Connect with us

Diplomacy

Envoy Tom Barrack urges Israel to embrace Türkiye as key to regional stability

Published

on

Tom Barrack, US Ambassador and Special Envoy for Syria, outlined a transformative vision for regional diplomacy at the Antalya Diplomacy Forum, asserting that Israel’s most strategic path forward lies in a fundamental realignment with Türkiye.

Speaking during a panel at the forum, Barrack described a United States that has achieved energy independence and is now signaling a programmatic shift in its Middle East policy. He characterized the current American stance as telling the region, “We love you, we are with you, but we now have a new doctrine.”

Barrack identified this framework as the “Donroe Doctrine,” which he defined as an extension of “America First.” This doctrine, he explained, dictates that US concerns are primarily centered on the Western Hemisphere. Amid global “pain and restlessness,” Barrack noted that the current administration is skeptical of international frameworks. “Forget multilateral organizations,” Barrack said. “I have a boss who cannot spell the word ‘multilateral’.”

Detailing the presidential approach to diplomacy, Barrack said that if his superior faces an issue with a world leader, he simply calls them to strike a deal. Should negotiations fail, he applies tariffs. This shift indicates a move away from global multilateralism toward a landscape of bilateralism, sending a clear message to the world: “Every region must begin to fend for itself.” Barrack characterized this as a matter of parity, stating, “He who pays the piper calls the tune.”

Turning to Lebanon, Barrack noted the absence of a census since 1938 and offered an assessment of the Shiite population. He suggested that Lebanese Sunnis, who constitute the majority of the Lebanese armed forces, as well as Palestinian and Syrian refugees, would be unlikely to engage in fratricidal conflict, particularly while Israel is conducting strikes against them. This environment, he argued, only reinforces the rationale for Hezbollah’s existence as a defensive shield against Israel. He contended that the ultimate solution to such instability must be rooted in fundamental prosperity.

Barrack emphasized that when a sovereign nation like Iran supports a militia, that force cannot be eliminated through military attrition alone—a philosophy he applied globally. He argued that stability must begin with individual and familial prosperity, eventually scaling up to the tribe and the broader society. This focus on local economic well-being is the reason, Barrack claimed, that his “boss” believes certain responsibilities should be left to the region itself.

He cited the Abraham Accords as a primary answer to regional challenges and described the US involvement in Syria as an experiment alongside Türkiye, which he characterized as a vital partner. Barrack lauded Türkiye as the only “real economy” in the heart of a complex region, describing it as a true nation defined by its people, resources, and military might. While Türkiye is the second-largest supporter of NATO, Barrack noted it is also one of the alliance’s most relevant and critical engines.

Barrack addressed the shift in global logistics, noting that the “Portsmouth Strait” and the Çanakkale Strait (Dardanelles) demonstrate that traditional maritime laws face modern challenges. He argued that the alliance must find a way to merge converging perspectives through a “harmony of interests” where individuals benefit. On the subject of religion, he called for mutual respect and the freedom for all to practice their faith, observing that such a state of affairs does not currently exist. He lamented a similar division in the US between those who believe the country should have a Christian identity and other minority faiths.

During the panel, the moderator noted that diplomacy is the only viable alternative to a cycle of war and pointed out the significant decline in trade and diplomatic relations between Türkiye and Israel. When asked about Israel’s current military posturing and whether it signaled a new cycle of conflict or a failure of diplomacy, Barrack offered his personal analysis.

“This region respects only one thing: power,” Barrack said. He described President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan as an “incredible leader” and stated that Benjamin Netanyahu is doing what he believes is best for his country. Barrack warned that failing to project strength results in “living in a dream world,” citing Syria as a prime example. He argued that Syria’s internal logic persists because of a “strong, powerful, and courageous leader” who has directed the country’s course, even if observers disagree with his perspectives.

Barrack characterized the heightened rhetoric between Erdoğan and Netanyahu as “merely rhetoric.” He noted that newspapers in Tel Aviv might depict a “modern Ottoman Empire” stretching from Vienna to the Maldives, while papers in Istanbul might show a “Greater Israel” with similar reach. He dismissed these as competing narratives of conquest.

Addressing energy security, Barrack stated that the “energy world” no longer views ships as the cheapest or most flexible method for transport due to inherent vulnerabilities. While ships can be diverted from the Arabian Gulf to Indonesia in the event of a conflict, pipelines lack that flexibility. However, he noted that pipelines are currently operating at only 30% capacity because the global focus has shifted from production to security. This represents a transition from a “just-in-time” logistics model to a “just-in-case” philosophy.

Barrack highlighted that critical infrastructure, including fiber optic cables, data, and resources, now flows through Türkiye. He suggested that just as Israel has aligned with Abu Dhabi and potentially Saudi Arabia, its ultimate prosperity depends on aligning with Türkiye. “Türkiye is not a country to be trifled with,” he said, adding that he expects the current hostile rhetoric to eventually dissipate.

Barrack defended the effectiveness of “benevolent monarchies” and “monarchical republics” in the Gulf, arguing that these strong leadership regimes are what currently work in the region. He contended that democratic experiments like the Arab Spring had failed, and countries targeted for human rights or democratic reforms had largely struggled.

He emphasized that Israel must align its interests with these “strong civilizations” and the Gulf. Mentioning Syria, he noted it as one of the world’s oldest civilizations where Jews, Muslims, and Christians lived side-by-side for centuries without conflict.

Barrack stated that he had shared these views with Israeli officials. While acknowledging that their current tactical moves might be correct from their perspective, he questioned the long-term strategy. He criticized the nature of current ceasefire agreements, specifically a 2024 mechanism where Israel retains the right to strike if it unilaterally deems itself under threat. He also noted that UNIFIL has spent 40 years and $10 billion in Lebanon without stopping conflict, and that war resumed shortly after the latest agreement due to side arrangements made with the Biden administration.

When asked about President Erdoğan’s proposal for an international stability force in Gaza and Israel’s rejection of the idea, Barrack offered a personal recommendation. “The smartest thing Israel can do is to encourage and embrace Türkiye’s entry into that forum,” he said.

He argued that Türkiye’s refusal to designate Hamas as a “foreign terrorist organization” is precisely what makes them a necessary mediator. He asked, “Who are the intermediaries to talk to?” He noted that while the US possesses absolute air, sea, and land dominance in the region, it does not possess “the hearts and souls of the people.”

Barrack revealed that during President Trump’s first term, the US relied on Türkiye’s unique access. He cited an instance where Trump called Erdoğan to request intervention with Hamas leaders before a peace agreement could be finalized. He credited Erdoğan, Hakan Fidan, and İbrahim Kalın with successfully bringing those leaders to the table. Barrack argued that if Türkiye had followed the US in blacklisting Hamas, such mediation would have been impossible. He concluded that including Türkiye in the Gaza process could help prevent atrocities and violations, as Türkiye “speaks the language” of the region.

Addressing Syria’s lack of retaliation against Israeli strikes, Barrack argued that the Syrian government under the El-Sharra regime has shown remarkable restraint and an openness to non-aggression. He stated that the Syrian leadership has repeatedly expressed a desire to avoid war and work toward normalization.

Barrack noted that Netanyahu’s stance that “everything changed after October 7” has rendered previous border agreements—from 1967 and 1974—irrelevant to current Israeli policy. He described Syria’s decision to stay out of the current war as a “brilliant move,” despite constant Israeli incursions against convoys.

Barrack revealed he had personally managed five meetings between Syrian Foreign Minister Assad al-Shaibani and Ron Dermer, representing Netanyahu. He stated that while the process “evaporated” after coming very close to a breakthrough, a foundation for a “fusion” remains. “The Syrians have shown tremendous patience,” Barrack said, adding that he believes a stage of non-aggression and normalization will be reached “sooner than one might think.”

Diplomacy

US drafts Ukraine plan with Nord Stream restart and sanctions relief

Published

on

Draft proposals by the US administration to end the war in Ukraine envisage establishing a demilitarised line in the Donbass region, easing sanctions against Moscow, and offering a comprehensive investment package to Kyiv.

According to a report by the British magazine The Economist, citing Ukrainian officials, Washington is working on a broad framework comprising both economic and political points to persuade the parties to reach a settlement.

Under the draft plan reported by the publication, Russia is offered the opportunity to conclude trade agreements with the US, an easing of sanctions, and the normalisation of political relations.

Ukraine, in exchange for relinquishing its goal of NATO membership, is promised direct foreign investment and European Union accession.

The report notes that Ukrainian officials do not possess complete visibility over every detail of the final text on the table, but are closely familiar with its overarching framework.

Nord Stream pipeline and natural gas shipments on the table

The Economist reported that the package designed to persuade the leadership in Moscow also includes items such as the resumption of Russian natural gas sales to the European market and the reactivation of the Nord Stream pipeline.

The magazine also points out that decisions regarding the operation of a pipeline located on European territory do not fall directly under US jurisdiction.

Ukrainian negotiators, meanwhile, are concerned that the Washington delegation may lock in commercial agreements in line with its own economic interests before the fighting formally stops.

Speaking to the magazine, a Ukrainian official summed up the American side’s approach with the words: ‘Why wait and waste time? Time is money.’

Diplomatic contacts intensify at leadership level

Stating that it is ready for talks, the Russian government announced that an agreement had been reached in recent contacts with Washington to launch a trilateral negotiation process that would also include Ukraine.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said: ‘The objective of these negotiations will be to address the issue of ensuring the security of Ukraine and Russia once peace agreements are reached.’

As part of these diplomatic efforts, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, met Russian leader Putin on 21 October at the Konstantinovsky Palace in St. Petersburg.

Speaking during the portion of the meeting open to the media, Witkoff noted that he had brought documents outlining a pathway to peace and asked Putin to examine these texts.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov announced that the president would evaluate the American proposals.

Noting that concrete ground for a ceasefire had emerged during the St. Petersburg meeting, Witkoff expressed hope for the start of trilateral contacts between Russia, the US, and Ukraine to address technical matters.

Putin thanked Trump for his interest in peace efforts and recounted that the US president had specifically emphasized during their recent telephone calls that the war must end as soon as possible.

Framework prepared in Oslo carried to Moscow

Immediately before his visit to St. Petersburg, Witkoff had attended talks held on 20 October in Oslo, the capital of Norway.

Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner joined the meeting remotely due to illness, which was attended by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store.

According to information provided by Stubb, the parties at the Oslo meeting clarified key security and economic elements that the American envoy would present to Moscow. Air defence systems, energy infrastructure, and partial ceasefire measures were also discussed.

Commenting after the talks in St. Petersburg, Russian presidential aide Yury Ushakov argued that the newly presented approaches did not contain many elements useful for a resolution.

Noting that Witkoff informed Putin about the contacts in Oslo and relayed fresh nuances in the positions of European leaders and the Kyiv government, Ushakov stated that the meeting was thorough and frank, adding that the conflict is ‘moving toward an end.’

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

South Korea pulls part of embassy staff from Ukraine amid POW dispute

Published

on

The South Korean government has decided to withdraw part of its embassy staff from Ukraine.

According to the Yonhap news agency, Foreign Ministry spokesman Park Doo-sun cited the Kyiv administration’s failure to take “positive steps” in the dispute that began with the leak of information concerning the handover of North Korean prisoners of war as the justification for the move.

The spokesman also listed the ongoing threat of air strikes, which complicates the safety of diplomats, among the reasons.

Following the withdrawal of part of the personnel, essential diplomatic contacts will continue under the leadership of the charge d’affaires ad interim to Ukraine. All consular staff tasked with protecting South Korean citizens will remain in Ukraine.

Prior to this move, the Seoul administration decided on 8 October to withdraw its ambassador. The Foreign Ministry stated at the time that it was ready to continue consultations with Kyiv to resolve the emerging issues constructively.

Tensions between the two countries began with a speech delivered by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the United Nations General Assembly in September.

Zelenskyy announced that two captured soldiers from the North Korean army had been handed over to South Korea.

South Korean President Lee Jae-myung, meanwhile, accused Kyiv of breaching a confidentiality agreement.

Lee said the disclosure of this information endangered the prisoners’ families and stability on the Korean Peninsula.

Seoul expects a public apology

Dmytro Lytvyn, an adviser to the Ukrainian president, denied the existence of a confidentiality agreement.

The South Korean Foreign Ministry summoned Ukrainian Charge d’Affaires Andriy Veshkin on 28 September and issued a note of protest against Lytvyn’s remarks.

President Lee Jae-myung warned in a statement on 2 October that they would take additional measures against Kyiv if Ukrainian authorities did not acknowledge the agreement and make a public apology. Lee stated that Ukraine itself had initially requested that the transfer of the prisoners be kept confidential.

Ukrainian Foreign Ministry spokesman Heorhii Tykhyi said the dispute stemmed from differing interpretations of the confidentiality regime.

Tykhyi noted that Seoul, based on its constitution which recognises the entire Korean Peninsula as its own territory, requested that the prisoners be handed over “like its own citizens”.

Describing the handover as a “gesture of goodwill”, Tykhyi stated that they were conducting closed-door negotiations to resolve differences of opinion.

Ambassador Park Ki-chang returned to Seoul on 10 October. According to a report by The Korea Times newspaper citing the ministry, recalling the ambassador served as a diplomatic protest against the leak of information regarding the prisoners.

The newspaper wrote that South Korea had last taken a similar step in 2008 by withdrawing its ambassador to Japan.

Moscow warned foreign diplomats

On 3 October, the Russian Foreign Ministry reiterated its warning to foreign nationals, including diplomatic mission staff, against remaining in Ukraine.

The ministry recalled its advice to leave Kyiv, citing ongoing strikes against military targets.

The ministry noted that those who failed to heed the warnings would bear responsibility for the potential consequences.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in a statement on 24 September that they had no information regarding Kyiv handing over two North Korean prisoners of war to Seoul.

Peskov, noting that prisoner matters fall under the authority of the Defence Ministry and intelligence services, said, “Contacts through the special services are continuing.”

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

Ex-BND head Hanning tied to former Mossad chief amid spy inquiry

Published

on

August Hanning, who led Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND) between 1998 and 2005, was arrested on 6 October on allegations that he obtained roughly 2,000 classified agency documents and used them during contacts with intelligence officers from a foreign state.

Accused of high treason and espionage on behalf of a foreign intelligence agency, the former spy chief is alleged to have procured the documents from former BND employee Manfred D.

Prosecutors stated that the leaked records included internal briefing notes presented to senior German officials, though the Berlin government has not yet publicly disclosed which country received the classified data.

According to an exclusive report by Jake Green for The Cradle, seized email exchanges revealed extensive ties between the arrested Hanning and former Mossad director Danny Yatom.

The correspondence shows that the two former intelligence directors built an ongoing network of contacts following their public service, combining commercial ventures, efforts to secure political influence, and intelligence links.

This dynamic has triggered debate that using personal connections and official access for private gain has left Germany’s intelligence apparatus vulnerable.

Intelligence notes for 10,000 euros and campaign proposals

According to the reviewed emails, Hanning told Yatom in a 2018 message that he could prepare an “overall assessment based on information obtained from senior German officials and intelligence agencies” concerning an unidentified candidate.

The former BND head committed to completing the report by 13 July in exchange for 10,000 euros.

Contacts between the two men subsequently expanded to cover domestic political processes in Germany. Ahead of the September 2021 federal election, Yatom asked Hanning to approach leading candidates.

Describing CIY Global as a “political campaign company”, the former Mossad chief noted that he aimed to introduce its capabilities to German politicians, and he mentioned his intention in the same exchange to transfer documents concerning a cybersecurity firm.

Cybersecurity partnership and surveillance operations across Europe

The partnership between Yatom and Hanning reached beyond political lobbying initiatives into the cybersecurity sector.

Hanning reportedly served as a consultant for World Health Energy Holdings, a cybersecurity company linked to Yatom.

Firms of this type, established or managed by former intelligence personnel, provide commercial platforms on the international market for Israeli-origin surveillance, cyber intelligence, and political influence capabilities.

The operational presence of private Israeli-based surveillance technologies across Europe has recently entered judicial records through scandals in Poland, Spain, and Greece.

Polish prosecutors announced on 12 October that data collected under the previous government via Pegasus spyware against political opponents had been transferred out of the country, adding that manufacturer NSO Group maintained access to the technical infrastructure.

In Spain, the 2022 CatalanGate investigation established that at least 65 people, including politicians, lawyers, and civil society representatives, were targeted using Pegasus or Candiru software, with Citizen Lab researchers publishing strong evidence linking the operation to Spanish authorities.

In Greece, the surveillance operation targeting journalist Thanasis Koukakis and Member of the European Parliament Nikos Androulakis was determined to have used Predator software, linked to Intellexa, a company founded by former Israeli intelligence officer Tal Dilian.

In the German espionage investigation, the traffic between Hanning and Yatom involving paid reporting, contacts with electoral candidates, and commercial partnerships does not yet provide conclusive legal evidence regarding the final destination of the roughly 2,000 classified documents.

Nevertheless, the disclosed correspondence gives German investigators a concrete line of inquiry to assess whether classified state secrets reached commercial networks tied to Israeli intelligence.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey