TEHRAN-22

The trilateral Iran-Russia-Türkiye summit in Tehran on July 19 is often referred to in the press as Tehran-22, alluding to the meeting of the legendary troika of the USA, UK, and USSR in the Iranian capital during the Second World War.

Although the current composition of the meeting and its objectives cannot be compared to the scale of challenges faced by the troika leaders of the last century, even today international politics are turbulent, and the issues addressed in Tehran were quite challenging. Either way, the meeting attracted a lot of attention, and it was interesting and notable for several reasons. Firstly, Türkiye has been actively preparing for an anti-terrorist operation in northern Syria for months now and is trying to reach an agreement with all the interested and involved parties to start it as soon as possible. Secondly, just a few days before the summit, US President Joseph Biden finished his tour to the Middle East. During the trip, he explicitly stated that the US would not leave a vacuum in the region to be filled by China, Russia or Iran.

This raised the following questions: will the troika leaders be able to agree on Türkiye's operation on the border with Syria? And will the summit's decisions be a response to the American president's visit to the region?

Fighting terrorists. But which ones?

The outcome of the summit showed that it did not quite meet the expectations. It was obviously not a summit of the like-minded people aiming to adopt a document that would bind their cooperation.

The trilateral meeting was preceded by bilateral talks between the leaders of Russia, Iran and Türkiye. The agreement reached during these meetings determined the overall tone of the trilateral talks.

Turkish and Iranian presidents Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Ibrahim Raisi were the first to meet. The Turkish leader then had a conversation with Iran's supreme leader Ali Khamenei, who expressed his strong protest against the new Turkish operation in Syria. He said that "the Turkish military operation in northern Syria would bring no good to Türkiye, Syria and the region. On the contrary, it would benefit the terrorists.” Meanwhile, the Iranian president said during a trilateral meeting that he saw no alternative to a peaceful solution to the Syrian problem. However, he did not explain how the territory of Syria could be cleansed from terrorists, as well as from externally supported political circles against the incumbent Syrian government.

Russian President Vladimir Putin was more specific and called for an end to ISIS and other terrorist groups in Syria once and for all. However, the sides have yet to decide whom to define as terrorists.

For example, while Türkiye regards PKK/PYD a terrorist organisation, Russia prefers to refer to it as a political institution of the Kurdish minority living in Syria. On the contrary, a number of organisations that resist the current Syrian government are considered as constructive opposition in Türkiye, while in Russia and Iran they are considered as radical armed groups.

Türkiye insists on a special operation

The parties also failed to reach unanimity as to who could definitively provide a political solution to the Syrian issue. While the Russian and Iranian leaders talked about the advantages of the Astana format in solving the Syrian crisis, the Turkish president said "the Astana process is an important mechanism to solve the Syrian problem". But he added that for a final solution to the conflict in Syria, the support of the world community is a must.

Using common rhetoric regarding the need to fight terrorism in Syria, Mr. Erdogan explicitly stated that he would not back down from his goals to set a security corridor on the Syrian-Turkish border. He also said Ankara expects Russia and Iran to help fight terrorist groups in Syria. "From the guarantors of the Astana process, we expect assistance to us in this fight," Erdogan said. He said the areas in and around Tell-Rifaat and Manbij in northern Syria, where Türkiye is planning a military operation against Kurdish separatists, had become a "port for terrorists", which must be eradicated.

Clearly alluding to the US, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that some countries are trying to use mercenaries in Syria for their own purposes. Considering that Washington actively supports Kurdish forces in the northeast of the country, it can be assumed that the Russian leader is hinting at the possibility of Moscow openly recognising the PKK/PYD as terrorist structures. This could happen if Washington actively uses its ties with them to fight against the Russian presence in Syria.

Three solutions to one problem

Vladimir Putin criticised Western policies in Syria calling them destructive. He said that the situation in non-government-controlled territory in Syria with a real threat of criminal actions, including extremism and separatism facilitated by Western countries led by the US, is particularly problematic. There is no doubt that these territories are under the control of PKK/PYD. If not explicitly, Mr. Putin expressed concerns about the Kurdish ties with the US regarding it as an attempt to divide Syria.

President Raisi of Iran said that the US needed to withdraw from Syria and the entire region as soon as possible, effectively supporting his Russian counterpart. Ibrahim Raisi also noted that security on the borders should be ensured by Syrian forces. He made it clear that his country did not support Türkiye's desire to establish a security belt on the border. However, Iran agrees that Kurdish PKK/PYD militant groups should not control the border area instead handing it over to the Syrian government. "The only possible way to establish a stable and secure environment on Syrian borders with neighbouring countries is for Syrian forces to be fully present on the borders, as well as to cooperate with neighbouring countries," Mr. Raisi said.

The opposition Syrian National Army (SNA) is also known to be operating on the border line controlled by Turkish troops. SNA, formerly known as the Free Syrian Army, was officially established in 2017. Türkiye supports SNA and sees it as a prototype for the country's new coalition government.

Civilian administration of SNA administers these territories. According to Ankara, 3.7 million Syrian refugees now live in Türkiye. Some 500,000 refugees have already returned to Syria's terrorist-free regions. Ankara therefore sees the security zone on its border with Syria as a region to host the returning refugees and be managed by a coalition of opposition forces. It is no coincidence that the Turkish leader underlined the significance of the Syrian constitutional committee. He believes that the failure of the commission will mean the failure of the entire Astana process.

Yet Iran considers SNA an illegal group, insists on stopping its armed struggle against Damascus and disarming the organisation. Calling this process ‘national reconciliation’, Tehran expects that this is how Damascus can establish control over this part of Syria and deprive Türkiye, using the factor of terrorist threat, to carry out any military operations in Syria. It is important for Iran that the military personnel of countries invited by the Al-Assad government remain in Syria, while the opposition accept the conditions of the Syrian government, if it wants to be admitted to the process of governing the country in any form.

In this context, Mr. Raisi stressed that "violating Syria's territorial integrity will not contribute to security and the fight against terrorism"; the sovereignty of the SAR must be respected and it must remain united.

In Syria, Middle East, then everywhere...

Remarkably, the Iranian president also drew the attention to the destructiveness of the US-Israeli duo in the region. He accused the US of stealing resources, including oil, from Syria and condemned Israeli strikes on Syrian territory. As a result, Erdogan and Putin supported the condemnation of the Israeli attacks on Damascus.

It is important to note that during both the bilateral and trilateral talks, the leaders of Türkiye, Russia and Iran also discussed a wide range of issues related to regional and international issues.

In particular, the troika expressed support for the 3+3 format in the South Caucasus, where all three countries represent extra-regional states. The parties underlined Türkiye's efforts to negotiate the export of Ukrainian grain, and discussed the general problems related to regional security.

It is no coincidence that in the final statement the sides agreed to extend the trilateral format beyond the Syrian issue. However, we have yet to see the realisation of this decision in practice.