You are here

Different protagonists, and objectives, in Syria

Sep 25,2016 - Last updated at Sep 25,2016

A new phase in the Syrian crisis was triggered by the Turkish intervention in the north of the country.

While there are many reasons for this Turkish move, it very quickly ended the dream of a Kurdish state, which has been floated recently.

There was also a PR aspect in the move to engage the terrorists directly, as the Turkish government that has been accused of facilitating Daesh’s crossing of the Syrian-Turkish border.

Moreover, a Turkish military presence in Syria secures a place for Turkey in any agreement or post-conflict solution, increasing its influence in the region.

The US has had the same goal as Turkey’s over the last five years: to secure a military presence in Syria and thus weight in the region.

In the meantime, the Russo-American agreement on Syria managed to protect the framework of a political solution, saving it from collapsing.

However, while the international players’ priority has been to salvage the idea of a political solution, violence on the ground has been escalating.

There are clearly various protagonists in Syria, with varying agendas and objectives.

On the surface, the recent American strike that targeted the Syrian army appears to show that the Americans want to be the only heroes in freeing the city of Raqqa from Daesh, as it did in Iraq in liberating the city of Mosul.

Digging a bit deeper, it seems that there is a split in the US administration, as some believe that a solution for Syria should be the first priority of the incoming president.

This group feels that US President Barack Obama has no capital or influence left to negotiate with and any deal he and his secretary of state, John Kerry, can negotiate will be compromised and involve concessions to the Russians and Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Such a deal would limit the new US president who would have to truce with the consequences. As such, there is the argument that an agreement in Syria is for the next president to reach.

The contradicting policies of the countries involved in the Syrian conflict may well postpone any comprehensive agreement. 

Still, the current escalation should not minimise the importance of retaining the hope for a political solution, even without agreement, as it is a clear point of reference that all parties can look to when the situation spirals out of control.

On the one hand, the US is keen to play a military role in liberating the city of Raqqa. On the other, Turkey is seeking to play a key role in a political solution through its military intervention in Syria.

This could result in compromises that undermine any political solution.

 

 

[email protected]

up
101 users have voted.


Newsletter

Get top stories and blog posts emailed to you each day.

PDF