Has Erdogan changed his position on the Syrian revolution?

The suffering of the Syrian people and their humanitarian crisis over the past five years did not stir the international community’s sense of responsibility towards them. However, the influx of thousands of Syrian refugees into Europe was enough to put the international community face to face with the need to take action to put an end to the crisis, which has crossed borders and transported all types of problems and crises around the world, including asylum issues as well as political tension and polarisation.

We have seen signs and hints recently of international and regional agreement and consensus regarding what is known as the transitional phase in Syria, as the events in the country evolved in an unexpected manner. The Americans did not object to Russia’s move towards Syria and its establishment of new military bases on the coast north of Latakia. Instead, there has been much talk recently about a US-Russian-British-French consensus regarding the transitional phase in Syria, in which Bashar Al-Assad will play a part. Meanwhile, Russia will supervise the transition with US and European blessings.

While the Russians want this phase to begin immediately, the Americans do not seem to be in a hurry. Perhaps this is because they want to enjoy watching the Russians sink into a quagmire even more complex and fierce than Afghanistan. Everyone knows that the Russians have no patience and do not possess America’s cunning, and are keen to reap the fruits of their efforts immediately. However, the Americans will get creative in playing with them, manipulating them, and then rubbing their noses in the dirt.

Netanyahu’s visit to Moscow and meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin has completed the international and regional consensus with regards to the transitional phase in Syria; a consensus, though, without the agreement of the people of Syria, who have paid a heavy price in blood, destruction and displacement. In addition, both Turkey and Saudi Arabia have objected, as they were calling loudly for the departure of Al-Assad as the first condition for any settlement to resolve the Syrian tragedy.

On his way back from Russia, after participating in the opening ceremony of Moscow’s largest mosque with his Russian counterpart, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan held a press conference in which he addressed current issues, beginning with the Syrian conflict. According to Turkish media outlets, Erdogan said: “We don’t have a problem with Syria’s domestic policies. But neither Al-Assad nor the world should forget that we have a 911 kilometre-long border with Syria. At every turn we are under the threat of terrorist groups there. Our patience has a limit.” He added that nobody can foresee Syria’s future with Al-Assad. “It’s not possible to accept a person responsible for killing 300,000 to 350,000 people.”

The comments made by Erdogan, who is known for his explicit calls for Al-Assad to step down, were made in light of the change in the position of several Western countries, including the United States and Britain, on the Damascus regime. US Secretary of State John Kerry said last Saturday that the Syrian president must step down, but that this does not necessarily have to occur immediately after reaching an agreement to end the conflict in Syria. British Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Philip Hammond made similar remarks. On her part, German Chancellor Angela Merkel called for involving Al-Assad in the dialogue to resolve the Syrian crisis.

Ankara had firmly rejected any political solution that involved the Syrian president and had held him responsible for the problems in his country until now. “Now in Syria, there are Daesh, other organisations, and the regime,” said Erdogan. “What I have called the ‘transitional process’ means what will be done to deal with the situation in Syria and the countries that will undertake this.”

However, international, regional and Gulf media outlets quoted Erdogan as saying, “The process could possibly be without Al-Assad, or the transitional process could be with him.” They also quoted him saying that Bashar Al-Assad may be part of the transitional phase in the context of resolving the Syrian crisis.

Sources close to Erdogan and the Justice and Development Party denied any change in Turkish policy regarding Syria, stressing that this policy stems from a humanitarian concern that comes down to standing by the Syrian people and supporting their fair demands against a regime that did not hesitate to kill its own citizens and destroy the country in order to remain in power. President Erdogan also renewed his calls for Bashar Al-Assad’s departure, saying, “If Al-Assad has a modicum of love for Syria, he should leave this job and go.” He added after his meeting with Macedonian President George Ivanov in Istanbul that Turkey’s policy towards Syria has not changed and is the same policy he has followed since he was prime minister.

The difference between Turkey’s version and what was reported by some international media outlets can be explained by the campaign launched by international and local forces to break the Justice and Development Party’s monopoly of authority in Turkey for the past 13 years. These forces have aimed to create a stereotype of Erdogan and the JDP, categorising them as supporters of Daesh and those fuelling terrorism. These same forces do not consider the People’s Protection Units as terrorist groups, despite their systematic policy of changing the demographic nature and deepening of the divisions in northern Syria. These same forces turn a blind eye to the Iranian occupation and the heinous acts committed by Hezbollah and the Shia militias affiliated with Iran. More importantly, these same forces want to rearrange and categorise the effective groups in the Middle East in accordance with a new perspective, which intends to eliminate what is known as political Islam, of which the JDP represents a successful example and acts as a source of inspiration.

Just for the sake of argument, let’s assume that President Erdogan did say that he does not object to Al-Assad remaining for a limited time with written international guarantees in order to prevent the collapse of the Syrian state and to prevent mass revenge operations; while insisting on considering Bashar Al-Assad to be a war criminal who must be held accountable for his actions, would Erdogan have withdrawn his support for the Syrian people and his support for the Syrian revolution?

There may be changes in Turkey’s policies in the future, but it will remain in the context of political tactics and pragmatism. In addition, Turkey’s will not be drastic changes that will turn its back on the aspirations of the Syrian people for freedom and dignity.

Translated from Alkhaleejonline, 27 September, 2015.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.