PrintWhat’s next for Syria?
The various Kurdish factions in Syria have agreed on a common political vision. That vision includes a federalist structure, which would provide the Kurds in Syria with regional autonomy and an independent security force. This vision by the Kurds, while entirely justified, is short of independence. It comes a month following the agreement between Ahmed al-Sharaa, Syria’s “transitional” president, and the leader of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), Mazloum Abdi.
These two figures, al-Sharaa and Abdi, were previously associated with terrorist groups. Naturally, the leftist and secular ideological bent of the SDF is in stark contrast with the conservative and Islamist views of al-Sharaa’s Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). Al-Sharaa was previously allied with al-Qaeda. Abdi was associated with the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK). Their meeting resulted in an agreement that stipulates that, over time, the SDF will integrate into Syria’s state institutions.
The culturally and ethnically non-Arab Kurds have endured a history of discrimination from both the Assad regime and the majority-Sunni Arabs. Clearly, Kurdish integration will not create an organic Syrian state.
The deal between al-Sharaa and Abdi says that over time, the SDF will integrate into Syria’s state institutions. They agreed on the territorial unity of Syria under a central government led by Ahmed al-Sharaa. The agreement stipulated a merger of the Kurdish military and civilian institutions into the Syrian state. It also included an agreement on a ceasefire and the safe return of civilians who were evacuated from their homes.
Nonetheless, the agreement was a complex endeavor because the SDF’s ideology and the institutions in eastern Syria are very different from the HTS, which the U.S. designated as a terrorist organization in May 2014. However, under a new Syrian government, it is possible, though unlikely, that accommodations could be made.
The SDF faced attacks by Turkey and Turkish-backed groups including the Syrian National Army (SNA). When the Syrian regime, with Russian and Iranian backing, took back much of eastern Syria, it appeared that HTS and the SDF might end up being surrounded in their areas and eventually isolated. That shared experience made al-Sharaa and Abdi find some common ground.
Badran Jia Kurd, deputy co-chair of the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES), recently emphasized to Reuters the need for a federal parliamentary system in Syria that must be democratic and pluralistic. He also shed light on the recent agreement with Damascus, prospects for engagement with Erdoğan’s Turkey, the ongoing security and political challenges facing Syria, and in particular his vision for a pluralistic Syrian future.
The demand by the Kurdish factions for a federal system of governance was accelerated as a result of the massacre of the Alawites last month, which caused fear to spread among all Syrian minority communities, including the Druze and Kurds. Hence, Badran Jia Kurd stressed what he considered the fundamental issue for Syria: the maintenance of the individual cultural and political administration of each group within its own region, and the need for internal (regional) security forces. This is a departure from the agreement between al-Sharaa and Abdi.
The Alawites, Druze, and Kurds have been looking to Israel for protection. Israel has had a history of seeking alliances with minorities in the region. Through the years, Israel has helped such groups as the Maronite Christians in Lebanon and Iraqi Kurds. Israel also has a special affinity for the Druze population in Syria in view of the loyalty and sacrifices of members of the Israeli Druze community who serve in the Israeli Defense Forces. Moreover, given the proximity of the Druze region to Israel’s Golan Heights, Jerusalem has become the de facto protector of the Druze minority in Syria.
The Alawites and Syrian Kurds are geographically remote from Israel, and some of the Kurdish groups have a close association with the PKK, considered a terrorist organization in the West, which makes it harder for Israel to extend the same protection to them. Still, Israel’s tension with Erdoğan’s Turkey makes an alliance with the Syrian Kurds rather logical.
Suleiman Osso, head of the Kurdish National Council in Syria (ENKS), told Reuters that a common resolution by the Kurdish factions would be announced at the end of April. He pointed out, however, that the removal of the Assad regime last December convinced most Syrians to view the federal system as the optimal solution for Syria. Osso justified the demand for federalism based upon the recent attacks on the Alawites and the rejection of the Druze minority of a centralized Damascus government.
The 2025 Interim Constitution of Syria, officially known as the Constitutional Declaration of the Syrian Arab Republic, announced by al-Sharaa, is not acceptable to the leadership of the Kurdish factions. The constitution doesn’t address the diversity within the Syrian state’s population, and it grants al-Sharaa extensive powers. It invokes sharia Islamic law as the major source for legislation and makes Arabic the official language of Syria, without providing for or even mentioning the Kurdish language. Al-Sharaa though, has rejected the idea of federalism in Syria.
Iraq and Syria were concocted by the colonial powers of Britain and France in the aftermath of the First World War. The Sykes-Picot Agreement created inorganic entities that have resulted in instability and chaos in these two states for decades. Iraq is divided among Shiite Arabs, Sunni Arabs, and Kurds. These groups have never lived in harmony. Similarly, in Syria, even more diverse groups such as the Sunni Arab majority were never in full harmony with the Kurds, Christians, Alawites, and Druze.
Although the optimal solution is full independence for the abovementioned groups, the next best idea is a federalized Syria that provides full autonomy to the various religious and ethnic groups.
FOLLOW US ON
