Turkey’s Health Minister Fahrettin Koca has become the embodiment of the country’s fight against the coronavirus. He urged everyone last week to “declare their own state of emergency” – possibly suggesting that the Turkish government was not prepared to impose an official curfew yet.

The coronavirus is turning a new page for both world politics and the economy, but, it seems we are not yet prepared to face the challenges

The COVID-19 pandemic is, first and foremost, a health risk. But we also rate various countries’ response to the crisis – like a stock market. In doing so, the main criterion is who was adequately prepared and whose response proved sufficient.

As China declares victory over the coronavirus, the World Health Organization (WHO) says Europe has become the pandemic’s epicenter. With Italy’s death toll on the rise, Western leaders have responded to the crisis in different ways. It is possible to argue that ideology, together with their respective health care systems’ total capacity and leadership styles, played some role there.

The coronavirus pandemic established, however, that we, as fellow humans, have a middle ground and certain shared responsibilities beyond self-interest and fear. No country can afford to isolate itself from the outside world. That path only leads to more poverty, conflict and bloodshed. What was simply a Chinese problem just weeks ago is now a truly global issue.

Since the emergence of the coronavirus epidemic in different parts of the world, many have argued that the response of this epidemic will influence various dimensions of the international system. There were debates about international actors and organizations and their potential role during this epidemic. In this column, for instance, the potential impact of the World Health Organization (WHO) will be discussed.

International focus has been on the Middle East for decades and particularly on Iran, Syria, Egypt, Iraq and Libya over the past several years. However, whatever is written about the Middle East, Russia is always part of the equation.

The March 5 agreement between Turkey and Russia put an end to the military confrontation in Idlib, Syria. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, shook hands on that deal to de-escalate what had become serious bilateral tensions. The 2018 Sochi agreement has thus been updated.

Turkey has been the main supporter of the Syrian opposition fighting the Bashar Assad regime. Ankara has also diligently protected innocent Syrian civilians living in the Idlib region. It has stood against the atrocities, the Assad regime attacks and the regime's main backers Russia and Iran. On one hand, Turkey has mobilized its deterrent military power in the region against the regime’s future attacks; on the other hand, Turkish officials and civil institutions initiated a campaign to provide food and shelter for civilians. Western countries have been reluctant to get involved in the humanitarian tragedy and security problem in the region.

After a six-hour meeting between leaders and technical committees, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his Russian counterpart announced a cease-fire for Syria's Idlib. During the meeting at the Kremlin, the presidents gave short speeches. The whole world followed the process as the decisions could trigger an escalation in violence while intensifying the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Syria. Turkey and Russia both wanted to end the civil war but were unwilling to concede their positions. For both Turkey and Russia, bilateral relations were at stake as well.

Since the outbreak of the Syrian civil war in 2011, Turkey has faced the gravest problems in the region regarding security, economics and refugees. That picture has not changed. At every turn, a new wave of issues knocks on Turkey’s door. That Europe and the U.S. have not taken initiatives required for a political transition in Syria is a major factor in this. Another leading cause is Russia’s desire to solve the crisis through military force. From the outset, Russia has deployed a course of destruction called the 'Grozny model." It is a policy consisting of three stages: besiege, destroy and rule. Russia has implemented this formula in many areas, particularly in Aleppo, which has wreaked extensive destruction and killed thousands of civilians.

The deal signed between Turkey and Russia eased the tension in Idlib by declaring a cease-fire once again. Yet, despite the positive intentions of both parties, the unreliable nature of the Syrian regime raises cautiousness while increasing the responsibility on the shoulders of the Turkish and Russian sides as guarantor states

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan visited Moscow this week to hold talks on the Idlib crisis. The world closely followed his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. All experts were sure that this would be the tensest meeting between the two leaders since the 2015 jet incident.

For days, both Syrian public opinion and the world have been discussing the question of “What is Turkey doing in Idlib, Syria?” If you are really curious about this question, you must have been born after 2015. Turkey has intervened in northern Syria for both humanitarian and security reasons due to a number of problems, such as nearly 4 million refugees coming to the country during the nine-year war, instability spreading from Syria and dozens of people killed in missile strikes on Turkish soil, which were launched from across the Syrian border.

It is distressing to witness the lack of European concern about the humanitarian disaster in Idlib and how Turkey has been abandoned in its fight for civilian safety

It has been more than eight years since the Syrian regime began one of the most brutal assaults against its own citizens, using every violent instrument at its disposal. The international community in these eight years stood idly by while the number of casualties and displaced people increased every day. The international bodies who should have been monitoring the situation stopped counting the number of people who died as a result of these atrocious attacks after half a million.

The recent escalation of violence between Turkey and the Assad regime in violation of the Sochi deal marks a significantly tense moment that may risk a deterioration of relations between Ankara and Moscow. Turkey has given an ultimatum to the Assad regime to withdraw its troops outside of the zone encircled by Turkey's military observation points until the end of February. So far, the Assad regime has resisted the idea of withdrawal and continued to expand further into the territory. However, Turkey expects its Russian counterparts to either convince or force the Assad regime to comply with the conditions laid out as part of the Sochi deal that was signed in September 2018.