Report prepared by: Geostrategic Studies Team
In a significant turning point for the Syrian conflict, the Syrian government and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) have reached a historic agreement aimed at integrating the SDF into state institutions. This development marks a dramatic shift, given the long-standing hostilities and deep mistrust between the two parties. The Syrian government, often viewed as uncompromising in its centralist stance, has now engaged in negotiations with a group it previously regarded as separatist.
This article will analyze the factors that led both parties to accept the agreement, the role of Turkey and the United States in shaping this development, and the long-term strategic implications for Syria and the broader region.
Why Did the Damascus Government Agree to a Settlement with the SDF?
1. Restoring National Sovereignty and Territorial Unity
Since the outbreak of the Syrian crisis, the government in Damascus has consistently maintained that Syria must remain territorially unified under a central authority. However, vast parts of the country fell under the control of various factions, with the SDF establishing an autonomous administration in the northeast. By reaching an agreement, the Syrian government aims to reassert its sovereignty over these territories and reintegrate them into the state framework.
2. Securing Economic Resources
The areas controlled by the SDF, particularly in Hasakah, Deir ez-Zor, and Raqqa, contain some of Syria’s most valuable natural resources, including oil and gas fields. Given the severe economic crisis and Western sanctions on Syria, regaining control over these resources is a crucial step for the government to generate revenue and fund reconstruction efforts.
3. Reducing American Influence in Northeastern Syria
The SDF has been heavily dependent on U.S. support, particularly in the fight against ISIS. However, as Washington’s strategic priorities shift, its commitment to sustaining a long-term military presence in Syria remains uncertain. By securing an agreement with the SDF, Damascus aims to gradually diminish American influence and pave the way for a U.S. withdrawal, aligning with Russian and Iranian interests.
4. Blocking Turkish Expansion in Northern Syria
Turkey has been a key actor in Syria, conducting multiple military operations against Kurdish forces and supporting opposition factions. By bringing the SDF under state control, Damascus reduces Turkey’s justification for further military incursions into Syrian territory. This could weaken Ankara’s influence in northern Syria and disrupt its long-term plans for territorial expansion.
Why Did the SDF Accept the Agreement?
1. Gaining Political Recognition and Securing Kurdish Rights
Although the SDF sought to establish an autonomous governance model in northern Syria, geopolitical realities forced it to reconsider its strategy. The agreement offers the Kurds formal political recognition within the Syrian state and provides a framework for protecting their cultural and political rights.
2. Protection from Turkish Aggression
Turkey considers the SDF an extension of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), which it classifies as a terrorist organization. With repeated threats of Turkish military operations, the SDF saw an alliance with Damascus as a means to secure protection from further Turkish incursions.
3. Diminishing U.S. Support and Western Ambiguity
Despite American military backing, the SDF has never received a long-term security guarantee from Washington. With U.S. foreign policy shifting toward other priorities, the SDF recognized the need to negotiate with Damascus to ensure its survival.
4. Avoiding Prolonged Conflict with the Syrian Government
The SDF faces multiple threats, including continued ISIS insurgencies and confrontations with Turkish-backed factions. Engaging in a direct conflict with the Syrian army would further weaken its position, making a settlement the most viable option.
Turkey’s Strategy and Response to the Agreement
Turkey stands as the primary loser in this agreement. A Damascus-SDF rapprochement directly undermines Ankara’s objectives in Syria. Turkey’s likely strategic responses include:
1. Undermining the Agreement Through Proxy Forces
Turkey will likely intensify its support for the Syrian National Army (SNA) and other opposition factions to destabilize any integration process between Damascus and the SDF.
2. Increasing Military Pressure on Kurdish-Controlled Areas
A direct military escalation remains a possibility, with Turkey launching attacks on border regions to disrupt SDF operations and challenge the agreement’s implementation.
3. Seeking Guarantees from Damascus
Ankara may attempt to negotiate with the Syrian government to ensure that the agreement does not lead to an empowered Kurdish entity near Turkey’s southern border. Given their mutual interest in containing the SDF, Turkey and Syria could engage in tactical cooperation.
The U.S. Role and Its Influence on the Settlement
The United States has remained relatively silent on the agreement, which complicates its strategy in Syria. Since Washington has used the SDF as a key ally to counter ISIS and maintain influence in the region, the agreement presents challenges for U.S. policy. However, several factors explain the lack of direct U.S. intervention to prevent the deal:
1. Shifting Strategic Priorities
With U.S. attention increasingly focused on Ukraine, China, and broader Middle Eastern dynamics, Syria is no longer a top priority.
2. Reducing Costs and Avoiding Long-Term Commitments
Washington is keen to minimize its military and financial involvement in Syria, particularly as domestic political pressure mounts against prolonged foreign interventions.
3. Encouraging Regional Stability
A stabilized Syria—where the SDF and the government coexist—could align with broader U.S. objectives to prevent further escalation in the region.
Long-Term Strategic Implications of the Agreement
1. Reunification of Syrian Territories Under a Central Authority
If fully implemented, the agreement could mark a significant step toward restoring Syria’s territorial unity and preventing the country’s fragmentation into permanent zones of control.
2. Reduced Internal Conflict and a Step Toward a Political Settlement
Bringing the SDF into the Syrian state structure may create momentum for broader political reconciliation efforts, involving other opposition factions.
3. Shifting Regional Power Dynamics
The agreement may lead to decreased American influence in Syria while strengthening Russia and Iran’s position. Additionally, it could push Turkey to reassess its policies toward Damascus.
Conclusion
The agreement between the Syrian government and the SDF marks a turning point in the conflict, reflecting the shifting balance of power both regionally and internationally. While challenges remain in its implementation, the deal has the potential to reshape Syria’s future, setting the stage for a more unified state and a recalibrated regional order.
