a build-up of Turkish forces near Kobani, which is a city in the Aleppo province close to the border with Syria and Turkey with a largely Kurdish population. Erdoğan may find it impossible to avoid conflict there.

A spokesperson for the Russian foreign ministry was recently overheard during a press conference, taking a telephone call about an aerial strike on Yuzhmash, a Ukrainian aerospace manufacturing facility in Dnipro, now called Pivdenmash. She was apparently quite happy about it, although neither Moscow nor Kyiv has confirmed if it was even the intended target. Putin has stated that his use of experimental hypersonic missiles against Ukraine is a response to the missiles Kiev has started using against Russia. The missile supposedly travels at ten times the speed of sound and is impervious to existing anti-missile defences. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has called the strike “the latest bout of Russian madness”. Ukraine has shown off the shattered remains of the missile, called the Oreshnik, to journalists. It was of a type they had not seen before. Its arrival caused damage to “civilian and other” infrastructure. I get the impression that his attacks will only end when he is in total charge of Ukraine, which will be counted (at least by him) as a part of Russia thereafter. Civilians living in the parts of Ukraine that have already been conquered and taken under Moscow’s control complain that they no longer have freedom of movement or speech. Their country is under tight foreign control.

As for Erdoğan himself, he has repeatedly stated that Turkey is not interested in taking over any other country. However, he cannot ignore developments in Syria, with which Turkey shares a 910-kilometre frontier. Erdoğan stressed again his lack of territorial ambition. There is a new political and diplomatic reality in Syria, Erdogan claimed, adding that, “Syria belongs to Syrians, with all its ethnic, sectarian, and religious components.” Clearly that is not a view shared by Putin, who seems to believe in simply seizing those places he wants and thereafter calling them “his”. Erdoğan stressed that Turkey does not have an eye on “even a pebble” of another country’s land. For its part, the Arab League, based in Cairo, has called on the people of Syria to safeguard tolerance and the rights of Syrians following al-Assad’s departure. In a statement, the League said: “The current critical stage requires all Syrians to uphold the concepts of tolerance and dialogue, protect the rights of all components of Syrian society and place the interests of the homeland above all considerations.” That will certainly make a change. Peace and tolerance, whether political or religious, will certainly come as a surprise in that part of the world. Can it be imposed or defended? It’s hard to tell. But whatever happens it seems as if Recep Tayyip Erdoğan will emerge triumphant, or at least largely undamaged. Probably. In that part of the world, that’s quite an achievement. As for Russia granting asylum to al-Assad, it’s been described in Moscow as a kind of message to Putin’s friends. The message is that Putin reacts favourably to those who show sympathy for his position, so al-Assad’s support for Putin’s invasion of Ukraine was his ticket to Moscow. Alexey Muraviev, a Russia expert and Associate Professor of National Security and Strategic Studies at the University of Perth in Australia, said the granting of asylum simply says: “As long as you remain loyal, we will not abandon you.” That’s good to know, isn’t it? At least, it is if you trust Putin.