Eleven days ago, President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea made a bold power grab, putting the country under military rule for the first time in 45 years, citing frustration at the opposition for obstructing his agenda in Parliament.

His martial law decree lasted only hours, and now he finds himself locked out of power: impeached and suspended by the National Assembly after a vote on Saturday in which a dozen members of his own party turned against him.

Lawmakers sought to draw a line under Mr. Yoon’s tenure after his declaration threw the country’s democracy into chaos and drew public outrage across the country.

Street protests turned to celebrations outside the Assembly when news broke that the impeachment bill had passed. Mr. Yoon’s popularity has plummeted during his two and a half years in office, a term marked by deepening political polarization, scandals involving his wife and a near-constant clash between his government and the opposition-dominated Parliament.

But the political turmoil and uncertainty unleashed by his short-lived declaration of martial law is far from over. Speaking soon after the vote, Mr. Yoon vowed to fight in court to regain his power, even as the police and prosecutors closed in on him with a possible criminal charge of insurrection.

The fate of Mr. Yoon, a deeply unpopular leader, now rests in the hands of the country’s Constitutional Court, which will decide — within the next six months — whether to reinstate or formally remove him. If he is formally removed, South Korea is then supposed to elect a new leader within two months.

During his suspension from office, Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, the No. 2 official in the government hierarchy, has stepped in as interim leader. Because Mr. Han is not an elected official, he will lead South Korea with no real political heft at a time when the country faces challenges at home and abroad, such as North Korea’s growing nuclear threat and the return of Donald J. Trump to the White House.

“My heart is very heavy,” said Mr. Han, a career bureaucrat. “In this heavy time, I will focus all my strength and effort to stably run the affairs of the state.”

For now, Mr. Yoon’s impeachment was a huge relief for crowds of protesters who have been gathering near the Assembly in recent days to call for his ouster. Hours before the Assembly was set to vote, thousands of people began converging on Parliament, carrying signs that said, “Impeach Yoon Suk Yeol, the Ringleader of Insurrection!”

After the vote, as the news reached them that Mr. Yoon was impeached in a vote with 204 in favor and 85 against, they jumped up and down and hugged one another.

“This is the happiest moment in my life,” said Kim Myoung-sook, 60. “Martial law is a declaration of war on the people, and I was so depressed over the past week.”

Opposition groups were triumphant but cautious. Park Chan-dae, the floor leader of the main opposition Democratic Party, called the impeachment “a victory for the South Korean people and democracy.”

However, the mission to oust Mr. Yoon is not over, said Lee Jae-myung, the main opposition leader. “We’ve just overcome a small mountain,” he told a rally of supporters outside the Assembly. “There is a larger, steeper mountain ahead.”

Mr. Yoon signaled he had no intention of going quietly. In a recorded speech released shortly after his impeachment, he addressed the nation and listed what he considers his accomplishments as president, including his efforts to align the country more closely with the United States and Japan in military ties. Now his efforts were paused, he said.

“But I will never give up,” he said, repeating his intention to fight it in the Constitutional Court.

The Assembly had impeached only two South Korean presidents before. In 2017, the Constitutional Court decided unanimously to subsequently remove Park Geun-hye from office. But in 2004, the court overruled the Assembly and overturned the impeachment of then-President Roh Moo-hyun.

The impeachment of Mr. Yoon was the most dramatic twist in his turbulent term that began in 2022, when he narrowly won an election on a conservative, business-friendly platform. His tenure has been marked by near-constant protests and political deadlock.

​Much of his political trouble involved his wife, Kim Keon Hee, who has been accused by his critics and the local news media of accepting improper gifts, including a Dior handbag, and illegally meddling in government affairs, such as personnel decisions.

In the impeachment bill, opposition lawmakers argued that Mr. Yoon had perpetrated an insurrection when he declared martial law on the night of Dec. 3 and sent military troops into the Assembly. They said that was an attempt to stop Parliament from voting down his martial law decree, as it was allowed to do under the Constitution.

His attempt to rule by martial law lasted only six hours, as angry citizens and parliamentary aides slowed down the advance of troops, buying time for lawmakers to gather and vote. But the episode reminded South Koreans of how close their country had come to the brink of martial law, recalling its painful history of military dictatorship decades ago.

In the past week, public pressure had been mounting on the governing party. Mr. Yoon’s popularity rating plunged to 11 percent, a record low, according to a Gallup Korea poll released on Friday.

Opposition lawmakers needed eight supporting votes from Mr. Yoon’s party to impeach him. When they called an impeachment vote last weekend, Mr. Yoon’s People Power Party boycotted it, saying that he should be given a chance to resign rather than be impeached. Only three of its 108 lawmakers participated.

On Saturday, the party said that it officially opposed impeachment, but its lawmakers were allowed to cast their secret ballots. The result indicated that 12 lawmakers from Mr. Yoon’s party had joined the opposition to impeach him and another 11 abstained or cast invalid votes, sealing his fate.

“The impeachment proceedings highlight how checks and balances are essential in stopping abuses of power and supporting the rule of law,” said Simon Henderson, deputy Asia director of Human Rights Watch.

Mr. Yoon has maintained that his martial law was part of the presidential power granted by the Constitution. But he faces the possibility of becoming the first president to be arrested before his term ends. Prosecutors have barred him from leaving the country and have arrested his former defense minister, Kim Yong-hyun, and two former police chiefs on charges of helping carry out insurrection.

Under South Korean law, insurrection is a crime punishable by the death penalty or life imprisonment for anyone found by the court to be a ringleader.

But Mr. Yoon’s impeachment “is not the end of South Korea’s political turmoil,” said Leif-Eric Easley, a professor of international studies at Ewha Womans University in Seoul “It is not even the beginning of the end.”

The impeachment concluded only “an executive-legislative standoff over an attempt at martial law,” he said. “Next is Yoon’s defense in front of the Constitutional Court and likely prosecution for insurrection.”

People came by the thousands the day after the rebels arrived in Damascus, racing down the once desolate stretch of road, up a jagged footpath cut into the limestone hillside and through the towering metal gates of Syria’s most notorious prison. They flooded the halls lined with cells, searching for loved ones who had disappeared into the black hole of torture prisons under Bashar al-Assad’s government.

Some tore through the offices of the prison, Sednaya, looking for maps of the building and prisoner logs. One woman shoved a photograph of her missing son toward others walking by, hoping someone had found him. “Do you recognize him?” she pleaded. “Please, please, did you see him?”

In the entrance hall of one section, dozens of men with sledgehammers and pickaxes tore up the floors, convinced there were secret cells with more prisoners deep underground. Crowds swelled around them as people clambered to see what they found, pausing only when Israeli airstrikes landed close enough to shake the prison’s walls.

“Move back, move back!” one man, Ahmad Hajani, 23, yelled. “Let them work!”

Fernanda Torres still remembers the day her mother, Brazil’s grande dame of film, came within reach of cinema’s most coveted prize: an Oscar.

“It had great symbolism for Brazil,” Ms. Torres, an acclaimed actress herself, said in an interview. “I mean, Brazil produced something like her, you know?” she added. “It was very beautiful.”

A quarter-century ago, Fernanda Montenegro, now 95, made history when she became the first Brazilian actress to be nominated for an Academy Award. She lost to Gwyneth Paltrow, and Brazil never got over what it considered a snub.

Now, Ms. Torres, 59, is attracting chatter in Hollywood that could put her in line to win the elusive golden statuette for a role that has ignited cinematic fever — and a national reckoning — in Latin America’s largest country.

Millions of viewers are packing theaters to watch “I’m Still Here,” a quiet drama starring Ms. Torres about a family torn apart by a military junta that ruled Brazil, by fear and force, for over two decades.

This past week, the movie was nominated for a Golden Globe for best foreign language film, and Ms. Torres was nominated in the lead actress category, bolstering Oscar hopes.

Though the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, which oversees the Oscars, will not reveal its nominations until January, “I’m Still Here” is Brazil’s official entry in the international feature film category.

At home, the movie has struck a nerve in a nation that suffered through the brutal dictatorship from 1964 to 1985.

Set in Rio de Janeiro in the 1970s, “I’m Still Here” tells the story of Eunice Paiva and her five children, whose lives are upended when the family patriarch, Rubens Paiva, a former congressman played by Selton Mello, disappears at the hands of the military government.

By telling this family’s story, the film tackles a “piece of Brazilian history” that is being forgotten, said Walter Salles, the movie’s director and one of the nation’s most prolific filmmakers. “The personal story of the Paiva family is the collective story of a country.”

The film has quickly become a national treasure, breaking box office records and eclipsing usual crowd-pleasers like “Wicked” and “Gladiator 2.”

Since the release of “I’m Still Here” in early November, more than 2.5 million Brazilians have seen it in theaters, and it has grossed more than six times the amount made by last year’s most-watched Brazilian film.

In a troubling twist, the movie was being widely shown in Brazil just as the police revealed new details about a plot to stage a coup and keep the far-right president, Jair Bolsonaro, a defender of the military dictatorship, in power after he lost the 2022 election.

Against this backdrop, the film’s themes have gained an urgent new meaning, said Marcelo Rubens Paiva, whose book about his family inspired the movie.

“The timing was, unfortunately, perfect,” he said, “because it showed this story isn’t just in our past.”

Human rights groups estimate that hundreds of people were disappeared and some 20,000 were tortured during the dictatorship. But, unlike Chile or Argentina, where many crimes committed there under military dictatorships have been tried and punished, Brazil has not pursued accountability for its military’s atrocities.

In recent years, what many had seen as the distant past began to creep into the present. Mr. Bolsonaro, a retired army captain, spoke frequently in nostalgic terms about the dictatorship, awarded thousands of government jobs to soldiers and dismantled a panel investigating crimes committed during the military’s rule.

Movies and other forms of cultural works were frequent targets of censorship during the dictatorship, which considered them political foes. Now, films like “I’m Still Here” can serve as “instruments against forgetting,” Mr. Salles said. “Cinema reconstructs memory.”

And the film has surely ignited Brazil’s collective memory. In classrooms and newspaper pages, heated debates are unfolding over the legacy of the dictatorship. On social media, stories of suffering at the hands of the military government have gone viral, drawing millions of views.

On a recent rainy weekday, as moviegoers packed a Rio de Janeiro theater, it was clear that “I’m Still Here” had cast a wide spell. Groups of teenagers, fathers and sons and older couples were all clutching tickets.

Some snapped selfies in front of the movie’s poster. Others took deep breaths before stepping into the theater’s darkness.

Inside, the crowd gasped at the sounds of the torture of political prisoners; teared up when Eunice, played by Ms. Torres, defiantly smiled for a newspaper photo, unwavering in the face of tragedy; and stifled sobs when Ms. Montenegro made a silent appearance in the closing scenes, as an older Eunice whose memories were fading.

The film echoed a familiar past for many. “It shows everything we lived through,” said Dr. Eneida Glória Mendes, 73, who grew up in a military family during the dictatorship.

Dr. Mendes, who has watched the film twice, remembers ripping up letters she received from friends who criticized the regime so that her father would not see them. Anyone sending or receiving such correspondence could have been detained.

“We were not free,” she said. “Even a silly criticism could lead to arrest.”

For younger Brazilians, the film offered a glimpse into a reality they had heard about only at school. “For my generation, there’s this thirst to know more,” said Sara Chaves, 25, an aspiring actress.

“I’m Still Here” has also captivated audiences and critics abroad. When it premiered in Venice this year, it won an award for best screenplay and drew a thundering applause that lasted 10 minutes.

So when the academy shared an image on social media of Ms. Torres at a Hollywood industry gala last month, Brazilians went wild. “Give her the award already!” said one of the more than 820,000 comments on Instagram.

If she is nominated in the best actress category, Ms. Torres would be following a remarkably similar path to her mother, who was nominated in 1999 for her role as a letter writer for illiterate people in “Central Station,” a Brazilian classic also directed by Mr. Salles.

“There was this feeling in the country that she was deeply wronged,” said Isabela Boscov, a Brazilian cinema critic who has been reviewing films for three decades.

“I’m Still Here” is widely expected to receive a nomination in the international film category, according to Hollywood insiders, but Ms. Torres’s chances are more uncertain.

Sony Pictures Classics, the studio distributing “I’m Still Here” globally, which launched the successful best actress nomination bid for Ms. Montenegro, is making a concerted push for Ms. Torres. Yet she may face tough odds this year in a crowded field that includes names like Angelina Jolie and Nicole Kidman.

To Ms. Torres, an Oscar nomination “would be a big victory” in itself, but she is not getting her hopes up. “It would be an incredible story if I got there, following my mother,” she said. “Now, winning — I consider it impossible.”

Since the first Oscars ceremony in 1929, only two actresses have won awards for leading roles in foreign-language films.

On a recent Sunday afternoon at Ms. Torres’s home, she sat across from her mother, reminiscing about art and family and other films the two have made together.

“This is also a legacy of life, of a profession,” Ms. Montenegro said, gesturing toward her daughter, then herself.

After a career spanning more than seven decades, Ms. Montenegro is still acting in films and onstage. But her movements are slower, her eyesight is weakening and she rests more.

Sharing a character with her daughter, in a film that has inspired awe and soul-searching across Brazil, has carried personal symbolism, too. “It’s a really special moment,” Ms. Montenegro said.

After a final lipstick check in the mirror, the two actresses faced a camera for a photograph for this article. They moved their faces close together, their cheeks nearly touching. Like Eunice Paiva, in the movie both are in, they prefer to smile.

“My mother is still alive; all is well with her,” Ms. Torres explained. “I’m happy.”

“By chance, I’m still here,” Ms. Montenegro replied. Ms. Torres chimed in: “We’re still here.”

Kyle Buchanan contributed reporting from Los Angeles. Lis Moriconi contributed research.

From desperate stabs at diplomacy to fanciful expressions of flattery, Ukrainian officials are doing everything they can to bring President-elect Donald J. Trump into their corner as they try to strengthen their position in the war against Russia.

President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine traveled almost 1,500 miles last weekend on the off chance he could meet with Mr. Trump in Paris. (He did.) Ukrainian leaders have delayed signing a critical minerals cooperation agreement with the United States, with an eye toward letting Mr. Trump claim credit after taking office. (Rather than President Biden.) One Ukrainian lawmaker even nominated Mr. Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize.

“The fate of Ukraine depends on Trump,” said the lawmaker, Oleksandr Merezhko. He said he spontaneously nominated Mr. Trump for the prize last month because of his promise to bring peace to Ukraine and his decision to sell the country anti-tank Javelin missiles during his first term. “We should appreciate what he’s done for us. We should be thankful.”

Since the election in November, Ukrainians have repeatedly tried to press their case with the president-elect, known for his skepticism about American support for Ukraine’s war effort and even about Mr. Zelensky himself. Mr. Trump recently told the French magazine Paris Match that ending the war in Ukraine would be his main foreign policy priority after his inauguration next month. He has vowed to try to start peace talks as soon as taking office.

With his military losing ground in Ukraine’s east, Mr. Zelensky’s public messaging has shifted since Mr. Trump’s election. He is portraying Ukraine as being open to negotiations that could involve concessions, including ceding Russian-occupied territory in the east and regaining it later through diplomacy. That is meant as a signal to Mr. Trump’s foreign policy team that the Ukrainian leader is reasonable compared with the nuclear saber-rattling of Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin.

“They want to secure their place on the new U.S. administration’s radar,” said Alyona Getmanchuk, the head of a Kyiv-based think tank, New Europe Center. “They’re trying to establish contacts, build bridges.”

Perhaps the most audacious effort occurred after Ukrainian officials learned that Mr. Trump planned to go to Paris last Saturday for the reopening of the Notre-Dame Cathedral.

First, they pushed for help from the French president’s office to organize a meeting between Mr. Zelensky and Mr. Trump, according to a French official who requested anonymity to discuss the preparations. Then, with no guarantee of a meeting, Mr. Zelensky’s team traveled many hours to Paris from Kyiv by train and plane.

The meeting was confirmed just before Mr. Trump walked into the Élysée Palace for talks with France’s president. Less than an hour later, Mr. Zelensky joined them. The discussion between the three men, supposed to last 15 minutes, stretched to 45.

“President Trump is, as always, resolute,” Mr. Zelensky wrote on social media shortly afterward, posting a photograph of their handshake under the palace’s gilded ceilings and chandeliers. “I thank him.”

On Tuesday, Mr. Zelensky added flattery, writing that he had told Mr. Trump that Mr. Putin “fears only him and, perhaps, China.”

Other efforts to appeal to the president-elect included a trip to Washington this month by Mr. Zelensky’s powerful chief of staff, who met with members of Mr. Trump’s team.

Since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, the United States has been Ukraine’s biggest supplier of military aid, more than $62 billion worth, and Mr. Biden has been one of Ukraine’s biggest defenders on the international stage. But Ukraine’s war prospects are looking dim: Russia now occupies about 20 percent of the country and is pressing ahead relentlessly to capture more eastern territory. And Ukraine’s recruitment system has not produced enough qualified new soldiers.

During his campaign, Mr. Trump promised to end the war in 24 hours. He has not said how, but given his skepticism over aid to Ukraine, officials in Kyiv fear he will immediately cut off the flow of money and weapons and try to force a settlement on terms favorable to Moscow.

A hint at how Mr. Trump might proceed comes from Keith Kellogg, a former national security adviser whom the president-elect has nominated to be special envoy to Ukraine and Russia. In a research paper published by a pro-Trump think tank in April, Mr. Kellogg proposed peace talks between Kyiv and Moscow with major consequences: If Kyiv did not participate, U.S. aid would be cut off. If Moscow did not participate, Kyiv would get more U.S. aid.

Mr. Trump has had a tricky relationship with Mr. Zelensky — the first phone call between them in 2019, in which Mr. Trump asked the Ukrainian president to investigate Mr. Biden, led to Mr. Trump’s first impeachment. Their second phone call did not happen until this past July.

Mr. Trump has also spoken favorably about Mr. Putin and said he wants to establish a positive relationship with him.

Mr. Zelensky’s team is betting that Mr. Putin is not ready to negotiate in good faith, despite claims by aides that Mr. Putin is open to peace talks, analysts said.

“They’re trying to explain to Trump and his people that if there is someone who doesn’t want to negotiate now, it’s Putin, not Zelensky,” Ms. Getmanchuk said. “Part of the Ukrainian tactic is to show that they’re constructive, realist.”

Ukrainian officials and business people have also tried to appeal to Mr. Trump’s transactional approach, saying the country is rich in natural resources that could support U.S. industries Mr. Trump wants to boost.

Ukraine has deposits of 20 critical minerals, such as cobalt and graphite, with reserves valued up to $11.5 trillion, according to Horizon Capital, Ukraine’s leading private equity firm. The country is home to a third of Europe’s proven lithium reserves, a key material for rechargeable batteries that could be of interest to the electric car business of Elon Musk, a Trump ally.

Ukraine had planned to sign an agreement to cooperate on extracting and processing minerals with the Biden administration. But the Ukrainian authorities have postponed the signing twice, according to officials on both sides — a signal that Kyiv may be waiting for Mr. Trump to take office to present the deal as an early victory for his administration.

“This war is about money,” Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and a Trump ally, told Fox News last month. “So Donald Trump’s going to do a deal to get our money back, to enrich ourselves with rare earth minerals. A good deal for Ukraine and us, and he’s going to bring peace.”

There are signs that Ukraine’s message is getting through. On Sunday, the day after meeting Mr. Zelensky, Mr. Trump wrote on social media that Mr. Zelensky and Ukraine “would like to make a deal and stop the madness.”

But there are also signs that Mr. Trump is hedging his bets. He told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he was open to reducing military aid to Ukraine.

One continuing point of friction is Mr. Zelensky’s insistence that Ukraine be granted NATO membership. That demand is unlikely to resonate with Mr. Trump, who is skeptical of NATO itself and aware that Mr. Putin considers Ukrainian membership a nonstarter. Mr. Kellogg has said that Kyiv’s allies should put off NATO membership for Ukraine for an extended period to persuade Mr. Putin to join peace talks.

For all of Mr. Trump’s bluster, many in Ukraine have pinned their hopes on him to end the war on acceptable terms. A recent poll by the New Europe Center found that 44 percent of Ukrainians trust Mr. Trump, higher than in any other European country, including Trump-friendly Hungary.

Part of that support, Ms. Getmanchuk said, stems from the disappointment many Ukrainians feel with Mr. Biden’s cautious approach to helping Ukraine’s military. Some Ukrainians nickname Mr. Biden “2L” — for “too little, too late.” Mr. Trump’s vow to end the war quickly has resonated with a growing number of war-weary Ukrainians who now favor peace talks, even though they do not want to cede territory.

At the Trump White Coffee Bar — one of at least two Kyiv cafes named for Mr. Trump — customers said they wanted him to fulfill his campaign promise.

“I hope Trump will do what he promised — for peace to come to Ukraine,” said Yulia Lymych, 25, a real-estate agent. “This is the main wish of Ukrainians. I feel very sorry for the guys who died at war. I have friends who died and friends who are still fighting. My boyfriend is fighting. I want them all to come back home.”

Georgia’s governing lawmakers handed the presidency to a former soccer star turned far-right politician on Saturday, setting up a standoff with the sitting president and deepening the country’s political turmoil after weeks of protests and a disputed parliamentary election.

Mikheil Kavelashvili, 53, a former striker for the Manchester City football team, was the sole candidate for the post, and the first to be chosen by an electoral college that replaced direct presidential elections seven years ago.

A coalition of opposition parties boycotted the vote, because they say the parliamentary elections in late October were marred by allegations of vote buying, intimidation and violence. But Mr. Kavelashvili was backed by the conservative Georgian Dream party, which has held a majority in Parliament for over a decade and steered the small Caucasus nation away from the European Union and closer to Russia and China.

The vote sets up a standoff between Mr. Kavelashvili, who is to assume office in 15 days, and the outgoing president, Salome Zourabichvili, who has sided with the opposition and vowed to stay in office until new elections are held. In a post on X, she called the result a “mockery of democracy,” comparing it to the way Georgia’s leaders were chosen when the country was part of the Soviet Union.

It is unclear what she could do to prevent Ms. Kavelashvili from taking his seat. On Nov. 30, she insisted that “there will be no inauguration and my mandate continues.” But on Dec. 3, Georgia’s constitutional court rejected a challenge to the elections filed by Ms. Zourabichvili and opposition groups.

Ms. Zourabichvili, who was elected by Georgia’s final popular vote for president, is pro-Western, while Mr. Kavelashvili espouses strongly anti-Western views. He claimed several times this year that Western intelligence agencies were conspiring to push Georgia into conflict with Moscow, which ruled Georgia as part of the Russian Empire and later the Soviet Union, until 1991.

Russia, which fought a five-day war with Georgia in 2008, still seeks influence over the strategically located Black Sea country.

Georgia has been racked by political crisis since May, when Georgian Dream lawmakers passed a law on “foreign influence” co-written by Mr. Kavelashvili.

The law requires nongovernmental groups and media organizations that receive at least 20 percent of their funding from abroad to register as organizations “pursuing the interests of a foreign power.” Its opponents argue it was modeled on a 2012 Russian law on “foreign agents,” which the Kremlin has used as part of a broad crackdown on rights groups, news outlets and others.

The crisis in Georgia further deepened after the elections in October, which were followed by weeks of street protests. Last month, the prime minister, who occupies a more powerful position than the president and is a member of the Georgian Dream party, said that Georgia would be suspending its work toward membership in the European Union, sparking another round of protests.

On Friday, following repeated clashes between protesters and the police, Parliament passed a law that bans face coverings and the use of fireworks at public demonstrations.

Ahead of the vote to install Mr. Kavelashvili, hundreds of protesters gathered in front of the parliament, according to videos on social media. Some kicked soccer balls, while others reportedly brought their college diplomas, an allusion to the criticism that the former soccer player lacks a university degree.

Mr. Kavelashvili entered parliament with Georgian Dream in 2016 but left in 2022 to co-found People’s Power, an anti-Western party. He was nominated for the presidency by Georgian Dream’s honorary chairman, the wealthy businessman Bidzina Ivanishvili, who made his $7.7 billion fortune largely in banking, metals and Russian real estate. His ties there are often cited by protesters as a reason for the party’s pro-Russian policies.

Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken on Saturday met with Arab ministers in Jordan to discuss how to assist a political transition in Syria, nearly a week after rebels toppled the dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad.

The Arab countries called for an end to hostilities in Syria and said they would support the transitional government there, according to a statement from Jordan’s Foreign Ministry.

The abrupt demise of the Assad government in Syria has prompted celebrations along with uncertainty over how the new interim administration there can manage a transition in a country shattered by 13 years of civil war and decades of repression.

It is another upheaval in a region already reeling from more than a year of war and has set in motion a realignment with implications for Turkey, Israel, Iran and Lebanon. It also affects the Russian government, which has given refuge to Mr. al-Assad and was a stalwart ally of his.

Mr. Blinken met in the coastal city of Aqaba with foreign ministers from Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Egypt, as well as the caretaker prime minister of Lebanon and secretary general of the Arab League, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, according to a statement by Jordan’s Foreign Ministry. Turkey, the United Nations and the European Union also participated but representatives of Syria’s new leadership did not attend.

Mr. Blinken is in Jordan as part of a tour of the Middle East that has included stops in the Turkish capital, Ankara, and the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, as the United States assesses the fallout from Mr. al-Bashar’s ouster.

The statements emerging from the meeting in Aqaba were only the latest signs of how rapidly the situation in Syria has affected the region. Just weeks ago, Arab nations led by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates had tried to bring Mr. al-Assad back into their fold after a rupture in relations over brutal treatment of his own people.

Days before Mr. al-Assad fell, top officials from Arab states, as well as from Turkey, Russia and Iran, met to try to contain the revolt.

In recent days, Turkey has emerged with greater influence in Syria, given its support of the offensive led by the rebel group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, which overthrew Mr. al-Assad. Some Syrian rebel factions backed by Turkey joined forces with the group in the assault.

The Turkish government made plans this week to reopen its embassy in Damascus, Syria’s capital, which has been closed for almost 13 years. It also conducted military operations, including airstrikes, in northern Syria against Kurdish militants whom it considers a threat.

On Friday, the Turkish foreign minister, Hakan Fidan, issued a stark warning to members of the Kurdish militia that controls northeastern Syria, the People’s Protection Units, or YPG.

“It is our strategic target to eliminate the YPG,” he said in an interview with the Turkish broadcaster NTV. He said any members who were not Syrian should leave the country as soon as possible, and added: “The entire command level of YPG should leave the country too. The remaining ones should continue living as they lay down their weapons.”

The Kurdish-led forces in Syria have been important partners with the United States in the fight there against the Islamic State terrorist group. The United States and Turkey are NATO allies.

Turkey, at the same time, has funded and trained a Syrian rebel force, the Syrian National Army, which provided security for Turkish military bases in northern Syria and helped it fight Kurdish-led forces in the country.

The commander of Syria’s largest Kurdish militia accused the United States this past week of abandoning its Kurdish allies in Syria.

Turkish officials told Mr. Blinken in Ankara that they shared Washington’s concern about the potential for an Islamic State comeback, according to a senior U.S. official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomacy. But they also reiterated their right to attack Syrian Kurds.

U.S. officials agree that Turkey has some legitimate security concerns when it comes to the Kurds, the U.S. official said, adding that Turkey also claimed to see threats from the Syria-based fighters that are not supported by American intelligence.

Of particular concern to the United States is the Kurdish-majority city of Kobani, which Turkey has attacked in the past. America is watching events there closely, the U.S. official said.

During his stop on Friday in Baghdad, Mr. Blinken stressed to the Iraqi prime minister, Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, that Iraq should be vigilant about any Iranian attempt to funnel weapons through the country to pro-Iranian militias within Syria who might use them for attacks there.

In response, Mr. Sudani told Mr. Blinken that Iraq was determined not to be dragged into any fights outside its borders, the official said.

In another ripple effect of the rebel takeover in Syria, Russian forces appeared on Friday to be packing up some military equipment at an important air base near the Syrian port city of Latakia in a possible prelude to a broader withdrawal.

The Hmeimim base is a critical part of Moscow’s military foothold in the region. But the upheaval in the country has left the prospects for a continuing Russian military presence in Syria unclear for now.

American officials have expressed concern that instability across Syria, where various armed groups with competing agendas are active, could threaten its neighbors.

The outbreak of civil war in Syria in 2011 helped to fuel the rise of Islamic State, which conquered large swaths of Syria and Iraq and took years to defeat.

Israel has also seized an opportunity created by the collapse of the Assad dynasty, bombing weapons stores and other targets in Syria to eliminate what it says are potential threats and also seizing territory in the country near the disputed Golan Heights.

Syria on Friday condemned Israel’s attack and called on the U.N. Security Council to compel the Israeli government to cease any further attacks.

Syria’s ambassador to the United Nations, Koussay Aldahhak, said the Security Council should “compel Israel to respect international law,” and not allow it to benefit from Syria’s transition.

The U.S. Central Command said on Saturday that Gen. Michael E. Kurilla, the U.S. military commander in the Middle East, had talks in Israel this week with Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi, the Israeli military chief of staff, on the situation in Syria and the region.

Safak Timur and Rawan Sheikh Ahmad contributed reporting.

The Palestinian Authority announced an unusually public crackdown on militants in the Israeli-occupied West Bank on Saturday, sending armored vehicles through the streets of the city of Jenin, where the armed groups have become increasingly powerful.

Palestinian security forces began their operation in Jenin to “put an end to sedition and chaos,” said Brig. Gen. Anwar Rajab, a spokesman for the Palestinian Authority’s security services. They killed a local militant ringleader, according to General Rajab and two residents.

As fighting has raged between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, the rising influence of militants in cities like Jenin and Tulkarm has also prompted a deadly cycle of Israeli military operations, which have often lasted for days and devastated Palestinian neighborhoods.

The militants — often affiliated with groups like Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad — oppose both Israel and the internationally backed Palestinian Authority, which administers some West Bank areas under Israeli occupation. The fragile Authority has struggled to fully crack down on the militants, fearing that doing so would undermine its already tenuous rule among Palestinians who see it as too close to Israel.

Violence in the West Bank has sharply escalated since the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas on Israel last year that triggered the war in Gaza. Since then, Israeli security forces and civilians have killed at least 700 Palestinians in the West Bank, according to the United Nations.

The Biden administration has called for the Palestinian Authority to ultimately take control over Gaza after Israel’s war against Hamas ends. Israeli officials have often rejected such a proposal, in part by pointing to the spiraling unrest in the West Bank, arguing that the Palestinian government is unable to rule its own backyard.

On Saturday, Palestinian security forces entered the Jenin refugee camp and killed Yazid Jaayseh, a local militant ringleader. The camp is a built-up neighborhood founded decades ago by Palestinian refugees displaced by the wars surrounding the establishment of Israel in 1948.

In a statement, Hamas mourned Mr. Jaayseh as a leader in a local militant group, although it did not claim him as a member. Hamas said the Palestinian Authority’s crackdown against the armed groups was “absolutely identical to Israel’s aggression and criminality,”

General Rajab vowed that Palestinian security forces had begun “a new stage” that aimed to “regain control of the Jenin camp from lawbreakers who ruin the lives of the citizenry.”

Two Palestinian officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they was not authorized to speak publicly, said that the operation around Jenin’s refugee camp was ongoing.

Omar Obeid, a 62-year-old resident of Jenin’s refugee camp, said he was huddled at home with family members. Intense gunfire between the Palestinian Authority’s forces and the militants began around 5 a.m. and had yet to let up, he said.

“None of this fighting should ever have happened,” Mr. Obeid lamented. “Violence isn’t going to get us anywhere. We need a bigger solution.”