Dr. MUHIB SALHA
Idlib's puzzle, none of the parties of the conflict in Syria has its own chip. Idlib, the northwestern province of olive, where tens of thousands of fighters from the armed Islamic opposition, such as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, the former Jabhit al-Nusra of al-Qaeda and hundreds of thousands of civilians who have been displaced from different parts of Syria and more than two million of its original inhabitants, gathered in it all the influential countries in the Syrian issue and aspiring countries to have an impact between the end of the war and the beginning of political and economic investment.
Both sides, the government and the armed Islamist opposition, are raising their expectations of the potential battle of Idlib, raising the media rhetoric against each other in anticipation of a war resolution that is prepared up according to the international interests. The visit of the Iranian Defense Minister to Syria through the Aleppo International Airport in the absence of the Syrian ceremony carried several messages in different directions.
The first is a double message to Damascus reminding it that the price of ending its role in Syria or weakening it is paid by its government and that its participation in the war against the Islamic armed opposition in Idlib depends on the survival of this role. Damascus grasped the message and signed with Tehran an agreement to rehabilitate and arm its army.
Tel Aviv recalls that Iran is staying in Syria as much as it wants in agreement with Damascus government and its presence is linked to the possible negotiations with the United States of America on the basket of disputed issues between the two countries. Tel Aviv received the message and responded with a double message to Damascus that it cares only about Syria in its security and is not committed to any agreements before the end of the war in the sense that they are only committed to the 1974 Disengagement Agreement.
And to Tehran, any agreements between it and Damascus strengthening its presence in Syria will not be recognized and will do everything possible to strike the Iranian military presence in it.
And the second message to Russia and Turkey that it will facilitate any political agreement between them to avoid Idlib and west the Euphrates, all pay the cost of war to relax the American project in the east of the Euphrates, and at the minimum if agreed in some form, especially the military action to remove Jabhit al-Nusra of Idlib equation, it will support this form in exchange for their support, its survival in Syria and any possible negotiations with the United States of America.
Turkey believes that its military presence in Idlid province is won by a large-scale military front, on one hand, it provides a permanent area of influence in north-west Syria and deep inside the Syrian territory, which it did not take in the Adana Agreement of 1998 enough to contain the majority of Syrian refugees.
On the other hand, the extension of the Democratic Autonomous Administration or federal project to the west of the Euphrates is prohibited. However, Turkey did not expect its military presence in Idlib to become a heavy burden on any complex political process because of the complexity of the field and political landscape and the intertwined international interests there. It did not realize that its obedience with the Russian axis in Astana would save it, but would obligate it to contain all the armed Islamic factions and Jabhit al-Nusra the terrorist, among them, to the satisfaction of Russia and its allies.
In fact, the task of Turkey was not difficult in this respect, except for Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, which led to the issuance of a decree to consider Hayat Tahrir al-Sham a terrorist organization in an attempt to trade to abandon al-Nusra and perhaps contribute to the fight in exchange for Russia to accept the survival of Turkey in Idlib. This ridiculous and very late step exposes the Turkish position supporting the terrorist gangs and their use throughout the years of the Syrian plight to achieve political goals in Syria and in the area and with Europe. The policy of the AKP and its leader Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has also focused on the Muslim Brotherhood project, which contradict with all the governments of the area and its political fields, this is in the interest of the Damascus government, which has always reminded the world that its battle against Islamic terrorism and not with its people, which has legitimate demands, has kept its ears silent before and after the protest of the people on the street.
On the other hand, the extension of the self-administration or federal project to the west of the Euphrates is prohibited. But Turkey did not expect its military presence in Idlib to become a heavy burden on any complex political process because of the complexity of the field and political landscape and the intertwined international interests there. It did not realize that its discontent with the Russian axis in Astana would not help it, but would obligate it to contain and respect all the armed Islamic factions and the terrorist victory front, among them, to the satisfaction of Russia and its allies.
Turkey would be mistaken if it thought it alone was counting on the armed Islamist groups that had gathered in Idlib. The Islamic groups are supported by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and Turkey has agreed to be a party to the Saudi-Qatari dispute (Wahhabi, Ikhwani in terms of religion). Al-Qaeda organization also as ISIS organization is a political activist with many military and political functions.
In this sense, any Turkish swap with the Russian, at the top of the table, at the next summit in Astana in Tehran, in which the end of Idlib operations will be announced and its track in exchange for partial delivery of the province, although the doors of Moscow are open to Riyadh and Syria, is a paper between their joint policy papers.
And with the US, under the table, to soften its positions towards Turkey and lift sanctions. This tradeoff will not take place unless Turkey pays its price. It is complete exit of Idlib province and concentration in the northern countryside of Aleppo, which is adjacent of its borders with Syria, and opening a crossing to al-Nusra or other Islamic groups who want to escape the American-covered Russian strikes.
Turkey, which is currently suffering from economic conditions, is keen to achieve a victory in Syria that protects its Islamic government from internal pressures, but any complicity in Idlib with Russia and Iran, whether in military or political operations, only takes the wind after exposing its subversive role in support of terrorism.
The Idlib scenario, despite the complexities of the situation will end as the areas of the previous de- escalation by handing it over to the Russian police and the decline of the Turkish role there, whether through limited military action or political process that saves the province of Idlib devastating war ravages, simultaneously, Turkey protects hundreds of thousands of refugees, then the conditions for a transition to a political process are created by a map developed by the two superpowers.
In the south, Israel and Iran, while in the north Turkey and Iran, and the common denominator is Iran, which international players in the two regions agree to remove from Syria because of its oversized role, while at the same time weakening the Turkish role, which aspires to expand south and east, before starting any political process that gets Syria out of its ordeal, in which regional players contributed to the green light of international players.
However, the regional parties arrogantly marketed them to act as if they were controlling the fate of Syria, and each of them built a position for himself to be a major player on the table, he maneuvered this situation and traded it as he wished, but these parties forgot that every green light followed by an ominous orange light warning and the red light prevents the limits of permissible behavior, and therefore the survival of any regional state in Syria or in a large part of its land is only a temporary residence in it / or whether by an international will now adheres to the Syrian file or the will of the Syrian people tomorrow when he regains its sovereignty and its national soil and deals with any military regional or international presence, as an occupying power ".