Political Activist: Turkey turns Syrian areas into arenas of testing, pressure

Syrian political and media activist Insaf Sleiteen affirmed that Turkey is seeking to influence the Syrian trajectory at a moment of recalibrating balances within the country, noting that it is turning Syrian areas into arenas of testing and pressure. She added that the transitional government’s visit to Moscow comes within the context of redrawing lines of influence.

Political Activist: Turkey turns Syrian areas into arenas of testing, pressure
26 December, 2025   06:25
NEWS DESK

Over the past two days, Syria has witnessed notable diplomatic and field developments. A high-level Turkish delegation visited Damascus, comprising the foreign minister, the defense minister, and the head of intelligence, where it met with a delegation from the transitional government headed by Ahmad al-Sharaa.

This visit was followed by a field escalation, as elements affiliated with the transitional government launched attacks on the neighborhoods of Sheikh Maqsoud and Ashrafieh.

Turkish Effort to Influence a Moment of Rebalancing

Syrian political and media activist Insaf Sleiteen told our agency that “the Turkish visit to Damascus cannot be read outside the context of its timing. It coincided with sensitive field developments, making it part of an intertwined political–security moment rather than a purely protocol or isolated visit.”

Regarding its significance, she said it “lies in the fact that it reflects a Turkish attempt to influence a moment of recalibrating balances within Syria, particularly in files related to the north and the Kurdish issue, within known margins imposed by regional and international understandings.”

On Turkey’s efforts to influence Syria’s internal trajectory, especially with regard to domestic files, she stated: “Turkey is clearly seeking to influence specific internal tracks, foremost among them the Kurdish issue and arrangements in northern Syria. This effort stems from declared Turkish security considerations, but it collides with a complex Syrian reality and with the positions of the SDF, which believes that any handling of the Kurdish issue must take place within a framework of political partnership and guarantees within the Syrian state, not through security-based approaches or field pressure. Hence, Turkish influence appears present, but it is not capable of imposing final outcomes on its own.”

Syrian Areas Turn into Arenas of Pressure and Testing

Sleiteen considered that “linking the Turkish visit with the escalation witnessed in the neighborhoods of Sheikh Maqsoud and Ashrafieh is not a trivial detail. While it is not possible to assert a direct causal relationship, it is more likely that this coincidence reflects an interconnected context that cannot be ignored. This is not the first time that Turkish political moves or messages have coincided with field tensions in sensitive areas, indicating that such areas turn, at these moments, into arenas of pressure and testing for political messages rather than events detached from the broader scene.”

She explained that “from the SDF’s perspective, what occurred is viewed as field pressure within a broader negotiating context regarding the future of security and administrative arrangements. As for Turkey, it is understood within an approach aimed at recalibrating the security reality in the north in a way that serves Ankara’s priorities.”

Political and Field Moves to Redraw Lines of Influence

In concluding her remarks, the Syrian political activist said that “the visit of the transitional government delegation to Moscow reinforces the reading of the interconnection between political and field tracks. The relationship with Moscow remains one of the most prominent determinants of the ceiling of Turkish maneuvering in Syria. This simultaneity between Damascus, Ankara, and Moscow, along with what took place on the ground in Aleppo, suggests that the scene is being managed within delicate balances, where political moves and field developments are used as parallel tools to redraw lines of influence, without any single party possessing the ability to decide the outcome unilaterally.”

ANHA