Çiya Kurd: Solution in Syria only by ending Turkish occupation, intra-Syrian dialogue
Badran said that Turkey aims to preserve and protect the terrorist groups in order to keep a threat element in their hands against any side that is different with their interests and to prolong the crisis and chaos in Syria, noting that the threats of al-Mualim to the east of the Euphrates were consistent with Erdogan's recent threats, he stressed that there is no solution in Syria only to end the Turkish occupation of Syrian territory and return to intra-Syrian national dialogue.
Commenting on the remarks of the Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Mualim, the adviser of the Democratic Autonomous Administration in al-Jazeera canton Badran Çiya Kurd said that Walid al-Mualim's statements indicate that the Syrian regime and the armed factions in Idlib have legislated the Turkish occupation in North Syria and we no longer hear them demanding the Turkish occupation to leave or call to liberate Syria from Turkey, and it became clear that the statements of the Foreign Minister when he said that after Idlib we will go to the east of the Euphrates again came in full harmony with the last statements of the Turkish president, which is threatening Manbij and the east of the Euphrates again and this is another proof of a great possibility for Ankara and Damascus to head towards an understanding to demolish and destroy the rest of Syria, forgetting the destructive role played by Turkey in Syria over the past years.
In an interview with Hawar news agency on the latest political developments, the statement by Walid al-Mualim and the latest developments in Idlib province were discussed by the official.
The text of the dialogue reads as follows:
- How do you assess the position of the Syrian regime of the Russian-Turkish agreement after the non-declaration of any of the mercenary factions out of the so-called demilitarized zone explicitly, especially after the position of the Syrian Foreign Minister, who gave the green light to give more time to implement this agreement?
We believe that there is a plan drawn up by the Astana Group regarding the status of Idlib and the drawing up of this plan according to the interests of those countries and not for the benefit of the Syrian people and not for the Syrian regime, factions and blocs in the name of the opposition and other armed groups. This plan is implemented with local human blocks and foreign military technology.
In addition to the existence of serious challenges and obstacles to the implementation of this agreement, the existence of negative fateful effects reflected on the future of Syria and its people from the Turkish occupation and its legitimacy through such agreements through the installation of permanent monitoring points in that area and this leads to the risk of dividing Syria and turning the North Syrian to north of Cyprus.
Turkey is also aiming to preserve and protect these terrorist groups in different places, both in Syria and within Turkey, in order to keep them as a threat against any side that is different from their interests. This is a clear indication that Turkey will prolong the life of the crisis and chaos in Syria to leave time for it to produce terrorism in other forms and labels attempting to retrieve hegemony of the so-called Ottoman Islamic Caliphate which the Brotherhood-affiliated AKP aim to.
On the one hand, the regime calls for giving time to Turkey and Russia regarding the departure of the mercenaries from Idlib after the agreement on the demilitarized areas. On the other hand, Walid al-Mualim pointed out that their forces are ready in the vicinity of Idlib if Jabhit al-Nusra does not agree to the agreement, does not this mean a contradiction in the position of the Syrian regime, How do you evaluate this procrastination?
It is known that Russia insists on the implementation of this agreement in order to win the Turks against American influence in the area, but it is surprising that the Syrian reliance on the implementation of such an agreement and requested an additional period from Russia to the Turks on the tongue of Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Mualim, this indicates that the regime and the armed factions in Idlib have agreed to legitimize the Turkish occupation in North Syria and we no longer hear them demanding the exit of Turkey and the liberation of Syria from it, as it is clear from the last statements of the foreign minister when he said, "after Idlib we will head to the east of the Euphrates" This statement came in full harmony with the statements of the Turkish President who returned to threat Manbij and areas east of the Euphrates and Rojava, and this is further evidence that there is a significant possibility that Ankara and Damascus will be heading towards an understanding to destroy what is left of Syria, and then the regime will forget the destructive role played by Turkey in Syria during the past years.
The speech of the foreign minister regarding the north and east of the Euphrates does not serve the national interest of Syria and does not fall within the political dialogue, but deepens the Syrian crisis and brings the conflict back to the first square. And the call by the Syrian regime for the Syrians to return to the homeland and to Syrian sovereignty and deal in accordance of the constitution indicates that Damascus will take advantage of the aggressive and the ruthless of Justice and Development in striking the democratic experiment for the future of Syria in order to maintain their authoritarian gains and push the region towards chaos in an attempt by the regime and Turkey to pass the reconciliation processes similar to areas sold by Turkey to the regime previously on the areas of north and east Syria.
In your opinion where is Idlib to turn in light of these contradictions, and whether this agreement will reach its goal, and in the case of consensus, what will be the fate of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham?
It is difficult to talk about a solution that is expected soon in light of the differences between the factions in that region and not to implement any of the terms of the agreement by them, contrary to what Turkey claims, Turkey is disguising these elements and their place or transfer them to secret sites and many groups are preparing to fight and trench to confront the regime and its allies and the result of Turkish confusion leads to the threat and intimidation of the north and east of the Euphrates to keep away from Idlib, as if everything is fine there to distract attention from Idlib
Certainly the three-way statements (Russia-Turkey-Syria) did not come from space. What Turkey is doing in Idlib is within the framework of a well-planned plan to be implemented in North Syria, a sectarian Sunni-Brotherhood scheme to counter the interests of other countries, obstructing the political process and striking the democratic experiment in North Syria. The solution lies in opposing the Turkish occupation in North Syria and liberating Afrin which will be the knockdown of this destructive project led by Turkey and its mercenaries.
Therefore, there must be a Syrian decision regarding the areas occupied by Turkey first and seeking to liberate the whole of North Syria from the Turkish occupation. The internal differences can be resolved through dialogue rather than threat and by consensus on a new Syrian constitution that guarantees all the rights and freedom of the components, sects and nationalities