عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

Syria 'Safe Zone': 3 Options for Turkey

Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan at the UN Headquarters in New York on September 24, 2019. (AP)
Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan at the UN Headquarters in New York on September 24, 2019. (AP)
TT
TT

Syria 'Safe Zone': 3 Options for Turkey

Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan at the UN Headquarters in New York on September 24, 2019. (AP)
Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan at the UN Headquarters in New York on September 24, 2019. (AP)

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has renewed his demand to establish a safe zone, devoid of the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) and Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), 30 kilometers deep into northern Syria.

Erdogan first made his intentions clear in 2013 and then presented a detailed map of his vision before the United Nations in 2019. His plan was rejected by the United States, Europe and Russia. Ankara managed, however, through various exchanges and military incursions to establish pockets of control in the area.

This was achieved through four military operations: Euphrates Shield in Jarablus in northern Aleppo in 2016, Olive Branch in Afrin in Aleppo's countryside in 2018, Peace Spring in Tal Abyad and Ras al-Ain east of the Euphrates River in late 2019 and Spring Shield in Idlib in spring 2020.

The process also demanded a series of agreements: Ankara, Moscow and Tehran signed an agreement over Idlib in Astana in 2017; Ankara signed a number of understandings with Moscow in 2018 and 2020; Ankara signed an agreement with Washington over the Manbij "roadmap" in 2018 and another one on the Peace Spring region in October 2019.

These deals allowed Turkey to establish its zones of influence that take up around 10 percent of Syria, or roughly twice the size of Lebanon. Turkey, along with Russia and Iran, which control 63 percent of Syria with the regime, is one of the main players in the war-torn country. Added to them are the United States and its allies, who back the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which hold 23 percent of northeastern Syria.

Turkey's incursions in Syria have prevented the Kurds from establishing their own state, similar to the Iraqi Kurdistan Region. It partially succeeded in driving out the YPG and PKK from its southern borders and prevented dramatic demographic changes in northern Syria. Ankara, Tehran and Damascus are in agreement over barring the establishment of a Kurdish entity. Syria, Iran and Turkey had in the 1990s also stood against the establishment of the Iraqi Kurdistan Region.

What has changed?
Erdogan believes that the war on Ukraine has granted Turkey a unique and major negotiations position with Russia, the US and Washington.

Washington supports Sweden and Finland's bid to join NATO and in order for that to succeed, it needs the approval of all members, including Turkey.

Moscow opposes the bid and is banking on Turkey's veto to that end.

Through the series of tradeoffs and understandings in Syria, and Ankara and Moscow's bilateral military, economic and political relations, Russian President Vladimir Putin succeeded in using his special ties with Erdogan in making a main breakthrough in NATO's southern front. Turkey's Incirlik base near the Syrian border lies just dozens of kilometers away from Russia's Hmeimim air base in western Syria.

Days ago, as NATO was preparing to hold a summit in Spain next month, Erdogan raised his tone and threatened to wage a new incursion in northern Syria with the aim of establishing a "safe zone" and driving out the YPG.

Turkish intelligence and allied Syrian factions have been preparing for the new battle. Shelling along the frontlines has also intensified in recent days, namely in the Peace Spring region covering Tal Abyad, Ras al-Ain and the area east of the Euphrates, the areas near Manbij in the Aleppo countryside, and in Tal Rifaat.

Each of these three zones has its own risks should Turkey choose to attack:

- Red zone. The US has deployed its forces, patrols and drones in the area east of the Euphrates to stress that it is there to protect its allies - the SDF - and repel the Turkish army. The US informed Ankara, through its UN ambassador, of its rejection of any military attacks.

Russia, meanwhile, has used the Turkish threats of an offensive to justify reinforcing its strategic deployment near American forces east of the Euphrates.

This has forced Turkey to backtrack somewhat with Erdogan clearly stating that the new offensive would not include the area east of the Euphrates, but it will cover the region west of the river, specifically Manbij and Tal Rifaat.

- Yellow - grey zone, covering west of the Euphrates in Manbij, where an old American-Turkish agreement called for the withdrawal of the YPG and PKK. Washington and Ankara also agreed to deploy joint patrols in the area and form a local council.

The US assurances to the YPG included Manbij and Washington believes that any threat to the Kurdish force will undermine the war against ISIS.

Any Turkish attack in this zone will lead to instability and raise demands in the US Congress for Washington to impose sanctions on Ankara that were imposed after the 2019 offensive.

Erdogan certainly wants to avoid more economic pressure, a year before presidential elections. He may, however, increase pressure in Manbij to reach a new settlement against the YPG.

- Green zone that covers Tal Rifaat, also west of the Euphrates. This area is, in theory, held by Russia, Iran and the Damascus regime. A Turkish incursion here may be easier than the other two zones. All Ankara needs is a green light from Moscow, just as it did for the Euphrates Shield, Olive Branch and Spring Shield operations.

At the time, Russia extracted a price from Turkey in Syria. This time around, Turkey's request for control of Tal Rifaat from Russia will be met with Moscow's demands over Ukraine and Sweden and Finland's NATO bids or perhaps that Ankara normalize ties with Damascus and agree to the deployment of Syrian border guards on the Syrian-Turkish border.

The coming days will reveal Turkey's true intentions: Is it seeking better negotiations conditions ahead of the NATO summit or is Erdogan seeking to impose a new reality on the ground before flying to Spain? Moreover, how will this clash play out with the UN Security Council seeking to extend the cross-border aid deliveries through Turkey before the July 10 deadline?

Most Viewed

 
 
Features

For Iran, Flexing Control Over Hormuz Is a New Deterrent

Female members of Iran's Basij militia are seen during a government rally in support of Mojtaba Khamenei. (The New York Times)
Female members of Iran's Basij militia are seen during a government rally in support of Mojtaba Khamenei. (The New York Times)
TT
TT

For Iran, Flexing Control Over Hormuz Is a New Deterrent

Female members of Iran's Basij militia are seen during a government rally in support of Mojtaba Khamenei. (The New York Times)
Female members of Iran's Basij militia are seen during a government rally in support of Mojtaba Khamenei. (The New York Times)

Mark Mazzetti, Adam Entous, Julian E. Barnes*

The United States and Israel launched their war against Iran on the argument that if Iran one day got a nuclear weapon, it would have the ultimate deterrent against future attacks.

It turns out that Iran already has a deterrent: its own geography, reported the New York Times.

Iran’s decision to flex its control over shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, the strategic chokepoint through which 20% of the world’s oil supply flows, has brought global economic pain in the form of higher prices for gasoline, fertilizer and other staples.

It has upended war planning in the United States and Israel, where officials have had to devise military options to wrest the strait from Iranian control.

The US-Israeli war has significantly damaged Iran’s leadership structure, larger naval vessels and missile production facilities, but it has done little to restrict Iran’s ability to control the strait.

Iran could thus emerge from the conflict with a blueprint for its hardline theocratic government to keep its adversaries at bay, regardless of any restrictions on its nuclear program.

“Everyone now knows that if there is a conflict in the future, closing the strait will be the first thing in the Iranian textbook,” said Danny Citrinowicz, a former head of the Iran branch of Israel’s military intelligence agency and now a fellow at the Atlantic Council. “You cannot beat geography.”

In several social media posts on Friday, US President Donald Trump said that the strait, which in one post he called the “Strait of Iran,” was “completely open” to shipping.

Iran’s foreign minister made a similar declaration. On Saturday, however, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps said that the waterway remained closed, suggesting a divide among Iranian military and civilians on the issue during negotiations to end the war.

Whereas just the prospect of sea mines is enough to scare off commercial shipping, Iran retains far more precise means of control: attack drones and short-range missiles.

American military and intelligence officials estimate that, after weeks of war, Iran still has about 40% of its arsenal of attack drones and upward of 60% of its missile launchers — more than enough to hold shipping in the Strait of Hormuz hostage in the future.

A central goal of the US-led military campaign in Iran is now reopening the strait, which was open when the war began. It is a precarious position for the United States, and its adversaries have taken notice.

“It’s not clear how the truce between Washington and Tehran will play out. But one thing is certain — Iran has tested its nuclear weapons. It’s called the Strait of Hormuz. Its potential is inexhaustible,” Dmitri Medvedev, a former president of Russia and deputy chairman of the country’s security council, wrote on social media last week.

Iran’s control over the strait forced Trump to announce a naval blockade of his own, and this week the US Navy began forcing cargo ships into Iranian ports after they transited the waterway.

Iran responded with anger, but also taunting. “The Strait of Hormuz isn’t social media. If someone blocks you, you can’t just block them back,” one Iranian diplomatic outpost, which has posted snarky messages throughout the war, wrote on X in response to Trump’s move.

The dispute over the strait has been the focus of numerous AI-generated videos depicting American and Israeli officials as Lego characters.

Still, the impact of the American blockade has been real.

Seaborne trade accounts for roughly 90% of Iran’s economic output — approximately $340 million per day — and that flow in recent days has largely ground to a halt.

Iran considers the blockade an act of war and has threatened to attack it. But so far it has not, nor has the United States tried during the current ceasefire to reduce Iran’s grip over the strait when the conflict finally ends.

“It may be that both countries see there is a real window to have negotiations” and don’t want to escalate the conflict right now, Admiral Kevin Donegan, who once commanded the US Navy’s fleet with responsibility for the Middle East and is now retired, said during a seminar hosted by the Middle East Institute this week.

Iran tried to block the Strait of Hormuz once before, mining it and the Gulf during the conflict with Iraq during the 1980s.

But mine warfare is dangerous, and decades later Iran has effectively harnessed missile and drone technology to threaten both commercial and military maritime traffic.

While the US and Israeli war significantly damaged Iran’s weapons manufacturing capability, Iran has preserved enough of its missiles, launchers and one-way attack drones to put shipping in the strait at risk.

US intelligence and military estimates vary, but multiple officials said that Iran has about 40% of its prewar arsenal of drones.

Those drones have proved to be a powerful deterrent. While they are easily shot down by American warships, commercial tankers have few defenses.

Iran also has ample supplies of missiles and missile launchers.

At the time of the ceasefire, Iran had access to about half its missile launchers. In the days that immediately followed, it dug out about 100 systems that had been buried inside caves and bunkers, bringing its stockpile of launchers back up to about 60% of its prewar level.

Iran is also digging out its supply of missiles, similarly buried in rubble from American attacks on its bunkers and depots. When that work is done, Iran could reclaim as much as 70% of its prewar arsenal, according to some American estimates.

Officials note that the counts of Iran’s weapon stocks are not precise. Intelligence assessments offer a broad look at how much power Iran retains.

But while estimates of Iran’s missile stockpiles differ, there is agreement among officials that Iran has enough weaponry to halt shipping in the future.

Iran’s government chose not to block the Strait of Hormuz last June, when Israel launched a military campaign that United States eventually joined to hit deeply buried nuclear sites.

Citrinowicz, the former Israeli official, said that decision probably reflected the cautious approach of slain supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, who may have been concerned that blocking the strait could have led other countries to join the military campaign against Iran.

Khamenei was killed during the first day of the current war, a move that signaled to Iranian officials that American and Israeli goals for this conflict were far more expansive.

Iran “saw the June war as an Israeli war for their own strategic objectives,” Citrinowicz said. “This is a regime change war.”

*The New York Times

Features

Allies Fear a Rushed US–Iran Framework Deal Could Backfire, Leaving Technical Deadlock

Commuters drive past a giant billboard referring to the Strait of Hormuz along a busy street in Tehran on April 19, 2026. (AFP)
Commuters drive past a giant billboard referring to the Strait of Hormuz along a busy street in Tehran on April 19, 2026. (AFP)
TT
TT

Allies Fear a Rushed US–Iran Framework Deal Could Backfire, Leaving Technical Deadlock

Commuters drive past a giant billboard referring to the Strait of Hormuz along a busy street in Tehran on April 19, 2026. (AFP)
Commuters drive past a giant billboard referring to the Strait of Hormuz along a busy street in Tehran on April 19, 2026. (AFP)

European allies fear an inexperienced US negotiating team is pushing for a swift, headline-grabbing framework deal with Iran that could entrench rather than resolve deeper problems, diplomats with past experience dealing with Tehran said.

They worry Washington, eager to claim a diplomatic win for President Donald Trump, could lock in a superficial agreement on Iran’s nuclear program and sanctions relief, then struggle through months or years of technically complex follow-on talks.

"The concern isn’t that there won’t be an agreement,” said a senior European diplomat, one of eight who spoke to Reuters who have previously worked on the nuclear file or continue to do so. "It's that there will be a bad initial agreement that creates endless downstream problems.”

Responding to a series of questions from Reuters, ranging from negotiating style and team to objectives and the potential dangers of a quick deal, the White House rejected the criticism.

"President Trump has a proven track record of achieving good deals on behalf of the United States and the American people, and he will only accept one that puts America first," spokeswoman Anna Kelly said.

2015 NUCLEAR DEAL ABANDONED BY TRUMP

Diplomats from France, Britain and Germany — which began negotiating with Iran in 2003 — say they have been sidelined.

From 2013 to 2015, the three worked with the United States to secure a deal on curbing Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief, known as the Joint ‌Comprehensive Plan of Action.

Trump withdrew ‌from the accord - the signature foreign policy agreement of his predecessor Barack Obama - in 2018, during his first term, calling ‌it "horribly one-sided".

After ⁠40 days of ⁠airstrikes, US and Iranian negotiators opened talks in Islamabad earlier this month, again focused on the familiar trade-off of nuclear restrictions for economic relief. There were some signs in the Pakistani capital on Sunday of preparations for a resumption of face-to-face negotiations.

Diplomats say deep mistrust and sharply different negotiating styles raise the risk of a fragile framework neither side can sustain politically.

"It took us 12 years and immense technical work,” said Federica Mogherini, who coordinated the talks from 2013 to 2015. "Does anyone seriously think this can be done in 21 hours?"

HIGH-LEVEL DEAL, LIGHT ON DETAIL

The diplomats said a skeletal agreement may be achievable, built around a nuclear package and an economic package. But they warned the nuclear component remained by far the most contentious.

"The Americans think you agree on three or four points in a five-page document and that's it, but on the nuclear file, every clause opens the door to a dozen more disputes," ⁠a second European diplomat said.

Talks are focusing on Iran's stockpile of roughly 440 kilograms (970 pounds) of uranium enriched to 60%, material ‌that could be used for several nuclear weapons if further enriched.

The favored option is "downblending" inside Iran under International Atomic ‌Energy Agency supervision. Another is a hybrid approach, with some material shipped abroad.

Türkiye and France have been mentioned as possible destinations. Shipping material to the United States would be politically difficult for ‌Iran, while Russia is unattractive to Washington, two of the diplomats said.

Even those options would require lengthy negotiations over recovering material possibly buried by airstrikes, verifying quantities and transporting ‌it securely.

Iran has also floated storing material abroad for a fixed period.

"Whatever happens now is only a starting point,” said a Western diplomat previously involved in nuclear talks. "That’s why the 2015 JCPOA ran to 160 pages."

Beyond stockpiles lies the deeper dispute over Iran’s right to enrich uranium at all. Trump has publicly pushed for zero enrichment, while Iran insists it has the right to enrich uranium for civilian purposes and denies seeking a bomb.

One possible compromise would be a temporary moratorium followed by resumption at very low levels under strict conditions.

Europeans stressed that a central role for the ‌IAEA, including intrusive verification and unrestricted access, was essential.

"A negotiation with Iran is meticulous and subtle: every word matters," said Gérard Araud, France’s chief negotiator from 2006 to 2009. “That’s not something you rush.”

SANCTIONS RELIEF AND FACE-SAVING

The economic track focuses on lifting ⁠sanctions and unfreezing Iranian assets.

In the short term, ⁠Iran wants access to limited frozen funds overseas. Broader sanctions relief would come later and require European buy-in, diplomats said, as Iranian leaders see European trade as critical over the long term.

Officials say Washington is again separating an agreement in principle from its painstaking follow-up, an approach they say risks misreading Iranian political culture.

"These talks aren't a real-estate deal settled with a handshake,” said a senior regional diplomat briefed by Tehran, referring to the background of Trump's main negotiators Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner. "They involve sequencing, sanctions relief and reciprocal nuclear steps.”

The war has hardened Iran’s stance, diplomats said, showing it can absorb pressure even as it seeks financial relief.

Tehran’s top demand is a non-aggression guarantee after being attacked by the US and Israel during earlier diplomatic efforts.

The concern is shared in the region. Gulf states want Iran’s ballistic missiles and proxy activities addressed, while Israel is pushing for maximal constraints.

Iran, by contrast, sees its remaining missile capability as a vital deterrent after the war degraded its forces.

Diplomats say demanding total abandonment would be unrealistic without broader security guarantees.

A senior Trump administration official said Washington’s redlines included ending uranium enrichment, dismantling major enrichment facilities, recovering highly enriched uranium and accepting a broader de-escalation framework involving regional allies.

EUROPE ON THE SIDELINES — BUT STILL RELEVANT

European officials acknowledge they sidelined themselves in part by pushing last year to reimpose UN sanctions and by designating Iran’s Revolutionary Guards a terrorist organization.

But they say their decision to stay out of the conflict has not gone unnoticed in Tehran.

"There’s simply not enough expertise in this US team,” said one European official, noting that roughly 200 diplomats, financial and nuclear experts were involved in the 2015 talks. "We’ve worked on this file for two decades.”

A White House official said officials from the National Security Council, State Department and Defense Department were present in Islamabad and remained involved.

Features

Iranians Expect No Post-War Respite Under Military Rule

People walk past closed shops at the nearly empty traditional main bazaar during Iranian New Year, or Nowruz, holidays in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, March 29, 2026. (AP)
People walk past closed shops at the nearly empty traditional main bazaar during Iranian New Year, or Nowruz, holidays in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, March 29, 2026. (AP)
TT
TT

Iranians Expect No Post-War Respite Under Military Rule

People walk past closed shops at the nearly empty traditional main bazaar during Iranian New Year, or Nowruz, holidays in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, March 29, 2026. (AP)
People walk past closed shops at the nearly empty traditional main bazaar during Iranian New Year, or Nowruz, holidays in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, March 29, 2026. (AP)

Iranians striving to maintain a semblance of normal life after weeks of US and Israeli bombing and a deadly crackdown on protesters in January remain daunted by the future as damage from airstrikes and internet cuts take a toll.

With Iran and the US wrangling over a truce extension and an agreement to end the conflict, shops, restaurants and government offices have stayed open. On sunny spring mornings, city parks are busy with family picnics and young people playing sports while others gather at streetside cafes.

But behind such peaceful scenes, Iran's economy is in tatters and people are fearful of a new government clampdown and angry about the destructive airstrikes. The difficulties that spurred mass unrest in January look likely to worsen.

Talks in Islamabad this month - the first direct negotiations between the United States and Iran in years - ended without an agreement. But with the current fragile ceasefire due to end on Wednesday, US President Donald Trump said on Sunday that his envoys would head to Pakistan and were prepared to hold more talks.

FEAR OF INCREASED PRESSURE AS THEOCRACY ENDURES

"The war will end, but that’s when our real problems with the system begin. I’m very afraid that if the regime reaches an agreement with the United States, it will increase pressure on ordinary people," a 37-year-old named Fariba, who took part in the January unrest, told Reuters by phone from ‌Iran.

"People have not ‌forgotten the regime’s crimes in January, and the system has not forgotten that people do not want it. They are holding ‌back now ⁠because they don’t ⁠want to fight on a domestic front as well," she said.

The bombing has killed thousands, according to official death tolls, including many at a school on the first day of the conflict.

It has also destroyed infrastructure across the country, raising the prospect of mass job layoffs. Iran's revolutionary theocracy looks as entrenched as ever after surviving weeks of intense bombardment and asserting control over global oil supplies.

"Iranians understood that this war is not going to topple the regime, but at the same time, it's going to make their lives much worse economically," said Omid Memarian, Iran analyst at independent US-based think tank Dawn.

"The military is not going to put down their guns. They are going to stay and it's going to be bloody. It's going to be costly, with no prospect for a better future," he added.

In well-heeled north Tehran this week, Reuters interviewed young Iranians on camera about the war and their concerns. Foreign media in Iran operate under guidelines set ⁠by the Culture and Islamic Guidance Ministry, which regulates press activity and permissions.

Mehtab, who works at a private company and asked ‌not to use her family name, said things could be worse for Iranians given the impact of war and years ‌of sanctions and isolation.

"I do not want to say that it is normal, but as an Iranian with such a history, it is not very bad. We can live with it," she ‌said.

That view was not shared by Iranians Reuters reached by phone. They voiced far greater anxiety while speaking anonymously for fear of reprisals.

"Yes, people are enjoying the ceasefire ‌for now — but what comes next? What are we supposed to do with a regime that has become even more powerful?” said Sara, 27, a private teacher who declined to give her family name or location.

IRANIANS LEFT WITH FEW OPTIONS

Thousands were killed when the authorities crushed weeks of protests in January, prompting Trump to say he would come to the aid of Iranians.

Iran's permanent mission to the UN in Geneva did not immediately respond to requests for comment for this story. It has previously blamed the violence in January on "armed terrorists" linked to Israel and the United States.

While Trump and Israeli ‌Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu both said early in the war that they hoped it would topple the ruling clerics, that goal faded as the bombing continued.

Anger over the crackdown meant that many Iranians wanted new rulers, but soon soured on the ⁠war, Memarian said.

"I think it became more ⁠clear for many Iranians that this war is not designed, or is not aimed, at helping the Iranian people," he said.

Neither Mehtab nor other women sitting at a cafe in north Tehran were wearing the hijab, a head covering that was mandatory for decades in Iran. Looser public dress codes are the result of mass protests in 2022, including over women's rights, which the authorities violently suppressed while tacitly backing off from enforcement of some dress rules.

Independent UK-based Iranian political analyst Hossein Rassam said it became clear in January that authorities would not back down again easily, and later that they would not crumble under military attack.

The war had left Iranians even more polarized than before, but with few options. "This is a moment of reckoning for Iranians because, at the end of the day, Iranians, especially Iranians inside the country, realize that they need to live together. There is nowhere to go," he said.

'FIRE UNDER THE ASHES'

Many fear repression could now worsen.

"On the streets, women are going around without the hijab, but it’s unclear whether these kind of freedoms will continue after a deal with the United States. Pressure will 100% increase, because once there is peace with Washington, the regime will no longer face the same external pressure," Arjang, a 43-year-old father of two, told Reuters by phone from north Tehran.

The January protests brought no tangible change to people's lives, while leading the authorities to severely restrict internet use - a blow to both businesses and ordinary people desperate for information during war.

“Even the smallest things, like connecting with our family members who live outside the country, are impossible,” said Faezeh, 47, as she played volleyball with friends in a north Tehran park.

Popular frustration may start to mount after the war ends and people are less afraid of being labelled as traitors, said Memarian.

"There is a lot of fire under the ashes," he said.