Turkey

Given the near-certainty that conflict will erupt again in northwest Syria, the United States should start planning for how it might leverage that next outbreak to push the parties toward a political process.

Turkey, Russia, and Washington have compelling reasons to welcome a new ceasefire agreement, however imperfect, but they still need to address the longer-term dangers posed by the Assad regime’s murderously maximalist strategy.

A deep dive into the evolution of Turkey’s Middle East policy and the mixed results it has had in two Russian-fueled conflict zones.

Various displacement scenarios may unfold as the fighting escalates, each carrying a high risk of negative humanitarian and economic consequences even if the parties live up to their promises.

As in other conflict zones, Moscow cares little about reaching a peace deal so long as it can outmaneuver the West strategically while securing port and energy access—with private contractors playing an increasingly important role.

After the fall of Sirte, Erdogan and Putin’s desired ceasefire can only be achieved with Washington’s support.

The Caesar Act will not put an end to the Syrian catastrophe so long as Washington keeps ceding political and military leverage to adversaries who do not care about human rights.

Renewing the UN cross-border mechanism is crucial to helping millions of needy Syrian civilians, preventing Russia and Assad from weaponizing aid deliveries, and safeguarding future international assistance efforts.

Directly investing in nongovernmental enterprise and giving international approval to private competition can change the dynamic in individual countries, promote liberal economies, and give citizens greater agency.