It was “time for settlement,” the Turkish Defense Ministry announced via Twitter on Sunday evening. Shortly afterwards came the message: Turkey is attacking Kurdish positions in northern Syria. Twelve people were killed in air strikes on the first night of the attack. On Wednesday, Turkish troops said they had attacked 471 targets since the start of the latest military offensive in Iraq and Syria. In total, “254 terrorists were neutralized,” said Turkish Defense Minister Hulusi Akar (70).
Turkey’s justification: the attacks are said to be the response to the terrorist attack in Istanbul on 13 November. The Ministry of Defense in Ankara invoked the right of self-defense in the Charter of the United Nations. It is about avoiding “terrorist attacks” against the Turkish people and security forces. “Terrorist elements” must be neutralized and attacks on Turkey avoided, it said. The center of gravity of the attacks: the Kurdish militias YPG and the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party PKK.
The US and Russia seem to agree
Maurus Reinkowski, Turkey expert and professor of Islamic Studies at the University of Basel, explains to Blick: “The aim is to weaken the Kurdish organizations in Syria, ie especially the Kurdish military units of the YPG. This is meant to nip in the bud any ambition to establish a Kurdish entity in Northern Syria.”
Since the middle of the year, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan (68) has been talking about a possible military offensive intended to penetrate the neighboring country from the border up to 30 kilometers deep – now this has become a reality. Russia and Iran – both also involved in the Syrian civil war – had advised Turkey against such an approach. The US had also warned Ankara of a new offensive. But Reinkowski is certain: “It is likely that Turkey has a fundamental understanding of both Russia and the United States.”
Because Russia largely controls Syria and Syrian airspace. “Turkey’s radius of movement is small and to avoid problems, Turkey must coordinate with Russia,” the expert explains. Turkey has some leeway with the US, as Turkey is still seen as a key ally and is still a member of NATO. “That’s why people are willing to look past some things for the bigger picture.” It’s “paradoxical,” adds Reinkowksi.
“The Kurds have relatively few opportunities to fight back”
NATO’s most recent expansion — Finland and Sweden joined the defense alliance in the course of the war in Ukraine — also serves as leverage for Erdogan. “One wants to force the European states to take Turkey’s side more clearly than before in the assessment of the Kurdish question. Turkey can always do this if it has leverage, as is the case now with the issue of NATO enlargement.”
For Reinkowski, there are also many inconsistencies in the attack in Istanbul. The responsibility of the PKK from Syria has so far only been proven in the eyes of the Turkish government. The justification that the military offensive is used to fight “Kurdish terrorism” is a pretext. “A fundamental problem is that Turkey acts militarily outside its borders, namely in Syria and Iraq, but always considers this a kind of domestic political problem and therefore refuses any criticism of its actions.”
According to Erdogan, ground offensives are also planned and the attacked parties threaten military responses. However, the expert does not consider a new conflict in the region possible. “The Kurds have relatively few options to fight back and defend themselves directly in this particular situation.” The Turkish military and security apparatus, on the other hand, is overwhelming. “The YPG will therefore not engage in open confrontation.”