Since they emerged as new states after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire following the First World War, relations between Syria and Turkey were marked by animosity. The history of Syria and Turkey would reveal that most of these relations have contributed to their physical insecurity with regard to each other, and their persistent endeavours to achieve their security requirements.
Border dispute was perhaps the thorniest issue. Both Syria and Turkey claim unquestionable sovereignty over Uskandaron province (Turkey calls it Hatay) which came under Turkish control in 1938. Dispute over water distribution — the problem of the Euphrates, Orontes and Tigris rivers — had also hindered the establishment of good relations between the two countries. This is especially an important issue wherein both sides try to meet their developmental requirements.
Furthermore, since the early 1980s, Turkey used to accuse Syria of providing the separatists Kurdistan Workers Party (Partiya Karkerana Kurdistan, or PKK) with weapons and logistic support to gain concessions on other fronts. Syria accused Turkey, on the other hand, of supporting the Muslim Brotherhood during and after the Hama massacre in 1982.
Given the complex nature of these relations, the end of the Cold War did not lead to fundamental shift in the way the two neighbours viewed each other. It was the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, however, that resulted in notable change in the foreign policies of Damascus and Ankara. Facing different set of challenges, Syria and Turkey opted for co-operation to help restore the regional balance of power, which has been disrupted by the occupation of Iraq. Common geo-political interests made most, if not all, of the historic differences between Turkey and Syria irrelevant.
Disregarded
Following the invasion of Iraq, Turkey sought to act independently, perhaps provocatively, towards Washington, which has completely disregarded Turkish interests in the region. Turkey opposed the invasion, fearing that it would lead to disintegration and eventually the emergence of a Kurdish state in the north. This would certainly affect Turkey's Kurdish minority and strengthen cession trends.
US policy on Iraq has hence provided key incentive to improve ties with Syria, which shared with Turkey its concerns on Iraq partition and the Kurdish issue. Rapprochement with Damascus was therefore of considerable geo-political significance for Ankara. It demonstrated that regional alliances are still seen by venerable states as key means to ward off threats and tackle challenges.
The withdrawal of the US forces from Iraq by the end of 2011 seems to have made the opposite impact on the relationship between the two neighbours. It played key role in bringing the situation back to conflict. In fact, the US invasion of Iraq brought Syria and Turkey close together; the US withdrawal is bringing them apart.
Rising influence
As the US retreats, Turkey, alongside the Arab Gulf States, fears Iran's rising regional influence. Iran could emerge with a sphere of influence stretching from western Afghanistan to the Mediterranean. If Iran manages after the completion of the US withdrawal from Iraq to establish the so-called Shiite Crescent consisting of Iraq, Syria and Hezbollah under its leadership, the political landscape of the entire region will undergo a fundamental change.
The breakout of the so-called "Arab Spring" presented Turkey therefore with a golden opportunity to contribute to reshaping the future of the region and re-assert itself as a key regional power with a political model to promote.
In addition, as the US seems to have accepted Iran's dominant position in Iraq, Syria is seen by Turkey as too important to be lost to Iran's sphere of influence. Following the outbreak of its uprising, Syria emerged as an ideal arena to check Iran's power and contain its ambitions. At present, the polarisation is clear; taking a sectarian flavour for some and Turkey sees an opportunity to bring about a regime change in Damascus.
This is quite a shift in Turkish foreign policy which until a few months ago viewed Syria and to an extent Iran as friends and partners. The failure of the US to prevent Iran from dominating Iraq and Tehran's attempt to aggressively further its regional influence made Turkey rethink its position on Syria.
Indeed, several other factors such as the position of the Turkish public opinion on the brutal repression of the Syrian uprising and the ideological and religious orientation of the Turkish leadership have played an important role in contributing to the shift in Turkish foreign policy. Yet, the geo-political factor remains the driving force of this shift.
Dr. Marwan Kabalan is the dean of the Faculty of International Relations and Diplomacy, Kalamoon University, Damascus, Syria.
