Alwaght- With clashes in Syria between Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS) forces and the minorities in various parts of the country raging, these developments have become the main agenda of the neighbors of the country. In this connection, the Jordanian capital Amman on Sunday hosted a meeting of the foreign ministers of Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Turkey.
The participants issued a 11-point statement voicing support for the efforts to rebuild Syria and mobilize the international support for projects aimed at early improvement of the situation in the war-ravaged country.
The participants in the meeting called for the lifting of sanctions on Syria to facilitate reconstruction and to strengthen economic cooperation and investment, especially in the fields of energy and transport.
They also emphasized the need to prepare conditions for the safe and sustainable return of Syrian refugees and for the international community to fulfill its responsibilities.
The statement emphasized that a second meeting would be held in Turkey in April to follow up on the implementation of these resolutions.
Various views of countries on the Syrian territorial integrity
One of the essential issues that was raised in Amman meeting was support for Syrian territorial integrity, with the participants stressing that security and stability of Syria are the basis for regional security, and that the parties condemn any efforts and groups and sides targeting the country's security, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.
The parties condemned the Israeli regime’s aggression on Syrian territory, which threatens the territorial integrity of the country, and called for the withdrawal of the occupiers and respect for the 1974 ceasefire agreement between Syria and Israel.
Although all members apparently accept this fundamental principle, it should be noted that Syria’s neighbors pursue different goals, which makes it difficult for them to reach a consensus.
Since Syria is part of the Arab world, Arab countries are trying to preserve the territorial integrity of the country in its current form. Iraq, for example, supports the territorial integrity of Syria and opposes any partition of the country.
Jordan supports the preservation of Syria’s territorial integrity since it shares border with this country and is concerned about arms and drug smuggling. With terrorist groups gaining power in Damascus, Jordan is concerned about the infiltration of these groups into border areas and the spread of instability in its territory.
In addition, Jordan and Iraq are also concerned about the Israeli occupation of Syrian territory and are trying to preserve Syria's territorial integrity in its current form by any means possible, because this Israeli territorial expansionism has not been seen since the last Arab-Israeli war, and the situation in Syria has shown that instability in Arab countries is the best opportunity for Tel Aviv's leaders to realize the "Nile to Euphrates" project.
Since Tel Aviv does not consider any boundaries for its promised land and has not yet established international borders, this issue has terrified the Arabs. Therefore, given the recent developments in West Asia region and Netanyahu's plan to establish a "Greater Israel", there is concern that the Israelis will seek occupation of parts of Jordan and Iraq after Syria.
Sharing borders with Syria, Lebanon supports the territorial integrity of this country and is opposed to any foreign intervention, because it is concerned about the spread of insecurity to its borders.
On the other side, although officially supporting the preservation of Syria’s territorial integrity, Turkey prioritizes containing the Kurds and preventing the formation of an autonomous Kurdish region in northern Syria. Turkey has been consolidating its military presence in northern Syria for a decade under the pretext of confronting Kurdish separatist groups, and now that rebel groups have come to power, it is trying to use this situation to achieve its ambitious goals.
With the help of armed groups under its command and by attacking Kurdish-controlled areas, Turkey seeks to seize these areas and eliminate threats from its borders, but this interventionist policy will lead to further insecurity in Syria rather than helping to restore stability.
It is important for Jordan, Iraq, and Lebanon that a strong government prevails in Syria so that it can stand up to Israeli occupation, but Turkey would like to have a weak central government in Syria so that it can justify its military presence and create spheres of influence in northern Syria for itself.
Different reading of terrorism
One of the issues raised in Amman was condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and the cooperation to fight it through military, security, and ideological measures, as well as launching a joint operation room to coordinate the fight against ISIS terrorist group and back efforts and regional and international formats. But there are various readings of terrorism, especially among Syria neighbors.
Turkey only considers the Syrian Kurdish groups to be a clear example of terrorists that must be dismantled, but it does not have such a view towards the 37 rebel groups based in Damascus and supports them in forming a government. This is something that Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan once again reminded of at the Amman meeting and, although he emphasized the need for all elements of the Syrian society to avoid any conflict, he considered the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) to be a common enemy of Iraq, Syria and Turkey, showing that Ankara is not willing to make any concessions against the Kurdish groups. This is while the Kurdish-majority Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which Turkey blacklist as terrorists, signed an MoU with the Syrian interim government on Sunday, based on which the Kurdish forces will be integrated into the security and political structures of Syria.
Jordan and Iraq consider groups like HTS, which have Islamist and Muslim Brotherhood leanings in the region, to be a threat to their national security, and now that this group is leading the government in Damascus, they have concerns about its future performance.
For Jordan that is next to Syria, the multitude of parties in Syria and conflict of interests of various countries that are vying for their share from "cake of Syria" can pose threats to the Jordanian national security and can foist heavy economic costs on Amman. Having in mind that hundreds of Jordanian takfiris are fighting in Syria civil war, Amman leaders are afraid that these forces apply the same Syria scenario on Jordan inspired by success of the Syrian opposition.
Jordan is also worried about growth of drugs smuggling from Syria to Jordan and this worry has increased with terrorists gaining power in the Syrian government structure.
Iraq, which threats are overshadowing its relative security, is concerned that elements affiliated with the HTS will once again pave the way for terrorists to re-emerge in Iraq.
Also, Lebanon considers terrorism a threat to its internal stability, especially due to the presence of extremist groups in the border areas and the risk of the Syrian crisis spreading into its territory.
Amid these serious concerns, Turkey has shown that it is not a reliable partner in the fight against terrorism. Turkey has always sought to intervene in the affairs of neighboring countries under the code name of terrorism, and over the past decade, it has established a foothold in Iraq and Syria by calling some separatist groups a threat to its national security. Turkey now does not feel a threat from these groups with the rise of armed groups in Syria, but the situation is different for Iraq and Jordan, and they are concerned about security threats emanating from Syria. This is because HTS has proven in the past three months with the crimes it has committed against Syrian minorities that it is not a reliable option for governance.
Therefore, the main source of instability in Syria at present are the terrorist groups themselves that are now holding the power in Damascus and that are massacring the civilians under the ruse of fighting remnants of the previous government. So, if the HTS and its affiliates are internationally recognized, it is not unlikely they will massacare their opponents in a legalized and systematic way.
Turkey and the HTS, the main winners of regional meetings
Although Arab countries have attended regional meetings on Syria to ease their security concerns from Syrian terrorist groups and still do not assess as positive the prospects for political and security developments in the country, such meetings are considered a trump card for Turkey and the interim government of Abu Mohammad al-Jolani in Syria to execute their ambitious plans.
Receiving HTS leaders in regional meetings (such as the presence of al-Jolani in the Arab League meeting and Asaad al-Shaibani, the interim government's foreign minister, in the Jordan meeting) would mean changing the group's status from a terrorist organization to a legitimate political actor, while it has taken no action to implement the slogans of defending human rights, preventing massacres, fighting ISIS, forming an inclusive government, and disarming small and large takfiri groups.
Maintaining strong relations with the HTS, Ankara can capitalize on this situation in favor of expansion of its foothold in Syria. It has always been under pressure for its backing for the terrorist groups in Syria, especially the HTS. Therefore, presence of this group's leaders in regional meetings would mean accepting its political role and consequently relaxation of diplomatic pressures on Ankara. In other words, Turkey will be recognized as a key player in management of Syrian developments if the HTS joins the regional meetings as an influential party.
In general, conflict of interests of the neighbors and interested actors in Syria not only does not settle any problems of the country, but also allows foreign interventions to go on even broader. The sole winner of this situation is the Israeli regime that seizes the opportunity to implement its expansionist plans.
