Afrin between the claws of the major powers
By Cihad Hammy
February 2, 2018 — Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal reposted from The Region — In an article
I wrote a day before the Turkish state's invasion of Afrin, I intended
to scrutinize the underlying ideological structures of the Turkish
ruling party (AKP) and the driving force behind the invasion of Afrin.
This article will focus more on the role of major powers, mainly US and
Russia, in the recent invasion of Afrin and the stances held by the
Assad regime and Iran.
In 2016, after the Turkish state invaded Syria and occupied Jarablus
in order to prevent the linking of the Kobani and Afrin cantons, Mehmet
Ocalan visited his brother,
Abdullah Ocalan, a political theorist and the ideological leader of PKK
who is confined in Imrali prison, Turkey. There, Abdullah Ocalan
reflected on the Turkish invasion of Syria and assessed the role of the
US in the operation, saying:“The US invited the Turkish state to Rojava through Jarablus a few
weeks ago. They must have pursued such a strategy to weaken both the
Kurds and Turks at this point. The Turks wouldn't have been able to
enter Jarablus if the US hadn't wanted this to happen. Their goal is to
make both parties confront each other here.”This statement is still strongly relevant as far as it concerns the
Turkish state's invasion of Afrin. But this time, Russia directly
invited the Turkish state to invade Afrin instead. The Turkish state
would not dare to invade Afrin if both the major powers-- US and
Russia-- did not give such an offensive the green light.Russia
Russia’s approval for the Turkish state’s invasion of Afrin is not
surprising. It is clear that Russia seeks to bolster the Assad regime in
order to sustain and gain political and economic interests in Syria.
Even more clear is that Russia sees Syria as a terrain from which to
wrestle away control from its imperialist rival, the United States.
After the battle of Kobani, Kurdish forces entered into a coalition with
other groups in the region under the banner of the Syrian Democratic
Forces in order to liberate large swathes of territory and even cities
from the Islamic State in Northern Syria. In their quest, they received
moral and political support from a U.S.-led International coalition to
the Chagrin of Russia. When the SDF finally gained the capacity to
control crucial water and oil resources that were previously under the
control of IS in Raqaa and Deir-ezor, tensions between the two world
powers reached a new height.
These tensions manifested in a new rivalry between the SDF – backed by a
US-led coalition – and the Syrian government, backed by both Russia and
Iran. In order to weaken the leverage that the US has in Syria, Russia
entered into a détente with Turkey.
At this point, the interests of both Russia and Turkey align. While
Turkey wants to dismantle the Kurdish-led project in northern Syria,
Russia seeks to reduce the influence of the US in Syria by trying to
remove one of the United States’ most important ally on the ground, the
Syrian Democratic Forces.Moreover, by allowing Turkey to invade Afrin, Russia aims to put the
US in a quandary, knowing very well that the US has trouble sustaining
its juggling act in Syria. On the one side, Washington has attempted to
keep Turkey, a fellow NATO member, as a close strategic ally. At the
same time, gains by the SDF give the US a foot in Syria that can aid in
putting pressure on the Assad regime, and thereby shrink the influence
of Iran in the region. Ankara, which is against the Kurdish project, is
unhappy. The SDF which seeks to ensure, among other things, the safety
of its population is perpetually unsafe. And whereas Ankara feels
betrayed, and the SDF feels like it ought to prepare itself for
betrayal, Moscow sees an opportunity.The Turkish state's s operation will not be limited to Afrin, but
rather will extent to Manjib, where over 2000 U.S military personnel are
stationed. This, at least, is what Erdogan has expressly said in a speech to provincial leaders in Ankara:“With the Olive Branch operation, we have once again thwarted the
game of those sneaky forces whose interests in the region are different"
he continues, " “Starting in Manbij, we will continue to thwart their
game.”If the Turkish state were to attack Manbij, in order to protect both
its leverage and interests, the US could possibly fight back. This is
what Russia hopes, for the US and Turkey to engage in combate, and risk
having the former country kicked out of NATO. Russia wants, among other
things, to have Turkey finally fall under its ambit of influence. This
should at least partially explain why Russia would allow for the Turkish
state to invade Afrin.United States
Not much needs to be said about US foreign policy as far as it
concerns the Kurds in Syria. It is a doctrine that can be summed up in
two words: hypocrisy and duplicity. The US has already claimed to
support the Turkish state’s right to protect itself from "terrorist
elements that may be launching attacks against Turkish citizens and
Turkish soil from Syria". By doing so, the US has signed its seal of
approval for the Turkish state to attack the Kurds of Syria.
Turkey is still a strategic NATO partner for the US. The latter does not
want to lose Turkey and the U.S doesn’t want that to change. The US
simply sees Afrin as a place that is not its problem, especially
considering that it doesn’t fall under the territory of the
International Coalition against the Islamic State. “No leverage, not my
problem” is another manner, to sum up this doctrine.The Assad regime
In Syria, there are two projects that the Assad regime feels
threatened by, federalism in northern Syria and the Islamic opposition
supported by Turkey. While the Assad regime strives to keep Syria as a
centralized nation-state, the Kurdish-led project in northern Syria
poses a big threat to the nation-state model, as it seeks to
decentralize the country while empowering ethnic minorities and women.
The other threat to the Assad regime is the Islamic opposition-- or the
counterrevolution directly backed by Turkey – that demands and fights
to topple the regime. To weaken both the Kurds and the Islamic opposition, the Assad regime
finds the Turkish's state invasion of Afrin by The Turkish army with
its jihadist proxies of the FSA as a golden opportunity to achieve the
regime’s ends. Thus, the Assad regime's warning that it would shoot down
any Turkish warplanes which violated Syrian airspace should be seen as
what it is: a blatant lie. Nevertheless, even if this were to
materialise, it would be a win-win situation for Russia. Moscow would
love the opportunity to receive the excuse to “protect” the Syrian
Government, and push Afrin under the control of the Assad regime. The Assad regime and Russia are both preparing to launch a major
offensive in Idlib, the only stronghold left for the armed Islamic
opposition in Syria. Since many armed Islamic groups are directly backed
by the Turkish state, Russia and the Assad regime seek to make a
bargain with the Turkish state. The latter could aid the Assad regime to
transfer the Ankara loyalists to fight the Kurds in Afrin, and Idlib
would be left for the Assad regime in such an agreement. The vehicle for
this bargain is Russia's Sochi congress. In short: Idlib for Afrin.
That is why Erdogan says that he has a deal with Russia. The seizing of the Abu al-Duhur military airport with scores of villages by the Assad regime is already a first goodwill measure inscribed within this silent pact.And finally, we need to shortly address how Iran benefits from the
Afrin invasion. Insofar as Tehran falsely perceives that the Kurdish-led
project is an expansion of the US, any threat towards it coincides with
its interests in the region. And insofar as Turkish expansion is not
mitigated by the Assad regime and Russia, Iran feels anxious about the
expansion of sunni fundamentalism as well. But should a rapprochement
occur, best evidenced by the joint “de-escalation zones” brokered in
Idlib by Iran, Turkey and Russia, then Iran feels that it has more power
to intervene in the Syrian conflict. Put simply, Iran benefits from the
fight between the Turkish state and the Kurds in Syria.
So we can speak of rapprochement between Russia, the Assad regime, Iran
and Turkey. It can also be said that it is the Kurdish-led project in
the region which brings these unlikely foes together on the bargaining
table. But this too is ephemeral. It does not erase the many
contradictions, the differences between various political projects on
the ground, and the seven years of conflict between these powers. This
shaky rapprochement will break down as soon as interests and battles on
the ground change in Syria. Conclusion
I should make my position clear. The major and regional powers are
guided in this war by their capacity to betray, their commitment to
achieving their interests, their genocidal and fascist mentality.
Kurdish fighters, however, are guided by the principles of
self-organization, self-defense, resistance, and freedom.So let’s return to Imrali and the last words we received from Ocalan,
after his brother concluded his final meeting to the outside world: “I
am a democrat and revolutionary. I will not surrender to the state or
anyone else.” I believe he would say the same thing to the Kurdish
Freedom Movement and the people of Afrin, “Be democrats and
revolutionaries. Don't surrender to nation states or anyone else.”
