Putin Presses for ‘Legitimizing’ Assad amid Western Conditions, Arab Silence

A poster depicting Syria’s president Assad is seen as supporters of him celebrate after the results of the presidential election were announced, in Damascus, Syria, May 27, 2021. (Reuters)
A poster depicting Syria’s president Assad is seen as supporters of him celebrate after the results of the presidential election were announced, in Damascus, Syria, May 27, 2021. (Reuters)
TT

Putin Presses for ‘Legitimizing’ Assad amid Western Conditions, Arab Silence

A poster depicting Syria’s president Assad is seen as supporters of him celebrate after the results of the presidential election were announced, in Damascus, Syria, May 27, 2021. (Reuters)
A poster depicting Syria’s president Assad is seen as supporters of him celebrate after the results of the presidential election were announced, in Damascus, Syria, May 27, 2021. (Reuters)

Syrian president Bashar Assad’s reelection to a new seven-year term was met with doubts in the West over the transparency of the elections and a reminder of the conditions to normalize relations with Damascus. Russia, Syria’s main ally, meanwhile, pressed for “legitimizing” the results of the polls, while the silence of Arab countries was interpreted as a positive sign.

Another positive sign was the World Health Organization’s decision to elect the Syrian government to its executive board, a month after the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in The Hague revoked Damascus’ rights and privileges.

Assad’s speech
In contrast to recent years, Assad’s victory speech was short and hand-written and broadcast on television, reminiscent of his father’s speeches in the 1980s. Assad also sought to respond to the anti-regime protests that erupted in 2011 and even attempted to portray his win as a counter-revolution.

Thousands of people had gathered in main squares in cities in regions held by the regime. The elections were held in regions controlled by the regime, therefore, excluding the province of Idlib and its western areas, Qamishli and its eastern areas and some southern regions. Syrians displaced abroad were also excluded from the vote.

In his speech, Assad declared that the Syrian people’s actions in recent weeks were “unprecedented defiance to the enemies of the nation and a shattering blow to their false arrogance and slap in the face to their agents and cronies.” Addressing the people, he added: “You have turned the tide and blown up the rules of the game. You have confirmed, without any doubt, that the national rules are set here, by our hands. There is no room for partners, except our brothers and friends.”

“You have known the revolution and reclaimed it after its name was tarnished by some mercenaries” and some traitors of the Syrian identity, he continued. The elections, he remarked, were not a celebration, “but a revolution, in every meaning of the word, against terrorism, treason and depravity.” It is a revolt of dignity against every immoral person who deigned to be manipulated by others.

Assad aimed his speech against the opposition and “revolutionaries” and thanked those who voted for him. He did not criticize any country or individual by name as he did in his 2014 electoral speech. Sights will be turned to his swearing in speech that should outline Damascus’ political agenda in the coming phase.

In his 2014 speech, Assad had slammed the so-called Arab Spring revolts, saying the Syrian people’s perseverance was the death knell of the uprisings.

Russian leadership
In 2014, Assad was declared victor with 88.7 percent of the vote. He received at the time cables of congratulations from the leaders of Armenia, Afghanistan, Belarus, Venezuela, South Africa and Iran and the BRICs Group (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa).

Russia did not lead the congratulations, but it did after this year’s polls.

President Vladimir Putin’s cable to Assad carried clear signs of defiance to the West, which has refused to acknowledge the “farce” elections.

“The results of the vote categorically confirm your high political reputation and trust your people have in the approach your leadership has adopted to stabilize Syria,” Putin said in his cable.

The Kremlin said that the Putin stressed that he will continue to provide all forms of support to the Syrian partners in fighting terrorism and extremism and offering a comprehensive political process.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said the elections were a sovereign Syrian affair, slamming western criticism of the vote.

Soon after, cables of congratulations poured in from countries allied to Russia and opposed to the United States.

China’s Foreign Ministry expressed Beijing’s readiness to help Damascus defend Syria’s sovereignty and territorial unity. Belarus’ President Alexander Lukashenko voiced his country’s readiness to take part in Syria’s reconstruction. The leaders of Venezuela, North Korea and Abkhazia also extended their congratulations. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said the Syrian people’s vote was as “an important step towards deciding Syria’s fate and prosperity.”

Arab signals
As in 2014, cables of congratulations were sent by the leaders of Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority and Algeria to Assad. Lebanese President Michel Aoun hoped Assad’s reelection will help stabilize Syria, restore unity among its people and pave the way for the return of refugees back to their homes.

PA President Mahmoud Abbas expressed his pride in the mutual ties of fraternity and respect between the Palestinian and Syrian people.

In 2014, head of the Lebanese Hezbollah party Hassan Nasrallah had declared that the “solution in Syria starts with Assad and ends with Assad.” In congratulating Assad on Friday, he issued a brief statement in which he hoped that “the coming years would be a major opportunity for Syria’s return to its natural and leading role in the Arab world and on the international scene.”

Significantly, this year’s elections were held at the Syrian consulates in the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait. This stands in contrast to the 2014 Arab position. The elections at the time were only held in 39 countries, including nine Arab ones: Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, Bahrain, Oman, Yemen, Sudan, Algeria and Mauritania.

In 2014, then Arab League chief Nabil al-Arabi said the elections were a “clear and flagrant violation” of Damascus’ vows before the UN. The polls were also met with Gulf criticism and the recognition of over a hundred countries, including Arab ones, of the opposition Syrian National Coalition as a representative of the Syrian people.

In sharp contrast today, no Arab country or official has come out to reject the results of the elections. This new position has emerged in wake of the “cautious normalization of relations” taking place between Arab countries and Damascus, and reports that Syria’s membership at the Arab League may be restored. It has been suspended since late 2011.

Qatar was the sole standout in declaring that it “had no reason to restore relations with the Syrian regime.”

Absent American leadership
In 2014, the West, lead by the United States, was clear in rejecting the elections. Indeed, the G7 said: “We denounce the 3 June sham presidential election: there is no future for Assad in Syria.”

With the 2021 polls, a statement by the foreign ministers of the US, Britain, France, Germany and Italy questioned the integrity of the elections. “We denounce the Assad regime’s decision to hold an election outside of the framework described in UN Security Council Resolution 2254 and we support the voices of all Syrians, including civil society organizations and the Syrian opposition, who have condemned the electoral process as illegitimate.

“As outlined in the resolution, free and fair elections should be convened under UN supervision to the highest international standards of transparency and accountability. For an election to be credible, all Syrians should be allowed to participate, including internally displaced Syrians, refugees, and members of the diaspora, in a safe and neutral environment.

“Without these elements, this fraudulent election does not represent any progress towards a political settlement,” they said.

The European Union went a step further in warning that the polls should not be a precursor to normalizing relations with Damascus. The day of the elections, the bloc extended sanctions against 353 Syrian figures and entities for another year. EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell stressed that the bloc does not recognize the results of the polls, a stance echoed by Ankara.

Western officials reiterated their conditions for normalizing relations and contributing in Syria’s reconstruction.

In Washington, officials underlined the Caesar Act against Syria and the sanctions that would be imposed against any party that helps in the country’s reconstruction.

“We have absolutely no intention to normalize our own relations with the Assad regime. And we would certainly, I think, call on all other governments that are thinking of doing so to think very carefully about how the Syrian president has treated his own people,” a senior US official said on Wednesday.

“You know, it’s very difficult to imagine normalizing diplomatic relations with a regime that’s been so brutal to its own people,” the official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said.

Seven years ago, then UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon rejected the Syrian elections and their impact on the political process. Now, UN chief Antonio Guterres has yet to make a statement about the elections. UN envoy to Syria Geir Pedersen has also shied away from commenting on the polls, sufficing by recalling the standards that should be followed in any elections to be considered credible.



What Will the Next Leader of the UN Need to Get the Job Done in an Increasingly Complex World?

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres receives a standing ovation after speaking during the 81st United Nations General Assembly at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, on September 22, 2026. (Photo by ANGELA WEISS / AFP)
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres receives a standing ovation after speaking during the 81st United Nations General Assembly at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, on September 22, 2026. (Photo by ANGELA WEISS / AFP)
TT

What Will the Next Leader of the UN Need to Get the Job Done in an Increasingly Complex World?

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres receives a standing ovation after speaking during the 81st United Nations General Assembly at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, on September 22, 2026. (Photo by ANGELA WEISS / AFP)
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres receives a standing ovation after speaking during the 81st United Nations General Assembly at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, on September 22, 2026. (Photo by ANGELA WEISS / AFP)

On Jan. 1, the next United Nations secretary-general will take over an aging organization still controlled by World War II powers. What will the world need from that person?

Once a major player in solving conflicts and crises around the world, the 81-year-old institution has been sidelined from the top table in trying to end the wars in Iran, Ukraine and Gaza. And its precarious financial situation — caused mainly by the billions of dollars the United States owes — has forced major cuts to its humanitarian and development programs where it has remained a key player.

The annual global gathering of world leaders at the United Nations that ended last week shed some light on what the next UN chief needs to focus on and pursue.

In his farewell address to the General Assembly, outgoing Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told global leaders, “The world does not need a weaker United Nations.”

“It needs a UN strong enough to face the world as it is," he said, “and determined enough to build the world as it should.”

But is that even possible?

Much talk of a shared future with the UN at the center

After 10 years at the helm of the United Nations, Guterres said he is strongly convinced that its greatest power is to build a tomorrow that works for everyone. As he put it, “Our shared future will be forged by whether humanity can govern power wisely.”

Guterres then issued challenges to the United Nations that will be led by his successor, the 193 countries in the General Assembly “and humanity itself."

Will you “uphold the law before impunity becomes normalized?” Will you “end wars before they consume generations?” Will you tackle inequality “before societies fracture?” Will you accelerate climate action “before tipping points are crossed?” Will you govern artificial intelligence “before it governs us?" Guterres asked.

For the next secretary-general — the selection process is ongoing — the top priority will be reconfiguring the United Nations to reflect the 21st century rather than the post-World War II era when it was established.

The new UN chief “will have the most monumental task that the UN has faced in decades because you have a UN that’s going through this critical reform process that it has not gone through for a long time,” said Kizito Byenkya, the Open Society Institute’s advocacy director.

The UN's financial crisis has led to budget cuts and efforts to consolidate programs and agencies, and eliminate hundreds of mandates ordering the UN Secretariat to take a wide variety of actions and deliver reports, many that never get read. That's just to name a few.

At the same time, Byenkya told The Associated Press, “You have huge pressure on all sides for the new secretary-general to act like a general and really play a central role in mediation for world conflicts.” He cited the late secretary-general Kofi Annan, who became directly involved in some conflicts and was a skilled mediator and negotiator.

“If you look at the conflicts we've been facing in the last few years, let's say from Gaza to Sudan to Ukraine and more, you often have to ask yourself: Where has the role of the United Nations been with all of these?,” he said. “In the time of Kofi Annan, he was center to all.”

Reform sounds good but is a lot harder than one might think

During high-level week, leader after leader spoke of the need for reform. But when it comes to taking action, serious and sometimes impossible differences emerge, especially when it comes to reforming the Security Council, the UN’s most powerful body and still controlled by the World War II victors.

All UN member nations want to see the council reflect the 21st century world, but there are huge national differences on how it should be expanded. That has stymied progress for decades.

The five permanent members — the US, Russia, China, Britain and France — hold veto power, which gives them ultimate control. Africa, home to 1.5 billion people, has no permanent seat. Neither does Latin America. Neither do the collection of island nations whose existence is threatened by climate change.

“Security Council reform is not a favor to Africa,” Ghana’s President John Mahama told world leaders last week. “It is an imperative for the legitimacy, credibility, and survival of the United Nations.”

Mahama also raised perhaps the most difficult problem that will confront the next UN chief: the world’s “intense fragmentation, deepening inequality and eroded trust in our multilateral system.”

“We must address the alarming breakdown of global order today,” he said, pointing to “the dangerous drift toward unilateralism."

Mahama lauded the UN Charter, whose opening words say the organization was founded to prevent a repetition of the 20th century’s two world wars. That, he said, “must reign supreme over the cynical doctrine that `might makes right.’”


Thousands of Young Sailors Adjust to Iran War Aboard USS George Washington

Night Aircraft Handling Officer Breana Royston and AE1 Andrew Schmucker coordinate aircraft positioning aboard the USS George Washington in the Arabian Sea, September 13, 2026 (Reuters)
Night Aircraft Handling Officer Breana Royston and AE1 Andrew Schmucker coordinate aircraft positioning aboard the USS George Washington in the Arabian Sea, September 13, 2026 (Reuters)
TT

Thousands of Young Sailors Adjust to Iran War Aboard USS George Washington

Night Aircraft Handling Officer Breana Royston and AE1 Andrew Schmucker coordinate aircraft positioning aboard the USS George Washington in the Arabian Sea, September 13, 2026 (Reuters)
Night Aircraft Handling Officer Breana Royston and AE1 Andrew Schmucker coordinate aircraft positioning aboard the USS George Washington in the Arabian Sea, September 13, 2026 (Reuters)

An emergency alert blares from a loudspeaker, and Damon Dennard and other sailors on the deck of the aircraft carrier USS George Washington are scrambling. Dennard, 23, is readying bombs for loading onto aircraft as his crewmates race to their positions.

“It has been eventful,” said Dennard, an aviation ordnanceman airman apprentice. Once the alert ends, he takes a breath, sits on one of the bombs and jokes that he probably expected an easier deployment.

“It’s crazy, but at the end of the day, it’s work. That’s all.”

Dennard was one of dozens of sailors Reuters spoke with in September on a rare visit to a US warship that is central to the Iran war.

The visit began at a particularly tense moment, just three days after the US military blew up five Iranian oil tankers in retaliation for Iran targeting a US Navy warship.

The George Washington’s mission near the Strait of Hormuz which has no defined end-date came as a surprise to the crew, who were deployed from Japan at the end of August to relieve another carrier.

The aircraft carrier is effectively a floating city of around 5,000 personnel, each with their own mission, from Majesta Ochoa, who operates a cash register, to Lieutenant Commander Brody Samaha, a “shooter” who helps oversee the launch of aircraft from the carrier’s catapults.
But there is a sense of synchronization as the sailors go about their jobs, crew say.

The aircraft carrier is effectively a floating city of around 5,000 personnel, each with their own mission, from Majesta Ochoa, who operates a cash register, to Brody Samaha, a “shooter” who helps oversee the launch of aircraft from the carrier’s catapults.

“It’s a dance, with lots of people checking each other,” Samaha said, before adding that the flight deck is also a “very dangerous place to be. It’s very unforgiving.”

Ouija Board

Breana Royston, the night aircraft handling officer, or ‘NACHO,’ has a unique perspective over the dangerous maneuvering on the flight deck.

Her job is to supervise aircraft movement, including bringing fighter jets up to the flight deck and back down to the hangar bay via massive elevators.

To do that, she uses what’s known in Navy parlance as a “ouija board” — a real-time model of the deck, with miniature aircraft all lined up in their current positions. It looks a little like a strategy board game.

“We’ve been on our toes the last week, maneuvering and everything — with everything that's going on,” Royston said, adding it’s been “kind of crazy, really busy.”

“It’s nerve-wracking, but it’s fun,” she said.

The Iranian government has repeatedly condemned US military actions in the Strait of Hormuz. On September 25, the Iranian foreign minister said the insecurity prevailing in the strait was the “direct result of the aggressive actions of the United States and the Israeli regime.”

The war began in February with joint strikes on Iranian targets by the US and Israel. US President Donald Trump has said many times the conflict would soon be over, but it persisted for longer than initially expected.

In August, in response to reports of deteriorating conditions, low morale and suicide attempts on the Lincoln, US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said the accounts “misrepresented” the reality, praising sailors who endure austere conditions.

Extended Deployments Pose Strain on Crew

Still, extended deployments can pose enormous strain on crews’ mental health, particularly in wartime, and are a challenge for any navy. Sailors must maintain a state of alert and readiness, heightened in the case of the George Washington due to the threat of drone and missile attack from Iran.

“Morale is really important to us,” said Rear Admiral Jeffrey Heames, the commander of Carrier Strike Group 5.

Heames talked about ensuring the ability of the crew to contact home and receive mail.

“Some of those things affect how sailors hold up out in this kind of environment,” Heames said. “They are huge focus areas for me.”

Reuters spoke with Seaman Deandre Cook as he checked in with his wife back home on a video call. She was holding one of their young daughters on her hip.

It was hard being away from his family, Cook said, but added: “The distance makes the relationship stronger.”

Growing Up

As jets thundered off the carrier’s deck above them, hundreds of members of the George Washington’s crew gathered for a ceremony to mark the 25th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks — an event many of them were too young to remember.

Al Qaeda’s attacks on New York and Washington propelled the US into two decades of war that sent troops to Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and elsewhere. Many supporters of Trump had hoped Middle East wars were a thing of the past.

After a sailor sang the national anthem, the chaplain on board, Ben Garrett, delivered a prayer as the assembled crew bowed their heads.

“Help us honor those who have gone before us,” Garrett said.

Garrett later told Reuters that many of the crew members are still learning the basics of growing up, including skills like patience, managing relationships and career expectations.

“A huge percentage of this ship are between the ages of 19 and 24 years old,” said Garrett, a Roman Catholic priest. “So they’re trying to figure out being an adult while they’re out here.”
Sometimes sailors enlist to get away from a small town or a situation back home, Garrett added.

Lieutenant Commander Brian Lasley said there were more people on the George Washington than back in his hometown of Fredericktown, Missouri, whose population was 4,429 in the 2020 census.

Camren Pollard, 24, an interior communications electrician third class, said he joined the Navy on a spur-of-the-moment decision after seeing older coworkers unhappy in his previous job. “I wanted to change things in my life,” he said.

“My mom freaked out more than anything. My little brother thought it was kind of cool.” For Pollard, however, “I don’t think about it a whole lot. It’s work for me.”


US-led Troops Exit Iraq: What's Next for Pro-Iran Groups?

A giant Iraqi flag hangs off the reconstructed 12th century "Hadba" leaning minaret at the historic Great Mosque of al-Nuri in the old city of Mosul on September 29, 2026 as Iraq marks the withdrawal of the US-led anti-ISIS coalition forces from the country.  (Photo by Zaid AL-OBEIDI / AFP)
A giant Iraqi flag hangs off the reconstructed 12th century "Hadba" leaning minaret at the historic Great Mosque of al-Nuri in the old city of Mosul on September 29, 2026 as Iraq marks the withdrawal of the US-led anti-ISIS coalition forces from the country. (Photo by Zaid AL-OBEIDI / AFP)
TT

US-led Troops Exit Iraq: What's Next for Pro-Iran Groups?

A giant Iraqi flag hangs off the reconstructed 12th century "Hadba" leaning minaret at the historic Great Mosque of al-Nuri in the old city of Mosul on September 29, 2026 as Iraq marks the withdrawal of the US-led anti-ISIS coalition forces from the country.  (Photo by Zaid AL-OBEIDI / AFP)
A giant Iraqi flag hangs off the reconstructed 12th century "Hadba" leaning minaret at the historic Great Mosque of al-Nuri in the old city of Mosul on September 29, 2026 as Iraq marks the withdrawal of the US-led anti-ISIS coalition forces from the country. (Photo by Zaid AL-OBEIDI / AFP)

With the US-led anti-extremist coalition leaving Iraq, Baghdad faces mounting pressure to rein in Tehran-backed armed groups, a difficult task in a country long caught between its allies, the US and Iran.

Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi, who assumed power earlier this year with the United States' blessing, has pledged that after the coalition exits on Wednesday, pro-Iran groups would hand over their weapons to the state.

But the issue has proven far more complicated than simple announcements, said AFP.

Iraq has long been a proxy battleground for the US and Iran, with each interfering in major political decisions and government formation.

The ongoing Middle East war, during which Iran-backed groups in Iraq targeted US facilities there and around the region hundreds of times, has deepened Iraq's entanglement.

- 'Tricky' -

Several senior Iraqi officials told AFP that Iran will not accept that the factions hand over their weapons, especially amid the regional war, and its officials have clearly relayed the message.

"If there's a deal between the US and Iran, I think that this whole issue becomes very easy to deal with," Iraqi political analyst Sajad Jiyad said.

But Jiyad said "Iran has been very clear that while there is a conflict going on, they cannot give up their strategic capabilities", including the Iraqi groups and "their ability to attack US interests in Iraq and the region".

It is, however, a "tricky situation", because Iran doesn't want an "unstable Iraq", he added.

"Iran's agenda is to reach a deal with the US, so that these groups will naturally reduce their visibility and activity," without giving up capabilities.

The factions also want assurances that the US won't target them before they consider surrendering their weapons.

But if no progress is forthcoming in terms of disarming these groups, then "the US is not going to make a longer-term commitment of not targeting them", he said.

It will continue on its usual paths: diplomatic and economic pressure through sanctions, and occasional strikes.

- 'Liability' -

The US-led coalition deployed to Iraq and Syria in 2014 to fight the ISIS group, which seized large swathes of both countries and committed atrocities.

Both the coalition and Tehran-backed groups fought ISIS, their common enemy.

After ISIS's defeat in Iraq in 2017, those groups demanded the withdrawal of US troops and began targeting them with drones and missiles, triggering US retaliatory strikes that killed several of their commanders over the years.

US pressure on successive Iraqi governments to disarm the factions mounted, especially after they intervened in support of Palestinians during the Gaza war in 2023, and later backed Tehran in the Middle East war.

Political analyst Jiyad said little should be expected after the coalition's pullout.

"We are not going to get disarmament... but there has to be some sort of progress and some plan," he said.

"What is probably going to happen is the process begins" towards a solution, but it will require time and "trust-building measures".

The Tehran-backed groups feel the government is unable to protect them from the US, and the government sees them as a "liability," he added.

- No plan -

While some groups said they would disarm, other powerful factions refuse to do so.

But the government "does not even have a plan" for how it is going to disarm them, a diplomatic source in Baghdad said.

Two senior politicians told AFP that Zaidi, a newcomer to politics, had repeatedly said he was ready to "confront" the groups if they don't disarm.

For weeks, tensions grew until an unannounced truce was reached, with the intervention of senior politicians who are now hoping to work out a deal.

An Iraqi official said that "the issue needs time to reassure the factions, and prevent any confrontation between Iraqi forces and the armed groups".

Kazem al-Fartoussi, spokesperson for the Kataeb Sayyid al-Shuhada armed group, said the factions don't want a confrontation with the state because "there will be no winners".

But "our weapons are precious, so we have said these weapons are in exchange for sovereignty," including the withdrawal of foreign troops and an end to American political and economic interference.

Fartoussi said the factions are in talks with the government about "regulating" their weapons, as well as their relationship with the state, but he doesn't trust the US.

For the Americans and Israelis, their objective is "nothing other than eliminating the factions, not the weapons," Fartoussi said.

If the issue is the factions' "existence", then "we reject any discussion".