United States Institute of Peace • www.usip.org • Tel. 202.457.1700 • Fax. 202.429.6063

UNITED STates institute of peace

© USIP 2011 • All rights reserved.

“For Ankara, Syria was 

going to be the proving 

ground for Turkey’s moderating effects on its neighbors 

and the place to showcase 

Turkey’s role as a kind of 

regional reform whisperer.”

October 25, 2011

From Endearment to Estrangement: 

Turkey’s Interests and Concerns 

in Syria

Summary

•	 Turkish relations with the Syrian regime have developed at a dizzying pace over the last 15 

years, going from outright hostility to close cooperation and back to estrangement.

•	 Prior to the current uprising, Turkey looked at Syria as a cornerstone in its plans to become a 

political, economic and “moral” leader in the Middle East.

•	 Ankara has deep concerns regarding developments in Syria, particularly in terms of the 

domestic repercussions of any Syrian political instability or social upheaval.

•	 These concerns shaped Ankara’s initial caution in completely breaking with Damascus and 

could still limit the scope of Turkish action against the Assad regime.

Relations between Turkey and Syria have developed at a dramatic and even dizzying pace over 

the last decade, both rapidly improving and—in recent months—rapidly worsening. Despite the 

recent strains in the two countries’ relations due to the Assad regime’s crackdown of its opponents, 

Syria remains for Turkey a dominant actor in its plans to become a political, economic and selfdescribed “moral” leader in the Middle East. At the same time, Ankara has deep and practical 

concerns over developments in Syria that have little to do with its regional aspirations and more 

to do with the perceived domestic repercussions of Syrian political instability or social upheaval, 

particularly in terms of economic losses with respect to the Kurdish issue. 

While these goals were instrumental in driving Turkey’s diplomatic outreach to Damascus in 

recent years, concerns about the domestic impact of the uprising in Syria have been the prime 

force in shaping Ankara’s caution about making a complete break with the Assad regime and 

about the use of stronger tools at its disposal, such as sanctions or the threat of military force, to 

rein in the regime’s brutal response to the protests it is facing. 

In addition to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s verbal lashing of the Assad regime, Ankara 

has expressed its willingness to introduce tougher sanctions against Damascus. But the extent of 

those sanctions could again be limited by concerns about their domestic impact in Turkey. 

From Antagonism to Partnership and Back

Tensions between Turkey and Syria run as far back as the 1930’s, when the disputed Hatay, or 

Alexandretta, region, claimed by both Turkey and Syria as their own, was incorporated into the 

Yigal Schleifer

E-mail: yschleifer@gmail.com

Phone: 202.543.2184

peaceBrieF109
© USIP 2011 • All rights reserved.

From Endearment to Estrangement: Turkey’s Interests and 

Concerns in Syria page 2 • PB 109 • October 25, 2011

nascent Turkish state by referendum. During the Cold War, meanwhile, the two countries found 

themselves on opposite sides of that era’s ideological divide. Relations between Turkey and Syria 

truly reached a breaking point in 1998, when Ankara threatened military action against Damascus 

because of its support for the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and its sheltering of the 

organization’s leader, Abdullah Ocalan.

Although Turkey’s improved relations with Syria are usually credited to the ruling Justice and 

Development Party (AKP) and its “zero problems with neighbors” policy, the groundwork for 

that policy was put in place during the late 1990’s by the late Ismail Cem, as the former foreign 

minister. During Cem’s tenure Turkey’s problematic relations with Greece normalized and began 

to take off. Even the improvement of relations with Syria and Iran trace their roots to this period. 

The first major breakthrough in Turkish-Syrian relations in recent years occurred in 2000, when 

arch-secularist president Ahmet Necdet Sezer went to Damascus for the funeral of longtime Syrian 

leader Hafez Al-Assad.

Still, the warming of relations between the two countries gained significant momentum under 

the watch of the AKP and its chief foreign policy architect, Ahmet Davutoglu. Bashar Al-Assad 

visited Turkey in 2004, marking the first such visit ever by a Syrian president. In that same year, 

Ankara and Damascus signed a free trade agreement and a strategic partnership treaty. The two 

countries went even further in 2009, establishing a visa-free travel regime and holding a previously 

unimaginable three-day joint military exercise. In yet another sign of deepening ties, Turkey announced the creation of an economic council to work toward creating a free-trade zone between 

itself, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. 

Turkish Interests versus Ankara’s Ambitions

The corollary to Ankara’s “zero problems” approach is “maximum trade.” At its heart, Turkey’s effort 

to minimize conflict in its immediate neighborhood—an effort that, admittedly, is now being 

tested by the fallout from the Arab Spring and other regional developments—is about creating an 

environment that is conducive to the flowering of Turkish trade and the expansion of the Turkish 

economy. In that sense, one of Ankara’s main interests vis-à-vis Syria is to use the country as an 

outlet for Turkish exporters, particularly from the highly entrepreneurial regions bordering Syria, 

such as Gaziantep and Hatay. The statistics from the last few years demonstrate the success of this 

policy: Turkish exports to Syria skyrocketed from $266 million in 2002 to $1.6 billion in 2010. The 

abolishing of visa requirements, meanwhile, has led to an increasing number of Syrians crossing 

the border, especially to shop for Turkish goods. And the number of Syrian tourists visiting Turkey 

has skyrocketed from 122,000 in 2002 to under 900,000 last year

On the political front, Turkey’s interests in Syria connect to Damascus’ close relations with Iran. 

While Turkey has been working towards improving its political and economic relations with Iran, 

the two countries remain rivals in terms of their regional influence and Syria can be seen as one of 

the arenas where this rivalry is playing out. Turkish officials, upon encountering American resistance when they initially began their outreach to the Assad regime, frequently justified their efforts 

by explaining that improving Turkish ties with Syria would blunt Tehran’s influence there. 

In a 2005 State Department cable released by Wikileaks, American diplomats in Ankara took a 

rather dim view of Turkey’s approach to Syria, describing it as a mixture of “wishful thinking and 

a form of neo-Ottoman nostalgia.” While Turkish officials would obviously object to that characterization, it’s clear that Ankara’s intensive efforts to improve ties with Damascus went much deeper 

than simple economic or political interests. For the AKP’s top leadership, Erdogan and Davutoglu 

in particular, Syria was going to be the proving ground for Turkey’s moderating effects on its 
© USIP 2011 • All rights reserved.

From Endearment to Estrangement: Turkey’s Interests and 

Concerns in Syria page 3 • PB 109 • October 25, 2011

neighbors and the place to showcase Turkey’s role as a kind of regional reform whisperer. Ties to 

Syria were seen as the cornerstone of a new regional order, one based on more open borders and 

the free flow of goods and people (some Turkish pundits and officials even started talking about 

the creation of a “Shamgen” zone—a term that fuses the name of the old Ottoman Sham province, which encompassed modern-day Syria, with Europe’s visa-free Shengen area). 

A Test for the “No Problems” Policy?

Turkey’s initially slow and ambiguous response to the brutal events unfolding in Syria has been 

shaped in part by Ankara’s inability to let go of its own vision of itself as the country that would to 

crack the code of the Assad regime. But that failure to respond decisively has also been shaped by 

concerns that unrest in Syria could affect its interests, both regionally and domestically. 

On the regional level, Turkey is worried about the opportunities that the uprising in Syria might 

offer its rivals, particularly Iran and Saudi Arabia. From Ankara’s perspective, completely cutting 

off ties to the Assad regime provides Iran with an opportunity to increase its influence in Syria by 

filling the space once occupied by Turkey. On the other hand, the possibility of the demise of the 

Alawite Assad regime and its replacement by a Sunni-dominated government provides Saudi 

Arabia with a golden opportunity to ramp up its influence in Syria, perhaps at Turkey’s expense.

Beyond these regional issues, Ankara’s response to the developments in Syria appears to be 

shaped more significantly by concerns about their domestic impact on Turkey. As Erdogan said in 

early August, and much to the dismay of the Syrian authorities: “We do not consider the problems 

in Syria a question of foreign policy but a domestic matter.”

One of Turkey’s main worries is the economic impact of Syrian instability and the loss of access to 

the country for Turkish exporters, who see economic opportunity there as well as valuable transit 

routes in Syria for other parts of the Middle East. But Turkey is more concerned about how Syrian 

instability might affect its own Kurdish problem. As Ankara sees it, any significant unrest among 

Syria’s Kurdish population could lead to problems among Turkey’s own Kurds, particularly in the 

already tense and predominantly-Kurdish southeast region. Syrian instability could also make Syria 

an ideal place for PKK activity once again. But with its own problems on the Kurdish front, the last 

thing Ankara wants right now is to see is something that could further inflame the Kurdish issue.

Because of these concerns, Ankara appears to be terrified by the thought of a rapid disintegration of the Assad regime that could create a power vacuum and might allow Syria’s Kurds to carve 

out a more independent space. Instead, it has been pushing for what would be a gradual easing 

from power of the Assad regime and the implementation of reforms that, in many ways, would 

create a state that emulates many of the political and economic reforms made in recent years by 

Turkey itself. Although it refrains from using the term, Ankara in many ways, would like to see the 

“Turkish model” employed in Syria. 

But Ankara’s ability to influence events in Syria—at least through Damascus—is rapidly diminishing. Turkey had initially tried to use its close relations with Assad to convince him to institute 

quick reforms and heed calls of protesters. But those efforts quickly proved to be fruitless, and 

the line to Damascus was shut off as soon as Ankara’s rhetoric against Assad heated up. Ankara 

is now clearly working to exert some influence on events by moving toward more punitive 

measures. It’s hosting meetings of Syrian opposition groups, for example, and intercepted arms 

shipment headed to Syria. And, recent Turkish military exercises near the Syrian border hint to 

Damascus that some form of military intervention isn’t off the table. Turkish officials have also 

promised that stronger sanctions targeting the regime will be forthcoming, even if they are as 

yet unspecified. 
© USIP 2011 • All rights reserved.

USIP provides the analysis, training and 

tools that prevent and end conflicts, 

promotes stability and professionalizes 

the field of peacebuilding.

For media inquiries, contact the office 

of Public Affairs and Communications, 

202.429.4725

2301 Constitution Ave., NW

Washington, D.C. 20037

About This Brief

This brief is part of a series 

examining the regional dimensions 

of Syria’s popular uprising. The 

Institute invited leading experts 

from the U.S. and the Middle East 

to identify key vectors of influence 

Syria’s neighbors are bringing to 

bear on the conflict, to forecast 

how the situation there will affect 

the regional balance of power and 

to examine how the opposition 

and the Syria regime are responding to these regional dynamics. 

Through this series the Institute 

aims to provide analysis and 

tools for on-the-ground conflict 

management in support of political 

transitions across the Arab world. 

The series was edited by USIP’s 

Steven Heydemann, senior 

adviser for Middle East Initiatives, 

and Scott Lasensky, a senior 

program officer.

This study on Turkey was written by 

Yigal Schleifer, a Washington-based 

journalist and analyst covering 

Turkey. He was based in Istanbul 

between 2002 and 2010 as a correspondent for the The Christian Science Monitor and Eurasianet.org. 

He is also the author of “Istanbul 

Calling” (istanbulcalling.blogspot.

com), a blog about Turkish foreign 

and domestic affairs. 

But those actions will likely be limited due to Turkey’s concerns about their domestic blowback 

and the absence of an obvious international consensus on how to punish the Assad regime. For 

now Ankara risks becoming a spectator, as violence engulfs a crucial neighbor and a regime that, 

up until recently, was thought to be among its most important allies.

From Endearment to Estrangement: Turkey’s Interests and 

Concerns in Syria page 4 • PB 109 • October 25, 2011