US, Russian, Turkish Agreements in Syria Await Military ‘Interpretation’

Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan shake hands during a meeting in Ankara. (Reuters file photo)
Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan shake hands during a meeting in Ankara. (Reuters file photo)
TT

US, Russian, Turkish Agreements in Syria Await Military ‘Interpretation’

Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan shake hands during a meeting in Ankara. (Reuters file photo)
Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan shake hands during a meeting in Ankara. (Reuters file photo)

Iran has become involved, through military means and services provided, in northeastern Syria where American, Russian and Turkish forces are deployed.

The three militaries have become deployed there through a series of agreements that military officials are seeking to implement on the ground in a way that averts a clash between the rivals.

On Friday, Tehran emerged in the picture where an Iranian firm has been tasked with tackling a water crisis in predominantly Kurdish al-Hasakeh where Kurds have accused Ankara of manipulating water supplies.

In the Deir Ezzor countryside, Iran has kicked off a training for its allied factions on the use of drones. The move took place days after US officials accused Iran of attacking the American al-Tanf military base.

Iran’s involvement complicates an already complex picture. Russia on Thursday deployed a fighter jet at Qamishli airport, while Turkey has for weeks been threatening to launch a new offensive against Kurdish factions near its border.

Washington, Moscow and Ankara have struck numerous agreements that manage the deployment of their respective forces in northern Syria. American, Russia and Turkish officials have repeatedly stressed the need for full compliance to these agreements that have effectively divided Syria into three zones of influence, overseen by three armies and in partnership or alliance with various Syrian parties and rivals.

What sort of agreements have been struck? Do the three concerned parties have an explanation for them? Is there a difference between the military’s “interpretation” of these agreements and how diplomats have phrased them?

From Astana to Idlib
Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s agreements over the Idlib province go back to the “de-escalation” deal that was struck in Astana on May 4, 2017. That day, Russia, Iran and Turkey agreed on a document that among many other points, calls for their “solid commitment to the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Syrian territories” in line with UN Security Council resolution 2254.

On September 17, 2018, Russia, Iran and Turkey reached an agreement on Idlib during a meeting in Sochi. It called for setting up an arms-free zone that is 15-20 kilometers deep. They agreed to deploy military observers and set up checkpoints, paving the way for thousands of Turkish soldiers, Iranian groups and Russian observers to enter the region.

Observation points without observation
Indeed, observation points were set up and the Hama-Aleppo highway was reopened, but several articles of the agreement were not implemented. In early 2020, Syrian forces, backed by Russia, kicked off a military operation in Idlib. They seized vast territories, forcing the displacement of tens of thousands of people.

Turkey soon entered the picture, but a military clash was averted. On March 5, 2020, Putin and Erdogan held a long meeting in Moscow where they reached a new agreement on Idlib that acts as a follow up to the one struck in Sochi.

They agreed to halt combat operations and set up a secure corridor north and south of the Aleppo-Latakia highway. They agreed to deploy joint Russian and Turkish patrols along the highway on March 15.

The patrols were deployed, but the highway was not reopened. Damascus also did not withdraw to the agreed border of the de-escalation zone.

The frontlines there stood in place for 18 months until September when Moscow and Damascus began to escalate their operations in Idlib. On September 26, Russian jets struck a Turkey-backed factions in northern Aleppo. They also struck areas in the Idlib countryside that had not been targeted since the signing of the March 2020 agreement.

The escalation continued until Putin and Erdogan met in Sochi on September 29. They did not hold a press conference after their talks and did not issue a joint statement to summarize their discussions.

Available information saidPutin and Erdogan signed a follow up deal to the military agreement, giving Turkey until the end of the year to fulfill its pledges to provide a secure zone alongside the Aleppo-Latakia highway and fight extremists. For its part, Russia pledged to cease its comprehensive military operations and prevent the displacement of more civilians and refugees towards the Turkish border.

Daraa to Qamishli
In parallel to the agreements between Russia, Turkey and Iran, Moscow was striking deals with the Americans. The first covered southwestern Syria and the other covered its northeast.

In the northwest, the US agreed to abandon opposition factions in Daraa and allow the return of government forces in July 2018. This agreement was continued in September when remaining opposition members laid down their light weapons, regime forces were allowed to fully return to the area and the border with Jordan was reopened. In the northeast, the American and Russian militaries reached a non-collision agreement.

In October 2019, then US President Donald Trump ordered the withdrawal of American troops from the border with Turkey. This allowed Turkish forces to carry out an incursion in Ras al-Ain and Tal Abyad east of the Euphrates and reshuffle military cards there.

On October 22, Putin and Erdogan reached another agreement in Sochi, this time over northeastern Syria. They agreed to commit to the regional and political unity of Syria and protect Turkey’s national security. They expressed their determination to combat all forms of terrorism and separatist projects in Syria – a reference to the Kurds, who are allied to Washington.

On the military level, the agreement called for maintaining the situation as it is in Ras al-Ain and Tal Abyad. It voiced its backing to the Adana agreement that allows Turkey to enter five kilometers into northern Syria to pursue terrorists and members of the Kurdistan Workers Party.

Crowded Skies
Operation rooms were set up to coordinate patrols and operations in northeastern Syria – an area that is already crowded by armies on land and in the sky. American, Russian and Turkish bases have been set up on the ground and American and Russian jets and Turkish drones roam the skies.

American, Russian and Turkish officials have repeatedly called on all sides to commit to signed agreements. There is no doubt, however, that each party is more focused on certain agreements over others. Moscow, for example, is more focused on the Idlib agreement, while Ankara has its eyes set on the situation east of the Euphrates. Washington, meanwhile, wants Ankara to hold back from attacking its Kurdish allies. Turkey, for its part, repeatedly reminds the US of the need to keep the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) away from its borders.

Failure to implement this last point has been pushing Turkey towards launching another operation against the Kurds. It is paramount for Ankara to prevent the establishment of a “Kurdish entity” south of its borders and it will view such a development as a national security threat.

Turkey has over the past three years carried out various operations in northern Syria aimed at fragmenting the “Kurdish entity” in the region.

Before receiving Erdogan in September, Putin escalated Russian attacks on Idlib and maintained coordination in the region east of the Euphrates. Before meeting US President Joe Biden on the sidelines of the climate summit in Glasgow in two days, Erdogan mobilized forces east of the Euphrates and in northern Aleppo. Putin also deployed fighter jets in Qamishli, the “capital” of the Kurds, and where pressure has been mounting on the American troops there ever since the US pullout from Afghanistan.

Amid all this, Iran, which is already present in the Alboukamal and al-Mayadeen regions west of the Euphrates, has started to turn to its “soft power” to counter these forces. It kicked off these efforts by addressing the water crisis in al-Hasakeh.

All of these developments demonstrate that the situation in Idlib, Aleppo and east of the Euphrates are connected even as the military has different interpretations of agreements signed by diplomats at the bidding of political leaders.



How Israel’s Regional Neighbors See Its Upcoming Elections

 Israeli right-wing activists supporting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gather for the Jewish holiday of Sukkot, the Feast of the Tabernacles, in a field outside Kibbutz Nir-Am by the Israel-Gaza border on September 27, 2026. (AFP)
Israeli right-wing activists supporting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gather for the Jewish holiday of Sukkot, the Feast of the Tabernacles, in a field outside Kibbutz Nir-Am by the Israel-Gaza border on September 27, 2026. (AFP)
TT

How Israel’s Regional Neighbors See Its Upcoming Elections

 Israeli right-wing activists supporting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gather for the Jewish holiday of Sukkot, the Feast of the Tabernacles, in a field outside Kibbutz Nir-Am by the Israel-Gaza border on September 27, 2026. (AFP)
Israeli right-wing activists supporting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gather for the Jewish holiday of Sukkot, the Feast of the Tabernacles, in a field outside Kibbutz Nir-Am by the Israel-Gaza border on September 27, 2026. (AFP)

Israel's upcoming elections are being followed closely by its regional neighbors, who are aware that any outcome will have ramifications far beyond the country's borders.

In his Likud party's campaign launch this month, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu repeated his refrain that he "has changed the face of the Middle East" and vowed to continue doing so.

He has been unapologetic about keeping Israeli troops in neighboring Lebanon and Syria, while his ministers tout plans to displace Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza, creating a refugee crisis for Jordan and Egypt and making a future Palestinian state impossible.

Opinion polls show the October 27 elections are likely to be close. The bloc led by Netanyahu and his far-right and ultra-Orthodox allies are squaring off against that of his main opponent, centrist Gadi Eisenkot.

AFP correspondents around the region take a look at how different countries are following the contest:

- Jordan -

While Netanyahu has stopped short of formally annexing the West Bank, observers say unofficial annexation is creeping in, as his government -- the most right-wing in Israel's history -- approves an unprecedented number of settlements.

Government officials repeatedly call for the expulsion of over three million Palestinians across the Jordan River, posing "an existential threat" to the Hashemite kingdom, according to Oraib Rantawi, founder of Amman's Al-Quds Center for Political Studies.

At the UN on Tuesday, King Abdullah II said "the Israeli government's expansionist appetite is now a regional threat".

"In the medium and long term, Jordan and Israel are on a collision course," Rantawi said, as right-wing politicians try to push responsibility for "dealing with the Palestinian population" onto Amman.

Jordan signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1994, and "is maintaining a minimum level of political engagement" Rantawi said is unlikely to change, no matter the outcome.

- Egypt -

Israel's other neighbor, most often threatened by what Israeli ministers describe as "voluntary emigration", has kept a "cold peace" since it first recognized Israel in 1978.

Cairo maintains extensive security collaboration, but ties have been increasingly strained as Egypt says it has had to resist repeated efforts to force more than two million Palestinians into its territory.

The best-case scenario is "a government that is less ideologically driven and more focused on security, which could help lower the temperature around Gaza, even without changing the fundamental Israeli position," said former ambassador El-Sayed Shalaby.

Asked by AFP, Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty said Egypt "will deal with any government that is coming," before blaming Netanyahu for obstructing the Trump ceasefire plan, which Egypt brokered.

- Lebanon -

Israel's attacks on and invasion of southern Lebanon have killed more than 4,300 people and left 329,000 displaced since March, while Beirut pursues gradual talks with Israel centered on the disarmament of Hezbollah.

Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri said this month that Israel "is turning southern Lebanon, its people and their properties into a ballot box soaked in blood" ahead of the vote.

"We are not optimistic," a former Lebanese minister and diplomat told AFP on condition of anonymity.

"The style may change... perhaps Eisenkot has a less radical discourse, but on the ground, the policy will remain unchanged. It is the far right that remains in power."

In an interview with AFP, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said the elections were an internal matter.

"But the question we want to ask the Israeli people, the State of Israel and all future governments is the following: do they want stability, security and no wars on their border, or not?" he said.

- Syria -

Since the December 2024 ousting of longtime ruler Bashar al-Assad, Israel has launched hundreds of strikes into Syria, sent troops into a UN-patrolled buffer zone on the Israeli-annexed Golan Heights and carried out regular incursions.

"For Damascus, the stakes are not whether the Israeli elections will completely change the rules of the game, but whether they will produce a government that is less inclined toward escalation and more willing to listen to Washington," a Syrian diplomatic source told AFP.

"A more centrist government, or a right-wing government that does not revolve around Netanyahu... could be less inclined to make political capital out of escalation," and work towards gradual security understandings.


From Jeddah to New York: Why Do Sudan's Truces Fail?

Members of the Quintet and Quad after their first joint meeting on Sudan. (African Union)
Members of the Quintet and Quad after their first joint meeting on Sudan. (African Union)
TT

From Jeddah to New York: Why Do Sudan's Truces Fail?

Members of the Quintet and Quad after their first joint meeting on Sudan. (African Union)
Members of the Quintet and Quad after their first joint meeting on Sudan. (African Union)

Sudanese doctor "S" needed a truce to get out of a health center where she and her colleagues were trapped in the first days of the war. She took a long route from Nile Street, crossing the Fiteihab and Halfaya bridges, until she reached her family in Kober.

She said she found bullet holes in the walls of her bedroom. Her siblings were waiting for her so they could leave together. The family fled and remains displaced today.

A brief halt in fighting in May 2023 allowed S to escape, but it did not last long enough for her family to remain in their home. Since that brief truce, initiatives and agreements have followed, while the hardest question has remained: How can mediators bring the two sides to agree to a cessation of fighting that is implemented and sustained?

The question returned to the fore on Sept. 23, when the Quad and Quintet met together for the first time in New York, under the co-chairmanship of the African Union and the United States. Participants called for a humanitarian truce and an end to hostilities.

They agreed to coordinate efforts to protect civilians and prepare to monitor and verify the implementation of any agreement. But the meeting's statement announced no agreement with the army or the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), and set no date for talks between them.

A worker repairs a damaged building in Khartoum on September 20, 2026 (Photo by Ebrahim HAMID / AFP)

The sticking point lies in the terms of the truce itself. According to Reuters, the army-led government accepted most of a US proposal for a 90-day truce but rejected a provision that would limit the RSF's withdrawal to specified areas.

It demanded that the RSF withdraw from all cities it had seized. Sudan's Foreign Ministry said this week that it rejected any negotiating process it believed would legitimize a reality imposed by the RSF through force. The RSF, meanwhile, welcomed the truce proposal, but the fighting continued.

Even when the two sides signed an agreement, it did not guarantee its implementation. In Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the army and the RSF signed a declaration committing them to protecting civilians on May 11, 2023. On May 20, they signed an agreement on a short ceasefire and humanitarian arrangements.

But the ceasefire did not hold. In June, the army suspended its participation in the talks, accusing the RSF of violating the agreement.

Other efforts faced different obstacles. In December 2023, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), a regional organization involved in peace efforts in the Horn of Africa, announced that army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, had agreed to meet face to face under its auspices. IGAD renewed the invitation in January, but the meeting never took place.

In Manama, Bahrain, a document titled "Principles and Foundations for a Comprehensive Solution to the Sudanese Crisis" was initialed on Jan. 20, 2024, in the names of Shams al-Din Kabbashi for the army and Abdel Rahim Dagalo for the RSF, according to the published text. But the initialing was not followed by a final agreement or a sustained negotiating process. Dagalo accused Kabbashi of backing away from the document, while Kabbashi did not comment on the reasons for the process coming to a halt.

In August 2024, the absence of one of the warring sides prevented direct ceasefire talks in Switzerland, shifting the focus to facilitating the delivery of aid and protecting civilians.

Rosalind Marsden, a researcher at Chatham House, wrote in an analysis published by the institute on Sept. 18, 2024, that the main reason the August 2024 ceasefire talks in Switzerland failed was that both the army and the RSF continued to seek a military victory. Their continued hopes of making military gains were a major reason for the negotiations' failure to make progress, despite limited progress in delivering aid to Darfur.

In September 2025, the Quad proposed a roadmap beginning with a three-month humanitarian truce, during which aid would reach areas across Sudan, followed by a permanent ceasefire and a political transition.

But the Quad's roadmap remained a proposal by the mediators and did not become an agreement between the warring parties. The dispute over withdrawal in the latest US proposal shows that the two sides have yet to agree on the terms under which a new truce could be tested.

Researcher Ahmed Soliman says the multiplicity of mediation groups and weak coordination among them make it necessary to link ceasefire efforts to a Sudanese political process led by civilian forces.

Hubert Kinkoh, a researcher at Chatham House, argued in an analysis published by the institute on Feb. 13, 2026, that the multiplicity of mediation tracks on Sudan, along with the absence of clear leadership and effective coordination among them, had allowed the army and the RSF to resist making serious concessions.

The New York meeting may help address the fragmentation of mediation efforts. Its real value, however, will become clear if it can bring the warring parties to a clear agreement and establish a mechanism to monitor compliance and address violations.

A brief truce allowed S to reach her family, but the family was then forced to leave their home. The truce that displaced people and refugees are waiting for today would allow aid to reach them and mark the beginning of a lasting end to the fighting, making a safe return to their homes and communities possible.


Trump's State Dinner for Xi to Feature Sea Bass and a Long List of Tech Titans

24 September 2026, US, Washington: US President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump welcome Chinese President Xi Jinping and his wife, Peng Liyuan, to the White House for a state dinner in Washington, DC. Photo: Joey Sussman/ZUMA Press Wire/dpa
24 September 2026, US, Washington: US President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump welcome Chinese President Xi Jinping and his wife, Peng Liyuan, to the White House for a state dinner in Washington, DC. Photo: Joey Sussman/ZUMA Press Wire/dpa
TT

Trump's State Dinner for Xi to Feature Sea Bass and a Long List of Tech Titans

24 September 2026, US, Washington: US President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump welcome Chinese President Xi Jinping and his wife, Peng Liyuan, to the White House for a state dinner in Washington, DC. Photo: Joey Sussman/ZUMA Press Wire/dpa
24 September 2026, US, Washington: US President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump welcome Chinese President Xi Jinping and his wife, Peng Liyuan, to the White House for a state dinner in Washington, DC. Photo: Joey Sussman/ZUMA Press Wire/dpa

A tech-heavy guest list, the fashion choices of those on it, who sits where, their body language throughout the night and what’s on the menu: these are the softer — often and glitzier — details of diplomacy.

Thursday's state dinner for China’s leader Xi Jinping featured a cavalcade of billionaires, Washington powerbrokers, business leaders and the type of festivities that excite President Donald Trump, who has a reputation for reveling in hosting parties, said The Associated Press.

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman signed autographs as he arrived at the White House. Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang chose a tuxedo over his trademark black leather jacket. Bernard Arnault, the CEO of French luxury goods company LVMH, walked through black security fencing to get to the White House.

Trump, clad in a tuxedo, and first lady Melania Trump, in a tuxedo-style outfit with a large necktie bow, greeted Xi and his wife, Peng Liyuan, out in front of the White House.

Xi, in a black suit, and Peng, in a red gown, emerged from their limousine onto a red carpet at the North Portico, where they shook hands with the Trumps.

“Everyone wants to be there,” Trump said during this week's UN General Assembly session. “It's the hottest ticket in town.”

Xi and Trump face tensions over Taiwan, trade and artificial intelligence during business hours — even as an ongoing, First Amendment fight over press access at the White House has unfolded. But Trump publicly chose to focus on showing Xi his White House updates on Thursday afternoon, before attention quickly turned to the flashy details of the swanky meal honoring Xi and his wife in the White House East Room.

Asked on Monday night who'd be in attendance, the president responded, “sort of everybody,” adding, “I would say you have the entire tech world, the entire banking world and a lot more.”

The dinner was expected to showcase “the positive vibes surrounding the visit” and indicate that “the president is very focused on signaling warmth and a close personal connection with Xi,” said Edgard Kagan, senior adviser and chair in China studies at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The first lady’s menu is being served on the red china service from Ronald Reagan’s presidency. It features a first course of yellow squash velouté with wild mushrooms, fresh herbs, crispy pancetta and drizzled scallion oil.

After that, guests will get sesame-crusted sea bass with braised baby bok choy, roasted garden eggplant and a sauce verte. Dessert is vanilla crémeux with sour cherry confit and walnut frangipane, as well as ice cream with honey from the White House.

Trump has already sought to one-up Xi after Beijing

The dinner comes after the president took the unusual step of personally greeting Xi and his wife on Wednesday as they arrived at Joint Base Andrews outside Washington. Normally, presidents wait for their state visit guests to arrive at the White House itself before offering a formal welcome.

During Thursday's arrival ceremony, Trump and Xi reviewed troops as trumpets blared, with the US president saying, “From the time of my first election in 2016, President Xi and I have forged a friendship.”

Thursday's dinner will include an abundance of technology industry titans, including Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, Google and Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai, OpenAI President and co-founder Greg Brockman, and Dell Technologies chairman and CEO Michael Dell.

During his own visit to Beijing in May, Xi hosted Trump for a state dinner that unfolded beneath grand chandeliers in the Great Hall of the People. That event included many tech luminaries who are likely to be at the White House this time, such as Tim Cook, formerly Apple's CEO, and Musk.

Trump has since begun referring to the White House ballroom he’s building as the “Great Hall of the United States,” to rival the place where he dined in China.

“This is a very large hall,” Trump recently said of the Great Hall of the People before adding, “But we’re gonna top it.”

Trump used to decry the pomp he now revels in

In 2015, as then-President Barack Obama was preparing to host Xi for a state visit, Trump — in the midst of his first presidential run — criticized all the hubbub.

“Just take them to McDonald’s and go back to the negotiating table,” Trump said then, during a rally in South Carolina. He later conceded on Fox News Channel that Xi might at least be worthy of getting “probably a double-size Big Mac.”

Xi visited Trump for the first time in 2017. But the White House said the Chinese wanted the meeting to take place at Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida, which is viewed as a more relaxed setting that might defuse some of the high expectations of a formal summit in Washington.

A dearth of pageantry didn't mean a lack of extraordinary moments, however, underscoring just how important it is for China's leader to dine with Trump.

Later recounting the incident to Fox News Channel, Trump said he sprung a surprise on Xi just after dinner, noting that the US was striking Syria as the pair was having “the most beautiful piece of chocolate cake that you’ve ever seen, and President Xi was enjoying it.”

Trump said he told Xi that US forces had “just fired 59 missiles” and that China's president “was eating his cake. And he was silent.”