On February 1, Reuters found itself, dramatically speculating over a possible clash between the Syria army and pro-Turkish forces in northern Syria:
A rapid advance by the Syrian army towards the Islamic State-held city of al-Bab risks sparking a confrontation with Turkey as Damascus seeks to stop its neighbor penetrating deeper into a strategically important area of northern Syria.
Northern Syria is one of the most complicated battlefields of the multi-sided Syrian war, with Islamic State now being fought there by the Syrian army, Turkey and its rebel allies, and an alliance of U.S.-backed Syrian militias.
In less than two weeks, Syrian army units have moved to within 6 km (4 miles) of al-Bab, a city that is also being targeted in a campaign waged by the Turkish military and its allies, groups fighting under the Free Syrian Army banner.
A source in the military alliance fighting in support of President Bashar al-Assad told Reuters on Wednesday the Syrian army aimed to reach al-Bab and was ready “to clash with the FSA fighting” alongside the Turkish army if necessary.
It seems Reuters’ editorial board failed to follow the recent developments over the Syrian crisis and now is urgently attempting to realize what is going on over Al-Bab.
Fortunately, the answer is here:
Dear Reuters, probably, you read some news about the so-called “Astana talks” which involved representatives of the Syrian government, the “Syrian opposition, Turkey, Iran and Russia. This was a clear indication of the Syrian-Turkish-Russian-Iranian cooperation over the conflict and a confirmation of unofficial agreements made by these sides.
Joint airstrikes by Russian and Turkish warplanes and the synchronized advances by pro-government and pro-Turkish forces in the area are a part of these agreements. The sides can have disagreements over the solution of the conflict, but they clearly agreed to fight ISIS in northern Syria and are not going to fight each other there.