The evolution of the Syrian crisis

The evolution of the crisis of the Kurdish territories in Syria, caused by Turkey, highlights, as has been expected, the growth of Russia's role in the area. The new alliance between Kurds and Syrians brought Assad's troops to the ground, dangerously close to the Turkish soldiers; formally the armed forces of Damascus are operating on their territory, while the army of Ankara has invaded a foreign territory, without, however, declaring war. The Turkish president presented the operation as a battle against terrorism and the need to relocate Syrian refugees, present in large numbers in Turkey and badly endured by Turkish citizens. The growing nationalism in the Turkish country and, precisely the will to bring back the Syrian refugees to their homeland, has determined the approval of the population and the political forces of Turkey, which support the Turkish president with a percentage of 75% of the citizens. This success favors an even greater intransigence of the Ankara government to pursue its goals, regardless of American sanctions and European warnings. In this dangerous scenario, Moscow plays a decisive role in avoiding the possibility of the widening of the conflict on a regional scale. The Russian troops have occupied the bases left free by American soldiers and, in fact, are among the Turkish and Syrian soldiers; it must not be forgotten, however, that the Russian presence is not neutral, but must be seen in the alliance with Damascus, an alliance that allowed Assad to remain in power. The Syrian dictator, however, no longer seems an autonomous subject, like before the Syrian uprisings, but a head of state now too dependent on Moscow. Putin, in addition to international prestige, continues to pursue his strategy for presence on the Mediterranean and in the Middle East, with the ever increasing possibility of increasing his specific weight in the international arena. The Kurds, in order to avoid a massacre, have agreed to ally with Syria, knowing that Damascus is not a reliable ally, which will almost certainly reduce the autonomy of the Syrian Kurdish region. On the other hand, deaths among civilians are already numerous and the number of people forced to leave their places of residence is estimated at around 190,000 people, of whom 70,000 are believed to be minors. Turkey, therefore, is causing a new humanitarian disaster in these areas, which follows those caused by the Islamic state and of which Ankara was probably complicit. Faced with these abuses, the international community appears divided and uncertain about the answers to be given and once again Trump's ineptitude stands out in international theater. Even Europe offers a painful image, immobile in its deviation and uncertainty, while the United Nations presents the usual initiatives with no results, once again highlighting their inadequacy and uselessness. To counter Ankara it was enough to leave the American soldiers in their place in Syria, but even without this presence it would be sufficient to subject Turkey to a regime of sanctions such as that applied to North Korea or Iran; if these solutions are not adopted it is only because we are dealing with the usual conflicting interests of the political actors involved in the region and also on a global scale. Beyond these considerations there is the real danger of the escape of the terrorists of the caliphate, until now kept in Kurdish prisons: among them there are also numerous foreign fighters ready to return to their countries of origin, including many Europeans, with a wealth of knowledge military learned in the field and easily usable in potential attacks. This must be framed in a broader discourse that includes the rebirth of the Islamic State, which has been prevented for now by large-scale military actions and, for this very reason, forced to demonstrate its strength with actions outside the Middle Eastern territories. The Turkish responsibilities are evident and, if the international community will not be able to go beyond the facade declarations, other dictators will be ready to defend their interests without any fear: this crisis can be an opportunity to restore the right through diplomatic pressure, but only if at least most of the nations will be able to overcome their differences: a difficult requirement to materialize.