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…
As the process of deporting Afghan migrants from Iran intensifies, Iranian officials say that in the past week, more than 120,000 people have entered Afghanistan from Iran, both forcibly and voluntarily.
The district governor of Taybad in Iran says that nearly 8,000 undocumented Afghan citizens enter Afghanistan daily through the Dogharun border alone.
Meanwhile, some deported immigrants say they left all their assets in Iran and were forced to return home empty-handed.
Hossein Jamshidi, the district governor of Taybad, told Iranian media that in the past week alone, more than 95,000 undocumented citizens and about 25,000 documented migrants from all over Iran have been identified and returned to Afghanistan from this border.
Dogharoon border is the largest crossing point for the deportation of Afghan migrants from Iran. Every day, thousands of migrants, most of whom were living in Iran without documents, are now transported in large convoys, in dozens of passenger buses from all over Iran, to this border point zero.
But in this side of the border!
But on this side of the border, at the Islam Qala crossing, thousands of people, including women and children, are standing in long lines in the scorching sun, wearing only a few layers of clothing, waiting to cross the border and enter Afghan territory.
Many of these migrants say they have nowhere to go and have been forced to leave all their belongings on the other side of the border, on Iranian soil, and return empty-handed.
The Taliban have called for the establishment of a “coordinated mechanism” with the Iranian government for the return of refugees.
UN agencies have called for increased financial assistance following the significant expulsion of Afghan refugees from neighboring countries.
The Norwegian government has expressed concern about the deportation of migrants in recent days and has allocated nearly $1 million to support them.
The administration of US President Donald Trump is reportedly discussing the possibility of providing Iran with up to $30 billion in financial access to develop its peaceful nuclear program as part of efforts to return to negotiations with Tehran.
According to a CNN report citing sources familiar with the matter, this offer requires Tehran to completely halt uranium enrichment, a condition emphasized as “non-negotiable.”
Under the proposed plan, the funds would not be provided by the US but by Arab nations. An administration official stated, “The US is ready to lead these negotiations. Someone will have to pay for the implementation of the nuclear program, but we will not make such a commitment.”
Other proposals on the table
American officials have indicated that other offers are also being considered. These include the potential lifting of some sanctions against Iran and granting Tehran access to $6 billion of its frozen assets in foreign banks.
Another idea involves US allies in the Persian Gulf covering the cost of building new infrastructure to replace the Fordow nuclear facility, which was damaged in US attacks. This new facility would also lack uranium enrichment capabilities.
Washington’s “comprehensive peace” initiative
Steve Witkoff, Trump’s Special Representative for the Middle East, told CNBC that the US aims to achieve a “comprehensive peace agreement.”
A White House statement emphasized that all proposals are designed to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
Following the events of the past two weeks, which include mutual attacks with Israel and a US strike on Iran’s nuclear sites, the White House hopes Tehran will accept Washington’s terms.
Experts are skeptical, fearing the offer could backfire
Conversely, Iran experts cited by CNN believe these events will further convince the country’s leadership of the necessity of possessing nuclear weapons.
Earlier this week, the Iranian parliament approved the suspension of cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Even before the US attack on the night of June 22, the Iranian government had already significantly restricted agency officials’ access to its facilities.
According to IAEA data from mid-May, Iran possessed approximately 409 kilograms of highly enriched uranium.
Bloomberg reported that this amount is theoretically sufficient to produce ten nuclear warheads. The agency’s Director General, Rafael Grossi, stated that the location of this material is unknown.
While Tehran claims it moved its uranium stockpiles from the attacked facilities beforehand, the IAEA assesses that a significant portion of the stocks may have survived the strike.
According to a classified military intelligence report obtained by CNN and the New York Times (NYT), US attacks on Iran’s three major uranium enrichment facilities did not eliminate the main components of Tehran’s nuclear program but only set it back by several months.
American officials who reviewed the report stated that the document, which includes a preliminary assessment of the 12-day war between Israel and Iran and the subsequent American attack, contradicts President Donald Trump’s declaration that the program was “completely destroyed.”
The report, prepared by the Pentagon, emphasized that the damage to Iran’s nuclear facilities was largely limited to the destruction of above-ground structures. It was determined that while the entrances to two underground facilities were filled with debris, the bunkers themselves remained intact.
Furthermore, it was reported that enriched uranium stockpiles might have been moved from the facilities before the attacks and that the centrifuges were “largely undamaged.” The report also noted that the US managed to damage the power grid of the nuclear facility built into a mountain at Fordo, but the facility itself did not sustain serious damage.
Timeline for a nuclear bomb extended
Before the military operation, US intelligence agencies estimated it would take Tehran at least three months to hastily produce a low-yield, primitive nuclear weapon. According to the NYT, military intelligence now predicts this timeline will extend to about six months.
The Times of Israel reported that Israeli intelligence also believes the US and Israeli attacks did not completely destroy Iran’s nuclear program, only setting it back “several years.”
Professor Jeffrey Lewis, an arms expert from the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, concurred with the US military intelligence assessment. According to Lewis, Iran could quickly rebuild its nuclear program using uranium stockpiles in the intact underground bunkers. The expert suggested that, in this scenario, it could take Iran five months to produce a nuclear bomb.
White House reacts strongly to leak
President Donald Trump had previously announced that the American attacks had resulted in the complete destruction of Iran’s nuclear facilities.
White House Spokesperson Karoline Leavitt, however, described the intelligence assessment cited by CNN and the NYT as “false.” Leavitt stated the document was classified and had been leaked to the press by a “low-ranking, unidentified loser.”
In a statement on the social media platform X, Leavitt remarked, “The leak of this so-called assessment is a blatant attempt to humiliate President Trump and discredit the brave fighter pilots who carried out a flawless mission to destroy Iran’s nuclear program. Everyone knows what happens when fourteen 30,000-pound bombs are precisely dropped on their targets: Total destruction.”
Trump also accused CNN and the NYT of collaborating to downplay one of the most successful military attacks in history. On his social media platform, Truth Social, Trump wrote, “The nuclear facilities in Iran have been completely destroyed!”
According to the NYT, the publication of the intelligence findings overshadowed President Trump’s victory at the NATO summit. The fact that the report was prepared by the Pentagon, which personally carried out the attacks, further underscored the situation’s significance.
A Controllable Conflict with No Winners
Plight of refugees in Iran
Chinese navy chief and top nuclear scientist expelled from legislature
Germany’s SPD faces ‘Russia rebellion’ at party congress
China, US reach agreement on export controls
-
America2 weeks agoIsrael’s nuclear arsenal used as a tool of blackmail, says expert
-
Opinion2 weeks agoViewing the Israel-Iran Confrontation Through the Lens of Grand History
-
America2 weeks agoUS presidents ignore intelligence reports on Iran, says ex-CIA analyst
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoNATO summit focuses on arms race in the Silicon Valley age
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoIranian foreign minister travels to Moscow for Putin talks after US strikes
-
Europe2 weeks agoIsrael-Iran conflict postpones EU plan for Russian oil sanctions
-
Middle East2 weeks agoUS bombs Iranian nuclear sites, sparking fears of wider conflict
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoErdoğan to meet Trump at NATO summit to mend relations
