Researchers comment on extension of Turkish Forces’ mission: “Turanist Policy”

The Turkish Parliament approved a decision to extend the deployment of the Turkish occupation army in Syria and Iraq for an additional three years.

According to the Parliament’s press office, “The Turkish Grand National Assembly ratified a presidential proposal extending the mandate of the Turkish Armed Forces in Syria and Iraq for three years.”

This decision comes despite the peace appeal issued by leader Abdullah Ocalan and the efforts by the PKK to advance this initiative, alongside ongoing attempts to foster consensus among Syrian parties. Nevertheless, Turkey continues to use its old pretexts to maintain its occupation of the region.

Turanist Turkish Policy

Lebanese political analyst Ali Yahya told ANHA Agency: “Ankara’s decision to extend its military mandate in Syria and Iraq for another three years comes at a highly sensitive local, regional, and international juncture.”

He explained: “Domestically, this aligns with a new shift within the Turkish deep state’s policy toward the PKK. Regionally, it follows the geopolitical realignment Turkey helped implement about nine months ago, ushering in a transitional phase where local and regional power lines are being redrawn.”

On the international level, Yahya noted that “as conflicts flare from Ukraine to West Asia and across Africa, Turkey seeks to safeguard its strategic gains — from the Zangezur Corridor to Libya.”

He added: “On the surface, the decision seems aimed at continuing operations against the PKK in Iraq and the Syrian Democratic Forces across the border. However, in essence, it reflects Turkey’s broader ambition to reassert regional influence following the collapse of the old order.”

Yahya emphasized that this is “the longest extension since the onset of Turkey’s occupation and military interventions — not a routine measure, but a declaration of intent to remain a principal actor, with tacit U.S. approval, in shaping post-war Syria and managing northern Iraq’s security dynamics.”

He further stated: “Ankara knows nature abhors a vacuum. A withdrawal now would open the door for other powers — affiliated with Iran, the UAE, or remnants of the old regime — to fill the gap. Thus, Turkey is moving to secure a permanent foothold before political settlements take full shape.”

According to Yahya, “Turkey is blending security logic with geopolitical ambitions through a Turanist lens. It intends to remain at the table during the re-engineering of the Levant — in both influence maps and new security arrangements.”

Search for Division and Consolidation of Influence

Discussing the Syrian context, Yahya said: “Extending the Turkish military presence in Syria will ensure that Turkey remains the dominant on-the-ground actor — capable of influencing and managing the security, political, and economic landscape, especially during Syria’s transitional phase as it rebuilds its new national identity.”

He added that Turkey aims “to divide and consolidate spheres of influence alongside de facto powers such as Israel, the U.S., and Russia, while reshaping the Kurdish question through both hard and soft power. Meanwhile, other regional players may reposition themselves — either through coordination with or confrontation against Turkey — fueling new geopolitical competition.”

In Iraq, Yahya noted that “the extension signals Ankara’s intention to continue operations against the PKK in northern Iraq and possibly expand its security zones — a move that may strain ties with Baghdad but strengthen security coordination with the Kurdistan Regional Government, which shares Turkey’s concerns about PKK expansion.”

He concluded: “Regionally, Turkey is entrenching itself as a guarantor in the post-Syrian-conflict regional order. Its presence in Syria and Iraq reinforces its role in the emerging collective security architecture of the Eastern Mediterranean and Northern Levant.”

Turkey Not Serious About Peace Agreement

Syrian lawyer and political activist Adel al-Hadi said:

“It is unlikely that Turkey will withdraw its military presence from Syria or Iraq before securing its share of influence in both countries through explicit agreements signed by their governments and approved by Washington.”

He added that this demonstrates that “Turkey’s engagement in peace processes is largely cosmetic — a means to polish its image rather than a genuine commitment. Turkey will only adhere to such agreements once its strategic interests are guaranteed.”

Al-Hadi continued:“As Israel seeks to expand control over parts of Syria for its national security, Turkey, in turn, aims to strengthen its military posture by prolonging its deployment in both Syria and Iraq.”

He concluded: “Ultimately, Turkey will not gain more than what Washington allows, while Iran may also play a decisive role as a co-guarantor in the Astana agreements alongside Turkey and Russia.”

a.k

ANHA