Relations between Russia, Turkey and Iran in the context of military-political ties with the Syrian Arab Republic

Kasyanenko Aleksandr Vladimirovich Postgraduate student, Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation; Junior Research Fellow, Center for Oriental Studies, International Relations and Public Diplomacy; Chief Specialist, JSC "National Aviation-Service Company" 119021, Russia, Moscow, Ostozhenka str., 53/2, office 1 kassa93@bk.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction. The subject of the study is the political relations that arose as a result of the initiation  Russia has a "triple format" on the Syrian issue between Russia, Turkey and Iran. The purpose of the study is to comprehensively analyze the development of the Astana format in the context of military-political relations with the Syrian Arab Republic (hereinafter SAR) in a political aspect.

The methodological basis of the research consists of descriptive, historical, institutional, comparative, typological and systemic methods, as well as some elements of game theory strategies, which allowed the author to obtain results with signs of scientific novelty. First of all, we are talking about the identified and analyzed role of Russia in the settlement of the intra-Syrian conflict.

The scientific novelty of the study is also determined by the fact that new sources have been involved in the work, which relate to various aspects of military and political relations with the Syrian Arab Republic in the context of the Syrian crisis, including those related to the negotiations held by the Guarantor Countries in the Astana format, which took place on January 24-25, 2024 in Astana.

The practical significance of the work lies in the fact that the materials presented in it can be used for the political and diplomatic settlement of crisis situations that contribute to the preservation of the integrity and sovereignty of States, preventing armed interference in their internal processes. 

A combination of factors that provoked military and political conflicts in Syria.  The Middle East is traditionally rich in events that require study and analysis by researchers in various fields, including political scientists. A number of modern revolutions are accompanied by large-scale changes, which indicates the importance of studying the trends manifested in relations between Russia, Turkey and Iran in the context of military and political ties with the Syrian Arab Republic as one of the most famous countries in the region.

In Syria, the largest part of the population professes Islam, which is the state religion. Over the centuries, the use of Islam as a religion has been noted in various social and national movements. With the aggravation of conditions in international relations, there was also a surge in ethnic and religious conflicts, which led to the deepening of social contradictions at different levels. In this regard, Islam was in demand as a special religious and political ideology.

Almost all recognized religions are characterized by differences of opinion between certain groups of their followers, and therefore there are intra-confessional movements, including in Islam, where the struggle for power leads to destructive tendencies. These trends can give rise to harsh oppositional fundamentalist manifestations associated with the formation of a radical fundamentalist religious worldview, in particular, which are based on the ideology of radical Islamism. Islamism, which became widespread in the 20th century, played a significant role in the creation of the military-political conflict in Syria, which began in July 2012. The Red Cross regarded it as a civil war ^[1].

The historical perspective of the military-political conflict in Syria. Recall that the beginning of the military-political conflict in Syria falls in the spring of 2011. At this time, protests against the established authoritarian regime are taking place in the SAR. The main calls were demands for social justice, the resignation of the current leader, as well as the elimination of the political monopoly. There are three main reasons that prompted the Syrian population to mass revolutionary protests. These include: the irremovability of power, corruption, and a high level of social stratification.  For a long time, the people of Syria have been completely excluded from the formation of power and the adoption of state decisions. At the same time, the external signs of democracy were preserved.

These events can be considered a turning point in the modern history of Syria, which, in particular, changed the model of relations between religion and the state. The Syrian Revolution is considered by contemporaries in the context of the so-called Arab Spring ^{[2, pp. 46-47; 3, pp.84-92; 4, pp. 33-44]}.

One of the consequences of this revolution is the growing influence of Islamist forces on the political life of Arab countries, aimed at eliminating all political regimes, although authoritarian, that have embarked on the path of modernization. This thesis is confirmed by the further development of the political process in Syria, since with the onset of the Arab Spring, conducted under the slogan of democratization, confessional contradictions were used, which strengthened the positions of radical Islamists.

Even after the referendum ^[5] and the adoption of the Syrian Constitution in 2012 ^[6], the process of influence of radical Islamists was not only not stopped, but also allowed Islamist groups to act as the basis for the destruction of state system elements.

The conflict that began in Syria in March 2011 very quickly escalated into a civil war, in which armed anti-government groups were involved ^[7]. Already in 2013, the headquarters of the Islamic State terrorist group appeared in the north of the Syrian Arab Republic. As noted in the joint report of the Syrian Center for Political Studies and the United Nations Development Program dated March 19, 2015, more than 220 thousand people died in the period 2011-2015 alone, and Syria's economic losses amounted to about $300 billion ^[8].

As a result, the Syrian government turned to Russia for help with a request for military support, as a result of which the military operation of Russian troops in Syria began (September 30, 2015), which helped the Syrian government regain control over most of the country's territory, begin de-escalation and a smooth transition to a political settlement of the conflict.

Since 2015, Russia's efforts have played a key role in stabilizing the situation in Syria, creating conditions for ending large-scale military operations and defeating such a hotbed of terrorism as the ISIS caliphate in the Middle East.  On December 30, 2016, the country announced the introduction of a cessation of hostilities regime. The exception was the territories where the fight against ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra continued.

Relations between Russia and the SAR at the present stage. Today, Russia, having its own view on the political settlement of the Syrian conflict, acts as an important regulator of this problem.

It is worth noting that Russia, as the successor of the USSR, has developed friendly relations with the Syrian Arab Republic ^[9].

Russia is striving to create conditions under which it will be possible through negotiations to find a compromise solution that suits the participants in the negotiations. While continuing to provide assistance to the legitimate leadership of Syria in order to restore order in the country, Russia continues its consistent line in the fight against terrorist elements.

It is worth noting that from the very beginning of the Syrian crisis, Russia began to make political and diplomatic efforts in support of Damascus, for example, blocking anti-Syrian resolutions in the UN Security Council jointly with the PRC providing for the imposition of sanctions against Syria, or opposed the military intervention proposed by the Western coalition ^{[10, pp. 31-46]}.

Russia initially perceived the Arab Spring as a tool used by the United States in its foreign policy to support color revolutions, which led to the activation of Islamic extremists and fundamentalists in the region. The decision on the use of Russian armed forces in Syria against terrorists after the official request of the Syrian government for military assistance was approved by the Federation Council of Russia ^[11]. Russia's main tasks in conducting anti-terrorist operations in Syria were to stabilize the situation in the region and prevent the spread of terrorism.

The military operation that began on September 30, 2015, which destroyed the main forces of the terrorists, created conditions and made it possible to move to the process of peaceful settlement of the Syrian conflict by the beginning of 2016.

However, a series of negotiations under the auspices of the United Nations, conducted to achieve a peaceful settlement of the civil war in Syria, the negotiating platform of which was Geneva, eventually reached an impasse due to disagreements between the parties ^{[12, pp. 94-102]}.

Therefore, due to the fact that the Geneva format of the Syrian settlement has reached an impasse, on December 14, 2016, Russia initiated the creation of a "triple format" in the Syrian issue, in which Russia, Iran and Turkey, as the largest regional players interested in peace and stability, assumed the role of the main mediators in resolving this conflict. its borders. A new negotiating platform was founded in Astana (Kazakhstan) with the assistance of President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev, who declared support for international efforts to peacefully resolve the conflict in Syria ^[13].

The negotiations of the foreign ministers of these states allowed them to make a joint statement on agreed measures to revive the peace process of resolving the Syrian conflict in order to end it ^[14].

The new format of negotiations allowed Russia, Iran and Turkey to coordinate the positions of the countries on issues related to the observance of the territorial integrity of Syria, as well as on the peaceful resolution of the conflict. The Astana format was a timely political decision that allowed us to expand the negotiation process. So, if earlier negotiations related, for example, to the ceasefire, humanitarian assistance and other issues of peaceful settlement were held at the Geneva negotiating platform, then the dialogue platform in Astana made it possible to resume the possibility of a political settlement of the conflict.

Among the main achievements of this format of negotiations, the following should be highlighted:

- The negotiations in the Astana format largely stimulated the work of the Geneva format for the Syrian settlement of the conflict under the auspices of the United Nations, which, before the start of negotiations in Astana, postponed meetings on resolving issues on the Syrian peace agenda for more than 10 months, and also stimulated the adoption of effective decisions related to the settlement of the conflict in Syria. For example, the introduction of the Astana format made it possible to reach an agreement on the Geneva platform with the help of Russia's active participation and support on the issue of including the problem of combating terrorism in the Syrian territories on the agenda.

- Russia, Iran and Turkey acted as guarantors of a political settlement of the conflict in Syria (hereinafter referred to as the Guarantor Countries), creating a trilateral mechanism for monitoring the ceasefire regime in Syria. De-escalation zones were created in a number of Syrian provinces, which contributed to the cessation of not only hostilities between government forces  SAR and armed opposition detachments, but also to ensure the necessary vital conditions for the peaceful life of citizens.  At the same time, the formation of these de-escalation zones was fixed at the legal level, and their formation is determined by the "Memorandum on the creation of de-escalation zones in the Syrian Arab Republic" ^[15]. This Memorandum was signed by Russia, Iran and Turkey, who acted as guarantors of a peaceful settlement of the conflict in Syria.

- The guarantor countries adopted a regulation on the working group on the release of detainees and hostages, as well as the release of prisoners and abductees, the transfer of bodies of the dead and the search for missing persons.

- For the first time, the guarantor countries made a joint statement on humanitarian demining in Syria, including the demining of objects related to cultural values and cultural heritage sites in Syria. According to UNESCO, the list of Syria's World Heritage sites under threat currently includes the Old City in Damascus, the Archaeological Sites of Palmyra, the Old City in Bosra, the Old City in Haleb, the Castles of Krak des Chevaliers and Qal'at Salah al-Din, Ancient villages of Northern Syria, etc.^[16]. It is worth noting that as a result of the war, about 300 World Cultural Heritage sites have already been destroyed or damaged ^[17].

- The guarantor countries contribute not only to the expansion of humanitarian assistance and assistance in the restoration of infrastructure facilities (water and electricity supply, schools, hospitals)  but also to create conditions for the safe return of refugees.

The 20th round of negotiations in the Astana format, as the Kazakh side assumed, without being a guarantor country in the treaty process, was completed. This was announced in a statement by Deputy Foreign Minister of Kazakhstan Kanat Tumysh, who considered the 20th round of negotiations as the final anniversary meeting in this format on the process of political settlement of the conflict in Syria ^[18].  At the same time, he noted the significant contribution of the guarantor countries to the peaceful settlement of the conflict in Syria.

The guarantor countries made a joint statement that the Astana format on Syria would continue, and Russia, Iran and Turkey would make their efforts to assist the Syrian Arab Republic and "return Syria to the Arab family" ^[19].

During a briefing following the results of the 20th round of negotiations, the special representative of the President of the Russian Federation for the Syrian settlement, Alexander Lavrentiev, said that the Astana format was not tied to the venue and recalled that similar meetings had already been held in Sochi (2 times) and in Tehran ^[20].

Without examining the geopolitical atmosphere that prompted Kazakhstan to make such a statement, since the purpose of this study is, first of all, relations between Russia, Turkey and Iran in the context of military and political ties with the Syrian Arab Republic, we note that Russia's efforts to resolve issues related to the peaceful settlement of the conflict in Syria have yielded results.

The result of such efforts was the 21st round of negotiations in the Astana format, which took place on January 24-25, 2024 in Astana ^[21]. Thus, the Astana format has shown its viability.

During the 21st round of negotiations, representatives of Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon, as well as representatives of the United Nations, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Committee of the Red Cross were present as observers ^[22].

Following the results of this round, the Guarantor Countries made a joint statement ^[23], which indicates that the Astana process plays a leading role in promoting a sustainable settlement of the Syrian crisis and expressed concern about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which negatively affects the situation in the Syrian Arab Republic.

In addition, the issues of the presence and activity of terrorist groups in the Idlib de-escalation zone were considered. During the negotiations, all illegal initiatives under the pretext of combating terrorism were rejected, as well as unilateral sanctions in violation of international universal conventions, including selective measures concerning certain areas of Syria, which could lead to the disintegration of the country.

Much attention was paid to the resumption of the activities of the Syrian Constitutional Committee, designed to ensure the implementation of the decisions of the Congress of the Syrian National Dialogue on the promotion of a political settlement of the conflict in the SAR, as well as to create favorable conditions ensuring its unhindered work for the activities of this committee ^[24].

At these talks, other topical issues were also considered, for example, regarding the expansion of humanitarian assistance for  Syria, including those related to the implementation of projects for the restoration of basic infrastructure facilities and humanitarian demining projects. In addition, the issues of expanding the mutual release of detainees/abductees conducted within the framework of the relevant Working Group were resolved, which contributes to the establishment of trust between the Syrian parties.

By agreement of the Guarantor Parties, it was decided to hold the 22nd round of negotiations in the Astana format in the second half of 2024 in Astana.

Relations between Turkey and Syria. The length of the common border between Turkey and Syria is more than 900 kilometers, but these neighboring states have been rivals rather than allies for a long time due to their desire for regional leadership, which contributed to the emergence of conflict situations between these countries. The range of main problems that hindered the normalization of Turkish-Syrian relations was related to disputes over territorial issues (related to the disputed province of Hatay) and the use of water resources (distribution of waters of the Euphrates River) on the Kurdish issue, as well as problems related to refugees, different views of Turkey and Syria on the formation of a regional security system, etc.

It is worth noting that the Kurdish factor was the most acute of the above problems, since in Syria in the 1990s a platform was formed for the activities of Kurdish rebel militant organizations and the PKK, and Turkey feared for its national security. The resolution of this conflict, which in 1998 could have turned into a military clash between these countries, was the negotiation process, as a result of which the Adana Agreement was signed, which became an important "turning point" in the relations of these countries.  The parties agreed on the cessation of Syria's support for the PKK, as well as on the closure of sites for the activities of Kurdish militants. In addition, the parties agreed on Turkey's right to self-defense and the possibility of Turkey's persecution of terrorists in Syria up to five kilometers deep. The main focus that was put at the conclusion of the Adana Agreement was the issue of cooperation between both countries in the fight against terrorism ^[25].

However, with the onset of the Arab Spring, Turkish-Syrian relations have changed.  Damascus accused Ankara of non-compliance with agreements and violation of the territorial integrity of Syria, since during anti-terrorist operations Turkey invaded the territory of Syria much more deeply than was provided for by the Adana Agreement, and, moreover, actions in Syria were not coordinated between Ankara and Damascus. In turn, Turkey pointed to the activation of terrorists and the existence of a separatist entity on the border with Turkey, as well as the need to ensure its own security.

In January 2019, at talks with Turkish leader R.T. Erdogan, Russian President Vladimir Putin recalled that the Adana Agreement on combating Terrorism is the base that closes most issues related to ensuring security on Turkey's southern borders ^[26]. 

In the future, Russia assumed the role of mediator in activating the Turkish-Syrian dialogue in order to prevent a major escalation in their relations, based on the position that both sides are determined to eliminate problems, then their joint fight against terrorism can re-"give political force" to the Adana Agreement ^[27].

In May 2023, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, noting the importance of working out the restoration of logistical ties between Syria and Turkey ^[28], proposed to prepare a draft roadmap for the normalization of relations between these states by the 20th round of negotiations in the Astana format.  The guarantor countries and Syria have ordered work on the draft roadmap. This draft roadmap for the normalization of relations between Syria and Turkey, the fight against terrorism and a number of other issues was put up for discussion at the 20th round of negotiations on Syria.

The Russian side has prepared this document based on the principles of unwavering commitment to the sovereignty, territorial integrity, independence and unity of all participating countries to the goals and principles of the UN Charter.

At the 20th round of negotiations ^[29] in the Astana format, Syria, Turkey and Iran supported the concept of the "road map" put forward by Russia in connection with which S. Lavrov noted the need for its systematization and coordination.

Among the priority topics of the roadmap are the tasks of restoring control over the entire territory of Syria by its legitimate government, eliminating the possibility of cross-border attacks and ensuring the security of the Syrian-Turkish border, infiltration of terrorists ^[30].

At the 21st round of negotiations in the Astana format (January 24-25, 2024), in their joint statement, the Guarantor Countries stressed the importance of intensifying efforts to continue work related to the restoration of relations between Ankara and Damascus in order to jointly combat terrorism and create appropriate safe conditions for the return of Syrian refugees to Syria on a voluntary basis with the participation of the Office of the Supreme The UN Commissioner for Refugees ^[31].

Relations between Iran and Syria. Syria and Iran are currently strategic allies. These partnerships are based on historical events taking place in the Middle East.  In addition, the countries were interested in pursuing a common policy, both in the international arena and in the region. Syria was interested in contacts with Iran to overcome its internal and external crisis. In addition, the process of rapprochement between these countries was influenced by the policies pursued by Western countries and the United States.  The invasion of Iraq by American troops in 2003, as well as Washington's categorization of Iran and Syria as countries supporting terrorism ^[32], caused Tehran and Damascus to sharply criticize such a US position, which naturally pushed the neighbors towards rapprochement ^[33].

Iran initially interpreted the Syrian crisis, which began as a result of the "color revolution", as a derivative of American policy. At the same time, Tehran indicated support for the legitimate leader of Syria ^[34]. On this issue, Iran's position is based on the fact that if the Syrian opposition comes to power, Tehran may lose its influence in Lebanon and find itself isolated in the Middle East region.

Iran's policy on the Syrian issue demonstrates its consistency, although at the beginning of the Syrian crisis, Tehran refrained from openly intervening in the struggle between the opposition and the Syrian government. While showing support for Bashar al-Assad, Iran limited itself to diplomatic and military consultations, and also made official statements in support of the legitimate government of Syria.  

After the start of the military operation of Russian troops in Syria (September 30, 2015), Iran stepped up assistance to the government of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, sending a military contingent of the most trained units of the Iranian army to fight the terrorist organization Islamic State and other religious extremist groups ^[35].

In the future, the efforts of Russia and Iran in the Syrian conflict within the framework of the military operation of the BC of the Russian Federation in Syria are coordinated, which led to the actual defeat of terrorists in Syria and the subsequent attenuation of the conflict. The Astana format, which was already gaining strength in the political arena, played a significant role in this.

It is worth noting that although Iran, Russia and Turkey participated in a series of negotiations under the auspices of the United Nations on the Syrian issue in Geneva, contributing to the conclusion of important international agreements to end the conflict, however, the most positive result on the regulation of the Syrian issue was obtained during the negotiations in the Astana format.

The Astana format allows Iran, Syria and Turkey to overcome the differences that have arisen between them and solve the problem without involving non-regional actors in the face of Western states, whose possible presence on the negotiating platforms will not be supported by Iran and, as a result, will lead the peace settlement process to a dead end.

If friendly relations took place between Damascus and Ankara before the start of the "color revolution" in Syria, then with the beginning of the military-political conflict, as it seems, under the influence of NATO's policy in the Middle East, R.T. Erdogan offered B. Assad to make concessions to the opposition, which eventually led Turkey to support opposition groups. Turkey has also shown ill will towards Iran, preventing participation  Iran, which supports the Syrian government, in the negotiation process in Geneva.

The Astana format allowed not only to mitigate this confrontation, preventing open confrontation, but also to set up these states for a political solution to the crisis situation in Syria.

Thus, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, speaking at the Mediterranean Dialogues forum in Rome in November 2018, noted that the policy of Iran and Syria is united on the issue of protecting the region from terrorist threats, and also stressed that Russia is seeking the same thing. As the head of the Iranian Foreign Ministry noted, the only mechanism that has worked in Syria is the Astana process ^[36].

Conclusions. Negotiations under the auspices of the United Nations have reached an impasse due to the lack of necessary levers of influence on the parties to the Syrian conflict. The "triple format" initiated by Russia on the Syrian issue, called the Astana format, made it possible to achieve a balance of interests between the Guarantor Countries on the political settlement of the Syrian conflict.

The Astana format helped bring Turkey, Iran and Syria closer together, which allowed Russia not only to prevent open confrontation, but also to set up these states for a political solution to the crisis situation in Syria.

Russia's initiation of the Astana format, first of all, is to preserve the integrity and sovereignty of Syria, as well as to solve the problem through political means, combat the terrorist threat, as well as create conditions for overcoming the crisis situation in which Syria was.

Russia was able to intensify the Turkish-Syrian dialogue in order to prevent a major escalation in their relations.  This has led to significant positive developments in Turkish-Syrian cooperation, which are based on the process of systematization, coordination and the draft roadmap prepared by the Russian side to normalize relations between these states.

The creation of the Astana format was timely, which allowed not only to expand the negotiation process, but also demonstrated both its effectiveness and viability.

Russia's active position in the military and diplomatic spheres contributed to changing the situation in the region and set up the interaction of the Guarantor Countries to seek compromise solutions in the existing conditions in order to create peaceful coexistence in the Middle East region, eliminate terrorist groups that contribute to fueling conflicts and confrontations between the countries of the Middle East.

The Astana format made it possible to establish a political dialogue between the Guarantor Countries to resolve the Syrian crisis, but also, in the context of the actual defeat of terrorist groups in Syria, to move on to the formation of a transitional period by the Syrian Arab Republic, which implies further efforts by the parties to normalize the political climate in the Middle East region.