Everybody knows the joint objective of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and US President Barack Obama is “Syria without Assad.” Where they diverged was not the objective but on how to achieve that objective.

Until their May 16 meeting at the White House, it was possible to speak plainly on how the two leaders differed on ways and means of reaching the goal of “Syria without Assad." In recent days, their different views appeared as contrasts.

Their difference was distinct above all in what kind of a solution they supported in Syria. The uprising in Syria first turned to a civil war and could well be tending toward a regional conflict. But the Baathist regime was still standing, with no indication that it would be going away anytime soon.

Ankara was nevertheless persisting on a military solution and continued to advocate creation of “secure zones” that could signify partial occupation of Syria. Washington, on the other hand, had never warmed to the idea of a military intervention, especially one that it would have to lead and had good reasons to avoid. The latest move was Washington’s giving priority to a political/diplomatic solution anchored on a joint understanding reached between US Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, in their May 7 meeting in Moscow. In Washington’s approach, assistance and support for the opposition was to facilitate such a solution.