Amidst complete silence from everyone, whether regionally or internationally; Turkey has recently intensified the volume of its military operations in both the Syrian and Iraqi north, against the People's Protection Units (SDF) and the Kurdistan Workers' Party. With the aim of destroying their weapons stores, their camps and the caves in which they hide, and the oil installations under their control, which provide them with permanent sources of funding for their terrorist operations against targets within the borders of the Turkish state, and to attack members of its armed forces present in the region.
These operations were considered a quick response by Turkey to the targeting of members of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party in Iraq – and its arm inside northern Syria, the People’s Protection Units – the locations where Turkish soldiers were stationed. As a result, some of them were seriously injured, and twelve of them were killed, especially after Turkish officials announced that their country has every right to maintain the security of its borders, and to do what is necessary to confront the dangers it faces.
Their operations, which are consistent with the provisions of international law and the principle of the right to self-defense, will continue until they achieve their goals and eliminate all terrorists present along their borders with both Syria and Iraq, considering that the military operations currently being carried out come within the framework of International cooperation is in the context of the war on terrorism, and does not aim at all to undermine the sovereignty of the two countries.
Intense military operations
It seems natural and even logical for official Turkey to have a reaction commensurate with the size of its status as a country, and with the attack on its soldiers. However, the insistence on expanding the scope of military operations, penetrating into areas that were never its target, and repeatedly talking about continuing them, This confirms that the goals that Turkey seeks to achieve through these operations go beyond the issue of revenge for its soldiers who were killed by armed elements it classifies as terrorists.
Perhaps one of the most important of these goals for Ankara at the present time is to exploit the state of silence that accompanies its military operations to cut off all roads and corridors that represent the basis of lines of communication between Kurdistan Workers’ Party officials stationed in northern Iraq and their counterparts in areas under the control of the People’s Protection Units (SDF) in Northern Syria, in order to prevent any step aimed at announcing the formation of Kurdish autonomy in northern Syria on the lines of what previously happened in northern Iraq, with the full supervision and support of the United States of America.
This is likely a proactive step, and comes in response to the Autonomous Administration of the SDF holding its fourth conference, which took place on the twentieth of last December, under the title: “Unity of Syrians, Democratic, Pluralistic, and Decentralized,” and issuing a document called: “A Contract.” “Social” used terms that revealed its intention and future plans, as the word “territory” was used in reference to the areas under its control.
Which seems to have increased the anxiety of Turkish officials, and prompted them to draw up a new strategy different from what was previously adopted, in order to confront the upcoming danger that was sensed on their part, despite the SDF making structural changes in its leadership elements in the areas under its influence, and excluding a number of extremist elements. Controversial, with the aim of reassuring Turkey that its political project for the region will pose no significant threat to it.
However, describing its areas of influence as a “region,” and talking about “pluralism” in particular, opened the door wide to the possibility that this would be the beginning of the actual movement towards preparing to declare its autonomy in the region, which Ankara sees as a direct threat to its national security, which prompted it To employ the attack on its soldiers to direct a military strike through which it would eliminate vital installations and infrastructure that could be the basis for declaring an autonomous region away from the centralization of the Syrian state in Damascus.
Expelling SDF members from the border areas
Removing armed elements stationed in the Turkish-Syrian border areas also represents one of the goals pursued by the Turkish political leadership behind its repeated military operations in the region. To fully secure its borders on the one hand, and to pave the way for the implementation of its plan aimed at forming a safe zone thirty square kilometers deep inside Syrian territory; To accommodate two million Syrian refugees, and eliminate the problem of their heavy presence on its territory, which has become a constant headache for it after it was used against it by the opposition parties in all electoral elections, and led to the emergence of a state of hostility and racism in the Turkish street against everything that is foreign. , even if he is a tourist.
What is striking about the new military operation is the expansion of its geographical area, as it extends to some areas of Ain al-Arab, Al-Hasakah, Raqqa, Tal Rifaat and Manbij, in addition to targeting its infrastructure and vital facilities, especially the oil field areas controlled by Kurdish militants, with the aim of ensuring the cessation of their main source of funding, which secures They may continue their terrorist operations against the Turkish state, whether within its territory or targeting its soldiers present in both Syria and Iraq.
These are areas that Turkey has always been careful not to attack due to the presence of US Marines there, but their recent targeting without any reaction or protest from the US administration, as is usual in such circumstances, indicates the possibility of an undeclared agreement between Ankara and Washington, following the terrorist operations against Turkey, requires that the United States turn a blind eye to the operations carried out by Turkey in exchange for agreement on a number of files and outstanding issues between them.
Such as the file of Sweden’s accession to NATO, where the Turkish Parliament finally approved its acceptance of its membership in the alliance after long, difficult negotiations that extended for months, in addition to the files of the war on Gaza, the Russian-Ukrainian war, Turkish-Iranian relations, and the Eastern Mediterranean issue.
Since interests are always the compass of political positions, it is no wonder that both Russia and Iran did not oppose what Turkey was doing, nor did they show any reaction indicating their rejection of the Turkish move. Russia, in cooperation with Turkey, succeeded in introducing Syrian Arab Army forces into a number of areas. The regions of northeastern Syria, which secured the regime’s presence in places not under its control, and gave Turkey hope for the possibility of cooperating with Damascus in the future to re-tighten its control over the areas under SDF influence, remove them from them, and secure them.
While Iran views the SDF as one of the arms of the American administration in the region whose members must be uprooted and expelled from it, in this proposition it supports the security concerns expressed by Turkish officials, which indicates that Turkey has a historic opportunity to achieve its goals, ensure its territorial integrity, and preserve Its national security if it is used well.