Will Turkey Join The Fight Against ISIL?

Initially, Turkey's approach to the US-led coalition against the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) was quite tepid, whipping up amongst pro-government circles in Turkey a false sense of “anti-American” excitement. Now however, Ankara has professed not only “every kind of support, including both military and political” for the coalition, but it also asserts the necessity of creating a “buffer zone,” and even declaring a “no-fly” zone over Syria. What exactly was it that sparked such a dramatic turnaround in the Justice and Development Party's (AKP) approach to this situation?

One thing is clear: it is not “because ISIL released the Turkish hostages,” though this is the excuse being loudly trumpeted by the AKP government. While the hostage situation may have in fact played a partial role in Ankara's stance -- in that they were not free to do precisely as they wished while Turkish citizens were being held -- this answer does not reflect the entire truth of the matter.

Statements made by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan on the occasion of the 69th anniversary of the creation of the United Nations did help shed some light on what really drives Turkey's now apparently fervent desire to help anti-ISIL coalition forces.

In statements made to Mustafa Karaalioğlu, editor in chief of the Star newspaper, President Erdoğan said: “The problems in Syria must be added to the calculations at hand. We also need to think of Iraq in this light. In fact, the Syrian arm of the terror organization the [Democratic Union Party] (PYD) needs to be included within the solution.” (24 Sept., 2014, Star newspaper).

Here is how US President Obama described the strategy that would be driving the coalition against ISIL: “First, air strikes will stop the advance of ISIL, pushing their attacks back, then support will be given to local forces fighting against ISIL, and over time, ISIL will be eliminated...”

While one can see these plans as either right or wrong, one cannot argue that the goals stated in this strategy are not plain and clear.

In fact, Ankara's now-collapsed Syrian policies played a major role in the strengthening up of ISIL and similar organizations throughout the region. To wit, this seems to be the view of US Secretary of State John Kerry, who said the following to CNN reporter Christiane Amanpour on the same day Erdoğan spoke with Karaalioğlu: "When the efforts to unseat [Syrian President] Assad began, there were those who made calculations along the lines of ‘There might be some rotten apples in there, but the important thing is that they are fighting against Assad.' And what this view really caused was the bringing together of a variety of different groups.”

Is it the real priority for the AKP, which has stated quite clearly that it is going to do “everything possible” to help in this coalition, to first push back, and then eliminate ISIL?
This is certainly not what I got from Erdoğan's statements. Both the AKP and Erdoğan wish to see, first and foremost, the overthrow of Assad; as to who replaces Assad, this makes no difference to them. Both the AKP and Erdoğan also wish to see the destruction of the autonomous Kurdish region in Syria. Which is why Ankara feels no discomfort whatsoever over the ISIL attacks aimed at taking over Kobane, which lies at the heart of Rojava. Ankara also wishes to see the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) pass up on its plans to declare autonomy. If possible, Ankara wants to see Tarik Hashimi, who was condemned to death because of his connections to terror attacks in Baghdad, declared the new leader of Iraq. At the same time, Ankara would like to get Turkish military forces in place in both Iraq and Syria in the areas declared thus as “buffer zones.” It wants, ultimately, to lead the way in the formation of new Sunni Arab regimes in both Iraq and Syria which do not include Kurds.

In the end though, Ankara's calculations on these fronts are both wrong and very dangerous. In fact, not only would Ankara's plans here be impossible to realize, they would also transform Turkey into one of the most chaotic elements in the Middle East, not to mention putting an end to the settlement process permanently, and dragging the country into a bloody and chaotic atmosphere.

It should be noted here that an “interfering” Turkey would be the trigger for a number of other possible international coalitions.

In the meantime, loud debates over things like the struggle against the “parallel structures” or the freeing up of headscarves in primary education are being used to keep the Turkish people from seeing, thinking and asking too much about the ISIL related developments.
And so, it is perhaps fitting to close with this question: Will Turkey in fact struggle against ISIL?

CAFER SOLGUN (Cihan/Today's Zaman)