Due to the U.S.'s unlawful and arbitrary policies within the post-Cold War framework of its new world order, the occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq traumatized both the U.S. government and the American people. Under the influence of these erroneous policies, U.S. foreign policy on the Syrian civil war has turned out to be irresolute. While the Middle East drifts into a state of chaos due to the U.S.'s hesitant attitude and the European Union faces a massive immigration wave, the Western alliance is now face to face with unrestrained Russian aggression.

The Syrian people's desire for a better future and a democratic regime was eclipsed first by the al-Qaida and then DAESH. What is worse, the success of the Syrian opposition forces was prevented by Iran, which has become more royalist than the king in Syria. In order to open the political deadlock both in its domestic and international affairs, Iran abused the Syrian civil war.

In the beginning of the Syrian crisis, Iran and Turkey could have managed to stabilize Syria by acting concertedly in the framework of their regional interests as two of the greatest states in the Middle East. In my conversation with an Iranian foreign policy expert at an international meeting, I underlined the importance of possible cooperation between Iran and Turkey: "For 300 years, the English have been the main playmaker in the region. Now, two great states might resolve the internal trouble of Syria and thus give hope to other Muslim countries for the resolution of their long-standing problems." I emphasized that the present chaos in Syria has become a threat to the perpetuity of both Turkey and Iran. However, Iran has taken the opposite course:

1. In order to sustain the Syrian regime, Iran abused Hezbollah, the pupil of Muslims, for murdering opposition Muslims.

2. Despite organizing massive military operations, Iran could not have succeeded against the Syrian opposition forces.

3. Eventually, Iran brought Russia as an occupying power right into the heart of the Syrian civil war.

4. What is more dangerous, Iran has prepared the political ground for the Stalinist PKK to flourish in Syria from where they committed bloodthirsty attacks against Turkey.

Last week, the Democratic Union Party (PYD) declared its independence in northern Syria, which connotes the disintegration of the country's integrity. Yet such an unstable and divided Syria poses a great threat not only to Turkey, but also Iran.

Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran's foreign minister, during his recent visit of Turkey said: "Iranians will not forget the support of Turkey for Iran in its difficult days of international sanctions."

Indeed, Turkey got Iran off the hook in its nuclear trouble with the West. During the Syrian civil war, Iran has taken almost each and every step that is plainly against Turkish interests. Behind the present rapprochement between Iran and Turkey there lies a common re-evaluation of their harmonious interests in the region.

Kurdish nationalism particularly puts Iranian interests in jeopardy. In this respect, Iran clearly realized the unreliable character of the PKK that vacillates between extremes according to fluctuations in the international picture. Moreover, Iran also realized that the Sunni countries harshly stood against the radical project of the Shiite crescent.

While Iran and Turkey, which had the capability to determine the future of the region by their own wills five years ago and which share common interests and risks in the region, have begun to negotiate. They have to overcome massive chaos and destruction. In addition, Iran has to persuade Russia in every step that it takes in the Syrian civil war.