• Research
  • Politika
  • About
Carnegie Russia Eurasia center logoCarnegie lettermark logo
  • Donate
Ankara and Washington Need an Ambitious Approach to Syria

Source: Getty

Article
Carnegie Europe

Ankara and Washington Need an Ambitious Approach to Syria

Turkey and the United States should promote a regional initiative on Syria that includes Iran if they are to prevent the crisis from further undermining regional stability.

Link Copied
By Sinan Ülgen
Published on May 16, 2013

The time has come for more ambitious policy responses to the increasingly intractable Syrian civil war. When U.S. President Barack Obama and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan meet in the White House today, Ankara should champion a regional initiative on Syria that includes Iran. The two leaders will have to consider this difficult option if they are to prevent the Syrian crisis from further undermining regional stability and the international order.

The conflict is already reverberating across the region. The spillover was painfully clear on May 11 when car bombs in the Turkish town of Reyhanlı, near the Syrian border, led to more than 50 casualties—the deadliest terrorist attack in the country’s history. The Turkish authorities have been quick to hold the Syrian regime responsible, but many Turks blame the government for having entangled Turkey in this deadly conflict.

The attack laid bare the risks for Turkey of its aggressive policy on Syria. Still, the Turkish people are calling for retaliation. An angry Turkish public increasingly cites Israel’s alleged raid near Damascus as an example of how Turkey should respond.

Ankara has refused to act unilaterally thus far, despite stalwartly opposing the Syrian regime. But the Turkish government has vowed to seek revenge for the terrorist act. Turkey’s reaction is likely to combine tactical and political approaches.

Tactically, Ankara may authorize a special operation targeting those behind the attack. When a car bomb exploded at the Turkish-Syrian border a month ago, Turkish special forces went deep into Syria to bring the culprits back to Turkey. A similar operation could be staged, if for no other reason than to placate public opinion.

In Washington, Prime Minister Erdoğan will seek support for his demands for regime change in Syria. He will press President Obama for a more interventionist U.S. policy that includes supplying arms to the opposition and the establishment and enforcement of a no-fly zone.

But Turkish policymakers are aware that there is still little hope for direct international intervention. At the same time, the supply of weapons to the opposition is becoming increasingly fraught as the rebels are co-opted by Islamists.

Regional ownership of any proposed strategy is indispensable for opening the door to a negotiated, nonmilitary settlement of the Syrian dispute. Otherwise, the external and destabilizing influences on Syria can be neither contained nor mitigated.

Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey have already set up a regional platform to tackle the politics of a lasting settlement in Syria. This is the only setup that can address the core interests of these four countries when it comes to both Syria and regional security. But the so-called quartet has only been able to meet once, as Saudi Arabia refused to associate with Iran.

Acting jointly, Ankara and Washington must convince Riyadh to take its place in the foursome despite the presence of Tehran. Yet, for this option to work, the United States also has to accept Iran’s open involvement in this regional equation.

A clear risk of such an approach would be the strengthening of Tehran’s hand in the P5+1 negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program. That is because arguably, the West’s reliance on Iran in Syria would undermine its ability to exert diplomatic pressure on Tehran elsewhere.

But the reality is that Iran has much to lose from a protracted conflict in Syria that visibly empowers armed Islamic extremists. The underlying incentive for Iran to take part in the quartet is Tehran’s fear of the emergence of Sunni extremism in Syria. In the early part of the last decade, Tehran engaged in direct talks with Washington with the objective of containing the Taliban and eradicating al Qaeda.

Now, the United States and Turkey must focus on the common objectives in Syria. While Syria is imploding, rising Syrian sectarianism is spilling over into neighboring countries and threatening the unity of Iraq and Lebanon. And as each day passes without a settlement strategy, the international community’s credibility is undermined. A regional initiative is urgently needed to counter these trends. If left unchecked, the Syrian crisis has the potential to unravel neighboring states already eaten away by the demons of sectarian strife.

About the Author

Sinan Ülgen

Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe

Sinan Ülgen is a senior fellow at Carnegie Europe in Brussels, where his research focuses on Turkish foreign policy, transatlantic relations, international trade, economic security, and digital policy.

    Recent Work

  • Paper
    From Trade Dependence to Geopolitical Leverage: The EU in an Era of Weaponized Interdependence

      Sinan Ülgen

  • Commentary
    The EU Equivocating on Turkey Is Bad Geopolitics

      Sinan Ülgen

Sinan Ülgen
Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe
Sinan Ülgen
Middle EastEuropeNorth AmericaTürkiyeUnited StatesIranNorth AfricaEgyptSyriaSaudi ArabiaSecurityPolitical ReformMilitaryForeign PolicyNuclear Policy

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Multiple Wars Are Ruining Central Asia’s Efforts to Diversify Its Trade Routes

    This year’s wars have made alternative routes to transit through Russia no less risky for Central Asian countries.

      Galiya Ibragimova

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    How to Ensure That Europe-Russia Talks Do Not Fail

    Reestablishing a dialogue with Moscow is not a goal in its own right. The goal is to guarantee the independence of Ukraine and the peace and security of Europe.

      Arkady Moshes

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Belarus Is a Test Case for Ukraine’s New Role in the Region

    Ukraine’s increasingly confrontational posture on Belarus reflects Kyiv’s effort to shape the emerging regional order in Eastern Europe. Kyiv wants to limit European normalization with Minsk—and any future rapprochement with Russia.

      Balázs Jarábik

  • Paper
    Loyal but Powerless: The Downgrading of Russia’s Elite

    The ruling elites in contemporary Russia are not a political class, but a community of managers who are not subject to competition or public accountability. The state is becoming an operating apparatus without any internal autonomy.

      Alexandra Prokopenko

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    What Does Pashinyan’s Parliamentary Victory Mean for Armenia’s Future?

    Pashinyan’s pro-European party has been re-elected with a decisive victory. But the pro-Russian opposition could still slow Armenia’s progress toward peace with Azerbaijan and rapprochement with Europe.

      Mikayel Zolyan

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Carnegie Russia Eurasia logo, white
  • Research
  • Politika
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.