Israeli media express concerns that the PKK laying down arms will negatively affect Israeli interests by altering the regional balance of power, particularly in relation to Syria and Turkish influence. The implications of this shift may lead to a constriction of Israeli operations and require new diplomatic approaches from the U.S. regarding Syria.
Recent reports from Israeli media suggest that the laying down of arms by the PKK, a designated terrorist organization, may jeopardize Israel’s strategic interests. It is asserted that this shift could initiate significant regional transformations likely to adversely affect Israel’s influence. Haaretz newspaper analyzed how a cease-fire could alter Syria’s power dynamics and threaten Israel’s position there, especially given the previously open airspace for Israeli operations coordinated with Russia under the Baath regime.
The analysis warns that an increase in Turkish influence may restrict Israeli operations, particularly in Syrian airspace. Additionally, there are concerns that the PKK’s Syrian offshoot, the YPG, could find itself losing U.S. backing and therefore compelled to heed the directives of the Syrian government. This scenario raises implications for Turkey’s involvement in northern Syria and might portray Israel as an “occupying power in southern Syria” on the global stage.
Channel 14 reported that recent developments signify the onset of a new era in the region, while Yedioth Ahronoth remarked that a potential agreement between the YPG and Damascus would considerably affect Turkey’s diplomatic posture. Similarly, The Jerusalem Post indicated that a shift in U.S. policy regarding Syria may force the PKK to negotiate with the Syrian administration.
These discussions have emerged in the wake of the PKK’s official cease-fire declaration following a significant appeal by its incarcerated leader, Abdullah Öcalan, urging the group to dismantle and conclude over forty years of insurgency. Such a decision is anticipated to have profound ramifications across the region, including potential alterations in Turkey’s relations with neighboring states.
Meanwhile, former U.S. ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford, articulated in Foreign Affairs that Washington should aid Syria by withdrawing its forces and fostering cooperation with the new Damascus government in combating Daesh. In his article titled “America Can Best Help Syria By Getting Out,” he posited that post-Bashar Assad, the U.S. could collaborate with a more robust, effective government rather than the YPG.
Ford emphasized that engaging with the Syrian government may yield better local support compared to reliance on the YPG. He advocated for dialogue between the Trump administration and Damascus to discuss deploying Syrian forces in regions contending with Daesh, potentially sharing intelligence. He concluded, “Public activism, reinforced by the rule of law and the protection of political and personal freedoms, is the only way Syria will build a genuine democracy. It will be slow and messy, and it will, above all, be an issue for Syrians to resolve.”
In summary, recent Israeli media analyses highlight concerns that the PKK’s decision to lay down arms may adversely impact Israel’s geopolitical interests in the region. The potential shift in Syria’s power balance could impose significant challenges for Israel, particularly regarding airspace control. Additionally, the changing dynamics with the YPG and Turkish influence could further complicate matters for Israel and its diplomatic positioning. Prominent voices like Robert Ford advocate for a strategic withdrawal of U.S. forces to foster local partnerships in Syria, which may realign the dynamics further.
Original Source: www.dailysabah.com
