Why Did Russia Set up a New ‘Tripartite Process’ in Syria?

Qatar's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Turkey's Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu attend a meeting in Doha, Qatar March 11, 2021. (Handout via Reuters)
Qatar's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Turkey's Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu attend a meeting in Doha, Qatar March 11, 2021. (Handout via Reuters)
TT
20

Why Did Russia Set up a New ‘Tripartite Process’ in Syria?

Qatar's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Turkey's Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu attend a meeting in Doha, Qatar March 11, 2021. (Handout via Reuters)
Qatar's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Turkey's Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu attend a meeting in Doha, Qatar March 11, 2021. (Handout via Reuters)

The first test facing the newly launched “tripartite consultations process” on Syria will be the successful convening of the sixth round of the Constitutional Committee talks before the advent of the holy fasting month of Ramadan in mid-April. The new process was kicked off by Russia with Turkey and Qatar, and without Iran, on Thursday.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov had vowed at the conclusion of Thursday’s talks in Doha that the committee would meet next month.

US stance
The new process was launched amid Russian diplomatic criticism while the United States was transitioning from the Donald Trump to the Joe Biden administration. Clearly, Syria is a not a priority for Biden. His administration is currently reviewing American policy in the war-torn country and Brett McGurk has been appointed White House Coordinator for the Middle East and North Africa. All signs point to Washington’s insistence on keeping forces in northeastern Syria. The deployment will not be victim to sudden tweets by Biden, which had been the case with his predecessor.

The US will continue to express the same “moral” position on the Syrian crisis, but it will not find itself forced to take any tangible steps on the ground because it does not want to act as the world’s policeman. Washington will instead return to seeking its direct interest that lies in fighting ISIS and making do with providing political support for the implementation of UN Security Council resolution 2254, offering humanitarian aid and issuing statements that urge accountability for crimes.

Signs of the US stepping back were evident when Secretary of State Antony Blinken cancelled a televised address before the Brussels donor conference, set for March 30. He will not attend the event. The US will be represented by the American ambassador. Blinken will instead be present at a conference for the international coalition fighting ISIS, set for the same day as the Brussels event.

Clear priorities
Moreover, American institutions are reviewing the impact the Caesar Act is having on the fight against the coronavirus pandemic and on the humanitarian situation. This does not mean that the sanctions will be revoked as some US Congress members continue to press punitive measures on the regime.

The US has agreed to issuing a statement with Britain, Germany and France on Sunday that outlines the political stance on the situation in Syria on the tenth anniversary of the eruption of the crisis. The European Union will issue a similar statement. Among the main points is the demand for the upcoming presidential elections to be based on resolution 2254. Failure to do so will not help in restoring relations with Damascus. It also notes that the causes that sparked the crisis in 2011 remain unaddressed.

Russian attack
Amid this picture and growing tension between Washington and Moscow, Russia decided to appeal to main Arab countries in a new attempt to persuade them to normalize relations with Damascus and restore its membership in the Arab League. It is also seeking their contribution in Syria’s reconstruction and in humanitarian aid.

Some of these countries believe that the causes that led to Syria’s suspension still remain and are demanding a political solution that pleases all Syrian parties. They also believe that sectarian militias are hampering the solution and that they must pull out from the country. Other countries believe that the Caesar Act impedes the chances of normalizing ties.

Speaking alongside his Qatari counterpart Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, Lavrov said he welcomes the development of a collective Arab stance over the need to return Syria to the Arab League.

“I believe that such a unified decision would play a major role in stability in this entire large region,” he added.

Evidently, this unified position has not been developed yet.

It is tempting to compare the new consultations process between Russia, Turkey and Qatar to the Astana process that was launched between Russia, Turkey and Iran in May 2017. The latter, however, was initially focused on the military aspect of the conflict before shifting to holding a national dialogue conference in Sochi in early 2018. It then turned its attention to the constitutional path in early 2021.

Lavrov said the three countries were not seeking to replace the Astana process.

The tripartite process launched on Thursday directly focuses on the humanitarian and constitutional aspects of the crisis and indirectly address political and military issues, such as the confrontation with the Kurds, Washington’s allies.

Written agreement
The statement from Thursday’s meeting is greatly similar to statements made by the Astana group, especially in regards to the constitutional process.

Russia, Turkey and Qatar stressed “the need to combat terrorism in all of its forms and to confront all separatist agendas.” These agendas refer to the US-backed Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). Such a statement is significant given that the US deployment in Kurdish-held regions east of the Euphrates River will continue during the Biden administration. The appointment of McGurk, who is viewed as a Kurdish sympathizer by Turkey, only cements this position and puts Washington further at odds with Moscow, Ankara and Damascus.

The gatherers on Thursday also underscored the need to increase humanitarian aid to everyone in Syria and throughout its territories. Ankara interprets such as a statement as a precursor to Russia’s extension of the resolution that allows cross-border aid deliveries. The resolution expires in mid-July. For Moscow, this statement could pave the way for the beginning of Qatari and Turkish contributions to Syria’s reconstruction, despite opposition from Europe and the US.

The consultations process also expressed its support for the constitutional path. It underlined the significant role played by the Constitutional Committee, which Moscow, Ankara and Doha hope will meet before Ramadan. On Wednesday, head of the government-backed delegation at the committee, Ahmed al-Kuzbari, submitted a proposal to head of the opposition delegation, Hadi al-Bahra, on the mechanism for the drafting of the constitution. On Thursday, Bahra submitted a “counter-proposal” to UN envoy Geir Pedersen, who will in turn send it to Kuzbari.

The test lies in whether a written agreement, desired by Pedersen, can be reached over the mechanism and whether a new round of committee talks can be held within weeks. Moscow is hoping for this, but the coming days will reveal Iran’s position after it was not invited to the Doha meeting. Damascus has also yet to declare its stance.

Representatives of the new process are set to hold their next meeting in Turkey and later in Russia.



Iran-Israel War: A Lifeline for Netanyahu?

FILE - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a ceremony on the eve of Israel's Remembrance Day for fallen soldiers at the Yad LaBanim Memorial in Jerusalem, on April 29, 2025. (Abir Sultan/Pool Photo via AP, File)
FILE - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a ceremony on the eve of Israel's Remembrance Day for fallen soldiers at the Yad LaBanim Memorial in Jerusalem, on April 29, 2025. (Abir Sultan/Pool Photo via AP, File)
TT
20

Iran-Israel War: A Lifeline for Netanyahu?

FILE - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a ceremony on the eve of Israel's Remembrance Day for fallen soldiers at the Yad LaBanim Memorial in Jerusalem, on April 29, 2025. (Abir Sultan/Pool Photo via AP, File)
FILE - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a ceremony on the eve of Israel's Remembrance Day for fallen soldiers at the Yad LaBanim Memorial in Jerusalem, on April 29, 2025. (Abir Sultan/Pool Photo via AP, File)

The Iran-Israel war has helped strengthen Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu domestically and overseas, just as his grip on power looked vulnerable.

On the eve of launching strikes on Iran, his government looked to be on the verge of collapse, with a drive to conscript ultra-Orthodox Jews threatening to scupper his fragile coalition.

Nearly two years on from Hamas's unprecedented attack in 2023, Netanyahu was under growing domestic criticism for his handling of the war in Gaza, where dozens of hostages remain unaccounted for, said AFP.

Internationally too, he was coming under pressure including from longstanding allies, who since the war with Iran began have gone back to expressing support.

Just days ago, polls were predicting Netanyahu would lose his majority if new elections were held, but now, his fortunes appear to have reversed, and Israelis are seeing in "Bibi" the man of the moment.

– 'Reshape the Middle East' –

For decades, Netanyahu has warned of the risk of a nuclear attack on Israel by Iran -- a fear shared by most Israelis.

Yonatan Freeman, a geopolitics expert at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, said Netanyahu's argument that the pre-emptive strike on Iran was necessary draws "a lot of public support" and that the prime minister has been "greatly strengthened".

Even the opposition has rallied behind him.

"Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is my political rival, but his decision to strike Iran at this moment in time is the right one," opposition leader Yair Lapid wrote in a Jerusalem Post op-ed.

A poll published Saturday by a conservative Israeli channel showed that 54 percent of respondents expressed confidence in the prime minister.

The public had had time to prepare for the possibility of an offensive against Iran, with Netanyahu repeatedly warning that Israel was fighting for its survival and had an opportunity to "reshape the Middle East."

During tit-for-tat military exchanges last year, Israel launched air raids on targets in Iran in October that are thought to have severely damaged Iranian air defenses.

Israel's then-defense minister Yoav Gallant said the strikes had shifted "the balance of power" and had "weakened" Iran.

"In fact, for the past 20 months, Israelis have been thinking about this (a war with Iran)," said Denis Charbit, a political scientist at Israel's Open University.

Since Hamas's October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, Netanyahu has ordered military action in Gaza, against the Iran-backed Hezbollah group in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen, as well as targets in Syria where long-time leader Bashar al-Assad fell in December last year.

"Netanyahu always wants to dominate the agenda, to be the one who reshuffles the deck himself -- not the one who reacts -- and here he is clearly asserting his Churchillian side, which is, incidentally, his model," Charbit said.

"But depending on the outcome and the duration (of the war), everything could change, and Israelis might turn against Bibi and demand answers."

– Silencing critics –

For now, however, people in Israel see the conflict with Iran as a "necessary war," according to Nitzan Perelman, a researcher specialized in Israel at the National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) in France.

"Public opinion supports this war, just as it has supported previous ones," she added.

"It's very useful for Netanyahu because it silences criticism, both inside the country and abroad."

In the weeks ahead of the Iran strikes, international criticism of Netanyahu and Israel's military had reached unprecedented levels.

After more than 55,000 deaths in Gaza, according to the health ministry in the Hamas-run territory, and a blockade that has produced famine-like conditions there, Israel has faced growing isolation and the risk of sanctions, while Netanyahu himself is the subject of an international arrest warrant for alleged war crimes.

But on Sunday, two days into the war with Iran, the Israeli leader received a phone call from European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, while Foreign Minister Gideon Saar has held talks with numerous counterparts.

"There's more consensus in Europe in how they see Iran, which is more equal to how Israel sees Iran," explained Freeman from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Tuesday that Israel was doing "the dirty work... for all of us."

The idea that a weakened Iran could lead to regional peace and the emergence of a new Middle East is appealing to the United States and some European countries, according to Freeman.

But for Perelman, "Netanyahu is exploiting the Iranian threat, as he always has."