Turkish Forum English

Tag: Turkish-syrian border

  • Daily Press Briefing – March 24, 2014

    Daily Press Briefing – March 24, 2014

    Daily Press Briefing – March 24, 2014

    03/24/2014 06:57 PM EDT

    Marie Harf

    Deputy Spokesperson
    Daily Press Briefing

    Washington, DC

    March 24, 2014

    QUESTION: Do you have a comment on the downing of a Syrian jet apparently —

    MS. HARF: Yes.

    QUESTION: — in the Syrian airspace yesterday by the Turkish?

    MS. HARF: Well, obviously, we’ve been following the issue closely. We have been in close contact with our Turkish counterparts – I would remind you, NATO allies – regarding the incident. We are committed to Turkey’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. We note that the Turkish Government has been fully transparent about the rules of engagement it is operating under since the Syrian Government shot down a Turkish aircraft in 2012. The Turkish Government in this case said its forces only fired after the Syrian military aircraft violated Turkish airspace and after repeated warnings from Turkish authorities. Obviously, the Government of Turkey is looking into the incident more, but we are talking to them and will remain in contact with them.

    QUESTION: So to the best of your information, do you have any independent information that it was actually shot down over Syrian airspace or Turkish airspace?

    MS. HARF: Where it was actually shot down, I don’t have specific information about that, but as I said, the Turkish Government said it only fired on the aircraft after it violated Turkish aircraft – or, excuse me, airspace, and was repeatedly warned by the Turkish Government not to do so.

    QUESTION: Are you concerned that any escalation might involve all other NATO allies, considering that you have some sort of a pact with Turkey?

    MS. HARF: Well, I think it’s a little soon to sort of take this more broadly. I would note that I don’t think Turkey has asked for anything yet in terms of NATO. Obviously, we’re talking to them about how to move forward here, but again, I think it’s too soon to sort of draw broader characterizations about what might happen next.

    QUESTION: And finally, Brahimi said that he doesn’t see Geneva II reconvening anytime soon. Do you have any comment on that?

    MS. HARF: Well, we have obviously been working with the special representative quite closely. We want – all want Geneva – the Geneva process, I would say, to reconvene when we can make progress. And up until this point, we’ve seen the Syrian regime not come to the table as a party that wants to make progress here. So I know he’s working on it to see if and when we can reconvene this and how, to see if we can move this diplomatic process forward.

    QUESTION: So you said that Turkey has been fully transparent about the rules of engagement? What does that mean, exactly?

    MS. HARF: That it has operated under since the Syrian Government shot down a Turkish aircraft in 2012.

    QUESTION: Right, but —

    MS. HARF: So I think what it means, without knowing all the specifics here, is that, for example, it repeatedly warned —

    QUESTION: Yeah.

    MS. HARF: — the Syrian aircraft not to violate its airspace. It only then took action. That’s what I think rules of engagement refers to here.

    QUESTION: Right. Right. But the rules of engagement, are they public? You don’t have —

    MS. HARF: I can check.

    QUESTION: Is that what that means in terms of —

    MS. HARF: Or do we mean transparent with the United States? I don’t know.

    QUESTION: Well, transparent – I mean, maybe you’d like to see —

    MS. HARF: I’ll check.

    QUESTION: — the Turkish Government tweet the rules of engagement or perhaps put them on Facebook or YouTube or something like that.

    MS. HARF: I would note here that there have been more tweets from Turkey since the government blocked it than there were before.

    QUESTION: So can we just —

    MS. HARF: Which is an interesting, I think, signal to people that try to clamp down on freedom of expression that it doesn’t work and isn’t the right thing to do.

    QUESTION: Are you helping in this?

    QUESTION: So —

    MS. HARF: Hold on. We’ll – let me finish Matt.

    QUESTION: So do you have any additional comment on the Twitter ban? When Erdogan announced that he was going to do this, he said now every – he didn’t care about international reaction and now the world would see the power of the Turkish Republic.

    MS. HARF: Well, I think what the world saw was the number of people inside Turkey tweeting about what they thought about it being blocked there.

    QUESTION: Well, could I ask you what you think —

    MS. HARF: Yes.

    QUESTION: — about the power of the Turkish Republic since they have failed so dramatically to enforce this ban?

    MS. HARF: We have conveyed our serious concerns over this action directly to Turkish authorities, both from here and on the ground. Obviously, we support freedom of expression in Turkey and everywhere else. We oppose any action to encroach on the right to free speech, and continue to urge directly the Turkish Government to unblock its citizens’ access to Twitter and ensure free access to all social media platforms —

    QUESTION: Right, but —

    MS. HARF: — so they can see what you and everyone else tweets.

    QUESTION: Right, but what does it say to you, if anything, about the power of the Turkish Republic?

    MS. HARF: In what respect?

    QUESTION: The fact that they’ve tried to ban it and it hasn’t worked. I mean, is this the kind of thing that you want to see a NATO ally doing or boasting about —

    MS. HARF: No.

    QUESTION: — beforehand, and then —

    MS. HARF: No.

    QUESTION: — failing miserably at it?

    MS. HARF: Well, the second part – clearly, we think it’s good that people inside Turkey are still able to express themselves, but that doesn’t mean that it should be blocked. I wasn’t trying to give that statistic —

    QUESTION: Okay.

    MS. HARF: — in terms of saying that it’s an acceptable action.

    QUESTION: So you’re —

    MS. HARF: No, clearly this is not an action we think the Turkish Government should take. We’ve told them that directly. We will continue to tell them that directly. There’s no place in a democracy for this kind of clamping down on people’s right to free speech. There’s just not.

    QUESTION: Okay. And so you would encourage people in Turkey to defy – to continue to defy the prime minister’s ban. Is that —

    MS. HARF: I’m not going to go that far, but I – what I will say is it’s important for people all over the world to hear what the Turkish people have to say.

    QUESTION: Do you see any connection between the Twitter issue and the downing of the plane, the Syrian plane, perhaps that Mr. Erdogan is trying to export his —

    MS. HARF: Not at all.

    QUESTION: — local issues? You don’t see that?

    MS. HARF: Not at all. No, not at all.

    QUESTION: Are you helping the Turks in breaking the blockade?

    MS. HARF: Is the United States Government?

    QUESTION: Yeah.

    MS. HARF: No, not to my knowledge. We’ve been in contact with Twitter and with the Government of Turkey about this, but to my knowledge, no, we are not. But we’ve said very clearly to the Turkish Government that this is not acceptable and that we do not think they should be able to block their citizens’ access to these kind of social media platforms.

    QUESTION: Mm-hmm. And —

    QUESTION: Just to clarify, Marie, you – I asked this question last week, that whether United States Government is involved with this case in the —

    MS. HARF: With Twitter?

    QUESTION: In this dispute between the Twitter and the Turkish Government in terms of the legal process, and you said no. Still the case? Still —

    MS. HARF: Well, I don’t think I said no; I think Jen said no. But we saw over the weekend, I think, some more actions being taken, right? So I’m not sure exactly how you asked the question last week, but what I can say is that we have been in contact with Twitter and separately with the Government of Turkey to talk about the fact that people should not have their access blocked to Twitter.

    QUESTION: So it is a legal dispute right now, and that maybe – I mean, Turkish Government is pursuing this ban, and they took several additional measures during the weekend to stop the people to use Twitter, like DNS ban, et cetera.

    MS. HARF: Which we think is an encroachment on their citizens’ freedom of expression, and we don’t think that it should be continued.

    QUESTION: You are in contact with the Twitter in terms of legal dispute or —

    MS. HARF: I’m not say in terms of any – I don’t know the legal – the specific legal aspect you’re referring to. We are in touch with Twitter, yes, broadly speaking. I don’t know exactly what that contact is like, but I don’t know if the legal – if that’s an internal Turkish matter, I’m not exactly sure, but we’ve been in contact with both Twitter and the Turkish Government.

    QUESTION: I mean, because Twitter is represented by the lawyers right now in Turkey, and there will be maybe case against —

    MS. HARF: I don’t have more details on any legal action that may or may not be happening in Turkey. I just don’t have those details. What we’ve said is separate and apart from that. People should be able to express themselves freely, whether it’s on Facebook or Twitter or whatever – Flickr, Tumblr, whatever people want to use – and that governments should not encroach on their – they shouldn’t block access for their citizens to do so. I don’t have a lot more information.

    QUESTION: Yeah, but —

    QUESTION: What about Instagram?

    MS. HARF: And Instagram too.

    QUESTION: Yeah, the problem —

    QUESTION: Not Instagram.

    QUESTION: Not – (laughter). Don’t play favorites now, Marie.

    MS. HARF: I am not. I am not on Instagram, but —

    QUESTION: The problem, the Turkish Government is trying to get some information about some users, specific users who are tweeting against the government and —

    MS. HARF: What I’m saying is that we oppose the Turkish —

    QUESTION: And the Twitter – and my question – okay. My question is —

    MS. HARF: Yes.

    QUESTION: — Twitter assured to Turkish Twitter accounts users that they will not disclose any private information.

    MS. HARF: That would be a question for Twitter, not for me.

    QUESTION: Yeah. But are you supporting this stand of Twitter against Turkish Government?

    MS. HARF: That’s not something that I should take a stand on. I don’t think that’s something that the company, Twitter, can decide on its own.

    QUESTION: Because —

    MS. HARF: What we have said is that governments should not block access for their citizens.

    QUESTION: Yes. But at the same time it’s a privacy question – not only freedom of expression, but the people are also trying to protect their privacy —

    MS. HARF: Again, that a question that’s —

    QUESTION: — and the Turkish Government is trying to get the information of all of the users.

    MS. HARF: That’s a question, I think, is better addressed to Twitter, who controls that issue. What I am saying is people’s freedom of expression should not be blocked by their own government.

    QUESTION: So no comment about the privacy?

    MS. HARF: I don’t have more for you than this – for you on this case than that.

    QUESTION: Okay.

    MS. HARF: I’m happy to check with our folks and see if there’s more.

    QUESTION: Right.

    MS. HARF: I just don’t think I’ll have more.

    QUESTION: Okay. Thank you. Please.

    And another question about the jet incident.

    MS. HARF: Yeah.

    QUESTION: Are you concerned that this confrontation between Turkey and Syria can turn into a more broader confrontation just before the elections, because —

    MS. HARF: Well, I think that’s the question Said just asked, and what I said was it’s a little too early to make sweeping characterizations about what may come from this. Obviously, we know there was a situation here where the Turks repeatedly warned the Syrians before taking action. I don’t think I want to probably draw broader conclusions about what will happen going forward.

    QUESTION: No, I’m – my question wasn’t related NATO that Said asked in terms of the NATO involvement. Beyond the NATO involvement, are you encouraging the parties to deescalate the tension?

    MS. HARF: I mean, we’re certainly in contact with the Turkish Government here on this issue. I’m not – I mean, in terms of the parties, you’re talking about the Assad regime?

    QUESTION: No, the parties – NATO ally, Turkey. Because there will be an election this week —

    MS. HARF: Right.

    QUESTION: — and the main —

    MS. HARF: I’m not seeing the connection here.

    QUESTION: The main opposition party urged to not do any military intervention, military – I mean, unilateral military action against Syria just before the election, to use a populist tool just before the election. So this is the concern of the main opposition party and other parties in Turkey.

    MS. HARF: I think I probably don’t have much comment on internal Turkish politics or how they may or may not respond —

    QUESTION: It stirs an international crisis.

    QUESTION: Well, are you encouraging the Turks to kind of remain calm and not escalate the situation?

    QUESTION: Yes.

    MS. HARF: I’m not sure how they – I mean I’m not sure there’s even talk of escalation here. I’m happy to check with our folks and see. To my understanding, it was a limited situation. I haven’t heard that there is escalation here.

    QUESTION: Is —

    MS. HARF: I’m happy to check with our team. We’re still talking to the Turks to get the facts about what happened here, but I, quite frankly, haven’t heard talk that people are worried about that.

    QUESTION: So – because my question is related to another religious site within Syria belonging to Turkey. This is a Turkish territory, 35 kilometers from Turkish broader within Syria, and it’s under threat some groups, ISIS and other radical al-Qaida-affiliated groups. And some cabinet members, Turkish cabinet members, even urged not to do anything to provoke Turkey for any unilateral military action, for example. This is another concern for Turkey to be part of the unilateral military action within Syria. So only – not only the jet, but this is another risk for Turkey to involve with Syria in terms of this kind of military action.

    MS. HARF: Well, I don’t have any, in terms of that specific question, any details for you on that. Again, I think I’ll let the Turkish Government speak for what their response will or won’t be here. As I said, we’ve talked to them, we’ve gotten the facts of what’s happened here, and if there’s more to share tomorrow, I’m happy to.

    QUESTION: Marie, a question that is on Syria.

    MS. HARF: Mm-hmm.

    QUESTION: There are report that 600,000 Syrians have applied for asylum in Europe and the United States. Could you tell us the portion of that that is being sought with the United States?

    MS. HARF: I don’t know the answer, Said. Let me check with our folks and see. I don’t have the numbers.

    QUESTION: Just one more question on the Syrian jet.

    MS. HARF: Uh-huh.

    QUESTION: You said we’ve established the facts and multiple warning were issued, I guess.

    MS. HARF: Mm-hmm. By the Turkish Government.

    QUESTION: How – yeah. How did you establish that? Did they share any information with the State Department?

    MS. HARF: The Turkish Government?

    QUESTION: Yeah.

    MS. HARF: With the United States Government they did. I don’t know if it was us or with the Defense Department, but —

    QUESTION: Yeah. But they shared, like, intelligence information about the incident?

    MS. HARF: I don’t know if it’s intelligence they told us. They warned the Syrians multiple times. I don’t know the details of exactly what that —

    QUESTION: Yeah. But how did you verify what they actually conveyed to you?

    MS. HARF: I can check with our folks and see.

    QUESTION: Were you in touch with them in real time during the incident?

    MS. HARF: I don’t know. I’m happy to check. It might be – and it might be the Department of Defense, but I’m happy to check with them.

    QUESTION: So did you —

    MS. HARF: I just don’t know.

    QUESTION: Did you say that these pieces of information were verified, or you’re not sure?

    MS. HARF: We have no reason to believe that it’s not accurate, correct. Yes.

    QUESTION: Okay. But —

    MS. HARF: And I’m happy to see if there are more details about how we verified it, correct.

    QUESTION: I wanted to ask one more.

    QUESTION: No, no. One more on Syria.

    MS. HARF: Uh-huh.

    QUESTION: News reports said that the U.S. Administration has finished its review on its policy towards Syria and decided not to intervene militarily and not to provide the opposition with sophisticated arms and not to allow Saudi Arabia to provide this kind of arms.

    MS. HARF: I’m not sure those reports are true. I haven’t seen them, but I haven’t heard those reports. In terms of the first, we’ve always said all options except for boots on the ground are on the table. Happy to check with our team, but it’s my understanding, as we’ve talked about in here, that this is an ongoing discussion of what policies we should undertake in Syria. I’m happy to check and see if there’s been some decisions made, but to my knowledge there haven’t been.

    QUESTION: Is there any review?

    MS. HARF: As I said – we went over this, I think, ad nauseam one day, but there’s constantly a review of our policy in Syria. We are constantly looking at options, what we could do, what more we could do, how we could influence the situation. That’s ongoing, yes. But to my knowledge, there hasn’t been some sort of major decision on what we will or won’t do.

    QUESTION: Can you check on this, please?

    MS. HARF: I’m happy to.

    QUESTION: Thank you.

  • Turkey becomes a victim of its own arrogance

    Turkey becomes a victim of its own arrogance

    Ben Levitas

    turkiye-suriye-sinirinda-duvar-tartismasi_normal_4850745Well Halleluya! Turkey has started to build a wall along its border with Syria. Guess what, most of the wall is 2 metres tall and will ‘have barbed wire fencing over it’ according to the Hurriyet Daily News, making it nearly 2,5 metres high. The first part of the wall that could extend over the 900 kilometres border between Turkey and Syria, is being built near the city of Nusaybin.

    According to the Times, of October 11th, “It is a largely Kurdish area, and the first aim is to make it more difficult for Syrian Kurds to join radical Kurdish groupings in Turkey”. Walls separate people and break up families. Walls cut people off from each other and their fields. This wall will split vulnerable refugees from their kith and kin across the border.

    This wall will divide Turkish Kurds from Iraqi and Syrian Kurds, and Turkey’s ruthless war against Kurdish nationalists has already claimed more lives than the Israel Arab dispute and dragged on for a longer time.

    Haven’t we heard all this before about the ‘Security fence’ that Israel built to stop attacks on its civilians. Yes, indeed and that one has been dubbed an ‘Apartheid Wall’, by Israel’s detractors. So why should this wall, which is likely to be longer and higher, not be painted with the same brush. Is it ok to separate Muslims from Muslims, but not Muslims from Jews?

    Surely if it permissible for Turkey to prevent terrorists from penetrating into its territory, the same rules should apply to Israel? Surely a wall is a wall, irrespective of where it is built!

    In 2003, while Israel was building its ‘wall’ there was an international outcry. No one expressed any concern while suicide bombers entered Israel at will and blew up thousands of civilians. In November, 2003 Pope John Paul II criticized Israel’s building of a wall to keep Palestinians out, and he called for a global movement against terrorism following deadly attacks in Iraq and Turkey.

    At a Sunday blessing on November 16th , 2003  the Pope said ; “In reality, the Holy Land does not need walls but bridges. Without reconciliation of souls, there can be no peace…The construction of a wall between the Israeli and Palestinian people is seen by many as a new obstacle on the road to peaceful coexistence.”

    Surely Israel’s detractors will need to acknowledge that the Pope’s words apply fittingly to the Turkish wall as well! Let’s see whether Turkey being a member of the NATO alliance, will draw any ire from the organization. It begs the question whether the European Union and even the International Criminal Court, which have pronounced on Israel’s Security barrier, will have equally vocal opinions.

    Is it not ironic, that Turkey who so arrogantly led an illegal flotilla to breach and deliberately challenge Israel’s blockade of Gaza, is now falling prey to its own venom. Turkey was shrill and defiant in its assault on Israel. Even after Israel apologized to Turkey, and offered compensation to the kin of those killed in the raid, Turkey has rejected with disdain Israel’s overtures.

    Turkey is now being ‘hoisted with their own petard’ and is culpable of the very same actions it so vociferously accused Israel of. Remember how Turkey reacted with brute force against its own citizens, over 3 million of them, when they protested in Gezi Park and elsewhere. The Turkish Police and military killed 11 protesters, injured about 8,500 some critically and arrested over 5,000 people.

    Remember how Turkey invaded Cyprus twice during 1974 and is still occupying 40% of the Island. Remember how the Greek majority that were living in Turkish occupied Cyprus, about 200,000 people were forced to flee to the south. Bear in mind that United Nations forces are required to man the ‘Green line’ separating the Turkish north from the Greek, south. Recall that a week ago, the Turkish parliament voted to extend by a year a mandate authorizing a military deployment to Syria if needed. Note with concern the firing of a TV presenter, Godze Kansu, only because she wore a revealing dress, while on air.

    Heed the move to Islamisize the country by the removal last week of the restriction on wearing headscarves, which exemplified Turkey’s status as a secular country since 1920. Observe with concern the continued imprisonment of journalists, more than any other country, as the Committee to Protect Journalists reported;

    “In Turkey, the world’s worst jailer with 49 journalists behind bars, the authorities held dozens of Kurdish reporters and editors on terror-related charges and a number of other journalists on charges of involvement in anti-government plots.”

    I await with anticipation an outcry from the multitudes of human rights activists who find walls and infringements of constitutional rights so cantankerous.

    via Turkey becomes a victim of its own arrogance | News24.

  • Turkey Launches Military Drills Along Syria Border

    Turkey Launches Military Drills Along Syria Border

    Suriye sınırında yapılan NATO tatbikatı soru işaretleri doğurdu

    Exercise at NATO Base to Test ‘Readiness for Battle’

    by Jason Ditz

    syria3With tensions soaring in the wake of the weekend Israeli attacks on Syria, the Turkish military has launched a round of military drills at a NATO air base along the Syrian border.

    The 10-day drills will involve military and government ministry coordination in mobilization for a war with Syria. NATO says the mission was planned ahead of time, but was never reported until it began.

    The drill adds to speculation about the possibility of a NATO attack on Syria, though officials downplayed that possibility. The Assad government has not commented on the exercise.

    Indeed, military drills in NATO nations are so common that it is entirely possible that they did just plan a small drill they didn’t figure was worth mentioning and it became a bigger deal because of the tensions with Syria.

    via Turkey Launches Military Drills Along Syria Border — News from Antiwar.com.

  • Turkey deports 600 Syrian refugees following protest over living conditions, official says

    Turkey deports 600 Syrian refugees following protest over living conditions, official says

    Turkish FM denies reports of forced evacuations, says 50-60 Syrians returned voluntarily; UNHCR reports riots in Jordan refugee camp.

    By Reuters and The Associated Press

    1100722365

    Syrian refugees make their way in flooded water at a temporary refugee camp, in the eastern Lebanese town of Al-Faour near the border with Syria, January 8, 2013. Photo by AP

    Turkey deported at least 600 Syrians staying at a refugee camp near the border after they clashed with Turkish military police in a protest over living conditions, a Turkish official said on Thursday in remarks disputed by the country’s foreign ministry.

    “These people were involved in Wednesday’s violence, they were seen by the security cameras in the camp,” an official in the camp told Reuters by telephone. “Between 600 and 700 have been deported. The security forces are still looking at the footage, and if they see more they will deport them.”

    Turkey’s foreign ministry, however, denies forcibly deporting the Syrians and said about 50-60 had returned to Syria voluntarily.

    “Some people have returned since last night, the numbers are closer to 50 or 60, and yes some of these may have been involved in the provocations from Wednesday but they returned of their own free will,” foreign ministry spokesman Levent Gumrukcu said on Thursday.

    The United Nations refugee agency voiced deep concern on at the reports of mass deportations of Syrians from Turkey and said it had taken up the issue with Turkish authorities.[1]

    “UNHCR is very concerned with reports of a serious incident and allegations of possible deportations from Akcakale Tent City in the past 24 hours,” Melissa Fleming, chief spokeswoman of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), told Reuters.

    Meanwhile, the UN refugee agency is reporting that a riot broke out at a refugee camp for Syrians in Jordan after some of the refugees were told they could not return home.

    Ali Bibi, a UNHCR liaison officer in Jordan, says it’s unclear how many refugees were involved in Thursday’s melee at the Zaatari camp. The riot broke out after some Syrians in the camp tried to board buses to go back to their country.

    He says Jordanian authorities refused to let the buses head to the border because of ongoing clashes between the rebels and President Bashar Assad’s forces in southern Syria, just across the border from Jordan.

    Bibi says there were no immediate reports of injuries. He says Jordanian authorities promised to organize the refugees’ return home at another time.

    In Damascus, activists say Syrian rebels are attacking army checkpoints in and around a key southern town that is a gateway to the capital. The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights says rebel attacks are under way in Dael and surrounding areas.

    The Local Coordination Committees, another activists group, says regime  bombardment of Dael killed at least three people on Thursday. Dael lies in the strategic Daraa province, which borders Jordan.The fighting comes as Mideast powers opposed to President Bashar Assad have stepped up weapons supplies to Syrian rebels in coordination with the U.S. in preparation for a push on the Syrian capital.

    That’s according to officials and military experts who spoke to the Associated Press in Jordan. The UN says Syria’s two-year civil war has killed more than 70,000 people.

    via Turkey deports 600 Syrian refugees following protest over living conditions, official says – Middle East – Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper.

  • Turkey and Israel Feel the Effect as Syria’s Civil War Fuels Tensions at Borders

    Turkey and Israel Feel the Effect as Syria’s Civil War Fuels Tensions at Borders

    By SEBNEM ARSU and RICK GLADSTONE

    ISTANBUL — Border tensions caused by Syria’s civil war worsened on Thursday, as Turkey threatened to prosecute or deport 130 refugees implicated in a violent protest, and Israel reported rising numbers of injured Syrians seeking medical help on the Israeli side of their disputed boundary.

    The tensions, which underscored how the Syrian conflict is threatening the region’s stability, came as international diplomacy aimed at ending the conflict faced new complications. Russia, a major supporter of the Syrian government, suggested that the special Syria envoy of the Arab League and United Nations had lost credibility because the Arab League had sided with the insurgency.

    Turkey, like Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon, has accepted tens of thousands of Syrian refugees since the uprising against President Bashar al-Assad began two years ago. The Turks threatened for the first time to deport a group of refugees after a riot at one of Turkey’s 17 refugee camps on Wednesday, a threat that alarmed the United Nations refugee agency, which said such a move would violate international law.

    Melissa Fleming, a spokeswoman for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Geneva, said in an interview that a forced return would breach legal protections that prohibit host countries from forcing refugees out.

    Turkey changed its stance on Thursday, saying that the refugees would not be deported but had agreed to leave voluntarily after having been told that they would face prosecution if they stayed.

    The Foreign Ministry, in a statement, said the group of refugees “wanted to use the right to voluntary return, and left for Syria.”

    A local government official in Turkey confirmed this Thursday afternoon, saying, “A deportation is out of question, and we cannot deport them when we do not have the right to do so according to the terms of temporary protected status.”

    The 130 Syrians had been identified as residents of the Suleiman Shah camp, in the township of Akcakale in Sanliurfa Province, who had been involved in a riot on Wednesday that damaged the camp’s facilities, including a medical center.

    The circumstances behind the riot are in dispute, but it may have started after a fire in a tent that killed a 7-year-old girl and injured her two sisters.

    Television images showed dozens of people hurling stones inside and outside the camp, cars with broken windows and damaged laptops inside a press vehicle.

    Camp security officers, unable to contain the violence, called in the military police, and images on television showed armored military vehicles moving into the camp. The military police tear-gassed and hosed down the protesters.

    The Turkish government said that the protest broke out when a crowd gathered outside the camp demanding entry. With 35,000 refugees, the camp is full, another local government official said, denying that the protest was linked to the fire, which he attributed to faulty electrical wiring.

    “It was clearly an act of provocation, which started at the gate, outside the camp, far from where the fire broke out,” the official said.

    Unlike Syria’s other neighbors, Israel — which remains in a technical state of war with Syria — has not accepted any Syrian refugees. But it has become increasingly concerned as fighting between Syrian insurgents and loyalists has crept close to the decade-old cease-fire line in the Golan Heights. An Israeli military official said Thursday that it had bolstered medical teams on the frontier because of wounded Syrians seeking aid.

    The latest such episode occurred on Wednesday, when several Syrians arrived at the demarcation fence. Israeli Army medical crews attended to most of them on location and returned them to Syria, but two who had suffered severe head wounds were taken to a hospital in Nahariya, in northern Israel.

    One of them died soon after, and the military transferred his body back to Syria early Thursday with help from United Nations peacekeepers in the area, according to Haggai Einav, a spokesman for the Western Galilee Hospital in Nahariya. The second remained in serious but stable condition on Thursday after having three operations, Mr. Einav added.

    At the United Nations, Vitaly I. Churkin, the Russian ambassador, enlarged on remarks Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov had made in Moscow, saying that the Arab League was playing a “destructive” role in international attempts to peacefully resolve the Syrian conflict because it had granted Syria’s vacant seat to the main opposition coalition, which seeks to topple Mr. Assad by force.

    Mr. Lavrov told reporters in Moscow that the Arab League’s action had raised serious questions about the role of Lakhdar Brahimi, the special Syria envoy who represents both the Arab League and United Nations. Mr. Churkin said Mr. Brahimi should distance himself from the Arab League.

    A spokesman for Mr. Brahimi said he had no immediate comment. Mr. Brahimi was appointed the joint envoy last August.

    “The Arab League has basically taken itself out of the joint effort,” Mr. Churkin said at a news conference, criticizing opposition supporters as concentrating on a military solution while merely “paying lip service” to a political one.

    “Now, instead of dialogue, we have a group of people whose legitimacy has been established from outside the country,” Mr. Churkin said. “Their legitimacy does not have any ground in Syria, no elections.”

    Mr. Churkin dismissed the opposition group, the National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces, as “an international traveling thing” and described its work as “chaotic,” with a constant parade of new leaders.

    He said Russia still maintained hope for a political settlement, although critics maintain that it has done little to actually push Mr. Assad in that direction.

    Mr. Churkin also said the Syrian opposition’s aspiration to take Syria’s seat at the United Nations would probably fail.

    “We’ll oppose it very strongly,” he said. “The U.N. is an intergovernmental organization. You simply do not seat opposition groups who have not gone through the process of legitimization.”

    Sebnem Arsu reported from Istanbul, and Rick Gladstone from New York. Nick Cumming-Bruce contributed reporting from Geneva, Isabel Kershner from Jerusalem, and Neil MacFarquhar from the United Nations.

    A version of this article appeared in print on March 29, 2013, on page A8 of the New York edition with the headline: Turkey and Israel Feel the Effect as Syria’s Civil War Fuels Tensions at Borders.
  • Turkey’s Syria Morass

    Turkey’s Syria Morass

    By: Pinar Tremblay for Al-Monitor Turkey Pulse

    Turkish soldiers block a road to Cilvegozu border gate near the town of Reyhanli on the Turkish-Syrian border in Hatay province

    Turkish soldiers block a road to Cilvegozu border gate near the town of Reyhanli on the Turkish-Syrian border in Hatay province, Feb. 11, 2013. (photo by REUTERS/Umit Bektas)

    The legend goes that the Prophet Muhammad came all the way to the walls of Damascus, saw the luscious landscape and refused to enter the city, uttering “you can only enter paradise once.” Once you make a decision to intervene in another country, it is a game changer. This applies to Turkey’s Syria policy.

    About This Article

    Summary :

    Turkey needs an exit strategy from Syria, writes Pinar Tremblay.

    Author: Pinar Tremblay
    Posted on : March 14 2013

    The easiest answer to the question of what Turkey wants in Syria would be what any country wants from another: to cooperate with it and the region in a stable manner. Turkey and Syria already had a mutually beneficial friendship, to the point that Turks have decided to demand more benefits from this relationship. I am convinced that Turks want a Syria which would produce not more, but different benefits. Turkey is struggling to undo the damages of the Iraq war, hoping that if Iraq could be reversed from Sunni-minority rule to a Shia-dominant rule strong influence from Iran in the post-US pullout, Syria could evolve from Alawite-minority rule to a Sunni-majority rule with a deep Turkish influence.

    Put bluntly, the conditions for Turkish objectives to be realized in Syria are the elimination of the Assad regime, its replacement by an Ikhwan (Syrian Muslim Brotherhood)-dominated government, good separation if not a total break from Iranian influence and a commitment to an alliance with Turkish leadership in the region, which will make certain demands on not only Israel but also Iran. If these objectives are achieved, Turkish power will expand well into Syria. As promising as this may sound, it gets messy as soon as we start questioning the meaning of certain terms.

    Let’s start with the first condition, the removal of al-Assad regime. For the anti-Assad coalition, we can include the EU, the US, Jordan, Israel, Lebanon’s March 14 Bloc and GCC countries, mostly Saudi and Qatar. Going into the third year of civil war, the regime has been much more persistent than many pundits predicted. A few crucial factors contribute to this: a strong and still-loyal army, the regime’s much ignored expertise in puppeteering different armed and non-armed groups, multiple countries involved with different goals and different degrees of support to the many factions. The Syrian regime still seems to have a better handle on intelligence gathering and analysis than others. I utilize the concept of factionalism, rather than sectarianism, for the opposition groups because divisions go beyond sectarian lines in Syria. Hence, overlooking these factions may indeed invite further escalation of the conflict. Hazem al-Amine has highlighted the fragility of the relationship between anti-Assad coalition and Syrian opposition very eloquently.

    The next condition, breaking Syrian dependence on Iran — or curtailing Iranian influence on Syrian politics — also has some allure to the anti-Assad coalition. Yet the devil is indeed in details. While wishing for a Syria not imbued with Hezbollah and Iranian policies, the US would prefer not to see Syria fall into the hands of jihadists. Who would want Sinaization of the Golan Heights, especially when there is no central government to keep it in check? Here, Turkey proves to be a wild card.

    So far, Turkey has deepened its relations with Hamas and many of the other Islamists groups in Gaza. Should we expect to see further fighting between Ikhwani and jihadi groups? Would a Syria under Ikhwan be a land more welcoming to armed groups? Would they be allowed to generate trouble on the Israeli border? If this scenario unfolds, wouldn’t Turkey and Israel clash in the power vacuum left behind the civil war?

    Hence, leading from behind, the US government has to ensure all involved parties, particularly neighbors of Syria, continue to cooperate with the mission of UN Special Representative Lakhdar Brahimi. The question of what shade of Sunni power under the vague umbrella of the “Friends of Syria” Turkey would like to see in Syria is a tricky one. Semih Idiz explained the intricacies of this quandary in his piece for al Monitor on March 12.

    Right now, we can provide the generic answer of Ikhwan. Yet it is hard to gauge whether the post-civil war Syrian Ikhwan would be still in admiration of the Turkish Justice and Deveopment Party. The longer the civil war lasts, the more difficult it will be to predict the evolution of Ikhwan and other groups in Syria. Turkey has taken some missteps, making a re-evaluation of policy is essential. Andrew Parasiliti warned about some of these wrong steps as early as October. There is no guarantee that a Sunni or Arab government would not fall under the influence of Iran, with Hamas being one of the examples. With such a fragmented opposition, the quest for stability will be challenging.

    Taking all these into consideration, here are a couple of steps the Turkish government may take for damage control:

    1. Find ways to shorten the civil war. For example, lessen the anti-Assad rhetoric for a smoother transition period in Syria. A civil war is not a winner-take-all game if the players can negotiate a credible cease-fire. Keeping communication channels open with Iran and Russia and encouraging the opposition to compromise with the regime can help.
    2. Strengthen Turkish-Syrian border security. Such a porous border can produce several layers of vulnerability. If penetrations from Syria to Turkey are not better scrutinized, major attacks will be inevitable in the near future. Careful vetting of the rebels is crucial, but insufficient with that high-risk border. I would not suggest a buffer zone, due to lack of international support for the idea and the Israeli experience in Lebanon between 1985 and 1990.
    3. Accept and adapt to the recent condition of having another “weak state” on the border. Although a “weak state” might initially sound advantageous in realpolitik, it serves as an additional liability. Turkey needs to understand that it cannot solve Syria’s civil war alone. Therefore, Turkey must accept the undesirable task of managing the Syrian civil war with a focus on fragmented factions, rather than sectarian concerns. At the end of the civil war, Ikhwan might not be what Turkey prefers.
    4. Prepare an exit plan. Turkey may never enter Syria with an official army, but the proxy war requires an end as well. An ambiguous Turkish presence in Syria cannot be sustained for long without serious payback. For example, a jihadist group may turn into a strategic issue for the southern border a decade later. Best to avoid grand words and grand approaches, which will most likely backfire.

    In sum, Turkey has taken a major leap of faith in its foreign policy toward Syria. If its objective is to establish a regime that can cooperate smoothly, Turkey must first actively evaluate its own objectives. A well-managed crisis always presents good opportunities. The legend of Damascus says that you can only enter paradise once, yet it is wise to assume hell has wide-open gates.

    Pinar Tremblay is a PhD candidate at UCLA in political science and an adjunct faculty member at Cal Poly Pomona. She has previously been published in the Hurriyet Daily News and Today’s Zaman. Follow her on Twitter: @pinartremblay.

    Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/03/turkey-syria-policy-exit-plan.html#ixzz2NaNwVpdE