From McGurk’s militias to Barrack’s pipelines

From McGurk’s militias to Barrack’s pipelines – a shift in US Middle East policy

Tom Barrack, President Donald Trump’s ambassador to Türkiye and envoy to Syria and Iraq, has distanced Washington from the Kurdish forces in Syria. This move contrasts with the approach of Brett McGurk, a long-serving American official in Middle East policy who has worked for multiple administrations.

Barrack’s stance emerged after clashes between Damascus and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in early 2026. While McGurk maintained strong support for the SDF, Barrack withdrew American political backing, stating that Washington would not allow Israel to become embroiled in the conflict. He argued that the original purpose of the SDF’s involvement in the fight against ISIS had ended, and that the Kurds should now enjoy broader rights within a state framework.

In Iraq, Barrack emphasized the importance of state control over all weapons and urged the government of Ali al-Zaidi to rein in militias. He sought to strengthen Iraq’s relationships with regional neighbors through state-to-state ties, in contrast to McGurk’s earlier approach during Nouri al-Maliki’s second term as Iraqi Prime Minister.

Barrack’s vision aligns with his belief in the primacy of the state, sovereignty, and territorial integrity. He criticizes Israeli air strikes and has accused Israel of violating UN resolutions and international law regarding the Golan Heights. Meanwhile, McGurk’s approach centered on the importance of the international coalition’s campaign against ISIS, relying on Iraqi factions and the Kurdish YPG in Syria despite their ties to Iran and the PKK.

While both officials share common adversaries, their contrasting perspectives on the role of non-state actors and the importance of state institutions have led to differing US policies in the Middle East.