Middle East
Transition from ‘non-state actors’ to interstate relations in Syria
Those who oppose normalization with Syria: The United States, the Pentagon-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which is active in Idlib and Aleppo outskirts and which Turkey considers a terrorist organization, some groups within the Free Syrian Army (FSA) …
U.S. Department spokesman Ned Price said: “We do not support countries upgrading their relations or expressing support to rehabilitate the brutal dictator Bashar al-Assad.” But let us note that there have been no loud objections from senior U.S. officials, senators, and European capitals. Çavuşoğlu, who is set to visit the United States on January 18, said, “The United States did not say ‘Why do you hold meetings?’ but we understand that they oppose to normalization.”
From the side of Syrian organizations, Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, leader of the HTS terror coalition, released a four-minute video titled ‘We will not compromise.’ “Talks between the Syrian regime and its Russian ally with the Turkish side represent a serious deviation from our goals,” he said.
The Syrian Democratic Council, which serves as the political framework of the separatist structure in Syria (YPG/PYD/SDF), also called on the “opposition” to the Ankara-Damascus alliance to unite: “We call on the forces of revolution and opposition to oppose and destroy the alliance between Turkey and Damascus, to unite against tyranny and those who sell the blood of Syrians for their interests.”
Abdullah Gedo of the Syrian Kurdish National Council (ENKS), withing the circle of the Iraqi Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), said the Syrian opposition would be uncomfortable with taking Ankara-Damascus rapprochement to the political level.
Protests were held in many FSA and HTS-controlled settlements in the north of Syria under oath of allegiance to the so-called ‘Syrian revolution.’
The remaining “Syrian opposition”
Minister of Foreign Affairs Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu met with the President of the Syrian National Coalition Al-Meslet, the President of the Syrian Negotiation Commission Bader Jamous and the Prime Minister of the Syrian Interim Government Abdurrahman Mustafa. “We reiterated our support for the Syrian opposition and the Syrian people in line with the U.N. Security Council Resolution 2254,” he said.
It is possible to infer some sort of uneasiness from Salem Al-Meslet’s statement, “Turkey is a strong ally of the Syrian revolution and opposition forces. I expect Turkey will remain so in all international decisions on the Syrian issue, especially the Geneva Resolutions 2118 and 2254.”
Resolution 2254 calls for the formation of a “unity government” to be followed by elections. Damascus, however, is not willing to give administration space to opposition groups that are no longer able to seize the state with their armed forces.
Although adjectives such as ‘Prime Minister of the Interim Government’ are used, this political fiction has no practical equivalent in Syria. Although it seems to be one of Ankara’s main priorities for these groups to find a place in a possible Syrian peace, apparently this is not a realistic approach and that these structures are a ‘trump card’ to be discarded at a certain stage of the negotiations.
It became clear in last autumn’s SNA-HTS clashes that efforts to bring countless undisciplined groups together and turn the FSA into the ‘Syrian National Army’ (SNA) were also in vain. Already after 2016, the role of the FSA was shaped in line with Ankara’s policy change, from overthrowing Assad to quickly fighting the PKK’s Syrian extension.
Why should Damascus share its authority with a structure that will be overthrown as soon as the TAF withdraws its support? It is clearly possible to interpret Syria’s demand for “TAF’s withdrawal from Syria” as “TAF is supporting the parallel armed force that wants to be a partner in my authority. I don’t want to share my sovereignty.”
What is Syria’s FSA plan?
A source from Damascus, who is in contact with the Syrian security bureaucracy, said that Syria raised the following demands on the FSA during the talks: “We have a clear path in the talks, we have some conditions. There are certain groups. These are no different from ISIS. We want Turkey to declare them a terrorist organization. And that won’t be easy.”
The source continued: “Turkey is not willing to make concessions from the FSA in the negotiations. Turkey is officially calling for joint action against the YPG. Damascus has no objection to this. However, Turkey also needs to take steps on certain issues.”
A report on the Middle East Eye website, based on Turkish officials, claimed that Turkey did not accept the request from Damascus to “declare some groups a terrorist organization.”
A source from Syria, who informed Harici, said that Damascus has plans for the future of the various armed groups that have rebelled against FSA and the administration, and quoted the following notes:
“One: According to Damascus, a large section of the FSA can benefit from the amnesty laws.
Two: Damascus does not expect the extradition to Syria of criminals who run criminal networks and are involved in illegal activities.
Three: FSA militants can join the 5th Corps, which was established with Russia’s guarantee of security in reconciliation negotiations with the opposition.”
Expectations from the Arab world
Stating that “the atmosphere of optimism prevails in Damascus” regarding the negotiation process, the source added that Syria is “balancing” relations with Iran and “counting days” to open up to the Arab world.
Noting that the reports of “cleaning the army” published in the Turkish press regarding the recent appointments in the Syrian army do not reflect the truth, the source said that these appointments are a routine process that is carried out every six months.
Damascus continues its ‘normalization’ tours not only with Turkey but also with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed met with Syrian Leader Bashar al-Assad in Damascus. Traffic is also heavy on the Syria-Saudi Arabia lane. It can be said that he wants to feel the support of the Arab world behind Damascus in normalization with Turkey.
The United States is doing everything to slow down the flow of the river…
In addition to the Caesar Act sanctions, Washington’s main goal, which aggravated the sanctions on Syria with the Captagon Act, is to Iraqize the Syrian state structure. It is possible to summarize what the U.S. understands by the ‘political solution in Syria’ as an autonomy in which the PYD can find a legal sphere of existence or as options for the federation where local governments are strong. It seems unlikely that Ankara will approve this plan under any circumstances.
The dismantling of Iran’s land logistics system from Iraqi territory to the east of the Euphrates and from there to Lebanon is also among the priorities of the United States and Israel. In other words, we can say that for a possible normalization, Iran will be tried to be removed from Syria and Washington will continue to tighten the sanctions until it includes autonomy.
Now, Astana partner Iran has not been involved in Ankara-Damascus meeting yet. For Tehran, which frequently give advises through official dialogues, the east of the Euphrates and the passageways are very important because they are the window to Lebanon. It is also unrealistic for Damascus to approve the proposals by pushing its foul-weather friend Iran completely out of the game. However, Syria does not want to be seen as fully engaged in Iranian politics as a state.
For now, Ankara’s operation demand has been replaced by dialogue and diplomatic traffic, which all sides are watching closely. As we get closer to the final agreement and the parameters of the possible rapprochement become clear, what lies beneath the objections and reactions will come to the surface. In this context, the year 2023 is decisive for Turkey-Syria relations. With the meeting of foreign ministers in January, the state-to-state dialogue and diplomacy line will be strengthened.
To summarize, 2023 is a candidate year for the transition from non-state actors to interstate relations. The possible resistance of the groups that do not want to lose their wartime ‘state-like’ status strengthens the possibility of opening a final bloody page in the Syrian book…
Middle East
US waives human rights terms on $320m military aid to Egypt
The US State Department stated that it has waived human rights conditions on more than $300 million in military aid to Egypt.
The statement emphasised that this decision was taken in consideration of Cairo’s “helpful role” since the outbreak of the war against Iran.
Egypt began receiving substantial support from the US after signing a peace treaty with Israel in 1979.
Since the late 1980s, the country has received approximately $1.3 billion annually in US military assistance.
A portion of this aid is subject to conditions related to human rights and democracy, which can be waived on national security grounds.
Withholding funds, including during the administration of former US President Joe Biden, has caused tension between Cairo and Washington in the past.
A letter dated 21 September and addressed to various congressional committees, obtained by Reuters, stated that Secretary of State Marco Rubio “decided to waive the certification requirement under the fiscal year 2025 Foreign Military Financing programme for Egypt of $320 million.”
This waiver was subsequently confirmed by the State Department.
An accompanying memorandum justifying the decision stated that this portion of military aid was “essential for counterterrorism, border security, or non-proliferation programmes, or otherwise important to the national security interests of the United States.”
The memorandum, dated 4 September and bearing Rubio’s signature, stated: “Exercising this waiver authority is critical to the US-Egypt relationship and to US national security priorities, particularly given the helpful role Egypt has played in the aftermath of Operation Epic Fury.”
“Operation Epic Fury” is the designation used by the US military for the campaign launched jointly with Israel against Iran in late February.
The State Department memorandum, whose authenticity was confirmed by two sources in Washington familiar with the letter, did not provide detailed information regarding what was termed Egypt’s “helpful role”.
The State Department’s annual decision on military aid to Egypt typically covers funds allocated for the preceding fiscal year, which ends on 30 September.
A State Department spokesperson stated that Rubio waived the certification in the interest of US national security and that the US continues to cooperate with the Egyptian government across a range of issues.
In an emailed statement, the spokesperson said: “This waiver recognizes the importance of maintaining security cooperation with Egypt at a time of significant security challenges in the region.”
The Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not immediately comment on the matter.
The spillover effects of the Iran war have imposed a heavy toll on US security partners, including Egypt.
Owing to rising fuel prices and other disruptions, the Egyptian economy is passing through a difficult period.
Under the Biden administration, the US withheld portions of the annual military allocation on multiple occasions over Egypt’s human rights record.
In 2024, following the Hamas-led 7 October attack on Israel and the subsequent war in Gaza, the Biden administration set aside human rights conditions, disbursing the entire $1.3 billion allocation to Egypt for the first time in its tenure.
Human rights organisations have long accused Egypt, under the administration of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, of widespread human rights abuses, including torture and enforced disappearances.
This week, Egyptian police detained six journalists from a fact-checking and investigative media outlet, accusing them of spreading false information on behalf of the banned Muslim Brotherhood.
Egyptian authorities state that they have taken steps to address human rights issues. Sisi said stability is paramount and that the government supports human rights by working to provide for basic needs.
Middle East
Britain expands curbs on arms exports to Israel over Gaza risks
Britain has significantly broadened its military export restrictions targeting Israel, suspending or rejecting more than 80 licences for items the IDF could use in Gaza.
This figure is nearly triple the number affected when the policy was first introduced in September 2024.
United Kingdom Minister of State for the Middle East Stephen Doughty said that as part of what he described as a “tighter system” for assessing exports to Israel, more than 50 further export applications have been refused since approximately 30 licences were initially suspended.
Under the initial decision taken in September 2024, 30 of roughly 350 licences were suspended after the British government concluded there was a “clear risk” that certain military exports could be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian law in Gaza.
The affected equipment included components for military aircraft, drones, naval systems, and targeting gear.
Doughty said additional measures adopted this month established what he termed a “double safeguard” mechanism within the approvals process.
Export applications must now be assessed both against existing international humanitarian law criteria and in light of Britain’s position on the legality of Israel’s presence in the Palestinian territories.
“We have so far suspended or refused more than 80 licences,” Doughty said, adding that he had personally examined each licence.
Despite the wider restrictions, British-origin parts entering the international F-35 fighter jet supply chain continue to be largely exempt.
The UK government argues that preventing British-made components from entering the global F-35 pool could undermine the programme as a whole and have serious consequences for the security of the UK and its allies.
Direct exports of F-35 parts intended specifically for Israel remain suspended.
Doughty defended maintaining the supply of components via the international programme, arguing that halting it could have severe ramifications for the broader European and allied security architecture.
Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Emily Thornberry challenged this position, arguing that the issue was political rather than purely legal.
Thornberry suggested adopting an approach similar to the Dutch model, under which components entering the international supply chain could be flagged as “not intended for aircraft bound for Israel”.
The initial suspension was implemented in September 2024 by then Foreign Secretary David Lammy.
Lammy stressed at the time that the measure did not constitute an arms embargo and applied solely to items assessed as usable in military operations in Gaza.
Since then, the policy has been tightened further under Prime Minister Andy Burnham.
The expanded export restrictions follow the Burnham government’s adoption of a more confrontational policy toward the Israeli government.
Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband drew sustained applause at the Labour Party’s annual conference in Liverpool after delivering a sharp critique of the Netanyahu government’s policies and defending the decision to ban trade with Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
Accusing Israel of committing war crimes in Gaza, Miliband stated that the British government heard public outrage over the conflict, telling delegates: “We hear you. You were right.”
Middle East
Netanyahu holds secret UAE talks with Saudi Arabia and Arab officials
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with representatives of Gulf and Arab nations that lack diplomatic ties with Israel, including Saudi Arabia, during his weekend visit to the United Arab Emirates.
Sources close to the gathering told the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth on Monday that representatives from Morocco, Libya, Jordan, and Qatar also took part in the meeting.
Netanyahu made a unannounced visit to Abu Dhabi on Sunday, where he met with the country’s leader, Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan.
According to Israeli media, this marked the first time the United Arab Emirates officially confirmed a visit by Netanyahu.
The meeting was arranged by Mossad Director Roman Goffman “at the request of Saudi Arabia, which asked for Israel’s assistance against Houthi attacks in the Red Sea region,” according to Yedioth Ahronoth.
The discussions addressed Iran and the Houthi militia. The newspaper added that the Arab states heard from Israel that “Israel is prepared to assist countries in the region with air defence systems, just as it aided the UAE during the conflict with Iran.”
Conflict in Yemen intensified in September when Ansarullah militiamen launched a rapid offensive that seized Yemen’s entire Red Sea coastline, including the vital maritime corridor of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.
The Yemeni resistance also imposed a blockade on Saudi Arabia’s energy exports and staged multiple attacks against the kingdom.
Saudi Arabia reportedly sought military assistance from the US to counter Ansarullah.
Washington declined to attack the Houthis directly, but announced that it would provide intelligence and targeting support.
Reporting on the same visit, The Jerusalem Post said Netanyahu spent six hours in the UAE and that the principal subject of his discussions with MBZ was Iran.
Citing sources familiar with the matter, the newspaper added that the trip came “after Netanyahu exerted heavy pressure on the United Arab Emirates to arrange a meeting ahead of the Israeli elections on 27 October.”
Separately, the Associated Press, citing a person with direct knowledge of the meeting, reported that Netanyahu’s visit to the UAE was arranged in part to ask MBZ to deny reports that he had warned the Israeli prime minister of an impending Hamas threat prior to 7 October 2023.
According to Israeli media, Netanyahu’s office denied the AP report, issuing the following statement:
“Fake news. The visit focused solely on strengthening ties between the two countries and on regional issues.”
-
Europe5 days agoEuropean unions urge governments to scrap all Palantir deals
-
Diplomacy5 days agoEast-West Forum in Istanbul highlights irreversible shift to multipolarity
-
Europe1 week agoEmmanuel Todd says West faces collapse amid Ukraine and Iran crises
-
Europe1 week agoEuropean intelligence chiefs divide over risk of Russian attack
-
Diplomacy1 week agoEast-West Forum in Istanbul to debate multipolarity and global order
-
Middle East1 week agoSharaa says 7 October must not shape Israel policy on Syria
-
America1 week agoRepublican support for Trump’s war with Iran drops sharply in polls
-
Middle East1 week agoPalestinian factions confront legitimacy crisis at Istanbul talks
