Connect with us

Middle East

US envoy reports deadlock in talks between Syria’s new government and the SDF

Published

on

While a group from the PKK is expected to lay down its arms tomorrow, the impasse in yesterday’s talks between Syria’s new central government and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which controls the country’s northeast with US support, could not be overcome. US Ambassador to Ankara and Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack stated that following the meetings in Damascus, which he attended, the transitional government in Damascus and the Kurds still disagree on the issue of integration.

An integration agreement was signed on March 8 between Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which established a transitional government in Syria after overthrowing the Bashar al-Assad regime, and the SDF. The agreement described the Kurds as a “fundamental component” of Syria and stipulated that the SDF and the political institutions in northeastern Syria would be integrated into the central army and administration by the end of the year. The plan also included transferring control of border crossings with Turkey and Iraq, as well as airports, oil fields, and camps holding ISIS members in the northeast, to the central government.

However, after the agreement, whose details were not fully clarified, the dispute over the SDF’s demand to be included in Syria’s new army as a single bloc without being disbanded had not been resolved.

The parties met in Damascus yesterday to discuss this issue as the PKK’s disarmament process accelerated. The talks between HTS leader Ahmed al-Sharaa (Abu Mohammad al-Jolani), who has declared himself Syria’s interim president, and SDF General Commander Mazloum Abdi were attended by Barrack, as well as France’s Special Envoy for Syria, Jean-Baptiste Faivre. However, Barrack announced that the “serious differences of opinion” between the parties on joining forces could not be overcome.

‘Unification is still a major issue’

Speaking to the Associated Press (AP), Barrack said of the issue of whether the SDF will join the new Syrian army as a separate unit or be disbanded with its members joining individually, “I don’t think there has been progress on this.” Barrack stated, “This is still a major issue between these two sides.”

“I think these kinds of things happen in baby steps because making progress is based on trust, commitment, and understanding,” Barrack said, adding, “Two sides that have been living apart for a while, and perhaps have had a hostile relationship for some time, need to build trust step by step.”

‘I hope the SDF will act quickly’

Notably, Barrack praised the new administration in Damascus, saying it was “doing a great job of presenting options to the SDF.” Regarding the SDF, the US representative said, “I hope they will consider these options. I hope they will do it quickly.”

Barrack stated that their confidence in the new Syrian army is “complete” and that the SDF is a “valuable partner” in the fight against ISIS. “The US wants to ensure that the SDF has the opportunity to integrate respectfully into the new government,” Barrack said, adding that for now, they are “not in a hurry” to completely withdraw the approximately 1,300 American soldiers in Syria.

‘Federalism will not work in Syria’

In an interview with the Erbil-based website Rudaw after the talks in Damascus, Barrack’s statement that “federalism will not work in Syria” was noteworthy. In response to a question about the relationship between the HTS government in Damascus and the SDF, Barrack said, “My perspective is this: The Syrian government has shown extraordinary and great enthusiasm to include the SDF in the framework we discussed: One homeland, one nation, one army, one government. As for the details of how this will be implemented, I think the Syrian government has shown its flexibility very well and decisively in finding a way to reconcile these interests.”

Tom Barrack continued, “To be honest, I think the SDF has been slow to accept this situation, to negotiate, and to take steps in this direction. My advice to them is to speed up this process. There is only one way, and that way is Damascus. That is the message.”

‘Adaptation takes time, but a state within a state cannot be established’

Regarding US Senator Marco Rubio’s statement that “Kurdish autonomy is one of the main pillars of US policy in Iraq,” Barrack made the following comments:

“With his words about autonomy and sovereignty, Senator Rubio means that Iraq is one nation, and Syria is one nation. The Kurds are a unique, distinguished, and beautiful component within these nations. I do not believe he meant an independent Kurdistan… The problem is that we have seen that federalism does not work in all these countries and that an independent state cannot be established within another state. So it takes time for everyone to understand this, especially after the terrible events Syria has experienced for years; adaptation takes time. But we are running out of time. The world is moving fast, the region is moving very fast. Look at what has happened in the last three weeks, it’s incredible. So this is the opportunity. The opportunity for Syria is now. The world wants to help them. Everyone complements each other. We must not stand in our own way. We all need to compromise and reach this conclusion: One nation, one people, one army, one Syria.”

The ‘onion peel’ analogy on the Israel issue

Meanwhile, regarding the reported talks between Syria’s new administration and Israel, Tom Barrack said, “My feeling about what is happening in the neighborhood is that this needs to happen, and as the region builds trust in each other, it will happen slowly, like peeling an onion.”

Middle East

US waives human rights terms on $320m military aid to Egypt

Published

on

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.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Britain expands curbs on arms exports to Israel over Gaza risks

Published

on

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.”

Continue Reading

Middle East

Netanyahu holds secret UAE talks with Saudi Arabia and Arab officials

Published

on

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.”

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey