In the Middle East, leaders from Russia, Iran, and Türkiye have made a unified call for the cessation of Israel’s military operations in the region, particularly as tensions have shown signs of spilling over into Syria. The announcement was made at the conclusion of the 22nd round of Syria talks held in Astana, Kazakhstan, where high-ranking delegations from each country reaffirmed their commitment to a political resolution for Syria and expressed deep concern over the regional implications of the ongoing violence.
The Astana talks—originally established to find a solution to the Syrian crisis—were dominated by discussions around the widening conflict between Israel and neighboring states, particularly with Israel’s ongoing airstrikes in Gaza and Lebanon. The talks saw the presence of key Syrian political figures from both the government and opposition, alongside representatives from the United Nations, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and observers from Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq. With regional stability hanging in the balance, the parties emphasized the necessity of a unified and diplomatic response to prevent Syria from becoming further embroiled in escalating hostilities.
Alexander Lavrentiev, Russia’s Special Representative for Syria, led the Russian delegation, which expressed serious concerns over the potential for Syria to become a battlefield in the broader regional conflict. Lavrentiev reiterated Moscow’s stance that military escalation in the Middle East is counterproductive to any prospects for peace, both within Syria and throughout the region. This view was echoed by Ali Asghar Haji, Iran’s Senior Political Advisor to the Foreign Minister, and Ihsan Mustafa Yurdakul, Türkiye’s Director-General for Syrian Affairs.
Lavrentiev warned that Israel’s expanding military presence could have “negative impacts” on Syria, where multiple factions already contend for influence and territory. Iran’s Ali Asghar Haji concurred, urging that “restraint and dialogue” must be prioritized to avoid regional destabilization. Türkiye, which shares borders with both Syria and Iraq, expressed similar concerns over the conflict’s proximity and the potential for it to spill over.
“This escalation jeopardizes the region’s fragile stability and threatens to dismantle years of diplomatic progress aimed at reducing conflict in Syria,” Lavrentiev said in a statement, underscoring that “the only sustainable path forward is one rooted in dialogue and political negotiations.”
At the center of the Astana discussions was a renewed emphasis on restarting the work of Syria’s Constitutional Committee, a body formed under UN auspices to draft a new constitution as part of a larger peace process for Syria. Lavrentiev stressed that the committee’s work is crucial to establishing a political solution that reflects the will of the Syrian people.
The Constitutional Committee, however, has seen frequent interruptions due to geopolitical rifts and disagreements among its members. Russia, Iran, and Türkiye have been staunch advocates of its continued operation, seeing it as a critical tool for achieving a sustainable peace in Syria.
UN Special Envoy Geir Pedersen, who also attended the talks, supported the trio’s calls, emphasizing the importance of resuming the Constitutional Committee’s sessions to foster dialogue between the Syrian government and opposition. The involvement of the UN and other international observers further underscored the global stakes in stabilizing Syria.
The discussions at the Astana talks extended beyond the current military escalation to include potential shifts in US foreign policy under President-elect Donald Trump, whose campaign rhetoric raised expectations of an American military drawdown in Syria. While Trump’s statements regarding the Middle East have sparked widespread speculation, Lavrentiev emphasized that Russia would remain open to discussions with the incoming administration.
“If there are proposals, Russia is open and ready to continue communication with the US,” Lavrentiev said. “Some compromises can only be reached through negotiations.” This openness, however, comes with conditions. Russia’s stance is heavily influenced by its close alliance with Iran and Türkiye, both of whom have vested interests in maintaining influence within Syria and ensuring that US policy does not undermine their regional strategies.
A source within the Syrian opposition suggested that while there is a shared perception that a US withdrawal from Syria may be in line with Trump’s intentions, it is not considered inevitable. “Trump has shown signs of pragmatism and has become more responsive to institutional pressures,” the source said, adding that both Russia and Türkiye are closely watching to see whether the US stance shifts toward a negotiated exit rather than a unilateral departure.
Türkiye, a NATO ally of the US but a regional partner to Russia and Iran in Syria, expressed its nuanced position during the talks. Türkiye has long been an advocate for the withdrawal of foreign forces, particularly those it perceives as exacerbating instability near its borders. However, Turkish officials emphasized that any US withdrawal should not be abrupt or uncoordinated, as it could lead to chaos and unintended consequences, particularly concerning the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), who maintain a precarious relationship with both the US and Syrian government forces.
Ankara’s priority lies in securing its borders and preventing Kurdish groups within Syria, which it views as terrorist-affiliated, from gaining strength. This position has often put Türkiye at odds with US support for the SDF in the fight against ISIS. For Türkiye, coordination with the US in any potential drawdown would ensure that power vacuums are avoided, thereby preventing both ISIS and Kurdish forces from expanding their influence.
A major point of contention throughout the talks was Israel’s campaign to curtail Iranian influence in Syria and across the region. Israel has conducted hundreds of airstrikes in recent years, primarily targeting Iranian assets in Syria, as part of a larger strategy to counter Tehran’s influence. Israeli leaders have consistently argued that a stronger Iranian foothold in Syria and Lebanon threatens their national security.
Despite these concerns, the Astana participants reiterated that Israel’s actions in the region pose a destabilizing risk, not only for Syria but also for other neighboring countries. The Syrian government delegation, led by Deputy Foreign Minister Ayman Riad, argued that such interventions only deepen the suffering of Syrians and hinder efforts toward a peaceful resolution.
Iran, too, remains firm in its position that it has a legitimate role in Syria, as Tehran views its alliance with the Syrian government as part of a broader regional strategy. Ali Asghar Haji affirmed Iran’s commitment to maintaining its presence in Syria for what he described as “defensive purposes” in support of the Assad government.
As regional powers grapple with a multitude of pressing issues—ranging from Syrian sovereignty and refugee crises to the potential restructuring of alliances under Trump’s presidency—the call for de-escalation resonated beyond Syria. Representatives from the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) raised concerns over the impact of rising hostilities on Syria’s humanitarian situation, where millions remain displaced and reliant on international aid.
Observers from Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq, countries directly affected by the Syrian conflict and home to large refugee populations, echoed these concerns. Lebanon, in particular, has been significantly affected by Israeli airstrikes near its border, raising fears that the conflict could worsen its own fragile political and economic stability.
