Three in a boat: how Syria becomes a haven

13
Three in a boat: how Syria becomes a haven


In parallel with how Syrian government forces complete the sweep of the city of Abu Kemal, finally knocking the ground out of the hands of terrorist groups, a number of countries advocating an early end to the conflict in the Arab state are engaged in resolving the crisis in the republic on the diplomatic front.



A meeting of the foreign ministers of Russia, Iran and Turkey, devoted to the Syrian issue, ended on Sunday in Antalya. As a result of the conversation, the heads of the diplomatic departments stated the decrease in the level of violence in Syria and came to the conclusion that the current situation allows for the resolution of the crisis in the country through political means. In particular, the parties were able to bring positions closer to the issue of truce and reducing tensions in de-escalation zones, noting that at present the situation in the republic is much better than it was recently.

Separately, it is worth noting that the communication of the foreign ministers of the three countries became a preparatory stage before the upcoming 22 November meeting of Moscow, Tehran and Ankara, which will also be devoted to Syrian topics, and also precedes the convening of the Syrian National Dialogue Congress in Sochi the beginning of December.

With a great deal of confidence, it can be assumed that the above events, to one degree or another, will become the catalyst for the actual reorganization of the Syrian Arab Republic, and their participants will act as guarantors of its territorial integrity. The fact is that the parties involved in the negotiations, in close cooperation with official Damascus, are today the only force in the region capable of actually influencing the situation and putting the country on a peaceful settlement track. However, if with Russia and Iran everything is clear from the very beginning - during the seven years of war the two states supported the legitimate Syrian leadership, then with Turkey, which for a long time was dependent on the position of its main NATO partner, the United States, everything was not so clear from the start.

Nevertheless, now Ankara, apparently, has finally decided on its views on the situation in general, and on the issues of regional security in particular. What made the Turkish leadership to radically reconsider the approach to the problem and to infringe on their own ambitions? The answer is obvious: a sober assessment of the imbalance of forces in recent years in the Middle East.
From the very beginning of the Syrian conflict, the United States relied on the formation and full support of the armed groups of the “moderate opposition”, often acting on the same side of the barricades with terrorist groups, Russia and Iran were on the side of the legitimate government of Syria and the civilian population, assisting the local military. Thanks to this interaction, the Syrian army managed to reverse the course of hostilities and deploy an operation, the purpose of which was the systematic squeezing of gangs from the occupied territories. Actually, it was this circumstance that became the “Gordian knot” that Washington has so far failed to cut.

Of course, the alignment in which the key ally is not able not to defend the interests of the partner, but also to protect its own geopolitical claims, did not promise Turkey bright prospects and forced President Tayyip Erdogan to look for options for retreat and reformatting the foreign policy agenda. In general, we can observe the results of the maneuvers of the Turkish leadership now.

As for the Turkish-American cooperation in the framework of the North Atlantic Alliance, which, as a result of the events described, was expectedly under threat, disagreements did not exist the first day, but frankly hostile relations were only recently.

It all started with the fact that Turkey turned to Russia with a request to sell it the C-400 anti-aircraft missile system instead of the Patriot anti-aircraft missile system in the country, which displeased the Pentagon, which declared the inadmissibility of such an approach on the part of the Alliance member. However, the response of the military-political bloc to such self-will of one of its members did not take long to wait: during the recent NATO exercise Trident Javelin, the portrait of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of the Turkish Republic, was on the stand of “enemies, and Tayyip Erdogan himself was listed conditional opponents of the alliance. And, despite the fact that the organization’s secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, has already apologized to the Turkish leader for an annoying mistake, promising to deal with the perpetrators of the incident, the sediment, as they say, has remained.

Already so timely was the mistake that now it looks more like a hint. Also very transparent ...
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

13 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    21 November 2017 15: 06
    But if instead of Lavrov Tillerson was in the picture, then he stood in the center.
    1. +2
      21 November 2017 15: 26
      In the photo they stand in height. And the highest Lavrov hi
      1. +1
        21 November 2017 15: 45
        The Turk in the center is a subtle hint of fat circumstances. The Turks intentionally pushed Lavrov to the side, and Tillerson would no doubt be put in the center. It is enough to recall how the heads of the allies were located in Tehran and Yalta.
      2. +1
        23 November 2017 20: 13
        LilyPutika where to put?
    2. +4
      21 November 2017 18: 03
      I strongly suspect that Lavrov walked along DB You look like partners grinning!
      1. GAF
        0
        22 November 2017 10: 07
        Quote: andrewkor
        I strongly suspect that Lavrov walked along DB You look like partners grinning!

        It looks like this. Three neighboring countries have found a common language. Three in a boat, not counting Israel.
  2. +2
    21 November 2017 15: 13
    In the "safe haven" the Russian Embassy is not fired from mortars ... The indestructible desire of full-time optimists to run ahead of the engine and take what they wish is real ...
    However, in the same East they say "no matter how you repeat halva, it will not become sweeter in the mouth" ...
    Syria is still far from silence - too many problems and contradictions have accumulated there in recent years and it has not been a safe haven for a long time, even before full-scale hostilities against radical Islamists ...
    I had a chance to see something there in due time during a special business trip and evaluate how it was "quiet" there ..
  3. +1
    21 November 2017 16: 13
    now Ankara, apparently, has finally decided on its views on the situation as a whole, Even it is doubtful. Turkish bitter tobacco no longer rolls.
  4. +4
    21 November 2017 17: 33
    Since the beginning of the civil war, Ankara, "was determined with its views on the situation in general, and on regional security issues in particular," three or four times. Just do not remember. Bearing in mind the speed with which Rezhep Akhmetovich turned from a best friend of the Russian Federation into an enemy who stuck a knife in the back and again into a friend in this performance, the spectators can only wait for the next transformation with interest.
    1. +1
      21 November 2017 18: 01
      Now it’s fashionable to say: “It’s changing shoes in the air.” I recently found out on VO!
  5. 0
    21 November 2017 22: 04
    how Syria becomes a safe haven

    Through mortar attacks on embassies in her capital?
  6. 0
    23 November 2017 16: 35
    Three in a boat: how Syria becomes a haven
    A headline worthy of the pen of a spokesman for our Foreign Ministry. wassat
  7. 0
    25 November 2017 22: 27
    Hints and equivocations ceased to be relevant after the Americans wanted to eliminate Erdogan at the hands of Gulenians. Edik now looks at partners through armored glass.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"