World Press on Turkish-Syrian conflict (October 4, 2012)

World Press on Turkish-Syrian conflict (October 4, 2012)

The conflict between Turkey and Syria caused by a shell fired from the Syrian side that killed five civilians in Turkey and today's approval by the Turkish parliament to launch military actions against Syria is in the focus of the international press today. "Turkey’s Parliament Approves Further Military Action Against Syria" is an article published by the New York Times.

"While suicide bombers killed dozens on Wednesday as violence surged in Syria’s largest city, Aleppo, it was the cross-border strike that raised the stakes in a civil war that has left tens of thousands dead and forced more than a million people from their homes. The war has defied exhaustive diplomatic efforts by the global community. The events may increase pressure for the West to take military action, something Turkey has supported. The United States and its allies have balked at engaging in another armed conflict in the Muslim world that would be far riskier than NATO’s intervention in Libya, which helped oust Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi," the article reads.
"But in the fog of war that has settled over Syria, where allegiances and motives are uncertain and a bloody stalemate has taken hold, some observers said they could not help wondering if the episode had been orchestrated by one side or another."
The Washington Post reacted on the events today with an article "Turkey authorizes military action in Syria after mortar attack that killed civilians." The author of the article, Liz Sly, notes that "Turkey has shown a willingness in the past to send troops into neighboring countries to address perceived threats to its safety. Specifically, it repeatedly sent forces into Iraq to combat Kurdish guerrillas who had struck at Turkish targets." However, the Turks "have expressed little appetite for a war with Syria, and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has no interest in provoking international military intervention in a domestic conflict that he still believes he can win."

"The strike followed more than a year of growing hostility between Turkey and Syria, former allies who have turned into bitter foes since Erdogan joined his Western allies in calls for Assad to step down," the article concludes.
British newspaper The Telegraph today published an analytical article by Richard Spenser entitled "Analysis: could Turkey's decision to shell Syria mean intervention is on its way?"
"It may be that the Turks are hoping to sucker the Syrians into a response which will justify a concerted effort to finish off a regime that Ankara - and just about everybody else except Iran - feels is a paper tiger whose exit is now the only possible solution to this messy, otherwise unending civil war. Even Russia is now fed up with President Bashar al-Assad, according to repeated rumours from Moscow. The only thing holding it back from turning publicly on its former client is the fear of handing a moral victory to America. Turkey, with or without western support, could almost certainly defeat the already weakened Assad regime. Such an effort would establish Ankara’s credentials as the new power of the Middle East, leapfrogging the claims of wealthy but ultimately eccentric Gulf states like Qatar and Saudi Arabia. It would also allow it to reshape to its satisfaction a neighbour whose rebellious Kurds are a source of constant concern to its own security," Richard Spenser writes.
"Nato, of course, issued strong words of support. But there is still little indication that the United States, Britain and France, the key members of the anti-Gaddafi coalition last year, have any intention of turning their fire on Syria."

”In non-diplomatic language, that reads like a suggestion to Mr Erdogan to cool it. He probably will, and it will be a relief to most of his allies. The slow death of Syria, meanwhile, will continue," the author of the article concludes.