Turkey has legal justification to intervene in Syria

Because the instability on the Turkish-Syrian border poses a security threat for Turkey, Ankara has the legal right to militarily intervene in war-torn Syria based on a mandate that allows the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) to carry out military operations beyond the country's borders. 

The security situation deteriorated in Turkish border towns after Ceylanpınar, a town on the Turkish-Syrian border in Turkey's Sanliurfa province, was hit by three mortar shells fired from the Syrian side on Wednesday. 

Wednesday's incident is the latest in a series involving stray bullets and shells hitting Turkish territory in the past few weeks after the Democratic Union Party (PYD), a political offshoot of the terrorist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), forces captured Tal Abyad, a Syrian town very close to Akçakale, and Ras al-Ain, another town just a few hundred meters from Ceylanpınar, last week. 

Following days of fierce clashes between Kurdish militants and several radical groups fighting to oust embattled Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Ras al-Ain was largely left under the control of the PYD and Kurdish militants are expected to declare an autonomous region in northern Syria in the coming days -- a situation that has alarmed Turkish opposition parties. 

As the PYD intensifies its presence in the northern part of the war-torn country, the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) called on the government to use the mandate that was passed by Parliament last October after mortar shells from Syria killed five civilians in a border town. 

According to the mandate, Turkey has the right to carry out military operations in foreign countries. 

Although the government promises that it does not have any intention to declare war on Syria, the parliamentary measure authorizing the government for military operations beyond Turkey's borders opens the way for military measures in addition to retaliatory strikes.

This week, MHP deputy Oktay Vural harshly criticized the government for not taking measures to prevent the formation of a Kurdish autonomous region in northern Syria. 

“The Turkish government has passed the mandate to keep it as a memory. I don't care about the rules of engagement. Who is not allowing the use of this mandate? I want to know the answer to this question,” Vural said. 

In recent years, Turkey passed several resolutions in Parliament to be able to carry out incursions into northern Iraq, to stage air strikes against PKK terrorists based in northern Iraqi territory. Turkish army units in countries such as Afghanistan, Somalia and Lebanon were also deployed after a relevant resolution was obtained from Parliament. 

Devlet Bahceli, the leader of the MHP, has also argued that the capture of the Syrian border town Ras al-Ain by the military wing of the PYD presents a clear risk of separatism to Turkey and urged the government to declare a military intervention should PYD rule become official. 

“Without a doubt, the events taking place in the north of Syria are a great risk for Turkey. I warn the government from here: The PKK declaring autonomy right beside our borders and gaining a position is a new move against Turkey's indivisible unity,” Bahceli said. 

He proposed that Turkey should prevent PYD rule receiving recognition and react militarily. “Turkey should declare that it will intervene with military force to the founding of an autonomous administration in the north of Syria,” said Bahceli and noted, “Turkey cannot and should not overlook an illegitimate formation right near its border.”

Meanwhile, Saleh Muslim, the leader of the PYD, made a surprise two-day visit to Turkey on Thursday for talks over escalating clashes near the Turkish-Syrian border.

 

'Military intervention in Syria to be disadvantageous for Turkey' 

While the opposition has called on the government to launch a war against Syria, experts believe that it would be Turkey's loss to go to war with Syria. 

Although Sinan Ülgen, chairman of the Istanbul-based Center for Economic and Foreign Policy Studies (EDAM), underlines that Turkey has the legal right to send armed forces to Syria based on the mandate, he maintains that such a move would not be to Ankara's benefit. 

“The issue is not sending troops, but rather how to withdraw them after sending them. Turkey should not repeat the mistake the US made in Iraq,” said Ülgen, adding: “In addition, sending troops to Syria would not solve the crisis there in the short run. On the contrary, in the long run it would create trouble for Turkey.” 

Agreeing with Ülgen, Yaşar Yakış, a former Turkish foreign minister and president of the Ankara-based Center for Strategic Communication (STRATİM), warns that Ankara will take a wrong step if it sends troops to Syria. 

“The presence of the PYD in northern Syria doesn't give Turkey the right to intervene in Syria. The PYD is Syria's internal issue. Such an intervention would lack legitimacy,” said Yakış in remarks to Sunday's Zaman. 

According to experts, it was not something new that the once close neighbors, Turkey and Syria, have come to the brink of war. 

Before 1998, the two countries were on the brink of war when Turkey threatened military action if Syria continued to shelter Abdullah Ocalan, leader of the terrorist PKK, in Damascus, his longtime safe haven. The signing of the Adana agreement in 1998 marked a turning point in relations between the two countries. 

But the Syrian regime -- which allowed Ocalan to take shelter and direct the terrorist organization from within its borders for several years until 1998, the year when Syria had to deport Ocalan because of pressure from Turkey -- seems inclined to play the PKK card against Turkey being silent to the presence of the PYD in northern Syria, in which case Turkey reserves the right to take necessary measures for self-defense, including armed interference into Syrian territory to contain the threat. 

The agreement squarely puts all the responsibility on the Syrian regime in this matter. For example, Article 1 of the agreement states that Syria will not permit any activity on its territory aimed at jeopardizing the “security and stability of Turkey.” The two states also inked a significant agreement on cooperation against terrorism in 2010. 

In brief, the mandate, the Adana agreement and the 2010 deal pave the legal path for Ankara to carry out a military intervention in Syria.

 

Istanbul Today's