Connect with us

Middle East

Talks collapse in Damascus: Shara and Abdi deadlock over control of Hasakah

Published

on

The integration and ceasefire process announced on Sunday between the de facto administration led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)—which currently controls the vast majority of Syria—and the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) holding the northeast has reached an impasse.

While clashes on the ground have intensified, high-level talks held yesterday in Damascus failed to produce a concrete consensus.

Reports indicate that Syrian President Ahmed Shara (formerly known as Abu Mohammad al-Jolani) and SDF General Commander Mazlum Abdi were unable to reach a mutual agreement on the terms of the accord.

“PKK pressure” in meeting lasting over five hours

According to information reflected in Arab and Kurdish media, the meeting in Damascus was attended by the US Ambassador to Ankara and Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack, Defense Minister Murhef Abu Kasra of the HTS-led transition government, and Foreign Minister Assad Sheibani.

It was alleged that the primary obstacle during the meeting, which lasted more than five hours, was political influence exerted over the SDF.

Journalist Abdulmalik Abbud, known for his proximity to the new administration in Damascus, highlighted the pressure facing Mazlum Abdi in his reporting on the talks.

Abbud reported that Abdi is facing “immense pressure from the PKK leadership to step back from the agreement,” which had been mediated by the US under the patronage of Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) leader Masoud Barzani.

Shara’s offer to Abdi: Deputy Minister of Defense

According to details from the meeting, Ahmed Shara offered Mazlum Abdi the position of Deputy Minister of Defense in the forthcoming government, on the condition that the SDF rejects PKK pressure, remains neutral, and completes the integration agreement.

Furthermore, Shara requested that Abdi nominate a candidate for governor for the strategic Hasakah province, located on the border with Türkiye and Iraq in northeastern Syria.

The Hasakah knot remains untied

The negotiation reportedly deadlocked over the issue of military control in Hasakah. Allegedly, Mazlum Abdi demanded that Hasakah remain entirely under the administration of the SDF and its civil wing.

Shara rejected this demand, emphasizing that the agreement could only be finalized on the condition that forces attached to the Ministry of Interior enter Hasakah to assume security duties.

It was stated that Mazlum Abdi requested a five-day extension to consult with his field commanders, but Shara turned down this request. Shara reportedly demanded a final response by the end of the day, warning that international parties would otherwise be notified that “Abdi has withdrawn from the agreement and the Damascus administration will resolve the Hasakah issue by force.”

PYD: We are being forced into total surrender

Following the meeting, statements from the SDF side emphasized that the proposal on the table constituted “surrender” rather than compromise.

Speaking to Rudaw, PYD Presidential Council Member Foza Yusuf said, “Our colleagues are still on their way back. However, the meeting ended negatively. Damascus is saying, ‘You will surrender everything, and the situation will revert to pre-2011.’ They are unwilling to accept our existence in any form.”

Drawing attention to the gravity of the situation on the ground, Yusuf stated, “There are clashes everywhere. None of the decisions Shara made yesterday were implemented on the ground. Total surrender is being imposed on us. We will never accept this.”

YPJ General Commander Rohilat Afrin, who was part of the delegation attending the meeting, accused the Damascus administration of “intransigence.”

Referring to the 14-point agreement text announced on Sunday, Afrin noted, “Previously, they said they could implement this agreement within a month.

However, following the attacks in Deir ez-Zor and Raqqa, they demanded immediate acceptance of their conditions. They wanted to present this as a fait accompli, which was evidently planned in advance,” she said.

Trump-Shara call: Promise “not to enter Hasakah”

As tensions spiked on the ground, a telephone conversation took place between US President Donald Trump and Ahmed Shara.

An official statement from the Syrian Presidency indicated that recent developments in Syria were discussed, and support for the country’s unity and its “fight against terrorism” was affirmed.

However, sources speaking to Al Monitor shared different details regarding the content of the call. According to these sources, Trump requested an “end to the clashes in northern Syria” and extracted a promise from Shara that “government forces would not enter the city of Hasakah.”

This contact occurred at a time when Syrian Kurdish groups have ramped up criticism of their US allies, and Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican close to Trump, has reacted against operations targeting the SDF east of the Euphrates.

Middle East

US envoy says Syria interim leader Sharaa seeks Israel normalization

Published

on

US Ambassador to Türkiye and Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack stated that Syria’s interim president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, wants to normalize relations with Israel.

At the same time, he called for an end to Israel’s military operations in Syria and questioned whether Washington should intervene to halt them.

Speaking at the Global Security Forum held in Doha, Qatar, Barrack said Sharaa had managed difficult circumstances well and was trying to reassure Israel that his government poses no threat.

“I think President Sharaa has done a very good job under very difficult circumstances,” Barrack said, describing the message he believes the Syrian leader is conveying to Israel: “I am not aggressive, I have no problem with Israel, I want relations with Israel to normalize.”

Barrack also urged Israel to stop its operations in Syria, while voicing uncertainty over whether the US should step in to end them:

“It’s time to stop this [Israel’s actions in Syria]. I don’t know if it’s time for the US to intervene to stop it.”

Israel intensified its military operations in Syria following the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad on 8 December 2024. Israeli forces entered the demilitarized “buffer zone” along the Golan Heights and took up positions on the Syrian side of Mount Hermon (Jabal al-Shaykh), with Israel describing the deployment as a temporary security measure.

Israeli air strikes have also targeted military facilities and weapons depots across the country.

Barrack pointed to Syria’s political transition as an example of how groups once viewed as adversaries could be incorporated into new political and security structures.

“You can take Nusra, which was once designated a foreign terrorist organization; following the transformation that took place on December 8, many people today evaluate this example as ‘here is a model,'” the US diplomat said.

The Nusra Front was a jihadist group that emerged during the Syrian civil war and, after pledging allegiance to al-Qaeda, announced its departure from the network. The organization was designated as “terrorist” by several countries and bodies, primarily the US and the UN.

The group’s leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa (Abu Mohammad al-Julani), subsequently headed Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which led the offensive that ousted Assad.

Barrack also highlighted the integration of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) into the Syrian national army as an outcome many had previously considered unlikely.

“Nobody thought you could reintegrate this Kurdish entity, the SDF, into a national army, but it happened,” the US official said.

Damascus and the Kurdish-led forces signed an agreement on 10 March 2025 to integrate the SDF’s military and civilian institutions into the Syrian state.

However, delays occurred in the implementation of the agreement due to disputes over integration terms and the future of self-administration in the region.

Barrack nevertheless expressed doubts about the effectiveness of earlier US interventions in the Middle East, citing Washington’s involvement in what he characterized as “23 regime changes” across the wider region.

“Whenever we have tried to intervene, to change a person or a regime, it seems to have been a mistake,” Barrack said, while also questioning the value of US intervention in Yemen, describing it as apparently “senseless.”

Continue Reading

Middle East

US and Israel weigh Iran strikes after midterm vote, reports say

Published

on

The US and Israeli defence ministries have drawn up plans for a fresh assault on Iran, with the envisioned offensive under consideration to launch after the US Congressional midterm elections on 3 November.

Citing sources, The New York Times reported that the blueprint anticipates a brief but intense campaign.

As military units step up their drills, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth discussed prospective strike options with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The list of targets encompasses Iran’s nuclear sites, its energy infrastructure, and its arsenals of missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles.

Several officials who spoke to the newspaper argued that a new wave of attacks could deal a heavy blow to the Iranian economy, forcing the leadership in Tehran into concessions.

Conversely, other sources doubt whether a resumption of fighting would prove any more successful than the earlier campaign conducted between February and April.

That previous offensive drove energy prices higher and drained US stockpiles of interceptor missiles.

It remains unclear whether US President Donald Trump will authorise the operation.

Domestic political calculations in Israel could also influence the trajectory of the plans, given that the country faces general elections on 27 October.

While some experts speaking to the newspaper contended that Netanyahu could leverage the threat of war to form a national unity government, others pointed to the opposition’s distrust of the prime minister.

Washington fears regional spillover

The US administration also harbours concerns that the fighting could engulf the wider region. On Wednesday, the US State Department ordered non-essential government personnel and their family members to leave Saudi Arabia following attacks by the Iran-backed Houthis.

A US military build-up, comprising three aircraft carriers, fighter aircraft, and special forces units, is slated to be fully deployed to the region by early November.

The targets under review include the deep underground nuclear facility code-named “Pickaxe”. Trump suggested that the high-yield GBU-43/B bomb, known as the “mother of all bombs”, could be deployed against the site, though experts doubt whether the ordnance can destroy a complex buried so deeply.

For its part, Tehran is preparing for a potential escalation, threatening to broaden its target list. Retaliatory options under consideration by Iran reportedly include data centres and subsea internet cables, in addition to shipping and energy facilities.

Mehdi Mohammadi, an adviser to an Iranian negotiator, dismissed US hopes of wrapping up a new campaign within 72 hours as a “fantasy”. Mohammadi warned that Tehran’s response would be more severe and unpredictable.

The Financial Times previously reported that an Israeli strike on Iran set for 10 October had been called off because the US president was unwilling to risk a broader conflict ahead of the Congressional midterms.

According to that report, the Israeli military had prepared a multi-day assault on nuclear sites, Iranian government targets, power plants, and civilian infrastructure on Netanyahu’s orders. The strikes had been designed to exceed the intensity of the campaign begun in February.

Washington seeks to secure an agreement from Tehran covering both the Strait of Hormuz and its nuclear programme.

“It will either be a deal or a strike,” one source told the Financial Times, adding that an operation could get under way in the coming weeks.

Another official who spoke to the paper suggested that Israeli preparations might serve as leverage to squeeze Iran in negotiations.

Axios also reported that the Pentagon had issued orders to prepare for renewed strikes, though the directive contained no specific date and Trump has yet to take a final decision.

The US and Israel launched their offensive against Iran on 28 February. Iran hit back by targeting US and Israeli assets across the region and curbing vessel transit through the Strait of Hormuz.

Although both sides signed a memorandum of understanding in June that provided for a ceasefire and talks to lift the blockade in the Strait of Hormuz, reciprocal attacks between the US and Iran have persisted.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Netanyahu trails Eisenkot in Israeli polls despite Trump backing

Published

on

As general elections scheduled for 27 October approach in Israel, the opposition camp led by former Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot continues to lead Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in public opinion polls.

Survey data published in the Israeli press on 19 and 20 October reveal that the governing coalition has failed to catch the opposition, despite explicit backing from US President Donald Trump.

However, the current distribution of votes documents that neither wing can reach a governing majority on its own.

Neither bloc reaches the 61 seats needed to form a government

According to a survey conducted by Channel 13, if an election were held today, Eisenkot’s bloc would win 51 seats, while the Netanyahu coalition would take 50.

A Channel 12 poll indicates that the gap has widened slightly, projecting 55 seats for Eisenkot’s alliance and 51 for the governing bloc. A minimum of 61 seats is required to form a government in the Knesset, Israel’s 120-seat parliament.

A key factor deadlocking the political arithmetic is the refusal by both sides to form a coalition with parties representing Palestinian citizens of Israel. This stance stands as the most tangible obstacle to securing a parliamentary majority after the election.

Channel 12 data shows that overall voter turnout is expected to remain at 72%. The inclination to head to the ballot box climbs to 81% among opposition voters, compared with 74% measured among Netanyahu supporters.

The same poll notes that Eisenkot has widened his lead over Netanyahu by two further points in prime ministerial preferences.

Yashar party climbs after Gantz bows out

A survey published on the Walla news site shows that the balance shifted after Benny Gantz decided to withdraw his Blue and White party from the race. Following that move, Eisenkot’s Yashar party increased its projected tally to 23 seats, while Netanyahu’s Likud dropped by one seat to 19.

Eisenkot’s party and the “Zionist Opposition” bloc it anchors have remained atop the polls for several months.

In an earlier message of support, Trump praised Netanyahu as “a great fighting prime minister and an even greater partner for peace.” Public opinion polls document that this diplomatic and political backing has not proved sufficient to tip the preferences of the Israeli electorate in favour of the incumbent government.

Support for Ben Gvir rises among young voters

Although Netanyahu’s alliance trails in overall strength, far-right figures within the coalition appear to be expanding their grassroots base. Gauged interest in the Jewish Power party of Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir is climbing, particularly among younger voters.

Speaking to a study conducted by Agam Labs, affiliated with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, an 18-year-old student described his shifting preference: “I used to think he was a bit crazy, but then I actually looked at what he was saying, and it all made sense.”

Another Israeli citizen stated that Ben Gvir’s push to arm West Bank settlers gave them “room to breathe.”

Ben Gvir is known for leading settler incursions into the Al-Aqsa compound and distributing military-grade rifles to tens of thousands of settlers since 7 October 2023.

Criticized for escalating violence against Palestinians, Ben Gvir has called for starving Gaza, maintaining military operations in Lebanon, and bombing Beirut. The far-right minister’s militaristic stances also find a political constituency across several opposition parties in Israel.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey