Egyptian politician, researcher warns Arab countries of danger of Turkey

 The occupying Turkish state has been interfering in Syrian affairs for more than a decade, occupying large areas of Syrian territory, changing the features of the areas it occupied, and turning them into dens for mercenary groups, led by ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra mercenaries, and built dozens of settlements there.

 Politician, researcher and expert on African affairs from Egypt, Rami Zuhdi asserts, "We have lost a lot because of the old Ottomanism, and we will certainly never accept a new Ottoman."

 Rami Zuhdi's assertions came in an interview with our agency, about Turkish policies towards the Syrian people, and the role of Arab countries, which made it clear that many Arab countries consider their strategic security to be linked to Syria and vice versa.

 * The Turkish state has been blatantly interfering in Syrian affairs for more than 11 years, and occupied parts of Syrian territory. In your opinion, what are its goals from this intervention?

 Turkish interference in the Syrian affairs and of other countries such as Libya and several countries on the African continent is a measure against humanity and international law, and against the covenants, norms and respected international neighborly rights.  Turkish goals are a reflection of a policy of dishonest interests;  Turkey did not have honorable purposes and will not be, by its intervention in the Syrian affairs, whether strategically in the field or politically or trying to manage matters in good faith, no matter how many justifications it gives to the world.  With the common interests in the world, and without harming the other, there is no sense in securing the future of a nation by robbing the capabilities another nation;  And the talk here is certainly not intended for the Turkish people, as it is in the end our partner in humanity and coexistence, but the policies of the Turkish regimes.

 So, the thing that drives all things is the economic dimension, then comes the idea of ​​domination, which can also be explained by its connection in the end, to economic conflicts and ambitions, and the ambitions of the colonial states for the bounties of the colonial states were always the motive or all motives, even if the form or name of these motives differed. 

 * Why is there no clear position for the Arab countries and the Arab League regarding Turkish interference in the Syrian issue?

 It is not a clear position here or there. They are joint responsibilities. Each regional or international institution bears part of the responsibility. It also has tools that vary from an international institution to a regional or continental institution. The most important thing is strong binding measures. Who can bind whom?  I think that if political and economic pressures are used well against Turkey, this could be a very influential axis, and these pressures in closed rooms and unannounced moves may be more important and more effective than the usual statements of rejection, denunciation which no longer have a place in light of global policies.  The language of international pressure has become louder than any other language.

 *Turkey has turned the occupied areas in Syria into dens for terrorist groups, often exporting them abroad, in addition to building settlements within Syrian territory. Why do we not see any position from the Arab countries regarding this policy?

 Many Arab countries are aware of the limits of the game here, and consider that their strategic security is linked to the security of Syria and vice versa, but the Arab countries differ among themselves, in the way of dealing with the confirmed danger, whether from harboring terrorists or exporting them outside this region or the cancerous danger of building settlements.  It is certainly a crime and an attempt to change the demography and geography of the region and impose a fait accompli. Regardless of the declared positions of the Arab countries on this matter, the systematic Turkish expansion in this region is a danger that affects everyone, and Syria will not be the only loser;  Because it is undoubtedly not the only target.

 * In your opinion, how dangerous is the Turkish state to the Arab countries, especially since there are statements issued by Turkish officials about the so-called neo-Ottomanism, that is, the attempt to occupy more Syrian and Iraqi lands?

 The old Ottomans greatly disrupted and delayed the march of nations, and we lost a lot because of the old Ottomans, and certainly we will never accept a new Ottoman.  The Ottomans may have succeeded in the end in creating the state of Turkey from non-existence, but the Ottoman state itself handed over the countries and peoples of the region from one colonizer to another, and left the peoples in the darkness of ignorance, disease and hunger at a time when the wealth of nations was transferred to Turkey, and I do not think that the repetition of the Ottoman word on  the tongues of the Turks are nothing but weeping over spilled milk, misplaced wishes and dreams for the unreasonable.

 * There are calls and appeals from the Arab and Kurdish political and intellectual elites for the sake of uniting the Kurdish and Arab peoples for their ranks and deterring the Turkish occupation attacks. How do you view these calls, and what is your position on them?

 Yes, such calls are important. The Arabs, Kurds and the rest of the region’s ethnicities agree on honorable humanity, coexistence and stable security against Turkish occupation and greed for what is in our hands. The invitations are important because at least our voice reaches the world, in the end it will not pass as they think, as long as there is a people on the earth  He has a just will that defeats anything.

 * In a related context, the components of northern and eastern Syria (Kurds, Arabs and Syriacs) formed an autonomous administration, and this administration was able to secure a safe and stable life for more than 5 million people. How do you evaluate this administration, and in your opinion, can it be a model for the democratization of Syria?

 I may not be able to give a wholly objective assessment;  Because I have not visited this region so that I can judge the degree of success and to what extent it is on the ground, but based on the political, social and economic analyzes presented to the administration in this region, it seems that almost everyone sees that they succeeded in managing their affairs, and that they almost do not lack anything effective.  On the contrary, their administrative affairs are developing day after day, whether this experience is valid or not;  To democratize Syria, I also think that the 5 million people who are best able to prove this are the people themselves. Perhaps we have to listen to examples from them to know to what degree they feel satisfied, and to what extent their eyes are looking forward, and in the end politics, democracy and governance are human-made terms.  All of them are tools for managing and improving people's lives and protecting their security.

A

 ANHA