Turkey, which borders Syria, said Sunday it would send its foreign minister to Damascus on Tuesday to deliver a strong message against the crackdown on the protesters. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said his country's patience was running thin and that Turkey could not remain a bystander to the violence.
Syrian military operations against civilians continue to increase the death toll. Turkey is getting fed up with it.
Perhaps Turkey was just opposed to interventions with lower odds of success. Turkey might well push into Syria on a broad front to set up a safe zone where Syrians can flee government violence without entering Turkey.
Or would Turkey go for broke and actually drive all the way to Damascus? That seems unlikely, but once Turkish troops are inside Syria, who knows what further steps might seem incremental once the big step to intervention is made?
What would the bulk of the shaky army do if the Turks invade? Rally to defend the home country? Or take advantage of a safe zone to desert?
Assad doesn't just have to outlast the will of his people to resist while dying; he has to look over his shoulder at the Turks who could tire of the disorder and violence at any moment.
UPDATE: Huh. The Saudis, who are usually very cautious types, are warning the Syrians:
King Abdullah, an absolute ruler like Assad, broke Arab silence and demanded an end to the bloodshed on Monday, saying he was recalling his country's ambassador from Damascus.
"What is happening in Syria is not acceptable for Saudi Arabia," he said in a written statement read out on Al Arabiya satellite television.
"Syria should think wisely before it's too late and issue and enact reforms that are not merely promises but actual reforms," he said. "Either it chooses wisdom on its own or it will be pulled down into the depths of turmoil and loss."
So what the heck does that mean?
Saudi Arabia didn't break with Iran during the Iran-Iraq War until late in the game when American-led naval forces confronted Iran in the Persian Gulf. The Saudis even used their military to confront Iran then. Do Saudi words mean somebody's actions are pending?
UPDATE: Via Instapundit, Berlinski asks "with whose generals does Turkey plan to threaten Assad?"
With some of the rest, is my answer. Russia managed to decide to attack Finland in 1939 despite their severe purges of the military. The Turkish military may be demoralized, but it is capable of advancing 20 kilometers into Syria and holding their ground against whatever Syria can scrape up against them.
What I find more interesting is Berlinski's reporting of this:
Iran has threatened to retaliate against Turkey if it interferes. It can, and everyone knows it.
Which might explain Saudi Arabia's declaration on Syria. Even if NATO can't be trusted to defend Turkey if Iran attacks them (and I can't imagine NATO failing to come to Turkey's aid in some fashion), Iran might immediately have a two-front war if they retaliate against Turkey.
Indeed, if the Turks are thinking of intervening, they should probably do it soon while we still have 6 combat brigades in Iraq to at least give the Iranians some reason to worry about us.
What Iran could do to Turkey, other than terrorism, I don't know. Their raw military power is pretty even. But Turkey would be on defense and the terrain is pretty bad out there on the border. Iran couldn't do much. And if it is to be a contest in the air, Turkey wins that hands down.
And I'll say again that the Turkish government has an interest in keeping their army busy against a foreign threat rather than thinking that they really should strike back after all the arrests they've endured.
That such a decision could spiral into a general war as Saudi Arabia leads the Gulf countries into a war on Turkey's side would not be a factor in staying their hand.
