Ignore The New York Times’ smear campaign against Turkey’s COVID-19 response. The United States tops the list of the world’s most unsuccessful countries in fighting the coronavirus. U.S. President Donald Trump, who previously dismissed the possibility of a second wave in the fall, was at odds with medical experts and walked back his comments during a news conference. If the virus were to come back, Trump said, his country would easily defeat it.

The coronavirus pandemic has had many social, economic, political and strategic implications. Individuals, societies, states and international organizations will be dramatically influenced by the pandemic. Today, I want to briefly discuss the possible impacts of the coronavirus pandemic on the future of international institutions.

Social scientists, think tank experts and policymakers are trying to grasp how the coronavirus pandemic and the transformations that may occur in its aftermath will influence life all around the world. Medical experts and scientists in various disciplines of natural sciences are trying to find a remedy for the novel coronavirus. In particular, the medical staff who are struggling ceaselessly to save people’s lives in overcrowded hospitals are the new heroes of our time. They are currently at the front lines of the struggle against COVID-19; however, once the virus' spread is brought under control, the focus will shift to the more complicated consequences of the pandemic. There will be a whole new research agenda for social scientists and policy researchers.

Neo-isolationism is among the expectations for U.S. rhetoric in the aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic and this can melt its frozen ties with Turkey

Since the outbreak of the Syrian civil war in 2011, Turkey has faced the gravest problems in the region regarding security, economics and refugees. That picture has not changed. At every turn, a new wave of issues knocks on Turkey’s door. That Europe and the U.S. have not taken initiatives required for a political transition in Syria is a major factor in this. Another leading cause is Russia’s desire to solve the crisis through military force. From the outset, Russia has deployed a course of destruction called the 'Grozny model." It is a policy consisting of three stages: besiege, destroy and rule. Russia has implemented this formula in many areas, particularly in Aleppo, which has wreaked extensive destruction and killed thousands of civilians.

Andrej Kreutz raised a poignant question in his book from 2007, "Russia in the Middle East: Friend or Foe," well before the Syrian civil war erupted in 2011. Even though Russia has been an important player in the Middle East since the Cold War era, its influence in the region has burgeoned since Syrian President Bashar Assad invited Moscow into the Syrian civil war in 2015.

The Syrian crisis is one of the best examples of this approach. The Bashar Assad regime has killed more than half a million innocent civilians by using prohibited weapons of mass destruction, including barrel bombs and chemical weapons..

When and why was the Ariadna (PKK) investigation launched in Belgium? What is the PKK’s history in Belgium? How was Belgium’s attitude towards the PKK formed? How did the Ariadna investigation proceed and conclude? What are the consequences of the final judgment?

There are also ghosts lingering in foreign and national security policies worldwide. The U.S. had a few of them. While approaching these issues maybe we should first be ready to understand the roots of the phenomenon..

SETA Security Radar attempts to anticipate the course of major security issues Turkey faces and how to develop and enhance sound and relevant responses within this increasingly challenging regional security environment.

Turkey is exerting a huge diplomatic effort to allow the fragile cease-fire in Libya to blossom into a lasting peace. Italian Prime Minister Conte visited the Turkish capital Monday, immediately following Libyan Prime Minister Fayez al-Sarraj. At the same time, Turkey's foreign minister, defense minister and intelligence chief spent the day in Moscow to facilitate talks between Libya's various warring factions.

With tensions between Iran and the United States de-escalating for now, there is talk about cease-fire agreements in Libya and Idlib.

Some people believe that Tehran's response to the Qassem Soleimani assassination resulted in an easing of tensions between the United States and Iran. They argue that the Iranians, intimidated, landed on a symbolic act of retaliation – which they proceeded to portray as vengeance on the home front.

Since the killing of Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad last week, there have been debates, questions and concerns about the potential implications of this attack on U.S. foreign policy and the international relations of the Middle East in general. The missile attacks of Iran on a base in Iraq and the debates about a Ukrainian airlines plane presumably shot down by a missile increased the level these discussions.

The targeted killing of Qassem Soleimani, the commander of Iran's Quds Force, an elite unit of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and the deputy chief of Hashd al-Shaabi forces in Iraq, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandisi, is a game-changer for Middle Eastern politics. Immediately after the attack that killed Soleimani, Iranian leadership threatened the U.S. and its allies in the region. Iran fired missiles at two American bases in Iraq in retaliation to the assassination of Soleimani. No casualties were declared in Iran's retaliatory attacks. Leaders of both countries escalated the tension, but they were careful not to let the crisis get out of control.

Trump's Iran policy completely differs from the former U.S. administration's as it contains the possibility of both winning or losing in the region