News and Analysis: Geo-Strategic Studies Team
News
“The U.S. Congress stipulates and emphasizes that the Syrian Democratic Forces must be an essential part of Syria’s political and security future.
The Congress makes clear that excluding the SDF from any settlement would be considered a violation of the American vision for stability in Syria and the region.”
The Congress makes clear that excluding the SDF from any settlement would be considered a violation of the American vision for stability in Syria and the region.”
Analysis
A Strategic Shift in Washington: From a Counter-ISIS Partner to a Structural Pillar of Syria’s Future
The latest position expressed by the U.S. Congress marks a significant shift in American policy toward Syria. For years, Washington publicly described the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) primarily as a tactical and indispensable partner in the fight against ISIS. Today, however, the congressional message goes far beyond military cooperation, framing the SDF as an essential political and security component of Syria’s future state architecture.
This evolution indicates that the United States no longer views the SDF merely as a military formation created for counterterrorism operations, but as a credible local governing authority capable of maintaining stability, administering territory, and preventing the resurgence of extremist threats. In practical terms, Washington now sees the exclusion of the SDF from any political settlement as a direct threat to regional stability and to U.S. strategic interests.
The latest position expressed by the U.S. Congress marks a significant shift in American policy toward Syria. For years, Washington publicly described the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) primarily as a tactical and indispensable partner in the fight against ISIS. Today, however, the congressional message goes far beyond military cooperation, framing the SDF as an essential political and security component of Syria’s future state architecture.
This evolution indicates that the United States no longer views the SDF merely as a military formation created for counterterrorism operations, but as a credible local governing authority capable of maintaining stability, administering territory, and preventing the resurgence of extremist threats. In practical terms, Washington now sees the exclusion of the SDF from any political settlement as a direct threat to regional stability and to U.S. strategic interests.
A Direct Message to Damascus: The Legitimacy of Northeast Syria Has Become a Fixed Element in Syria’s Internal Equation
By stressing that the SDF must be included in any future settlement, Congress introduces new political constraints on the Syrian government. Damascus, which has long attempted to treat the Autonomous Administration and the SDF as temporary or peripheral actors, now faces an American position that elevates these structures into indispensable partners in any post-war political configuration.
The U.S. stance pushes Syria toward a model that incorporates meaningful decentralization, acknowledges the autonomy of local institutions, and prevents the return of rigid centralism. It also signals that Washington considers the governance model in northeast Syria as part of the legitimate Syrian political landscape—one that must be recognized rather than dismantled.
An Explicit Warning to Ankara: Turkish Security Cannot Be Built on the Elimination of U.S. Partners
Congress’s insistence that excluding the SDF is unacceptable sends an equally strong message to Turkey. Ankara has long pursued a strategic triad: preventing international recognition of the Autonomous Administration, weakening the SDF through military pressure, and establishing alternative proxy structures aligned with its interests.
The congressional statement draws a clear line: U.S. partnership with the SDF is not temporary, expendable, or negotiable. Any attempt to reshape the political map of northern Syria through unilateral military action runs counter to American strategic priorities. This is part of a broader U.S. effort to balance Turkish ambitions while maintaining the SDF as a stabilizing force that protects American objectives, limits Russian expansion, and restricts Iran’s influence.
Re-Engineering Regional Security: The SDF as a Stabilizing Force in a Fragmented Landscape
In Washington’s strategic calculus, Syria’s stability is inseparable from the broader stability of the Middle East. The northeast, governed by the SDF and the Autonomous Administration, is viewed as the most stable region in the country—politically, socially, and militarily. It is the only area that maintains a sustainable governance model, secures international humanitarian operations, and limits the movement of ISIS cells.
For U.S. lawmakers and defense institutions, weakening the SDF would risk reopening corridors for ISIS revival, enabling Iranian-linked militias to push deeper into the Euphrates region, and granting Russia larger leverage over Syria’s future. In this context, institutionalizing the role of the SDF becomes part of a deliberate American design to maintain a geopolitical foothold, protect regional energy corridors, and prevent the emergence of a power vacuum that adversaries could exploit.
Strengthening the Autonomous Administration: De Facto Recognition Through Political Anchoring
Although the United States continues to emphasize its commitment to a unified Syrian state and does not officially endorse a separate Kurdish entity, the congressional stance grants the Autonomous Administration a form of indirect yet powerful legitimacy. By tying the SDF to Syria’s political future, Washington implicitly recognizes the administrative, social, and security structures that have taken root in the northeast.
This new dynamic enhances the Autonomous Administration’s leverage in negotiations with Damascus, provides an international shield against Turkish military pressure, and positions the SDF as a legitimate institutional actor rather than a temporary force created by war conditions. Any political or constitutional process that excludes the SDF is now framed as structurally unviable in the eyes of U.S. policymakers.
Conclusion: A Defining Moment for Kurdish and Local Forces in Syria’s Political Landscape
The congressional decision marks the first explicit linkage between Syria’s long-term stability and the inclusion of the SDF as a political and security stakeholder. This represents a critical turning point for Kurdish and local forces, elevating their role from battlefield partners to central actors in shaping the country’s post-war framework.
While this shift does not resolve the conflict nor guarantee a smooth political transition, it fundamentally rewrites the rules of engagement in Syria. It ensures that northeast Syria cannot be sidelined, pressured into marginalization, or erased from the future political map. The U.S. Congress has made clear that the SDF is no longer a force that can be circumvented, but rather a cornerstone of any viable Syrian settlement.
This new phase will shape the regional balance of power and the internal Syrian equation for years to come.
