In the midst of breathtaking global developments, the behind-the-scenes bargaining between Washington and Moscow over the future of Ukraine, and most importantly, the ongoing genocide in Gaza, a news item was released that, although not prominently featured in the regional noise, is highly significant from a strategic perspective: the holding of a technical meeting between Turkish and Zionist regime officials to prevent tension and conflict in Syrian territory, hosted by the Republic of Azerbaijan. While this meeting appears to have a constructive goal, its content reveals a bitter reality: the continuation of occupation under the guise of cooperation and coordination.
The Turkish Ministry of Defense issued a statement emphasizing the need to end Israel's provocative attacks against Syria, while the Turkish Foreign Ministry simultaneously stressed the need for a technical mechanism to prevent misunderstandings with Israel. On the surface, these positions seem to be an effort to reduce tensions, but in reality, they conceal an alarming principle: the legitimation of the illegal presence of the two occupying players in the territory of an independent country.
Occupation in the Guise of Coordination
According to the principles of international law, the territorial integrity of countries must be respected. However, the two parties attending the Baku meeting, Turkey and the Zionist regime, are themselves the main perpetrators of violating this principle in Syria. Over the past decade, Turkey has occupied parts of northern Syria under the pretext of security concerns and in support of armed opposition groups, and continues to maintain its military presence despite the central government's objections. On the other hand, the Zionist regime, in clear violation of the 1974 agreement, not only targets Syrian military positions but also occupies the Damascus countryside and plunders its resources.
Under these circumstances, the announcement of a meeting to "prevent conflict" is merely an attempt to coordinate further occupation, rather than an effort to exit the crisis. If Turkey were truly concerned about Syria's territorial integrity, it would first need to clarify the status of its military presence. In practice, however, Ankara not only fails to withdraw from the occupied areas but also does not support the formation of a central government in northern Syria, instead collaborating only with groups that have a history of membership in organizations like Tahrir al-Sham or similar groups.
Russian Model or Legitimizing Occupation?
The Zionist officials' claim of following the model of cooperation with Russia is a clear attempt at making an incorrect comparison. Russia is present in Syria based on an official invitation from the Syrian government and has repeatedly warned against Tel Aviv's illegal actions. In contrast, Israel has not received any invitation from the Syrian government and has explicitly violated international law and disregarded past agreements. Therefore, any comparison between Russia's cooperation and the Zionist regime's actions is merely a deception aimed at justifying the continuation of occupation.
Interestingly, the Republic of Azerbaijan, which has not taken a clear stance in support of Syria's territorial integrity, has hosted this meeting without any prior diplomatic involvement in the Syrian issue. This suggests that Baku is being used as a tool to manage a larger geopolitical project in the Caucasus and West Asia, a project that, under the guise of discussing Syria, is actually pursuing different objectives.
Consolidating Occupation or Reducing Tensions?
Given the track record of the actors involved in this meeting, there is no indication of a strategic shift in addressing the Syrian crisis. Neither Turkey is willing to leave the occupied areas, nor is the Zionist regime intent on stopping its aggressions. From this perspective, the Baku meeting can be seen not as a step towards resolving the crisis, but rather as a form of "division of labor" and "consolidation of occupation lines" in Syrian territory. In other words, this meeting is more of an effort to prevent clashes between the two occupiers in pursuit of separate but coordinated interests, rather than a genuine attempt to reduce tensions.
Under these circumstances, the only option that can lead to true stability in Syria is the complete withdrawal of all illegal foreign forces from the country and respect for its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Until such a process begins, any negotiations or coordination between external actors will only reproduce the crisis and perpetuate instability, a crisis that not only affects Syria but also puts the entire region at risk of further tensions.
NOURNEWS