POMED Notes: The Future of Syria: Political Turmoil and Prospects of Democracy

On Monday, the SETA Foundation hosted a discussion panel on Syria’s future and the potential role of Turkey in the conflict going forward. The panel discussion began with opening remarks by the moderator and panelists, followed by a question and answer session. Moderating the discussion panel was Kilic Kanat, non-resident fellow at the SETA Foundation. Panelists included, Helena Cobban, veteran journalist and Erol Cebeci, Exeutive Director of the SETA Foundation, Washington DC.

For full event notes, continue reading. Or, click here for the PDF.

The panel discussion opened up with a brief introduction by Kanat who gave a brief overview of the current situation in Syria and the general response from the Turkish Government. Kanat noted that Turkey has become one of the most vocal critics of the Assad Regime and are now hosting thousands of the refugees and defected soldiers.

Cobban was the first panelist to speak, who gave some brief remarks about the Arab Spring and the numerous events that hard occurred since its start at the beginning of the year. Moving on specifically to Syria, Cobban noted that “Syria is blessed and cursed by its position and place geographically” in the region and was a geo-strategic player as such. Cobban noted that because of this fact, the destabilization of the Syria created serious policy problems for the international community, which seemed paralyzed with indecision. Cobban then went into a lengthy discussion of the dangers of sectarian violence in Syria should violence not decrease and a solution be found. She also mentioned that need for addressing the legitimate concerns of the minorities- especially the Alawite- in a Post-Assad scenario in which a Sunni-dominated government comes to power. Cobban said that Turkey is the most logical choice for helping negotiate an end to this crisis in Syria because of numerous factors including the 910km border Syria shared with Syria and the immense amount of economic trade between the two countries. Cobban also noted that during the Bush administration, Turkey was the only nation that reached out to the Assad regime and invested political capital in the regime. Furthermore, Cobban noted that given the West’s recent history in the region –especially with regards to Syria- western nations did not have the credibility necessary negotiate the crisis. Cobban thought that Turkey and possibly also South Africa were credible enough to negotiate a solution to the crisis. Lastly, Cobban stated that she felt that military intervention was also not a suitable option and would only serve to further destabilize the country. Cobban hopes that a solution can be found that will allow free and fair elections that provide a smooth transition “to majority rule.”

Cebeci was next to speak and gave some background regarding the historic relationship between Turkey and Syria and its seesaw nature. Cebeci noted that in 1999 Turkey and Syria were on the brink of war and how one of President Bashar Al’Assad’s crowning foreign policy achievements was how he turned around Syria’s relationship with its biggest neighbor, Turkey. Cebeci then went on to discuss Turkey’s general foreign policy stance of “having no problems with neighbors” and having pushed a foreign policy that stressed regional stability. Cebeci discussed how Turkey had hoped through economic integration and engagement with the Assad regime, that it could help promote and push some political reforms within Syria. With regard to the current uprising, Cebeci noted that even very late in the uprising “Turkey was still banking that Assad was able to change and he would stay in power in exchange for some recognition of rights. But they [the Assad regime] never delivered on those promises.” Cebeci stressed the amazing shift in Turkish policy towards Syria in such a short period of time and that now “the Turkish government is practically helping the opposition organize.” Cebeci also expressed that Syria is a priority for the Turkish government because unlike other countries in the region, a conflict in Syria runs the serious risk of have a “spillover effect” into other countries and “the Assad regime knows this is the case and uses this kind of regional influence to threaten the entire region.”  Cebeci also mentioned the geopolitical aspects of the conflict in Syria including the issue of Iran, Russia’s relationship with the regime, and also the Kurdish issue and the fact that the Assad regime had given aid and haven to the PKK in the past. Regarding the current relationship between the PKK and the Assad Regime Cebeci stated that “we can see renewed relations between the PKK and the [Syrian] Mukhaberat recently. Obviously this is a very sensitive issue for Turkey.” Finally, Cebeci noted that military intervention or the creation of a buffer zone has been “resisted” by the Turkish government so far, but that that the option “is still on the table.”

After opening statements, the panel was opened to questions from the audience. Questions focused on a variety of topics including what kind of effect sanctions are having on the regime and whether they were effective or not; what kind of effect the conflict will have on the peace process with Israel; and what Turkey’s relationship with the Free Syria Army in the short-term will be. Cobban stated that sanctions are “punitive” and that a transition plan that includes focused sanctions was needed. Regarding the peace process, Cobban noted that the impact would probably primarily be on Hamas and its position, but other than that, Cobban felt that “Arab Spring has reinforced the importance of individual Arab rights.” In regards to the relationship between the FSA and Turkey, Cebeci stated that he takes Col. Riyad’s word that Turkey has yet to supply them with military or logistical hardware but, in the short-term Turkey was providing a platform for the FSA.

Finally, several questions focused on the prospects for civil war in Syria and the issue of sectarian conflict and why Turkey’s stance towards Syria changed. Cobban noted that the Assad regime plays on sectarian fears and tensions. She also mentioned the Christian communities and their nervousness- especially when considering what happened to the Christian communities in Iraq. Cebeci noted that the danger of a civil war in Syria was that such a war would “not be left to just Syrians to fight, other regional powers and groups will involved themselves.” With regards to the shift in Turkish policy, Cebeci noted that the shift took time, but there was an “erosion of patience and humanitarian need” that definitely helped shift the balance. Cebeci also noted that Turkey had invested much political capital in the regime and their unwillingness to listen to Turkey and any advice given, also destroyed Turkey’s patience for the Assad Regime.