Turkish President Erdoğan called it a “threat to national security” and added his country would not permit the establishment of a “Terroristan”. He referred to a planned referendum in the Northeast of Syria, east of the Euphrates.
The self-declared autonomous entity here, militarily, politically and financially supported by the United States and led by the PKK’s Syrian branch, had announced holding local elections.
Initially planned for May 30, the elections were postponed to June 11. Amidst Türkiye’s threat of a military intervention, they are now planned to be held in August.
The US Department of State declared that “conditions” in the Northeast of Syria do not qualify for “free, fair, transparent and inclusive” elections.
An interesting evaluation indeed, given that the US has been providing assistance to electoral and political processes in the region through USAID since years.
On the actual situation in Syria, we interviewed Ismail Hakkı Pekin. Pekin is a qualified expert on the matter for various reasons. During his active service in the Turkish Armed Forces, he finished service as lieutenant-general and head of military intelligence of the General Staff, he was responsible to conduct the so-called Adana Agreement. Within it, the Turkish and Syrian government coordinated the struggle against the PKK forces located on Syrian soil.
Following the start of the Syrian conflict in 2011, Pekin maintained his contacts to Syria. He visited the capital city of Damascus various times and met with representatives of the Syrian government, among them Faisal Miqdad, then deputy and today Foreign Minister of Syria.
How do you evaluate the referendum attempt in the Northeast of Syria?
This is above all part of the policy to fracture Syria. Through this referendum, they want to define the borders of the autonomous entity comprised by the Syrian Democratic Forces. Their plan is to later connect it to the Soleimania region in Iraq, via a confederation, and finally to declare a federal state.
For that purpose, the YPG, the Syrian branch of the PKK, is holding talks with Damascus and also Arab tribes in the territory. The United States has warned against the election, though I have my doubts how serious these are.
The YPG faces Türkiye’s pressure, and it knows it can’t rely on the Russians. The Americans seem to have the approach that, as long as there’s no war on their territory, they don’t want to be pulled into another conflict. But do they pull strings behind the curtain? I am not sure that they don’t.
As you know, the YPG has already declared a social contract. This aims to change the administrative structure. They even changed the name of the entire country, from the Arab Republic of Syria to Democratic Republic of Syria.
They receive a lot of help from France and even prepare the establishment of conditional courts and other administrative bodies. But they face even opposition from Kurdish movements such as the NKS, the Kurdish National Council.
And there are of course the Turkish Armed Forces, the Turkish-supported Syrian National Army. And remember that back then, Iraq’s Barzani also tried an independence referendum, which was foiled.
Turkish politician Devlet Bahçeli, partner of Erdoğan’s governing coalition, has proposed a cooperation between Ankara and Damascus. How do you see the Syrian government’s position?
I think this is a good proposal, because if we cooperate with the Syrian government, we pull the Arabs on our side. In several parts of the concerned territory, the Arabs are the majority.
Additionally, the Syrian army has forces in Hasakah, Deir ez Zor and other parts of the region. These forces might be used too.
Right now, the Assad government says it does not take into consideration a military operation into the region. It says it wants to solve the conflict politically, that is, by widened local administrative autonomy. But one that is strictly limited to municipal affairs, without touching the general administrative system.
But it maybe that a new process of communication and coordination between Türkiye has and Syria has started. Bahçeli’s words might be a preparation of ground for a changed policy in Ankara.
Hence, though not participating in the operation, Damascus may refrain from qualifying the operations as an offensive and occupation.
But Türkiye has a problem: For some of the armed movements in Syria that it supports, the Assad Government is the main enemy. But diplomacy is very important and in the long run, Türkiye has no other option but to reach out to Damascus.
In your opinion, how probable is such a Turkish military operation?
I think that as long as the elections are not cancelled, Türkiye will conduct the operation. It might be accompanied by. Uprising of Arab tribes in the territory. Such a situation occurred recently, when the Kurdish forces arrested an Arab tribal leader in Deir Ez Zor, which caused an uprising. I think that Türkiye should support such an uprising and place Arab leaders in the forefront.
What is the wider context of the election?
One has to state that the United States and European countries support this separatist movement strongly. Türkiye must disrupt this support, step by step.
The United States has a plan for the region. They want to establish a defense and security architecture in the region, focusing on Israel, that can control the entire Eastern Mediterranean.
The Abraham Accords are part of that structure, as well as the inclusion of Saudi Arabia. It evolves, as I said, around Israel.
They want to use Türkiye, Egypt and even Russia for that purpose. They encircle Iran, use the connection to Azerbaijan. The establishment of a Kurdish federation is part of that plan that provides the control over Crete till Malta for the US and Israel. France and Greece support this plan.
I consider that Türkiye must act recognizing and taking into account this plan. Ankara has to see that all, the conflict in Gaza, the civil war in Sudan, the war in Ukraine are connected.