Jerusalem Post/Opinion
Too obvious to conceal: Ankara’s threats herald a northern Syria operation - opinion
The US must send a clear and immediate message to Ankara and Damascus that attempts to militarily reshape northern Syria are unacceptable.
Turkish soldiers march during a military parade to mark the 1974 Turkish invasion of Cyprus in response to a short-lived Greek-inspired coup, in the Turkish-controlled northern Cyprus, in the divided city of Nicosia, Cyprus July 20, 2023.
(photo credit: REUTERS/YIANNIS KOURTOGLOU)
ByAMED MARDIN
DECEMBER 17, 2025 10:21
Turkey’s recent escalation of threats toward northern Syria is not ordinary diplomatic posturing. Ankara is laying the groundwork for a new military operation, and the process is now too obvious to conceal.
In Qatar, Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan called for “the elimination of non-Syrian elements within the SDF [Syrian Democratic Forces]” and the surge of military buildup along the border, along with successive visits to the region by high-level commanders.
This follows the three-stage model Turkey has employed in every previous intervention: rhetorical escalation, military preparation, and the search for international legitimacy.
These threats didn’t emerge in a vacuum. From December 2024 through May 2025, Turkish forces and Islamist militia groups launched months-long assaults on the SDF to seize the strategic Tishrin Dam in the Euphrates basin. Despite air support, these operations failed. Now Ankara is attempting, through diplomatic pressure, what it couldn’t achieve on the battlefield.
Presidential adviser Mehmet Ucum’s recent writings laid bare the state’s true intentions: “Goals unattainable through terrorism cannot be reached through law and democracy either.” This sentence encapsulates how Ankara views Kurdish actors. The political space will be narrowed, and force will be used if necessary.
US SPECIAL ENVOY for Syria Tom Barrack speaks at a news conference in Damascus in September 2025. (credit: Khalil Ashawi/Reuters)
The SDF and the Rojava administration repeatedly called for dialogue. Every call was rejected. Devlet Bahceli declared that the SDF must lay down its arms and the Rojava administration must be dissolved. This is not a call for negotiation – it’s an ultimatum for surrender.
Is Washington giving Ankara the green light for a Turkish operation in Syria?
At this critical juncture, statements by Trump’s Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack, have been perceived as giving Ankara a green light. His remarks, that “benevolent monarchies work best in the Middle East” and “we Balkanized Iraq and Syria” signal that Washington is open to reshaping regional structures rather than protecting existing ones.
More importantly, Barrack’s vague language on Syria’s future failed to draw a clear red line against Turkey’s military preparations. This ambiguity has convinced Ankara that no “stop” order will come from Washington. America’s posture is not merely a diplomatic weakness – it is eroding the trust that Kurdish forces in Rojava have built through years of cooperation with the US.
THE TRUMP administration previously managed tensions between Ankara and Kurdish forces through what might be called a “soft braking” strategy. Its consistency was debatable, but it prevented open conflict. Today, the same brake mechanism is needed, yet Barrack’s statements raise concerns that it won’t engage.
The new Syrian regime under President Ahmed al-Sharaa is acting in accordance with Turkish demands and showing no willingness to reach an accommodation with the Kurds. Damascus’s withdrawal from the Paris talks proves its submission to Ankara’s pressure. Sharaa needs Turkish support for reconstruction and international legitimacy. But this is being achieved by sacrificing Kurdish political existence.
Damascus must hear this clearly: The violent elimination of Kurds from the political arena will delay Syria’s recovery for decades. A regime under Ankara’s influence weakens Syria’s independence and drags the country toward new conflicts rather than genuine peace.
Erdogan’s sole priority is maintaining power. He launched a “peace process” in Turkey, then terminated it.
The Kurdish issue is managed not through a consistent vision but through calculations of power. Currently, Erdogan calculates he can both consolidate his nationalist base at home and gain new ground abroad, in Syria. When the process becomes damaging, he can swiftly change course.
At this critical moment, when Rojava faces existential threats, the natural allies of the Kurds must mobilize and raise their voices. Influential actors in Washington – human rights advocates, think tanks, and members of Congress – must use their leverage on the Trump administration.
Figures with influence over America’s Middle East policy must remind the administration that abandoning the Kurdish forces who fought shoulder-to-shoulder against ISIS in northern Syria would constitute both a moral and strategic betrayal. Advocates for the Kurdish people must explain to the Trump administration how much Washington’s ambiguous stance has emboldened Ankara and how it threatens regional stability.
THIS IS not only the Kurds’ problem – America’s credibility and its future in the Middle East are at stake. Influential voices in Washington must understand that the price of silence will be steep and send a clear message to the White House: Military operations against Rojava are unacceptable.
The picture is clear: Turkey is preparing both militarily and politically for a new operation. The Kurdish population in Rojava is directly in the crosshairs. The Syrian regime struggles with reconstruction. In this context, Ankara’s operation would upend not only the Kurds but all regional balances.
Washington’s role is vital. American support for Kurdish forces in northern Syria is not merely military cooperation – it is critical for maintaining regional stability. A comprehensive Turkish operation would shake the strategic balance the US is trying to maintain in the Middle East. Washington’s ambiguous stance could lead to irreversible humanitarian and political consequences.
The US must send a clear and immediate message to Ankara and Damascus that attempts to militarily reshape northern Syria are unacceptable. Kurdish security and political representation are inseparable components of regional peace.
The question is simple but vital: Will Washington read these threats as the first sign of an approaching storm and act, or will the Middle East once again pay the price of “intervention that came too late”?
The answer will determine not only the fate of the Kurds but the future of the region.
The writer is a Kurdish exiled journalist, political analyst, and Middle East observer focusing on Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Kurdish affairs. a.mardin@icloud.com
No comments:
Post a Comment