Russia Plans To Meet With Iran, Syria, Turkey in Bid To Broker Damascus-Ankara Deal
If successful, a deal could increase Russia's influence, undermine US power in the region, and be used by Erdogan as leverage in Turkey’s upcoming election
Russia is coordinating a meeting for the deputy foreign ministers of Russia, Iran, Syria and Turkey, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov told the state RIA news agency. Experts believe that the move is aimed at mediating a deal between neighboring Damascus and Ankara.
“We proceed from the fact that it should take place the sooner the better. But our colleagues, the Syrians, the Turks and the Iranians, have their work plans and timetables. While there is no specific date, we will continue to coordinate,” Bogdanov reportedly said on Tuesday.
Turkey and Syria’s ties have a rough history. And in 2011, with the outbreak of the Syrian civil war, the two countries became sworn enemies as Ankara supported the Syrian opposition that fought the war against Syrian President Bashar Assad and occupied part of Syria’s territory in the north of the country. But in the last year, both countries have shown signs of diplomatic openness to warmer relations, starting with the first official meeting in more than a decade held in December.
Federico Donelli, an assistant professor of International Relations at the University of Trieste, Italy, says that Russia’s main interest is to stabilize the situation in Syria, in order to be able to allocate more resources to the ongoing offensive in Ukraine.
“Any agreement reached in Syria would have significant political implications not only at a regional level but also globally,” he told The Media Line, explaining that brokering a deal between neighboring Syria and Turkey would both place Russia in a better geopolitical position and undermine American influence in the Middle East.
“The normalization of Syria, following the China-brokered deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia, would highlight how the United States has limited influence in Middle East politics. This issue is particularly relevant in a changing and reconfiguring global environment,” said Donelli.
Dr. Omar Munassar, a Middle East scholar who specializes in foreign policy and security affairs with a focus on Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Yemen, told The Media Line that even though Russia is busy with its war with Ukraine, it appears to be trying to maintain its influence in the Middle East as a mediator, similar to China’s recent efforts.
All three of the countries involved in the upcoming talks are friendly with Moscow, Munassar noted, explaining that Turkey plays a crucial role in mediating between Russia and Ukraine, while Teheran provides military support to Moscow. “Bringing the three countries together is important for resolving the Ankara-Damascus rivalry,” he said.
Any agreement reached in Syria would have significant political implications not only at a regional level but also globally
Donelli notes that since the outbreak of the Russo-Ukrainian war, Turkey’s stance has been rather peculiar. “Ankara supports Kyiv militarily but maintains diplomatic and economic relations with Moscow. The Turkish approach is pragmatic, aimed at maximizing its own interests,” he said.
He believes that reaching an agreement on Syria with Moscow, Damascus and Tehran falls within this framework.
Munassar says that such an agreement would serve the Turkish government in terms of domestic politics.
“Turkey, which is facing upcoming elections, is concerned about its security in northern Syria and the refugee crisis, while Syria is looking toward a post-war future,” he said.
That is why he believes that if Turkey reaches an agreement with Syria, brokered and guaranteed by Syrian allies Russia and Iran, it will give AKP, the political party led by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, more clout in the upcoming elections.
The normalization of relations with Syria, added Donelli, “would be presented by Erdogan as a foreign policy achievement, helping to divert attention from the government’s responsibility for earthquake prevention and relief.” Erdogan and his government have come under intense criticism for the slow response from its Disaster and Emergency Management Authority in the wake of last month’s 7.8-magnitude earthquake.
Turkey’s NATO membership and alliance with Western powers may seem to put it in a delicate position with countries that are so antagonistic with the West. But Donelli believes that even though this may not be appealing to several NATO members, Ankara is an important strategic partner, clearing its path to involvement in this kind of activity.
At the same time, Donelli argues that Turkey’s choices could be instrumental to promoting NATO interests. “Especially if a window of opportunity for talks with Russia should open up,” he said.
Overall, Donelli says that the strategic autonomy that Turkey is trying to achieve poses both a challenge and an opportunity for NATO.
“Turkey’s behavior poses an open challenge if we consider the old conception of alliances as rigid,” he said. On the other hand, he added: “If we change our perspective, we realize the potential benefits. Within an international environment that is increasingly fragmented, a member country that can also operate outside the alliance could be an asset, especially in some regional contexts.”
Munassar adds that Turkey has been pursuing an independent foreign policy in recent years and through it has established ties with Russia and Iran, “particularly regarding the situation in Syria amid Turkey’s concerns over Washington’s support for YPG,” the armed wing of the Kurdish Democratic Union Party of Syria, he said. He adds that Ankara believes that it plays a constructive and neutral mediating role as a NATO member.
Among the topics that could be addressed in a potential Turkish-Syrian deal brokered by Russia and Iran, Donelli said, are issues of conflict, including “the repatriation of Syrian refugees located in Turkey, Ankara’s backing of rebel factions in Syria, and the existence of Kurdish militias near the border.”
