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
Lebanon Claims It Is Replacing Hezbollah in the South
Lebanese Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam speaks at the presidential palace on the day he meets with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, in Baabda, Lebanon, Jan. 14, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Mohamed Azakir
JNS.org – Lebanon’s leadership declared in recent days that the Lebanese Army has begun replacing Hezbollah forces in the country’s southern region.
In an April 15 interview with The New Arab, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun announced that 2025 would be the year of the Lebanese state’s monopoly on arms.
Aoun pledged that only the state would have weapons, referring to the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF), and stressed this goal would be achieved through direct dialogue with Hezbollah, while explicitly ruling out steps that could ignite conflict with Hezbollah.
“I told the Americans that we want to remove Hezbollah’s weapons, but we will not ignite a civil war in Lebanon,” Aoun said, referencing a meeting with US Deputy Envoy Morgan Ortagus.
Aoun added that Hezbollah members could potentially integrate individually into the LAF but rejected replicating the Iraqi model where Shi’ite, Iranian-backed paramilitary groups formed independent units within the military. He asserted the LAF was conducting missions throughout the country “without any obstruction from Hezbollah.”
Hezbollah member Mahmoud Qamat, however, responded by stating, “No one in the world will succeed in laying a hand on this weapon,” according to Lebanese media.
Hezbollah Member of Parliament Ali Fayyad stated the group was open to internal dialogue but warned against pressure on the LAF to disarm Hezbollah.
Col. (res.) Dr. Hanan Shai, a research associate at the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy and a former investigator for the IDF’s commission on the 2006 Second Lebanon War, told JNS on Wednesday that statements by Lebanese officials and the activities of the Lebanese army are “unequivocally an achievement for Israel.”
But Shai warned that due “the weakness of the Lebanese army, the IDF cannot rely on it and must back it up with its own parallel defense—mainly through detailed intelligence monitoring and targeted thwarting of any violation not only in Southern Lebanon but also [deep] within it, including at sea and air ports.”
The fragility of the situation was highlighted when a LAF soldier was killed, and three others were wounded while attempting to neutralize suspected Hezbollah ordnance in the Tyre district of Southern Lebanon on April 14.
Hezbollah’s real intentions were also apparent when its supporters reportedly burned billboards celebrating Lebanon’s “new era.”
Most tellingly, the Israel Defense Forces is continuing to detect intelligence of illegal Hezbollah activity in Southern Lebanon, and acting on that intelligence. Overnight between April 15 and 16, the IDF conducted strikes against Hezbollah infrastructure in Southern Lebanon.
In one strike near Aitaroun in Southern Lebanon, an IDF aircraft killed Ali Najib Bazzi, identified by the IDF as a squad commander in Hezbollah’s Special Operations unit. Other recent IDF actions included strikes and artillery fire targeting a Hezbollah engineering vehicle near Ayta ash-Shab in Southern Lebanon.
Meanwhile, reports emerged suggesting Hezbollah was actively adapting its methods for acquiring weapons. Reports indicated a shift towards sea-based smuggling routes utilizing Beirut Port.
The Saudi Al-Hadath news site reported on April 8 that Iran’s Quds Force created an arms smuggling sea route that bypasses Syria.
Amidst these reports, Aoun visited Beirut Port on April 11, calling for strict government cargo monitoring.
Karmon expresses skepticism
Senior research scholar Ely Karmon of the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism at Reichman University in Herzliya stated, “There’s no doubt there’s a change in Lebanon, first of all on the political level— the fact that President Joseph Aoun was elected—supported by the West, the United States, Saudi Arabia.”
In addition, he said, “Hezbollah’s political weight in parliament and in Lebanon in general has dropped significantly after the blow they received from the IDF.”
On the other hand, Karmon expressed deep skepticism about Aoun’s stated path to disarming Hezbollah. Aoun’s statement that he “isn’t interested in coming to military confrontation with Hezbollah,” and that it needs to be a “slow process,” as well as his call for Hezbollah to enter Lebanese army units, should not be taken at face value, according to Karmon.
“I don’t really believe it. First of all, because traditionally, in the Lebanese Army, most of the soldiers were Shi’ites, for a simple demographic reason. And therefore, the integration of thousands of Hezbollah fighters or personnel into the army—certainly at this stage in my opinion—it’s a danger that they’ll take control of the army from within, after they’ve already for years cooperated with the army.”
He added, “We know, for example, that they received weapons from the Lebanese Army—tanks and APCs—when they operated in Syria in 2013, 2010, and they even presented them publicly in Qusayr [in Syria]. On the other hand, we also heard one article from a Hezbollah representative who’s on their political committee, stating, ‘Absolutely not, we will not give up the weapons!’ It is clear there’ll be opposition.”
Karmon said he was skeptical about Lebanese government claims about taking over around 95 out of some 250 Hezbollah positions in Southern Lebanon. Karmon assessed that Hezbollah and its Iranian sponsors would be cautious but that they would continue to try “as usual, to act and to bring in weapons, to prepare some infrastructure in case, for example, there is a crisis in the negotiations on the Iranian nuclear issue.”
The post Lebanon Claims It Is Replacing Hezbollah in the South first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
‘Tradition, Tradition!’
An image from “Family at the Seder,” from the 1935 Haggadah by artist Arthur Szyk (b. 1894, Lodz, Poland—d. 1951, New Canaan, CT). Photo: Courtesy of Irvin Ungar
JNS.org – How important is tradition in Judaism? Obviously, the answer is that it is very important. I mean, they even dedicated a major song by that title in “Fiddler on the Roof!”
How strong is the need for tradition in the spiritual consciousness of Jews today? Despite the effects of secularism, I’d venture to suggest that there is still a need inside us to feel connected to our roots, our heritage and our sense of belonging to the Jewish people. Perhaps more than any time of the year, Passover is the season when millions of Jews embrace their traditions with love, warmth and lots of nostalgia.
But for vast numbers of our people, tradition alone has not been enough. And that applies not only to the rebellious among us who may have cast aside their traditions with impunity, but also to many ordinary, thinking people who decided that to do something just because “that’s the way it has always been done” was simply not good enough.
So what if my grandfather did it? My grandfather rode around in a horse and buggy! Must I give up my car for a horse just because my Zaidy rode a horse? And if my Bubbie never got a university degree, why shouldn’t I? Just because my grandparents practiced certain Jewish traditions, why must I? Perhaps those traditions are as obsolete as the horse and buggy?
There are masses of Jews who think this way and who will not be convinced to behave Jewishly just because their grandparents did.
We need to tell them why their grandparents did it. They need to understand that their grandparents’ traditions were not done just for tradition’s sake, but there was a very good reason why their forbears practiced those traditions. And those very same reasons and rationales still hold good today. There is, in fact, no such thing as “empty ritual” in Judaism. Everything has a reason, and a good one, too.
Too many young people were put off by tradition because some cheder or Talmud Torah teacher didn’t take their questions seriously. They were silenced with a wave of the hand, a pinch of the ear, the classic “when you get older, you’ll understand,” or the infamously classic, “just do as you’re told.”
There are answers. There have always been answers. We may not have logical explanations for tsunamis and other tzuris, but all our traditions are founded on substance and have intelligible, credible underpinnings. If we seek answers, we will find them in abundance, including layers and layers of meaning, from the simple to the symbolic to the philosophical and even mystical.
The seventh day of Passover recalls the “Song of the Sea” sung by Moses and the Jewish people following the splitting of the sea and their miraculous deliverance from the Egyptian armies. Early on, we find the verse, “This is my God and I will glorify Him, the God of my fathers, and I will exalt Him.”
The sequence is significant. First comes “my God,” and only thereafter “the God of my fathers.” In the Amidah prayer, the silent devotion, which is the apex of our daily prayers, we begin addressing the “Almighty, as our God and the God of our fathers … Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.” Again, “our God” comes first. So while the God of our fathers, i.e., tradition, most definitely plays a very important role in Judaism, an indispensable prerequisite is that we must make God ours, personally. Every Jew must develop a personal relationship with God. We need to understand the reasons and the significance of our traditions lest they be mistaken for empty ritual to be discarded by the next generation.
Authentic Judaism has never shied away from questions. Questions have always been encouraged and formed a part of our academic heritage. Every page of the Talmud is filled with questions and answers. You don’t have to wait for the Passover seder to ask a question.
When we think, ask and find answers to our faith, the traditions of our grandparents become alive, and we understand fully why we should make them ours. Once a tradition has become ours and we realize that this very same practice has been observed uninterruptedly by our ancestors throughout the generations, then tradition becomes a powerful force that can inspire us forever.
The seders we celebrated at the beginning of Passover are among the most powerful in our faith. They go back to our ancestors in Egypt, where the very first seder was observed. How truly awesome is it that we are still practicing these same traditions more than 3,300 years later!
Our traditions are not empty. They are rich and meaningful and will, please God, be held on to preciously for generations to come.
With acknowledgments to Chabad.org.
The post ‘Tradition, Tradition!’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Thousands of Protesters Rally Against Trump Across US
“Protect Migrants, Protect the Planet” rally in New York City, U.S., April 19, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Caitlin Ochs
Thousands of protesters rallied in Washington and other cities across the US on Saturday to voice their opposition to President Donald Trump’s policies on deportations, government firings, and the wars in Gaza and Ukraine.
Outside the White House, protesters carried banners that read “Workers should have the power,” “No kingship,” “Stop arming Israel” and “Due process,” media footage showed.
Some demonstrators chanted in support of migrants whom the Trump administration has deported or has been attempting to deport while expressing solidarity with people fired by the federal government and with universities whose funding is threatened by Trump.
“As Trump and his administration mobilize the use of the US deportation machine, we are going to organize networks and systems of resistance to defend our neighbors,” a protester said in a rally at Lafayette Square near the White House.
Other protesters waved Palestinian flags while wearing keffiyeh scarves, chanting “free Palestine” and expressing solidarity with Palestinians killed in Israel’s war in Gaza.
Some demonstrators carried symbols expressing support for Ukraine and urging Washington to be more decisive in opposing Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine.
Since his January inauguration, Trump and his billionaire ally, Elon Musk, have gutted the federal government, firing over 200,000 workers and attempting to dismantle various agencies.
The administration has also detained scores of foreign students and threatened to stop federal funding to universities over diversity, equity and inclusion programs, climate initiatives and pro-Palestinian protests. Rights groups have condemned the policies.
Near the Washington Monument, banners from protesters read: “hate never made any nation great” and “equal rights for all does not mean less rights for you.”
Demonstrations were also held in New York City and Chicago, among dozens of other locations. It marked the second day of nationwide demonstrations since Trump took office.
The post Thousands of Protesters Rally Against Trump Across US first appeared on Algemeiner.com.