RSS
How Turkey Is Manipulating Syria for Its Own Advantage
Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan leaves after attending a military parade to mark the 1974 Turkish invasion of Cyprus in response to a short-lived Greek-inspired coup, in the Turkish-controlled northern Cyprus, in the divided city of Nicosia, Cyprus July 20, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Yiannis Kourtoglou
Following the recent regime change in Syria, Israel now faces a complex reality in which it must prevent the flow of advanced weapons to hostile actors in Syria while exploring possibilities for political dialogue with the new regime. At the same time, Turkey’s growing presence in Syria poses a strategic challenge due to both the potential for military confrontation and the possibility that Turkey may help Hamas expand its operations in the north.
Turkey’s trends in Syria align with the neo-Ottoman vision, which seeks to restore Turkey’s influence in the Islamic world. Beyond the military dimension, Erdogan is advancing an image of Turkey as savior, aiding refugees and helping Syrians with their country’s reconstruction. This image, along with the consolidation of internal control, serves as a counterbalance to criticism over human rights violations and Turkey’s historical legacy.
Turkey’s increasing involvement in Syria not only reflects its strategic aspirations but also acts as a political tool through which Erdogan is presenting Turkey as a humanitarian and protective power, furthering its position in the Muslim world at the expense of its rivals — Israel, Iran, and Arab countries.
The rapidly changing reality in Syria presents Israel with a mix of challenges and opportunities. Jerusalem is concerned about the security of its citizens in the face of Syria’s instability, but is also cognizant of emerging diplomatic possibilities that could transform the entire region. The bringing of those possibilities to fruition will require the acquiescence of Turkey, however, which is highly unlikely at present.
Israel’s security challenge stems primarily from the fear that both conventional and unconventional weapons could find their way into hostile hands close to its northern border. Missiles, chemical weapons, and even Syria’s military arsenal present real threats. However, a Syrian regime that is allegedly non-hostile toward Israel might, at least in the short term, offer diplomatic opportunities that align with Israel’s interests.
Israel remains vigilant and prepared to act. Thus, it prefers to destroy any weapons that pose a threat, ensuring that conventional and unconventional weaponry in the region does not fall into the hands of jihadist elements, even if they are Sunni and fierce enemies of Hezbollah and Iran. The concern is that Sunni and Shiite jihadist forces might position themselves at Israel’s border, threatening the Golan Heights and the eastern Galilee. Moreover, despite claims of ideological moderation by the HTS party, there is concern that extreme religious ideology could take over and turn the country into an authoritarian-controlled zone. Abu Mohammad Al-Jolani, the leader of the HTS, is a member of ISIS, and Israel cannot afford the presence of ISIS on its border.
Israel needs to eliminate any strategic capability from Syria for several reasons.
First, the new regime’s position toward Israel, while not openly hostile at the moment, remains unclear. It is too dangerous to allow weapons to remain in the area given that Al-Jolani could adopt ISIS’s extreme positions in the future.
Next, the fact that the Syrian border with Lebanon is now controlled by the Kurds, who view Israel as a partner, is an unplanned positive development in Israel’s efforts to prevent the smuggling of Iranian weapons to Hezbollah. However, the Kurds in Syria are in constant danger from the Turkish military. Zeki Aktürk, the Press and Public Relations Advisor of Turkey’s Ministry of National Defense, declared in December 2024 that “Turkey will not allow ‘terrorist organizations, foremost the PKK/YPG terror organization,’ to seize territories by exploiting the situation in Syria. We will continue to take destructive preemptive actions.” He also stated, “We believe that the new Syrian regime and its army, the Syrian National Army, will liberate the Syrian people and the areas occupied by the PKK/YPG terror organization.” This approach to Turkish involvement in northeastern Syria is also supported by the opposition party CHP, which is usually a harsh opponent of Erdogan. For example, its members have declared that Erdogan is not assertive enough against Israel. Yankı Bağcıoğlu, Vice Chairman of the CHP, whose responsibilities include relations with the military and national security policy, said that if there is a threat to Turkey in Syria, a military operation against the Kurds could be carried out. In this context, Erdogan can once again be seen exploiting internal and international conflicts to strengthen his rule and neutralize the opposition.
Another relevant minority in Syria is the Druze population in the southwest, along the Jordanian border. As Israel has a Druze community, it may be possible to renew an alliance to ensure defense of the shared border.
Because the new Syrian regime’s policy toward Israel remains uncertain, Israel has no choice but to maintain a high level of military readiness and take steps to prevent the Iran-Hezbollah-ISIS axis from reorganizing there. Israel must also quickly identify and destroy any weapons that might eventually be aimed in its direction. If the new Syrian regime does ultimately adopt a positive position toward Israel – which is unlikely, at least as long as Turkey remains active – Israel could strengthen its position in the region through diplomatic and economic cooperation, presenting a more optimistic political-security picture overall.
With that said, the Turks are very confident about their position of power in Syria. By shifting its support among different forces in that country after the Arab Spring, Turkey expanded its influence in northern Syria. Turkey aims to turn Syria into a satellite, not unlike like the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. It is possible that the relationship with Syria will eventually go through Ankara, as Turkey may demand a military alliance with the new regime to ensure its influence in the region. It has leverage to make this demand, as it has invested significant forces and money in Syria. Such an alliance would further bolster Turkey’s standing, both in the region and internationally.
Turkey is already playing a significant role in Syria’s reconstruction. It has invested billions of dollars in that country, especially since the start of the Syrian civil war in 2011. In terms of humanitarian aid, Turkey has provided support to millions of Syrian refugees affected by the war, allocating about $40 billion (according to a speech by Erdogan five years ago) for aid to Syrian refugees. Turkey also frequently states its intention to repatriate the Syrian refugees back to their homeland.
In addition, Turkey has invested in the reconstruction of areas in northern Syria – especially those under its control, such as Afrin and Idlib – and allocated funds for infrastructure, education, health, and public services. According to Turkish media, the reconstruction of Syria requires a total investment of $400 billion. The first phase will involve the construction of infrastructure and thousands of housing units, with Turkish companies at the forefront of that effort. The forecast is that over the next decade, sectors such as furniture, energy, logistics, and retail will generate $100 billion for Turkey’s economy.
Turkey has also spent billions of dollars on military operations in Syria, including deploying military forces, operating military bases, and paying local militias. Due to these massive investments, Turkey may demand a permanent military presence in Syria, especially given Syria’s current fragile state. This could pose a threat to Israel.
Turkey does not want its vision in Syria to be compromised. It demands that Israel withdraw beyond the border, with Erdogan going so far as to threaten at least twice to take military action against Israel if it does not comply. The tension engendered by this language could manifest in several ways.
First, Turkey wants to eradicate all Kurdish activity in Syrian territory, especially along its border. But, as noted above, the Kurds are a partner Israel relies on. These are obviously conflicting interests. Moreover, Israel is very concerned about Turkey’s connection with, and well-known support for, Hamas. Turkey may establish Hamas bases in areas under its control in Syria, creating a link between Hamas in the north and Hamas in the south. In view of this danger, Israel is trying to prevent Turkish control from spreading in Syria and reduce the threat to its borders. Given these facts, even a small-scale military clash could arise between Israel and Turkey in the future.
Experts in Israel-Turkey relations have often used the term “frenemy” to describe the dynamic between the two countries, especially since the second decade of the 2000s. In light of current developments, such as the growing threat from Turkey towards Israel from the north, Turkey’s demand that Israel withdraw from Syria, and its belief that Israel plans to occupy parts of southeastern Turkey as part of the biblical Kingdom of Israel, it might be time to reconsider the “frenemy” and perhaps replace it with the term “enemy.”
Turkey’s presence in Syria, from Erdogan’s shifting from supporting anti-Assad forces in the early stages to conducting military operations in northern Syria, is a means of exploiting the conflict to achieve central objectives: to block Kurdish forces associated with the PKK and to expand Turkey’s regional influence. By framing Turkey’s involvement in Syria as national security defense, Erdogan has managed to both justify increased military intervention and strengthen his image as a strong and determined leader on the international stage.
Erdogan appears to be not just strong but a savior. Turkey’s presence in Syria is perceived as part of neo-Ottomanism, a term that describes the geostrategic and cultural policy of the Turkish government particularly under AKP administration. The concept aims to restore Turkey’s regional influence in areas that were once under the control of the Ottoman Empire (such as the Middle East, the Balkans, the Caucasus, and North Africa), combining political, economic, and cultural power. Turkey is succeeding where Russia and Iran failed, and now holds the most significant footprint in Syria.
Turkey’s international image is largely negative. It is perceived as an oppressor of minorities, as responsible for the Armenian genocide during the Ottoman Empire, and as stubborn in its refusal to acknowledge its historical responsibility. The image of Muslim savior would help Turkey improve that global image. This aligns well with Turkey’s strategic needs as it tries to establish itself as a regional power with global influence.
Against the backdrop of Turkey’s ongoing efforts to achieve legitimacy in Europe, its involvement in Syria reflects a strategic shift in its national vision. Given its failure to integrate into the European Union and achieve equal status among Western nations, Turkey is turning its attention to the Islamic world, where it aims to establish itself as a dominant regional power and gain the recognition and prestige it believes it deserves. It wants to be seen as a nation that succeeds, unlike other Muslim-majority countries, at saving Muslim societies, both within and outside its borders.
Erdogan oscillates between peace negotiations and military repression depending on his political needs. In the early years of his rule, Erdogan led a peace process with the PKK in order to garner support from the Kurdish population and present himself as a leader capable of resolving one of Turkey’s longest-running conflicts. However, when the dynamics shifted—especially after the electoral success of the pro-Kurdish party (HDP)—the Turkish military launched a campaign against the PKK, using the conflict to garner nationalist support and weaken the political influence of the HDP.
In Syria, a new opportunity presented itself. On March 1, the PKK declared that it would lay down its weapons and announced a unilateral ceasefire. This could mark the beginning of the end of the PKK’s 40-year violent struggle for independence in Turkish territory. Consequently, Ankara will no longer regard Turkey’s PKK and its branches in Iraq and Syria as a terrorist organization.
The hope is that the end of the armed conflict between Turkey and the PKK in Iraq will not only conclude Turkish military operations in the region but ultimately improve political and economic relations between the Kurdish regions of Iraq and Turkey. The same may happen in Syria, where unprecedented opportunities for effective governance and stability are opening up in the north.
However, while Nechirvan Barzani, President of Iraqi Kurdistan, embraces this message, there is no rush to disarm the SDF in Syria. Abdi has already declared that the disarmament does not apply to his group. Despite the agreement he signed with al-Jolani, according to which their military forces and the institutions they established would merge into the new Syrian state, the agreement represents more of a dialogue in the form of a state of non-war. It does not contain any solution for the Kurds in Syria.
Turkey may bring peace to its borders and present itself as a peacemaker and savior of the Muslim world, a role it has sought for many years (evidenced by its attempts to mediate between Israel and the Palestinians, Russia and Ukraine, and others). However, while Turkey’s image may be bolstered as a peacekeeper that ensures stability in the region, this very role could paradoxically lead to further fragmentation among the Kurds, deepening the already existing rift within Kurdish society – this time in Syria.
Prof. Efrat Aviv is a senior researcher at the BESA Center and a senior lecturer in the Department of General History at Bar-Ilan University. A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.
The post How Turkey Is Manipulating Syria for Its Own Advantage first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
US Issues New Sanctions Targeting Chinese Importers of Iranian Oil
The Liberian-flagged oil tanker Ice Energy transfers crude oil from the Iranian-flagged oil tanker Lana (former Pegas), off the shore of Karystos, on the Island of Evia, Greece, May 26, 2022. REUTERS/Costas Baltas
The United States on Wednesday issued new sanctions targeting Iran’s oil exports, including against a China-based “teapot refinery,” as President Donald Trump’s administration seeks to ramp up pressure on Tehran.
The US Treasury Department said in a statement the action would increase pressure on Chinese importers of Iranian oil as Trump seeks to restore his “maximum pressure” campaign on Iran, which includes efforts to drive its oil exports down to zero.
The action comes as the Trump administration has relaunched negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program this month, with talks in Oman last weekend and a second round expected in Rome this weekend.
The Treasury on Wednesday said it imposed sanctions on a China-based independent “teapot” refinery it accused of playing a role in purchasing more than $1 billion worth of Iranian crude oil.
Washington also issued additional sanctions on several companies and vessels it said were responsible for facilitating Iranian oil shipments to China as part of Iran’s “shadow fleet.”
Iran’s mission to the United Nations in New York and China’s embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
China does not recognize US sanctions and is the largest importer of Iranian oil. China and Iran have built a trading system that uses mostly Chinese yuan and a network of middlemen, avoiding the dollar and exposure to US regulators.
“Any refinery, company, or broker that chooses to purchase Iranian oil or facilitate Iran’s oil trade places itself at serious risk,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in the statement.
GUIDANCE FOR SHIPPING
“The United States is committed to disrupting all actors providing support to Iran’s oil supply chain, which the regime uses to support its terrorist proxies and partners.”
The Treasury on Wednesday also updated guidance for shipping and maritime stakeholders on “detecting and mitigating Iranian oil sanctions evasion,” warning, among other things, that Iran depends on a vast shadow fleet to disguise oil shipments.
The Treasury said it was the sixth round of sanctions targeting Iranian oil sales since Trump restored his “maximum pressure” campaign on Iran, which includes efforts to drive its oil exports down to zero in order to help prevent Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon.
In his first 2017-21 term, Trump withdrew the US from a 2015 deal between Iran and world powers that placed temporary limits on Tehran’s uranium enrichment activities in exchange for sanctions relief. Trump also reimposed sweeping US sanctions.
Since then, Iran has far surpassed that deal’s limits on uranium enrichment.
Western powers accuse Iran of having a clandestine agenda to develop nuclear weapons capability by enriching uranium to a high level of fissile purity, above what they say is justifiable for a civilian atomic energy program. Tehran says its nuclear program is wholly for civilian power purposes.
“All sanctions will be fully enforced under the Trump Administration’s maximum pressure campaign on Iran,” State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said in a separate statement on Wednesday.
“As long as Iran attempts to generate oil revenues to fund its destabilizing activities, the United States will hold both Iran and all its partners in sanctions evasion accountable.”
The post US Issues New Sanctions Targeting Chinese Importers of Iranian Oil first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Why Is Qatar Getting Away with Undermining US Interests?
The Al Jazeera Media Network logo is seen on its headquarters building in Doha, Qatar, June 8, 2017. Photo: REUTERS/Naseem Zeitoon
While much of the American foreign policy conversation is consumed by China, Russia, and Iran, a far more insidious actor has been hiding in plain sight: Qatar.
This tiny Gulf state has managed to infiltrate the American political ecosystem with surgical precision — through influence operations, media manipulation, academic funding, and elite lobbying. Its endgame? To bend US policy in its favor while funding the very extremists we claim to be fighting.
For too long, Washington has treated Qatar as a quirky ally — an oil-rich outlier hosting the largest American military base in the Middle East — Al Udeid. But behind the airbase is a monarchy that plays both arsonist and firefighter: funding Islamist terror groups like Hamas while simultaneously branding itself as a necessary “mediator.” That’s not diplomacy — it’s blackmail.
Qatar isn’t challenging US power head-on; it’s buying access, shaping discourse, and laundering its image through think tanks, universities, and former officials. The result is a foreign policy establishment increasingly compromised by Qatari influence — and unwilling to hold Doha accountable.
Qatar has spent billions pouring into America’s elite institutions: Georgetown, Brookings, RAND, and more. These aren’t charitable donations; they’re strategic investments in influence. What happens when the same think tanks advising US policymakers are on the Qatari payroll? What happens when former diplomats and retired generals take consulting fees from a regime that funds Hamas and cheers on Al Jazeera’s anti-Western propaganda?
After the October 7 Hamas massacre — one of the most brutal acts of terrorism in modern memory — Qatar remained untouched. While its ties to Hamas were public and long-standing, Qatar wasn’t sanctioned, pressured, or even criticized. Instead, it was elevated as a “key negotiator” in hostage talks. Imagine that: a state that hosts Hamas leaders in five-star hotels was rewarded with diplomatic prestige after the terrorists it bankrolls slaughtered civilians. That is influence at work.
The fact that the US continues to rely on Qatar as a go-between reveals the depth of the problem. US institutions — media, government, academia — have been too thoroughly compromised to challenge the narrative. Every time the US spares Qatar from consequences, it sends a clear message: American foreign policy is for sale.
In Israel, a corruption scandal now dubbed “Qatargate” has exposed how deep Qatar’s reach extends. Israeli media reported secret payments, PR services, and cozy ties between Netanyahu’s communications team and Qatari operatives. Arrests were made. Gag orders issued. The Shin Bet launched an investigation. The scandal has rocked the Israeli government — not because Qatar did something unusual, but because someone finally got caught.
If Qatar can manipulate a tightly surveilled, security-conscious country like Israel, what has it already done in a distracted, divided, lobby-saturated Washington?
Qatar has retained some of the most powerful lobbying firms in D.C., from those connected to Democratic insiders to Republican powerbrokers. It has poured resources into shaping US discourse, often by proxy. It funds conferences, media outlets, cultural programs, and fellowships. It hires former White House staffers and Pentagon officials to lobby Congress, and feed op-eds into major newspapers. The goal isn’t short-term gain. It’s long-term positioning: to ensure that no matter which party is in power, Doha remains untouchable.
Unlike China or Russia, Qatar operates with a velvet glove. There are no cyberattacks or airspace violations — just cash, contracts, and calculated charm. And because its methods don’t trigger alarms, it has gotten away with it.
Qatar undermines US allies like Egypt, funds the Muslim Brotherhood, gives voice to anti-American demagogues, and manipulates Western media through platforms like Al Jazeera. It hosts Taliban leaders one day and strikes multi-billion-dollar gas deals with US companies the next. It’s not an ally. It’s a shapeshifter — wearing whatever mask serves its interests.
The American people need to wake up. Qatar is not simply playing both sides. Its billions buy silence, its PR campaigns buy credibility, and its influence buys exemption from the consequences that any other terror-sponsoring regime would face.
Congress should immediately investigate Qatari lobbying efforts in the United States, including all funding to universities, think tanks, nonprofits, and media organizations. Every foreign donation to a US institution should be publicly disclosed. Any American policymaker, academic, or analyst who takes Qatari money must register it and explain it — clearly.
The Pentagon should reconsider the military relationship with Qatar until a full review of its terror ties and foreign interference operations is conducted. Hosting a US base does not make you an ally. If anything, it makes you more dangerous — because it shields your true motives behind a curtain of cooperation.
We must also reassert moral clarity. There is no world in which funding Hamas and being a responsible stakeholder are compatible. If Qatar wants the privileges of Western partnership, it must be held to Western standards. Until then, it should be treated like any other hostile regime that funds terror, meddles in democracy, and manipulates American policy for its own ends.
This is not about partisanship. Qatar gives to Republicans and Democrats. It hires former officials from both parties. This is about national sovereignty — and the basic principle that American foreign policy should serve the American people, not the ambitions of a royal family in Doha.
Amine Ayoub, a fellow at the Middle East Forum, is a policy analyst and writer based in Morocco. Follow him on X: @amineayoubx
The post Why Is Qatar Getting Away with Undermining US Interests? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
How Canadian Universities Are Allowing Jewish Students to Be Doxxed and Harassed
The Fine Arts Building of McGill University in Montreal, Quebec. Photo: DXR/Wikimedia Commons
With the rise of the digital age, an entirely new form of harassment and intimidation has emerged. Nameless accounts run by faceless adversaries comment on, post about, and attack others — their identities hidden behind a digital mask.
What’s worse than this anonymous harassment is the increasingly common practice of doxxing, where one’s personal information is released to the public in an effort to intimidate and silence them.
That’s the situation that pro-Israel Jewish Canadians have been facing for over a year — and it threatens free expression, academic integrity, and open discourse.
In the year and a half since October 7, 2023, this harassment has become a common practice on college campuses for students who dare to voice any support for Israel, or criticism of Palestinians or Hamas. My school, McGill University, is no different. Pro-Israel students, Hillel staff, and even McGill security guards have been followed, photographed, and videoed.
A prime example of this phenomenon is the Instagram account, “Shart-Up Nation,” which regularly targets pro-Israel activists and the McGill administration by sharing photos and videos of Jewish students and professionals, and asking followers to find information about them so that they may release it to their 800+ followers.
Their feed and stories are flooded with vicious photos of McGill’s pro-Israel community accompanied by horrible insults, stating that “all Zionists look like this to a certain degree” and comparing Jewish students to an unflattering emoji.
Memes are drenched in antisemitic sentiments — such as one regarding a former hostage’s nose job paralleling the trope of a Jew with a large hooked nose, one suggesting Jews are constantly surveilling people (suspiciously close to the sentiments put forth in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion), or even another suggesting that Jews “want to swim in the blood of dead Palestinians,” echoing the age-old blood libel.
This past December, the group came across the Instagram page of another local pro-Israel organization, Allied Voices for Israel. The account manager captured screenshots of students’ faces on an educational trip to Israel, which focused on conversations between Israel and Palestinians “fighting for peace and coexistence.” The doxxers then located their LinkedIn profiles, and posted their academic and personal information along with their full names.
These actions extend far beyond violating privacy — they induce a fear to speak up and make opinions known in the pro-Israel community. It is clear that these actions are a thinly veiled threat — dare to engage in conversation about Israel, no matter if there is nuance, and your professional and personal life will be put at risk.
Despite the vicious posts about students — and the now illegal release of their private information — neither the Concordia nor McGill administration have identified the student perpetrator.
Unfortunately, hiding one’s identity while protesting, chanting some questionable (at best) statements, and performing illegal actions, is nothing new for the pro-Palestinian crowd at McGill.
On October 7th, 2024, students covering their faces with keffiyehs stormed McGill’s campus, pushing down protective barriers and covering school property with graffiti.
Protestors hiding under sunglasses or masks is a common sight on campus. Just recently, a group of masked individuals went so far as to smash over 20 windows in one of McGill’s largest buildings, leaving shards of glass and a terrified student body scattered around campus.
Their masking — and their unwillingness to be associated with their actions — is a tacit acknowledgment that they know what they are doing is wrong. If they were not undertaking destructive, illegal, and harmful actions, why take so much care to hide behind social media accounts and face coverings?
If they truly believe that they are fighting for a just cause and doing it in the correct way, there is no reason that they should feel the need to conceal their involvement or identity. Clearly, then, certain people recognize that their actions place them on the wrong side of history. They know that pushing down fences is not the proper way to instigate social change, that doxxing and humiliating fellow students online is a blatant violation of McGill’s Student Code of Conduct, and that chanting about restarting the “Final solution” while doing a Nazi salute is unacceptable.
If they were proud of their actions, they would not go through so much trouble to hide their identities.
The rise of anonymous harassment and doxxing in Montreal is not just a symptom of political division — it is a threat to the open discourse and academic integrity that is supposed to thrive on college campuses.
And this issue festers in the broader Montreal community as well. The police have yet to make any arrests following extreme acts of vandalism on McGill’s campus in early February; local newspapers misrepresent the facts of the conflict. The mayor of a prominent Jewish community in the city allegedly “tolerates illegal behavior by masked protestors.” McGill and Montreal must break out of this vicious cycle.
If universities fail to address these violations, then they are contributing to a culture where fear reigns supreme and productive dialogue is rendered not just impossible but dangerous. Our institution and our neighbors at Concordia University must take a stand — not just to protect those targeted in today’s world — but for the preservation of open and constructive discourse for generations to come.
Maris Brail is a student at McGill University, pursuing a Joint Honours degree in Jewish Studies and philosophy. As an active member of McGill’s Hillel and Students Supporting Israel executive boards, Maris is committed to fostering a space where Jewish life and advocacy can thrive. She is also a CAMERA on Campus Fellow, dedicated to promoting accurate and fair representations of Israel in academic and media discourse.
The post How Canadian Universities Are Allowing Jewish Students to Be Doxxed and Harassed first appeared on Algemeiner.com.