Naisa: Russia offered a malign solution to Turkey amid the rapid volatility of the Syrian situation

SEYDO IBO /NEWS DESK

Recently, the Syrian arena has witnessed many changes in the political and military arena at the regional and international levels, following the decision of the American withdrawal and the Turkish threats to launch military operations in north and east Syria. As well as a change in Turkish policies on the region and the Adana Agreement, after gathering between the two presidents Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

In response to these changes, Hawar news agency (ANHA) held an interview with the General Coordinator of the Syrian Revolutionary Leftist Movement Dr. Giyath Naisa.

* The Turkish state has threatened by its officials to launch a military operation on areas of north and east Syria, how do you read these threats?

The Turkish state's threats to launch a military operation on north and east Syria can be read in several ways. First, the Turkish state has real hatred and phobia of any progress to free the Kurdish people, in any area of its presence. This chauvinistic concern against the liberation of the Kurdish people in the Turkish state is found in all the countries that share Kurdistan. The Turkish state has succeeded in the peace agreement with the Kurdish movement in Turkey, and it stood against the referendum that took place in the Kurdistan region of Iraq for independence, despite the good relationship between Turkey and the presidency of the Kurdistan region and the last initiated the idea of a referendum. Turkey cooperates with Iran in suppressing the Kurdish movement in Iran's Kurdistan. As far as Syria is concerned, Turkey occupied Afrin with its mercenaries and threatened to launch attack against Democratic Autonomous Administration (DAA), as the liberation of the Kurdish people is considered as nightmare for them and their aggressive ambitions.

On the other hand, the threat and even the desire of the state to attack north and east Syria is consistent with the Turkish state's strategy of becoming the most important regional state in the region and its attempt to become the main player in determining Syria's fate and strengthening its long-term influence in our country, and its success, means that Turkey has become an effective and dominant regional state. Considering that the expansion of its occupation power is accompanied by the revival of its shaky economy and the expansion of its markets. There are therefore economic and geopolitical reasons for the aggressive and imperialist tendencies of the Turkish state.

*Statements were issued by Turkey regarding the existence of indirect relations with the Syrian regime. What do these statements indicate after the meeting between Erdogan and Putin?

Turkish statements about indirect contact between the Turkish regime and the Syrian regime have been more frequent after the meeting between Putin and Erdogan a few days ago. It comes in the context of confirming what Russian officials reiterate to all international parties the need to coordinate with the Syrian regime as the "legitimate" government in Syria.

If we know that the Syrian regime itself has become, to a great extent, under Russian tutelage, we can simply understand that the Russians are telling everyone that what we decide is not only determined by the Russian government, but as guardians of the Syrian regime. Thus, the Russian government seems to be calling on Turkey to improve relations with its "agent" of the Syrian regime.

What explains the change in Turkish policies in their threats to the North Syria for launching a military operation and focusing on a buffer zone, and then the Adana Agreement?

In fact, the Turkish state was quick to announce its intention to carry out a military operation in the north and east of Syria once the US President announced the withdrawal of troops there, this Turkish acceleration by showing aggressive military intentions towards new Syrian areas, exploring the expansionist intentions of the Turkish regime. Ignoring the Turkish declaration of mobilizing its forces for an impending military operation, it ignored several facts. First, the cost of invading Autonomous Administration areas would be prohibitively expensive and would have violent repercussions within Turkey itself. Turkey has also discovered that its strategic ally, "America" does not bless such a Turkish military operation in Syria, because it does not respond to the interests of America in Syria, and it seemed, as if the American declaration of withdrawal, came to expose the intentions of the actors in Syria, towards the regions of north and east Syria. On the other hand, neither Russia nor Iran want Turkey to expand its domination of more Syrian territory, especially as they have turned a blind eye to the Turkish occupation of Afrin a year ago, because the expansion of Turkish influence in Syria means strengthening Turkey's cards as a player in the Syrian scene, which is not desired by Russia, because Russia wants to remain the most important player scheduled for the Syrian track.

In short, Turkey has found that none of the international and regional countries do not support its declared military operations towards north and east Syria, and remains alone. If it is to pursue its own adventures, it will find itself facing a great popular resistance, as well as regional and international parties, but this does not eliminate the possibility of violence in the policies of the Turkish state.

*Is the return to recalling the Adana Agreement by Turkey pointing to a rapprochement between Turkey and the regime at the expense of the armed factions in Idlib and the northern countryside of Aleppo?

In my opinion, this refers to two issues. The first is that Russia did not give Turkey a green light for a large-scale military operation, as it has done in Afrin, but provided Turkey with a malignant solution set by the Adana Agreement of 1998 between Turkey and the Syrian regime. On the condition that Turkey recognizes the legitimacy of the Syrian regime, to be done. In exchange for Turkey to facilitate the situation in Idlib in favor of the regime and its allies. This is the ceiling that the Russians, in my opinion, have set for the Turkish side.

However, I would like to point out that the situation in our country is volatile and fast moving from one status to another. Nor should we rely on the promise of regional and international states, because the latter is working for their own interests. We must, first and foremost, rely on our own energies and the capabilities of our people and on a clear liberation strategy for ourselves and for our people.

Where will things in North Syria lead to, between the US decision to withdraw and the establishment of a buffer zone and the Adana Agreement, coinciding with the battle to defeat terrorism led by the Syrian Democratic Forces in the countryside of Deir –ez-Zor to end IS alleged caliphate, in your opinion?

The cohesion of Autonomous Administration and its military capabilities and the popular incubator make any party that wants to attack it militarily consider the very high cost of such an attack and its wide repercussions. But that does not mean, sleep on the pillow, but it means that we have to prepare for all possibilities. Popularly, politically and militarily. Our speech must be clear, to everyone and public, our positions must match our practices. We do not defend anyone, but we will defend our country and our freedom and our experience. We are not defending democracy and freedom of a part of Syria. We defend freedom, independence and a democratic future for all of Syria. We are not all Syrians, we call on all national forces and Syrian democracy to cooperate and work together to maintain Syrian unity and rid it of terrorism and occupation and establishing democratic, decentralized political system based on the ruins of the old regime. Our battle and sacrifices are not for ethnic, national or regional reasons, it is a battle for the liberation of all Syrians.

Therefore, it is the duty of every Syrian democrat and patriot to support the struggle of our people in north and east Syria, because our victory there is a victory for all of our people, and our defeat there will be a defeat for all Syrians. I call upon all democratic and secular forces and personalities to meet and circumvent a democratic and social program that establishes new Syria, freedom, democracy, decentralization and social justice. At the heart of this dynamic is Syrian Democratic Council SDC, whose focal point is the north and east of Syria.

In your opinion, how can the Syrian crisis be solved in light of the changes taking place in the region?

When the democratic, secular and social forces of Syria agree on a democratic transition program, dynamics largely launched by the meetings of Ain Issa, the Syrian-Syrian dialogue, the documents and mechanisms issued by these meetings closely resemble those of the 1919-1920 Syrian General Conference, that is, it is a kind of popular "parliament" capable of presenting a constitutional body and expressing the voice of the multi-political and ethnic coloring of the people under the broad political framework, as SDC and perhaps with others, in any negotiation political context of the democratic transition, and cut off any attempt to reproduce the old authoritarian regime.

(T/S)

ANHA