But the uncertain future would be exactly the motivation I would need if I was Turkey to try to peacefully and strategically resolve the differences with the Kurds now. I think nations and peoples are more likely to be peaceful with each other if they have a history of mutually beneficial economic relationships. Such a relationship between Turkey and a Kurdish state could serve as a good foundation for on-going peace after the oil is gone.
I agree that Turkey is unlikely to do anything radical or bold in this area. But I think it is unfortunate that Turkey can't or isn't permitted to play a larger role in the Middle East. Because of and despite of their historic role — the Ottoman Empire — in the past, I feel they could serve an important stabilizing role in parts of the Middle East such as Kurdistan.
Again, I am likely to be way off base here with my assumptions.
When we're discussing degrees of power, democracy, soft force, human rights, etc., in the region, we can't forget that some countries are big, such as Turkey, and they have powerful militaries, and can defend their interests. Others, such as Syria for example, are relatively weak and have become international pariahs for their support of terrorism. However, they too believe they are defending their interests--by what they term the best means possible. So, in that sense, it's hard to see how Turkey and Syria could establish common ground. Turkey has historically seen itself as a power broker not because it is in the Middle East, but because it girds Russia and Eastern Europe, and it lies on a transcontinental root for resources. Other than providing airbases for Western militaries, Turkey really hasn't been a lynchpin in Middle East discussions.
But I will say that the new Turkish PM Erdogan is the first in many years that has aggressively sought close relations with the Arab world. In Turkey sometimes people perceive these new relationships as threats because of Erdogan's party's background with Islam.
