Which world capital is most likely to provide a breakthrough in the global response to the violence in Syria? Some would say Moscow, but I am plumping for Ankara.
Which world capital is most likely to provide a breakthrough in the global response to the violence in Syria? Some would say Moscow, but I am plumping for Ankara, and here’s why.
It is true that the Russians currently block any UN resolution condemning the Assad regime, let alone imposing UN sanctions including a UN arms embargo. Though I’m told that Russian diplomats are, in private, more open to talking about President Assad’s removal and a political transition than they are in public.
This has given rise to hopes that even if Kofi Annan’s peace plan has spectacularly failed to stop the violence, the process Mr Annan is supposed to lead can be reversed. In other words, put the emphasis on political transition first, with the Russians playing a leading role, and the fighting is then more likely to stop.
I don’t see much hope that a resurgent Vladimir Putin will agree to this, which is why I think Ankara is more important than Moscow.
Ankara holds the key to a regional response. London, Paris and Washington have shown the scantest appetite for safe havens or military action; but should Turkey decide to assume a regional leadership role, that could change.
In 1991 a forward-looking Turkish President, Turgut Ozal, agreed to Operation Provide Comfort, which created a safe haven for Kurds in Iraq fleeing from Saddam Hussein. American, British and French jets were stationed at a Turkish airbase and defended the no-fly zone. British Royal Marines were amongst coalition forces providing humanitarian assistance on the ground.
The question is whether Turkey has the nerve for such cross border action once again. Turkish foreign policy veers from hyper-engagement with its neighbours to what I can best describe as a surly isolationism. Turkish politicians may have the will, but the Turkish military currently does not.
I suspect the humanitarian situation in Syria will have to become far, far worse, with the risk of significant refugee flows, before any kind of safe haven can be contemplated. Unlike Iraqi Kurdistan, there is not a relatively homogeneous ethnic area which can be protected in northern Syria; and any regional sanctuary would require military action against Syrian air and ground forces which might threaten it.
Nevertheless, where is William Hague today? In Turkey!
I suspect Britain’s foreign secretary knows that the seemingly endless cycle of EU sanctions – the 16th round is due this month – is leaving him with fewer and fewer levers to pull; and that if the Russians fail to budge, all eyes may turn to the Turks.
Follow Jonathan Rugman on Twitter