Turkish Armed Forces launch air operation in Syria! What is happening across the border? Experts weigh in

Turkey's cross-border operations in Syria have been ongoing for 7 years.

Most recently, following the bomb attack carried out by the PKK at the General Directorate of Security of the Ministry of Interior in Ankara on the day Parliament was set to open, an air operation was conducted against terrorist groups in Syria.

Retired Staff Colonel Ünal Atabay, Prof. Dr. Haydar Çakmak, and Prof. Dr. Timuçin Kodaman evaluated the operation.

The responses of Retired Staff Colonel Ünal Atabay are as follows:

-There is an 800 km distance between Tel Rifaat and Derik, where the operation was conducted. In this context, could you evaluate the TSK's strength and operational capability on the ground?

"The TSK organizes itself according to the threat, whether on the Syrian or Iraqi border line or in any other region. It determines a force based on the depth of the operation it will conduct focused on the region where the threat exists or based on the control of the area it wants to capture. When asked about the strength on the Syrian border, it changes according to the need; it will be different today and tomorrow, and it varies according to the objectives of the operation to be carried out."

-Tel Rifaat is located in the west, far from the YPG-controlled region. Could you comment on the possibility of removing these elements from there?

The US evacuated Tel Rifaat and handed it over to Russia, and Russia signed an agreement stating that the PKK would evacuate it. Russia did not keep its promise for both Manbij and Tel Rifaat. It was Russia, not Turkey, that was supposed to evacuate the PKK there. In the time that has passed, Turkey is still waiting for the area to be evacuated due to its relationship with Russia. Otherwise, the TSK will enter there and remove the PKK. Likewise, it will enter Manbij and easily remove them from both sides. But since Russia has a commitment to remove the PKK with its own power and contacts in the region, the result of that will be waited for until a certain day, and it has already been waited for. Turkey will decide on an intervention there based on the outcome of this.

-Is the claim that the YPG has 70 thousand armed elements true?

There are different figures; we are making an estimate by conducting a study based on social media data. As far as we can see, it is around 70 thousand; there are those who say it is 100 thousand. I think their force in northern Syria, which is called the so-called guerrilla, is around 12-13 thousand.

The others are internal security units, public order units, border units; when you put them all together, it becomes 70 thousand. There is a budget that the US has allocated for the personnel expenses there, and there are salaries it pays per person. Regardless of the number of people, the presence of the PKK there always means a threat.

-How did the US train the YPG in the region? How much ammunition and equipment did it transport?

The US transported tens of thousands of cargo shipments and thousands of air-delivered weapons, ammunition, and spare parts for weapons to the YPG terrorist organization. In other words, it provided logistical support here within a system that would almost build an army. It is understood that they stored some of it in certain places and gave some of it to the terrorists. It is understood that they have already established the infrastructure to support them there when they want to bring a larger formation and a larger armed force into the region with the weapons and ammunition they have stored. At the same time, it is understood that they brought enough weapons and ammunition to bring the YPG to the so-called army-building stage.

-Can you explain the security connection of the operation within the country in the context of a terror corridor?

They want to create a so-called greater Kurdistan by severing Turkey's Southeastern and Eastern Anatolia regions through the PKK's terrorist activities within the country. If the corridor in northern Syria merges with the Iraq line, the integration of the elements there with the terrorist groups within the country will be inevitable.

They will pose a greater threat to Turkey's sovereignty. For this reason, the opening of a terror corridor extending to the Mediterranean in the south of Turkey will threaten Turkey's integrity. In this respect, the terrorist structure in northern Iraq and Syria threatens Turkey's survival.

-How does the existence of a terror threat on the border line affect a country's energy in which directions?

As long as there is an armed terrorist organization along a country's borders and a terror threat that extends into the country, the country is forced to direct its energy and resources here because it wants to eliminate the threat and eradicate the trouble. It transfers the country's financial resources and material power here, thus keeping Turkey busy. They are practically sucking Turkey's resources. Turkey, rightfully, allocates sufficient force and energy to the terrorist organization within a plan, provided that it does not let its guard down and plans for threats that may develop in other regions of the country, while observing its resources in a balanced manner."

Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli University Faculty Member Prof. Dr. Haydar Çakmak

-What do you attribute the US's YPG-PKK distinction to?

Even if you are an ally with countries that play a global role, their first priority is definitely their own interests. However, the US does not only look after its own interests in the Middle East; it also looks after the interests of Israel and the UK. Therefore, the reason why the US deliberately keeps the YPG separate from the PKK and supports it, despite Turkey being a NATO member and despite the fact that it should support Turkey's security, is that it does not take Turkey very seriously and the interest relationship it has with the YPG must be above Turkey, so it prefers the YPG over Turkey.

The US sees the excess of its interest value in Syria as being above the advantages that Turkey directly adds to it. Under normal circumstances, this is a mistake that a great state should not make, because it is not an easy task to force Turkey to do something it does not want to do in the Middle East, the Balkans, the Black Sea, and the Caucasus. The US can do this, but it would be much easier to do it in cooperation with Turkey; otherwise, it will struggle.

But it does not take all of this into account; it chooses to confront Turkey. This means that the US has a plan that is not currently visible. Under normal circumstances, the situation I just described emerges. If there is a secret agenda, which it seems there is, there is no place for Turkey in the secret agenda, and it is even a situation that could be against Turkey, so it does not hesitate to confront Turkey. Therefore, we see that the interest of the ally that the US sees as close to itself is above its cooperation with Turkey.

-What could the destruction of oil and communication facilities, as well as fuel and electricity depots in the region, bring before Turkey in terms of international law?

These devices came to them from the Americans or the British. It has been a successful operation. It makes it difficult for them to move comfortably. War has a place and definition in international law. If there has been bombing of civilian settlements, it is not correct according to the Geneva war law.

But if there is a military structure there, the army has to do this. The essential thing is whether it is used for military purposes and against Turkey. Because Turkey says it has the right to self-defense. If there is anything against Turkey at the points hit, it does not matter what it is, it is normal for Turkey to hit it. Turkey can defend itself by saying 'I used my legitimate right' and nothing will come of it.

Süleyman Demirel University Faculty Member Prof. Dr. Timuçin Kodaman

-What can you say about Turkey's position in the region after the operation?

For Turkey's security, a region 30 kilometers deep from Hatay to Iran is being mentioned. Can we do this or not? We took a region east of the Euphrates, but were we able to do anything about the other regions? It is not just the YPG or Syrian forces we are facing; the US and Russia are also there.

This is a matter of measuring these means and capabilities. That is why we will conduct operations in these places. No one can stop us from doing so. As a medium-sized state, we also try to ground it in law, for example, every time we make such a move, a statement comes from our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, explaining it with many things like hot pursuit according to such and such article of the UN. We try to derive our legitimacy from UN law or international law.

We will do these, but is there the means and capability to do it as the government officials or the security bureaucracy wants? I think this is the main problem. We can bring it to an end, but the problem here is not 3-5-8 months, of course; this is an indefinite period. For example, if the US and Russia leave, this could be easier.

-How will the diplomatic repercussions of our UAV shot down by the US be for our country?

This was discussed without being announced to the public; the intelligence agency and the foreign ministry have moves regarding this. The US said, 'It happened without knowing, we had notified.' I think this will be covered up to some extent to be opened later; frankly, I don't think we will be interested in this at this stage. We are not in a position to deal with that. Meanwhile, due to the economic crisis, we know where, with whom, and with which institutions Economy Minister Mehmet Şimşek is meeting. When he meets with the World Bank, we cannot say that it is distributing China's reserves, so a little more restraint will be exercised.

What are the international effects of the oil, energy, and water resources under YPG control in the region?

There is an oil source, but it is not oil that can be exported on a large scale like the Mosul-Kirkuk oil. It may be used in the financing of the YPG. It is a limiting factor for the US's expenditures there because it spends 300 million dollars from its budget there; perhaps if there were no oil, it would spend 600 million dollars. The biggest water source comes from us; we never talk about this. In the 80s and 90s, while we were dealing with the PKK, the Euphrates and Tigris created problems between us and Syria. While we were dealing with PKK actions, we could not solve the water issue. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs made efforts to solve it, but the Syrian administration was not very willing.

Yes, every water source is important in the middle of the desert, and no matter how much oil comes out, it is also important according to your population. I must also say that I do not think there is oil here that can be used for huge investments. Syria was never one of the oil-exporting countries.