Assad, Erdogan...and Putin’s ‘Goblet of Normalization’

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan during their meeting in Sochi (AFP)
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan during their meeting in Sochi (AFP)
TT
20

Assad, Erdogan...and Putin’s ‘Goblet of Normalization’

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan during their meeting in Sochi (AFP)
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan during their meeting in Sochi (AFP)

It is quite known that Russian President Vladimir Putin is pushing his Syrian and Turkish counterparts to drink from the goblet of “normalization.” This desire is as old as Russia's military intervention in Syria seven years ago.

But what is new is that conditions have become more favorable for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to shift from attending security meetings in Moscow and Tehran to normalizing political ties between Ankara and Damascus.

The “deposit” lodged by Putin in Erdogan’s pocket a few days ago at their meeting in the Black Sea city of Sochi proposed that instead of Turkey launching a new military operation in northern Syria, the Turkish president would call Assad and hold negotiations to meet Turkish security demands.

It is noteworthy that several meetings were held between the head of Syria’s National Security Bureau Ali Mamlouk and his Turkish counterpart, Hakan Fidan. Some of the meetings were publicly held in Moscow at the start of 2020. Other meetings, especially those convened to discuss developing a new version of the 1998 Adana Agreement, were held in secret.

In fact, developing the Adana Agreement and security cooperation against the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) requires political normalization and the opening of diplomatic channels.

Putin's key is for Erdogan to communicate directly with Assad with the blessing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. However, each of the three presidents sees this move from a different angle. Here there are losses and there are risks.

The Russian president is ready for this step because it weakens the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) allied to the US, Britain, and France. These are the countries that are fighting Russia in Ukraine.

Moreover, such a move would strengthen the Russian role in Syria and give legitimacy to the regime in Damascus. It would do so by neutralizing the Turkish role in support of the Syrian opposition.

If successful, the normalization of ties between Damascus and Ankara would turn a key page of the last decade.

For Putin, such a step increases the chances of his “arch-friend” and “hostile partner” in many arenas, Erdogan, to win the elections in the middle of next year.

However, this expected “gift” from Putin completely contradicts the desire of Assad, who does not want a new presidential term for Erdogan, who has been giving military and political support to the Syrian opposition for the last decade.

For Assad, normalizing ties with Turkey could constitute an embarrassment that is difficult to navigate among his allies in Damascus and abroad –especially that Turkey continues to occupy large swathes of land in northern Syria that are twice the size of Lebanon.

Also, Erdogan has been the target subject of media campaigns, accusations, and criticisms by Syrian authorities.

Khamenei, the third partner in the Astana process and the control of Syrian territory, has complicated calculations as well.

Tehran wants to support Assad and weaken US allies and does not want Turkish incursions. It also agrees with Damascus and Ankara in rejecting Kurdish entities.

Indeed, the three countries coordinated against Iraqi Kurdistan in the 90s. But Iran also has rivalries with Turkey and Russia in Syria and elsewhere.

For his part, Erdogan wants to neutralize the Syrian refugee issue and to deal a blow to Syria’s Kurds before upcoming elections.

He also does not mind security and political coordination with Damascus to keep Kurds away.

However, he finds it embarrassing to switch stances on Assad and Damascus. For years, Erdogan had raised the ceiling of his stances and support for the opposition.

Most likely, Putin is pushing the relationship between Assad and Erdogan to new stages.

The first stage was after the protests in early 2011, when meetings were held to search for a political settlement to the Syrian crisis.

The second stage witnessed maximum hostility in the Turkish president’s rhetoric about Assad stepping down.

The third stage saw Erdogan’s focus shift from “regime change” in Syria to making deals with Putin for disbanding the Kurdish entity in northern Syria. Subsequently, Turkey spread its forces in several Syrian enclaves.

The fourth and newest stage includes political dealings under Putin's umbrella. Erdogan would deal with Assad as president. In turn, Assad would accept Erdogan as an interlocutor.

This may come as a shock or surprise to some. But it is okay to recall the fluctuations of the Damascus-Ankara line over the decades as there have been many upheavals in the Syrian-Turkish-Kurdish triangle.

In mid-1998, Turkey massed its army on Syria’s borders and demanded the expulsion of PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan.

Afterwards, the Adana Agreement, which established security cooperation against the PKK, was signed.

When Syrian President Hafez al-Assad died, Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer’s participation in the funeral inaugurated the transition to a new political dimension and the intensification of cooperation against the PKK.

After the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, relations gradually moved towards more cooperation and more visits and meetings between Assad and Erdogan.

This led to a “strategic partnership,” “eliminating borders,” and a tacit recognition of the annexation of Iskenderun (Hatay).

Indeed, Erdogan was among the few leaders who maintained a relationship with Assad after the US isolated Damascus over the assassination of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005.

Moreover, Erdogan mediated between Assad and former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.

Erdogan talking about Putin asking him to contact Assad, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu recently recalling a “quick chat” he had with his Syrian counterpart last year, and Damascus holding back on its condemnation of Turkey are all factors likely signaling a new beginning whereby Assad and Erdogan drink from Putin’s “goblet of normalization.”



A Week Into the Fragile Israel-Iran Peace Agreement, Here's What We Still Don't Know

People attend the funeral procession of Iranian military commanders, nuclear scientists and others killed in Israeli strikes, in Tehran, Iran, June 28, 2025. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
People attend the funeral procession of Iranian military commanders, nuclear scientists and others killed in Israeli strikes, in Tehran, Iran, June 28, 2025. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
TT
20

A Week Into the Fragile Israel-Iran Peace Agreement, Here's What We Still Don't Know

People attend the funeral procession of Iranian military commanders, nuclear scientists and others killed in Israeli strikes, in Tehran, Iran, June 28, 2025. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
People attend the funeral procession of Iranian military commanders, nuclear scientists and others killed in Israeli strikes, in Tehran, Iran, June 28, 2025. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS

It's been a week since the United States pressed Israel and Iran into a truce, ending a bloody, 12-day conflict that had set the Middle East and globe on edge.

The fragile peace, brokered by the US the day after it dropped 30,000-pound "bunker-busting" bombs on three of Iran's key nuclear sites, is holding. But much remains unsettled, The Associated Press reported.

How badly Iran’s nuclear program was set back remains murky. The prospects of renewed US-Iran peace talks are up in the air. And whether US President Donald Trump can leverage the moment to get Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu 's government and Hamas focused on a ceasefire and hostage deal that brings about an end to the 20-month war in Gaza remains an open question.

Here is a look at what we still don't know:

How far Iran's nuclear program has been set back Trump says three targets hit by American strikes were “obliterated.” His defense secretary said they were “destroyed.”

A preliminary report issued by the US Defense Intelligence Agency, meanwhile, said the strikes did significant damage to the Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan sites, but did not totally destroy the facilities.

Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday that the three Iranian sites with “capabilities in terms of treatment, conversion and enrichment of uranium have been destroyed to an important degree.” But, he added, “some is still standing” and that because capabilities remain, “if they so wish, they will be able to start doing this again.” He said assessing the full damage comes down to Iran allowing inspectors access.

What future US-Iran relations might look like

After the ceasefire deal came together, Trump spoke of potentially easing decades of biting sanctions on Tehran and predicted that Iran could become a “great trading nation” if it pulled back once-and-for-all from its nuclear program.

The talk of harmony didn't last long.

Ali Khamenei, in his first public appearance after the ceasefire was announced, claimed Tehran had delivered a “slap to America’s face." Trump responded by suggesting the supreme leader own up to the fact Iran “got beat to hell. The president also said he was backing off reviewing any immediate sanction relief, because of Khamenei's heated comments.

White House officials say the US and Iran are already in early discussions about resuming negotiations that had ended after Israel began launching strikes. But Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi says there's no agreement in place to restart talks.

It's unclear if Iran's leadership is ready to come to the table so soon after the fighting has ended — especially if Trump holds to the position that Iran must give up nuclear enrichment for even civilian use. And Trump has offered conflicting statements about his commitment to talks. “We may sign an agreement,” he said Wednesday at a NATO summit press conference. He added, “I don’t think it’s that necessary.”

What role Iran's supreme leader will play

Khamenei's age and recent diminished appearance have raised questions about the scope of his involvement in US-Iran relations and Iran's response to both American and Israeli strikes. But despite having spent the last few weeks in a bunker as threats to his life escalated, there is little indication that Khamenei does not still reign supreme over the country's massive military and governmental operations.

Khamenei has ruled three times longer than his predecessor, the late Ruhollah Khomeini, and has shaped life for the country's more than 90 million people perhaps even more dramatically.

He entrenched the system of rule by the “mullahs,” or Shiite Muslim clerics. That secured his place in the eyes of hard-liners as the unquestionable authority, below only that of God. At the same time, Khamenei built the paramilitary Revolutionary Guard into the dominant force in Iran’s military and internal politics.

How Iran might strike back Iran's retaliatory missile attacks on a US base in Qatar following the American bombardment were sloughed off by the White House as a half-hearted, face-saving measure. The US was forewarned and the salvos were easily fended off.

Yet Iran remains a persistent threat, particularly via cyberwarfare. Hackers backing Tehran have already targeted US banks, defense contractors and oil industry companies — but so far have not caused widespread disruptions to critical infrastructure or the economy.

The US Department of Homeland Security last week issued a public bulletin warning of increased Iranian cyber threats. And the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, is urging organizations that operate critical infrastructure like water systems, pipelines or power plants to stay vigilant.

Whether the Israel-Iran ceasefire will hold It remains a fragile peace.

Immediately following the US strikes, Trump got on the phone with Netanyahu and told the Israeli leader not to expect further US offensive military action, according to a senior White House official who was not authorized to comment publicly about the sensitive diplomatic talks.

But even as he agreed to deal, Netanyahu made clear that Israel will strike again “if anyone in Iran tries to revive this project.”

The ceasefire deal came without any agreement from Tehran on dismantling its nuclear program. Khamenei claims the attacks “did nothing significant” to Iran's nuclear facilities.

Trump expressed confidence that Iran, at the moment, has no interest in getting its nuclear program back up. “The last thing they’re thinking about right now is enriched uranium,” Trump said.

Still, Trump says he expects Iran to open itself to international inspection to verify that it doesn’t restart its nuclear program by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN nuclear watchdog, or some other organization "that we respect, including ourselves.”

Whether Trump can now press Netanyahu on Gaza

The president took a big gamble with his decision to order strikes on Iran's nuclear fortress.

As a candidate, he promised to quickly end Russia's brutal war in Ukraine and the Israel-Hamas conflict in Gaza, but has failed to find a resolution to either. He also vowed to keep the US military out of foreign conflicts.

But after helping Israel with US strikes on Iran, Trump — in conversations with Netanyahu and other world leaders in recent days — has made clear he wants a deal completed soon, according to two people familiar with the private discussions and were not authorized to comment publicly.

On Friday, Trump told reporters, “We think within the next week we’re going to get a ceasefire.”

Trump didn't offer any further explanation for his optimism. But Israeli Minister for Strategic Affairs Ron Dermer is expected to be in Washington this week for talks on a Gaza ceasefire, Iran and other matters, according to an official familiar with the matter. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.