Latest news with #Sykes-Picot
NDTV
26-05-2025
- Politics
- NDTV
"Era Of Western Interference Over. Future Belongs To...": US Envoy To Syria
Washington: Tom Barrack, US ambassador to Turkiye and special envoy to Syria, on Sunday slammed the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement that divided the Turkish empire for "imperial gain-not peace." He said the division of Syria was a historic mistake, as he stressed that the fall of Bashar al-Assad's regime in the country would open the door for prosperity and security. "A century ago, the West imposed maps, mandates, penciled borders, and foreign rule. Sykes-Picot divided Syria and the broader region for imperial gain-not peace. That mistake cost generations. We will not make it again," Barrack wrote on X, criticising the past Western policies. The Sykes-Picot Agreement was a secret treaty between the United Kingdom and France, with assent from Russia and Italy, to define their mutually agreed spheres of influence and control in an eventual partition of the Ottoman Empire following World War I. The pact is widely seen as the foundation for the imposition of Western influence and arbitrary borders in the Arab areas of the region, particularly in oil-rich areas. Echoing US President Donald Trump's May 13 remarks in Riyadh, Barrack said the future of the Middle East depends on regional solutions and cooperation. "The era of Western interference is over. The future belongs to regional solutions, but partnerships, and a diplomacy grounded in respect. As President Trump emphasized in his May 13th address in Riyadh, "Gone are the days when Western interventionalists would fly to the Middle East to give lectures on how to live, and how to govern your own affairs," he wrote. Barrack noted that Syria's tragedy "was born from division," saying its "rebirth must come through dignity, unity, and investment in its people." "That starts with truth, accountability-and working with the region, not around it," he said. The statement follows a significant change in US policy over Syria following Trump's meeting with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa in Riyadh earlier this month-- the first direct encounter between US and Syrian leaders in 25 years. Before the meeting, Trump ordered the removal of "brutal and crippling" sanctions on Syria, following which US has issued general license sanctions relief. The EU has also lifted economic sanctions on Syria on Tuesday to support reconstruction efforts. Barrack stressed that the US stands with Turkiye, the Gulf, and Europe - but "not with troops and lectures, or imaginary boundaries," but "shoulder-to-shoulder with the Syrian people themselves." "With the fall of the Assad regime, the door is open to peace - by eliminating sanctions, we are enabling the Syrian people to finally open that door and discover a path to renewed prosperity and security," he said. The US ambassador's statement came after he met Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa on May 24 in Istanbul to discuss the recent US decision to lift sanctions on Syria. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Tuesday said that Washington supports efforts to help Syria's new government succeed, warning that failure could trigger renewed conflict and regional instability.
Arab News
28-04-2025
- Politics
- Arab News
Franco-British recognition could usher in a new era for Palestine
This should have happened decades ago. It may still not happen. It should be a plain and simple, uncontroversial decision. It is not. Yet the words of President Emmanuel Macron of France have triggered a scintilla of hope that a major power will join the 147 states to have recognized the state of Palestine. 'We must move toward recognition and we will do so in the coming months,' Macron said this month. But France must not be an isolated actor in this. It cannot be a Macron-only declaration. Is it too much to think that others might join him? Above all, one power — the UK — should follow Macron's lead and give new force to a renewed Entente Cordiale. Imagine a Franco-British recognition of Palestine. Symbolically, it would be huge. Marcon and Prime Minister Keir Starmer standing together — the leaders of the two major European colonial states, the ones that so brutally and imperially carved up the Middle East more than a century ago. The Sykes-Picot powers — with one, Britain, also being the author of the infamous Balfour Declaration — could start to remedy a small part of the damage that was perpetrated in cigar-filled rooms all those years ago. It would leave the US as the only permanent member of the UN Security Council not to recognize the state of Palestine. It would encourage the remaining European and other powers to join in. How long, for example, would Germany, Italy and the Netherlands want to be isolated? Could Canada, Australia, Japan, South Korea and New Zealand follow suit? Momentum would be crucial. The Sykes-Picot powers could start to remedy a small part of the damage that was perpetrated all those years ago Chris Doyle The text of any recognition would matter. It should recognize Palestine on the 1967 lines with immediate effect. No doubt they would state that, if Palestine and Israel were to agree new borders, then this would be altered accordingly. One issue would be embassies. The Palestinian leadership would want an embassy in Jerusalem, just as Israel wants these states to shift their diplomatic presence from Tel Aviv to the city. Perhaps, given the situation, embassies will be set up temporarily in Ramallah while keeping consulates in Jerusalem. The long-term European political position has always been not to recognize any state's sovereignty over any part of the city. None of this is to suggest at all that this would resolve the conflict or bring the genocide and system of apartheid to an end. Recognition should not even be the priority, which right now must be to end the complete siege of Gaza that was imposed more than 50 days ago and to bring an end to the bombing frenzy the Israeli forces carry out every single day. Recognition will mean little if those processes are not terminated with immediate effect. France says that recognition will be conditional on the release of hostages in Gaza and Hamas no longer being in charge of the Strip. But all this does is give Hamas additional motivation not to adhere to either demand, as it opposes a two-state solution. But while dealing with the ongoing emergency, the medium to long-term outlook still matters. This is why Macron's summit with Saudi Arabia in June is so important. The visit of French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot to Saudi Arabia last week brought this into sharp focus. The pre-summit diplomacy and legwork is typically even more vital than the event itself. If external parties are serious about a solution, then this reinforces their preferred option: the two-state solution. Apart from the US, pretty much every state has backed this template to resolve the conflict, but too many have so far only recognized one state — Israel. If external parties are serious about a solution, then this reinforces their preferred option: the two-state solution Chris Doyle Many Palestinians no longer see the two-state solution as viable given the massive illegal Israeli colonial settlement enterprise. So, recognition needs to not rule out any consideration of other long-term solutions, including a one-state option, a federal or a binational state, but it would at least allow a state of Palestine to negotiate as a state and be respected as such. Israel will expect further recognition of its statehood from regional powers. But it should have to end its occupation and accept a state of Palestine. That is the bare minimum, essentially the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002: a full withdrawal in return for a full peace. Fresh recognitions of Palestine serve to strengthen international backing for the Palestinian right to self-determination and confirm that, as a people, they have national rights. It would end the nauseating disputes as to whether Palestine should be treated as a state in international bodies. Anti-Palestinian groups still argue, with no merit, that such agencies cannot have jurisdiction as Palestine is not a state. Many might see France and Britain as hangovers from a bygone era. Yet such a joint move, right now, would show that these two powers still retain some weight in international affairs. They can shift trends in the right direction, not least when the US is more of an obstacle than a facilitator. But if Europe wishes to be taken seriously, this should be a full Europe-wide recognition. The continent can show it is just as prepared to adapt its position on the Middle East as it is on Russia-Ukraine.
