In Turkey there was a very remarkable meeting, which may have long-term consequences for the entire region.
The Iranian military delegation arrived in the country of NATO to discuss joint action in Iraq and Syria.
In the delegation were the chief of staff of the army of Iran, Baqeri, Deputy commander of the IRGC, the Deputy foreign Minister, the commander of the border security forces.
During the meeting, was reached a number of agreements that allowed the head of the Iranian General staff to declare that the negotiations were very successful.
1. Turkey and Iran do not recognize the Kurdish referendum in Iraq. Iran categorically oppose an independent Kurdistan and according to the chief of the Iranian General staff, this issue with Turkey has been found a common language.
2. The sides agreed on mutual visits, exchange of students of military academies, the presence of military observers in military exercises in each other, as well as holding of joint exercises.
3. Agreed that the chief of Turkish General staff Hulusi Akar will soon visit Tehran. Well and there to visit Erdogan’s close. Both sides strategically committed to the negotiation process in Astana, which is of course beneficial for Russia.
4. Turkey is pleased that Iran and Russia understand the concern of the Kurdish question, unlike US, who have not refused to support the YPG, which is Turkey’s problem No. 1.
5. Iran and Turkey will continue consultations between the army and security services on the subject of joint action against “al-Nusra”. due to problems of the Turkish “proxy” in Idlib, where “An-Nusra” too much tipped the scales in their favor.
6. Discussed the controversial issues in the areas of de-escalation, which are including under the guarantees of the Russian Federation. This issue remained contentious issues, as Turkey fears that the resolution of contentious issues, Iran is its “proxy” that he not owed under the agreements in Astana and other arrangements.
In General, against the backdrop of strategic changes in the course of the Syrian war, can be seen as situational coincided Iranian and Turkish interests. This option was introduced in Turkey after she refused from the idea to overthrow Assad and defected to the Russian-Iranian camp. The Kurdish question objectively will be to push Ankara and Tehran closer cooperation on the Kurdish issue and the division of spheres of influence in Syria, moreover, that Russia would have preferred to see Turkish and Iranian (within reason) than American troops in Syria.This cooperation has proved after the conclusion of agreements in Astana and the parties received a fair benefit from these agreements intend to further continue this beneficial cooperation, where in addition to the General goals with Russia, they have their parochial interests. Turkey’s struggle with Kurdish influence and restore the shaken position in the region, Iran is a Shiite building of the bridge of Tehran-Beirut directed including against Israel and continued hybrid war against Saudi Arabia.Given the fact that the number of goals Iran and Turkey coincide with the objectives of Russia on the one hand perform socially useful work to end the Syrian war in favor of Assad, and on the other hand, significantly expanding its influence, taking advantage of the failure of the Saudis and Americans, which greatly weakened the control of the regions, and that opened a space of possibilities for a large regional players.
The weakening of American influence, including in view of Russia’s actions, have led to the fact that different countries have quite openly pursue their own policies without looking at Washington, deals in tour of Washington and divide spheres of influence without asking Americans. Better illustration to demonstrate the crisis of us hegemony is hard to imagine.
Current information attack on the United States related to allegations of the supply of the chemical weapons to the rebels, and demands that Syria stop the actions of the us coalition in its territory, consistent with a gradual amplification factor of the postwar Syria, where all the key players try to advance to stake out a favorable position and thus put pressure on opponents. The American position here is more vulnerable.as in Syria, they are illegal and the closer will be the defeat of the Caliphate, the more clearly we will see that the U.S. is in Syria, for the dismemberment of a sovereign country, and this will facilitate further information campaign against the United States, which have already abandoned the slogan “Assad must go”, what makes them stay in Syria the purest of agressiia. Russia, Iran and Turkey are in a winning position so as to operate in Syria in coordination with Damascus, but Russia and Iran generally operate at the invitation of the Syrian government.
Naturally, Russia and Iran, and joined them Turkey, will seek to squeeze out the USA from Syria, and the Kurdish issue to resolve on their own terms. USA in turn give to understand that just because their strategy will not refuse (otherwise it would be an admission that the US is finally lost in the Syrian war), which resulted in statements from the leadership of the SDF that the United States will remain in Syria in the years ahead “a lot of fruitful cooperation.”As the defeat of the Caliphate and “An-Nusra”, these contradictions will more and more come out and the position of Turkey will be of great importance in the formation of the configuration of Northern Syria after the defeat of the Caliphate. Therefore, there will be many more talks between Russia, Iran and Turkey, where the parties will coordinate their positions in light of the potential conflict with the U.S. for control of Northern Syria.
Erdogan still has not abandoned the invasion of Afrin and he obviously continues to offer this option, Russia and Iran, if relations with the Kurds and the USA does go bad, what will Erdogan take Afrin under the pretext of “combating terrorism”. The main intrigue lies in the fact that if the US wants to force the isolation of Syrian Kurdistan from the Syrian, Russia and Iran will have just two good reasons to bring Erdogan to conduct a tougher policy towards the Kurds in Syria.On the one hand is the struggle for the territorial integrity of Syria, than converge, Russia, Iran and Turkey. On the other hand, is the desire to squeeze out the USA from Syria. Turkey is here quite ambiguous position, as it being the companion of the Russian-Iranian coalition, continues to probe the Americans for review by Washington of its strategy in Syria.Here there is an option when squeezing the Americans out of Syria and curb the separatist aspirations of the Kurds banal will be part of one of the challenges for all stakeholders that can serve as a breeding ground for a new war in Northern Iraq and Northern Syria, where U.S. plans for the dismemberment of Syria and Iraq (with the help of a number of NATO countries, Jordan, Saudi Arabia + possibly Israel) will perform ad hoc coalition of Syria, Iraq, Russia, Iran and Turkey + possibly Qatar, in light of new realities it will kill you.Russia prefers not to force things and offers to connect the Syrian Kurds to the negotiation process in Astana, hoping to get at least some of the Kurds under American influence and to ensure the compromise agreement between the Kurds and Assad. But against such a plan while openly Turkey that Kurds do not want to negotiate.And a tough stance on the referendum in Iraq, which demonstrates together with Iran, can be regarded in particular as a kind of demonstration, indicating that Turkey like Iran prefers a more firm stance in the Kurdish question, with which Russia will have to be considered.
However, this is rather a pending issue, and when in full growth will fall next autumn, much still has time to change, although the General contours of potential conflict are already visible.
The next bifurcation point is access to Deir-ez-Zor, Raqqa’s capture and holding of the Kurdish referendum in Iraq, then we will see further clarification of the pattern and the General configuration of the conflict around the Kurdish self-determination, which is in fatal conflict with the territorial integrity of Syria and Iraq.