Putin Won’t Abandon Iran and Doesn’t Trust Erdogan

by Alessandro Orsini

Syria is sinking into chaos. Turkish-backed militias have taken Aleppo and Hama. This is a defeat for Putin, who has fought for years in Syria alongside Iran, Hezbollah, and the Syrian army to bring the country back under the control of his loyal ally Bashar al-Assad. Some claim that a desperate Putin is considering abandoning Iran in Syria to embrace Turkey. This theory argues that, realizing Iran is too weak, Putin might prefer Turkey instead — a dramatic shift in alliances. However, I don’t believe this is Putin’s logic for several reasons, summarized in one sentence: Turkey’s dominance in Syria would not be beneficial for Russia.

Firstly, abandoning Iran in Syria would undermine the global alliance Putin is building against the United States, which includes Iran, China, and North Korea. Handing Syria over to Turkey would be contrary to Putin’s broader geopolitical strategy. Additionally, the group advancing in Syria, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, is a jihadist faction. Islamic terrorism is a significant threat for Russia. The success of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham would energize the jihadist movement, similar to the fervor during 2014-2015 when ISIS controlled territory with 12 million people across Syria and Iraq. Putin also has crucial military bases in Syria and would not welcome a jihadist-controlled Syria, which would be bad news for Israel as well.

Switching alliances is also impractical because Putin views Erdogan as far less reliable than Assad. While the West sees Putin and Erdogan as close, this is a misconception. Putin perceives Erdogan as opportunistic, driven by Turkey’s desire for power. For example, Erdogan buys cheap Russian gas while supplying military aid to Ukraine. In July 2024, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov dismissed the idea of Erdogan mediating the Ukraine conflict. Similarly, in November, Lavrov criticized Erdogan for supplying Bayraktar drones to Ukraine. Putin also remembers when Erdogan shot down a Russian jet in 2015, seeking NATO’s protection afterward. Unlike Erdogan, Iran’s Khamenei is a dependable partner for Putin. Structurally, Turkey’s economy is vulnerable to Western sanctions, and pro-Western factions within Turkey have already attempted to overthrow Erdogan in 2016. If Turkey controlled Syria, pro-American forces taking over Turkey could pose a serious threat.

Lastly, Turkey lacks the capacity to control Syria. Iran, Russia, Hezbollah, and Assad’s army have struggled to achieve this, so it’s implausible that Turkey, backing a jihadist militia, could succeed. Moreover, Iran would heavily invest in reclaiming Syria.

What’s next? Rather than changing alliances, it benefits Putin to strengthen existing ones. Despite Hezbollah’s setbacks from Israel and Russia’s challenges from NATO in Ukraine, the likely outcome is a counteroffensive by Iran, Russia, Assad, and Hezbollah. This scenario suits the White House, as Syria’s continued destruction serves American interests. The U.S. has consistently opposed peace efforts, fueling the civil war while maintaining a base in Syria to counter Iranian missiles. In the end, Syria’s suffering seems endless.

Il Fatto Quotidiano, December 7, 2024