Sheikh Baqi: Adana agreement is illegal

OLVA HAJ MANSOR /AL-HASAKAH

The Secretary-General of the Kurdish Democratic Party of Syria, Jamal Sheikh Baqi, said that the agreement of Adana since its foundation is illegal because it does not express the will of the Syrian people. This came during an interview conducted by Hawar news agency with him on the latest political developments in the Syrian arena and the recent meeting between Turkey and Russia on the Adana agreement.

The conducted interview is as follows:

- What is the aim of the Adana agreement signed in 1998 between the Syrian regime and the Turkish one?

At first, I can say that this agreement which is called the Adana agreement, is illegal because it primarily does not reflect the will of the Syrian people. Second, because it came under the threat of invasion, this is not an agreement. This is not an agreement because it was imposed by threat and under the regional and Arab pressure.

The regime was in a position of weakness and under much pressure, thus was forced to sign this agreement. This agreement has not yet been ratified on by the legitimate institutions representing the people. It has not been ratified on by the Syrian People's Assembly, although it is a formal council.

Is it possible to say that the agreement was a starting point for Turkish intervention in Syrian affairs, and what we see from the killing, destruction and displacement of the people during the crisis is one of the results of the agreement?

The basis of the Turkish intervention in Syria and other countries is the result of the Turkish mindset, and the Turkish mentality, which continues to bemoan what it lost from the so-called Ottoman Empire, which still considers France and England responsible for what happened to Turkey after the First World War, Aleppo and Mosul were parts of Turkey and the Ottoman Empire that extended to Yemen, North Africa and even the Balkans.

It keeps following this mindset, and when circumstances allow it to intervene in these areas and find a loophole to recover some of what it lost in these areas, it does not hesitate to do so, and therefore it would not miss any opportunity to intervene in the closest geography, that is Syria, which Turkey claims there are PKK bases here.

In our view, the Adana Agreement did not have any effect because the PKK was a party that started from Bakur, "northern Kurdistan". Its main area was in northern Kurdistan. It is still present in this main arena and its struggle is evolving year after year after the Adana agreement. We all know the Adana agreement did not have any effect because the PKK was a party that started from Bakur, "northern Kurdistan". Its main area was in northern Kurdistan. It is still present in this main arena and its struggle is advancing year after year after the Adana agreement, its achievements in the struggle became much greater before the Adana agreement.

Why was the Adana agreement reintroduced at this time?

In my opinion, it is not Turkey that raised the issue, but Russia that has raised the issue and put it back on the scene. It is a maneuver that says that we will not allow the establishment of a buffer zone. This is what I understand from the speech of Russian President Vladimir Putin and his offer to return to abide by the Adana agreement. The application of the Adana agreement and the Turks must withdraw from the occupied Syrian territories, i.e. from Jarablos and Azaz to al-Bab and Tal Refaat, they must withdraw from Idlib and stop supporting terrorism. These are normal conditions of the Adana agreement. Therefore, Putin is trying to tell him that the Turks cannot have a buffer zone.

The Syrian regime said that it is committed to the agreement, but demanded that Turkey withdraw from its occupied territories and stop supporting terrorists. Is it possible for the two sides to reinstate the agreement?

I think that the activation of the agreement is no longer possible, and the regime when it says it is bound by the agreement, it requires how to abide by the agreement, the agreement in this form is finished and became something from past. They cannot prove the danger to Turkish national security. They cannot abandon the armed and terrorist groups, because their role is in Syria through these groups and Turkey to implement the Adana agreement, which will end any role in Syria, and therefore the Adnan agreement cannot be implemented.

If the agreement is activated, who will be the target again?

This agreement is basically aimed at Kurdistan Liberation Movement, and the liberation movement in general in the region, they can certainly understand again but not by the agreement of Adana, they may be able to reach new understandings, the regime that cares about nothing but to remain in power, Turkey is looking at the democratic project in the north of Syria if it succeeds in the future it will reflect on the internal situation in Turkey and specifically on the north of Kurdistan, here Erdogan sees the danger, but now there is no danger and no one is trying to pose a threat to Turkey, but just our project succeeded in northern and eastern Syria, the situation will be reflected not only on Turkey but also on the whole region, especially Turkey.

What is the position of the Kurdish forces on this agreement? How must they act?

All the Kurdish forces since the signing of the Adana agreement expressed their negative attitude towards the agreement at that time, but now with great regret, there are some Kurdish forces that justify the Turkish intervention in the affairs of northern and eastern Syria by having legal legitimacy through the agreement, which always works on the undermining of the Kurdish house from the inside, one of the trumpets of Turkish propaganda, and therefore its words go in the void and are meaningless.

A.H

ANHA