"US support for the SDF was always problematic and ultimately destined to end. During my time working on the Syria file at the State Department, I joined several officials in warning the Obama administration that backing the SDF was a strategic mistake that would prolong the conflict and deepen sectarian tensions. It would have been wiser though more difficult to address the root causes that enabled the rise of ISIL (ISIS): al-Assad's repression of his people and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's sectarian policies."
"Instead, Washington risked fracturing Syria and undermining its ties with Turkiye. The SDF was dominated by hardline Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) elements that were actively fighting Turkiye, a critical NATO ally. The group was also deeply at odds with the rest of the Syrian opposition and with most Kurdish factions in Syria and Iraq. We argued that whether al-Assad or the opposition ultimately prevailed, the SDF would eventually be forced to reintegrate into a state structure led by the victor."
Recent fighting between the Syrian military and the SDF ended with the government expanding control, particularly in Arab-majority areas. Washington brokered a ceasefire and endorsed reintegration of the SDF into the Syrian state. The US pivot accelerated after Bashar al-Assad's ouster in December 2024. Officials warned that long-term support for the SDF risked prolonging the conflict and deepening sectarian tensions. Addressing the root causes of ISIL's rise—al-Assad's repression and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's sectarian policies—would have been wiser but more difficult. The SDF's PKK dominance strained ties with Turkiye and other Syrian and Iraqi Kurdish factions.
Read at www.aljazeera.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]