The U.N. has unfortunately turned out to be a platform where the significance of multilateralism and global cooperation is increasingly ignored or even damaged

This week's attack on the facilities of Aramco, Saudi Arabia's national oil company, was no mere skirmish among proxies. Iran has allegedly fired missiles, loaded on drones, to strike at the heart of the Saudi oil industry. Although Yemen's Houthi rebels claimed the attack, already some fingers are pointing to Tehran. Hence a series of questions: have tensions in the Gulf, which have been escalating since May 2018, already spun out of control? Is the policy of "maximum pressure" on Iran giving way to war? Why did U.S. President Donald Trump escalate tensions right after sacking John Bolton, his hawkish national security adviser? What will be the Trump administration's military response to an attack that it considers a casus belli? As world leaders pack their bags for the United Nations General Assembly's opening session, the world is still trying to answer those questions.

Despite its ups and downs, the Astana Process is the only serious option currently playing a decisive role to create a permanent solution in the Syrian crisis

The second half of September will be a busy season. Turkey, Russia, and Iran will hold a trilateral summit on Sep. 16. Five days later, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan will fly to New York for the U.N. General Assembly's opening session.

A new conversation with strategic perspective, realistic goals and achievable outcomes needs to be restarted between Turkey and the U.S.

Considering the military capability of Russia and the U.S. and the game-changing capacity of Turkey, it will take time to reach a real solution in the Syrian crisis

Turkey and the United States are setting up a joint operations center at Şanlıurfa in Turkey under a recent agreement. That U.S. European Command (EUCOM), as opposed to U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), commanders are involved in negotiations reflects both sides' commitment to the deal.

After three days of intense negotiations, Turkey and the U.S. reached an agreement on the proposed safe zone in Syria. Both sides issued written statements to announce the establishment of a joint operations center and reaffirm their commitment to addressing Turkey's security concerns.

Negotiations between Turkish and U.S. military officials regarding a safe zone in Syria ended this week with an agreement. This discussion has been going on at least seven months, following U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria.

After weeks of difficult diplomatic consultations and negotiations between diplomats and military officials from both sides, Ankara and Washington managed to reach a breakthrough on the situation in northeastern Syria. Turkish and American officials agreed on three item protocols that satisfy the fundamental concerns of both parties. The agreement includes the following items: "Rapid implementation of initial measures to address Turkey's security concerns," "Starting up a joint operations center in Turkey as soon as possible" and the "Creation of a safe zone and 'peace corridor' for the return of displaced Syrians to their country."

Turkey is hell-bent on neutralizing the terrorist threat next door. Neither the threat of sanctions nor the endlessly reheated Daesh story will convince the Turks to abort this mission

As expected, the National Security Council's most recent statement reiterated Turkey's commitment to combating terrorism. The communiqué made references to Turkish military operations in northern Iraq and the assassination of a Turkish diplomat in Erbil, criticized Interpol over the cancellation of arrest warrants for PKK leaders, urged NATO to act in line with the spirit of alliance and stressed Turkey's commitment to protecting its interests in the Eastern Mediterranean.

When the discussion started between Turkey and the U.S. regarding a 'safe zone', many considered it a possible turning point in relations. The mutual mistrust in Syria and an escalating divergence of opinions between the two countries throughout the Syrian civil war had derailed relations more than any other issue in the last decade.

The status of more than 3.6 million temporary Syrian asylum seekers across Turkey has been one of the most controversial political issues being discussed by the Turkish people and politicians in the last few weeks..

There is a growing tendency among Western media outlets; they seek to answer what the West must do, given President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan will remain in power for another four years. Believing that the risk of "losing Turkey" is higher than before, they advocate the "carrot and stick" approach. Let me say at the outset that this is a fruitless endeavor.

James Jeffrey, Washington's special representative for Syria, visited the Turkish capital Ankara last week to hold talks on the proposed safe zone in northern Syria..

The Istanbul rerun election fueled new developments in Turkish politics. There is an ongoing discussion on a range of issues including the presidential system and the prospect of new political parties. The newfound "self-confidence" of Kurdish nationalists deserves particular attention in this context. The Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) takes credit for the Republican People's Party's (CHP) success in the March 31 and June 23 elections. As a matter of fact, it dates its influence back to the June 2018 elections.