I speculated (and admitted the dots I was connecting were sparse) that it could have something to do with rumors of Iraqi chemical weapons going to northeast Syria before and perhaps even after the fall of Saddam's regime.
But it might just be concerns over Syria's Kurds:
Kurds in the north of Syria say they have taken control of most of the region's major towns and cities from government forces. Turkey fears the twin threats of the Syrian civil conflict spilling over the frontier along with a potential escalation of its internal war against Kurdish separatists.
So far, Syria's Kurds say they just want freedom within a unified Syria. Wise words. Ambitions greater than that can cause unwanted attention. But who knows what they will think if Syria collapses anyway?
Turkey does not want Syria to break up just for that reason. Iraq wouldn't want Syria to break up if it provides a magnet to Iraq's Kurdish region to secede from Iraq and join up with Syria's Kurds.
Any more than Iraq would like Anbar to join with Syrian Sunni Arabs in eastern Syria--although I don't know if that is practically possible since there isn't the cross-border ties that shared Kurdish oppression provides. Borders may be artificial, but after so long, separation is no less real on either side of that border.
Iraqi Kurds would surely like to help brethren across the border--but you never know what deals they might have cut with the Turks.
And we'd be interested in keeping a lid on the whole potentially explosive problem.
So there is plenty of reason to draw everyone's attention to northeast Syria without my pet concern raising its head at all.
I do have to wonder if the prospect of Syria breaking up would compel Turkey to send in conventional forces to topple the Assad regime in order to help the Sunni rebels emerge victorious in Syria rather than just emerge victorious in whatever part of Syria Assad decides not to contest.
