A Mystery Called Syria
A Mystery Called Syria
In recent days, with the renewed attack by the terrorists of Jabhat al-Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham on the city of Aleppo and the recapture of parts of this city by these groups, nearly seven years after the end of the Syrian civil war, Syria has once again become a topic of discussion. Why do global and mainly regional policies tend to steer in a direction that always keeps Syria at a degree of insecurity? Which countries gain the most from the insecurity in Syria?
1. The Topic of Tourism
This section might seem very insignificant at first glance, but it should be noted that before 2012, Syria was a tourist country. Besides religious tourism, which attracted Shia pilgrims from around the world, its coastal tourism due to its pleasant Mediterranean climate annually welcomed thousands of people from all over the world. It should also be noted that before 2012, Syria’s GDP, a part of which was sourced from tourism, was more than 50 billion dollars annually, while after the onset of insecurity, Syria’s GDP fell to less than 8 billion dollars in 2021. Now, the question arises, what are the alternatives to Syria’s tourism industry with its Mediterranean climate in the surrounding region? The answer is quite simple: part of these tourists will head towards the occupied territories, and another part will go to Turkey.
2. Energy Corridors
A significant number of analysts who examine Syrian issues from the perspective of international political economy propose that energy corridors are one of the major issues leading countries to try to influence security developments in Syria and, using their proxy groups, attempt to dominate Syria or at least maintain a degree of insecurity there.
It should be noted that Syria is one of the best routes for transferring energy resources towards the Mediterranean Sea and from there to other parts of the world. It is obvious that security in Syria might not necessarily be beneficial for the national interests of other countries and regions in the Middle East that are seeking to become the energy hub of the Middle East, including Turkey.
Additionally, for some regions looking to export their energy resources, the export of Iranian energy resources through Syria can be seen as a competitor in energy markets, including the occupied territories, which have recently started extracting energy resources from the Karish field.
Moreover, Qatar will benefit from insecurity in Syria because if there is insecurity in Syria, countries will be forced to accept Turkey as an energy hub, and on the other hand, the export of Iranian energy resources, especially gas, through Syrian soil will be limited, forcing Iran to export its energy resources through Turkish soil as a NATO member. As a result, from this perspective, Turkey, some Arab countries, and the occupied territories benefit from the continuation of insecurity in Syria, which will lead to the limitation of Iranian energy lines or their passage through Turkish soil.
3. Goods Transportation Corridors
Although Syria is currently not present in any of the mapped routes for goods transportation in China’s New Silk Road corridors and possibly in the future in India’s Cotton Road corridor, it should be noted that just like energy resources, due to its long coastline with the Mediterranean Sea, Syria, if it becomes a secure country, can claim a part of the goods transportation corridors in the future.
This issue can reduce Turkey’s dominance over the potential New Silk Road corridors of China and Israel’s dominance over the IMEC corridor.
This means that part of the transit, not completely but relatively, can be allocated to itself, which can reduce the traffic on other corridors. In this matter, the United States will also benefit because, practically, China’s New Silk Road will pass through a NATO member country, Turkey, instead of Syria.
4. Syria’s Importance as a Gateway for Goods into the Middle East
It should be noted that just as Syria can act as a port for exporting goods and energy from the Middle East and even East Asia towards the European Union and other parts of the world if it becomes secure and has the infrastructure, it can also serve as a port for importing goods from Europe, parts of Africa, and South America into the Middle East, which from this perspective can put Turkey and Israel at a disadvantage and redirect part of the future tariff revenues of Turkey and Israel towards Syria.
As a result, if insecurity in Syria continues, other countries will try to export their desired goods to the Middle East and the Asian continent via Turkey or the occupied territories.
5. Syria’s Water Issues with Turkey and the Kurdish Issue
During the era of Hafez al-Assad, Syria also had problems with Turkey over the Euphrates water, but at that time, Syria could use the leverage of supporting the Kurds to secure its water rights from Turkey. However, currently, with the insecurity in Syria, reduced revenues and foreign reserves, and the lack of government control over Kurdish regions, this issue has created an advantage for Turkey from a security perspective and has strengthened Turkey’s position regarding the Euphrates water to the extent that Turkey can negotiate with regional countries, including Syria, over the Euphrates water in exchange for exporting goods and services to this country. However, from this perspective, it must be acknowledged that for the first time in the history of relations between Turkey and Syria, Syria has used terrorist groups as a tool to exert pressure against Turkey.
6. Syria’s Energy Resources
Although Syria’s oil and gas resources are much less compared to other Middle Eastern countries, this country, albeit minimally, has oil and gas resources, mainly located in the northern and Kurdish regions where American bases are currently stationed around these resources. It is obvious that if Syria’s national sovereignty is consolidated, the country will ultimately seek to reclaim its energy resources, whether through legal means and international courts or by force, which in itself leads to a green light from Americans regarding the continuation of Syrian security developments to other regional players.
7. Ensuring Israel’s Security
Syria has always been considered an enemy of Israel since Israel’s establishment. The existence of a unified and powerful Syria, which is also an ally of Iran, can impact the security issues of the occupied territories. Therefore, the continuation of insecurity in Syria is somewhat beneficial for Israel because it diverts the focus and energy of the Syrian army.
8. The Issue of the Golan Heights
The Golan Heights, which were separated from this land during the Arab-Israeli war, are of great security importance to Israel because they overlook Israel. It is not far-fetched that if the security puzzle in Syria is solved and this country’s army can regain its strength, it will seek to reclaim the Golan Heights, whether legally and through international means or by force. Consequently, the existence of scattered insecurities in Syria, which distracts and drains the energy of this country’s army, is considered an advantage for Israel and brings a kind of security commodity for Israel.
9. Capital Flight from Syria
It should be noted that during the Syrian civil war, a large portion of this country’s economic capital and human resources left the country. To this day, Syria has turned into a consumer country, importing its simplest consumer goods from other countries. However, the question must be asked: which country was the closest destination for human resources and economic capital from Syria during the civil war? The answer is very simple: the closest country that Syrian investors, workers, and traders chose to remain close to their own country was Turkey. Although Turkey hosted five million Syrian refugees during the Syrian crisis, it was also able to attract a portion of Syria’s cheap labor force and capital.
10. Using Armed Groups as a Tool for Political Pressure
Even if these armed groups cannot completely dominate the whole of Syria, their supporters can use them as a tool for political pressure to gain geopolitical, economic, and security concessions in exchange for abandoning these groups or even using them as bargaining chips, a scenario that has repeatedly occurred throughout the history of the Middle East, similar to what Hafez al-Assad did with the Kurds against Turkey.
Conclusion
It should be noted that the two main players in Syria’s security developments, Turkey and Israel, have tried to steer Syria’s environment towards a geopolitical setting to secure their economic, national, and security interests. It must be acknowledged that these two players have succeeded in this regard and have been able to advance their economic and security objectives concerning Syria, even though they have not been able to dominate Syrian soil, and in the battlefield, Iran, Russia, and Syria have played a more powerful role. However, even this slight insecurity in Syria has brought them closer to some of their geopolitical goals. For example, it can be mentioned that currently, no tourists are heading towards Syria, no energy pipelines pass through Syrian soil, and no investment prefers Syria over Turkey.
Currently, the Syrian army does not have the power to play a role in security developments related to the occupied territories. Syria, like in the past, cannot support Kurdish groups. Regarding Turkey, which could have had a win-win game by steering Syria and the region towards a geo-economic environment, it apparently seeks to steer the region towards a geopolitical setting to secure a win only for itself and push the region in a direction where there is only one winner. Concerning the issue of how strengthening armed groups in the region might affect Turkey’s security in the future, it is a subject that should be considered by future researchers because, according to the Copenhagen School of Regional Security theory, insecurity in one region can spread to neighboring areas. It can also be noted that Turkey’s actions might be based on the premise that these groups grow to a certain extent where there is always a state of neither peace nor war in a geopolitical environment in Syria, allowing Turkey to achieve its national interests.