Error occured during this request! Please try again later.
Analysis
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad (R) receives the Russian President’s Special Envoy Alexander Lavrentiev (L) in the Syrian capital Damascus, September 15, 2019. Photo: Syrian presidency Telegram page / handout / AFP
Over the past week statements from both the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Damascus and his Russian backers in Moscow demonstrate beyond a doubt that neither power is willing to accept long-term autonomy for northeastern Syria’s Kurdish-majority regions.
On September 15, the Syrian Foreign Ministry sent a letter to the United Nations denouncing the Kurdish-led and US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which presently controls northeast Syria.
The letter accused the SDF of being behind “terrorist and criminal activities” against Syrians in Deir ez-Zor, Hasaka, Raqqa, and other areas it controls with direct US support – territories the SDF liberated from the Islamic State group (ISIS).
“This runs in line with schemes being implemented by some state agents to the USA and plotted by authorities of the Israeli occupation, neglecting UNSC resolutions that stress sovereignty and territorial unity of Syria and [the] unity of its people,” the letter claimed, without citing evidence.
More worryingly, the letter once again confirmed that Damascus ultimately aims to recapture “every inch” of northeast Syria from the “terrorist” SDF.
Unlike other armed groups in Syria’s protracted civil war, the SDF has not fought directly with the regime. The Syrian Kurds did not join the initial uprisings against the regime in 2011, enabling Damascus to relocate forces hitherto based in the Kurdish regions to other fronts, giving the Kurds there unprecedented autonomy in the process.
However, there is no reason, given its record, to believe that the regime will grant the Kurdish regions legal autonomy or self-governance in the long run nor recognize existing autonomous institutions in northeast Syria as legitimate.
Following these latest threats, the SDF called for renewed dialogue. The group has twice tried in vain to negotiate a settlement with Damascus to retain some of its hard-won autonomy.
More recently, the SDF claimed the Syrian regime, as well as Turkey, is responsible for a series of bombings aimed at destabilizing the northeast to undermine its de-facto autonomy.
This could be the preamble to direct regime action against the SDF to reclaim the one-third of Syrian territory under its control, which includes most of the country’s natural resources and fertile land.
However, a major attack is unlikely, at least for now, as the regime is currently dedicating its resources to the reconquest of the northwest province of Idlib, which is controlled by the jihadist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) – the latest iteration of al-Qaeda’s former Syrian offshoot Jabhat al-Nusra.
Last week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov argued that the Syrian conflict is essentially over and that the country “is returning to normal peaceful life gradually”.
“Separate hotbeds of tension only remain on the territories uncontrolled by the Syrian government, for example, in Idlib and the eastern bank of the Euphrates,” he said.
Lavrov’s conflation of Idlib and SDF-controlled northeast Syria was noteworthy considering the SDF has focused on fighting ISIS and was never part of the opposition that tried to topple the Syrian regime. It has instead focused on governing its own regions and combating ISIS.
The foreign minister also reiterated Russia’s support for the restoration of Syrian sovereignty, which in reality means the regime reconquering the entire country and resubjugating its population under its brutal rule.
“It is only natural for Lavrov to equate Idlib Province with north Syria or Rojava, even though the two are very different in their social composition and the way they are ruled,” Professor Joshua Landis, a noted Syria analyst and Director of Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma, told Rudaw English.
“Although one is dominated by Arab Salafi-Jihadists and protected by Turkey and the other is dominated by the Kurdish supporters of ‘democratic confederalism’ and protected by the United States, to Russia they are similar,” he said.
“In Lavrov’s eyes, they are both foreign proxies, which illegally resist Damascus’s sovereign authority.”
Furthermore, the Syrian regime and its Russian ally “will not rest until they have pacified both regions”.
“Russia and Damascus view both to be ruled by illegitimate, foreign-backed insurgencies,” he said.
Northeast Syria is in an extremely precarious position since the Syrian regime, Turkey, and Russia “all have an interest in driving American troops out of north Syria and pacifying the Kurds”.
At the same time, the Syrian regime opposes Turkey’s presence in the country. It recently claimed the ‘safe zone’ agreement reached between the United States and Turkey in northeast Syria constitutes a “blatant attack” on Syria’s sovereignty.
Landis ultimately doubts there will be a major Russian-backed regime escalation in northeast Syria – if the United States retains a military presence there.
“Although neither Damascus nor Russia can hope to take the US on directly, they will do everything in their power to destabilize north Syria,” he said.
On September 15, the Syrian Foreign Ministry sent a letter to the United Nations denouncing the Kurdish-led and US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which presently controls northeast Syria.
The letter accused the SDF of being behind “terrorist and criminal activities” against Syrians in Deir ez-Zor, Hasaka, Raqqa, and other areas it controls with direct US support – territories the SDF liberated from the Islamic State group (ISIS).
“This runs in line with schemes being implemented by some state agents to the USA and plotted by authorities of the Israeli occupation, neglecting UNSC resolutions that stress sovereignty and territorial unity of Syria and [the] unity of its people,” the letter claimed, without citing evidence.
More worryingly, the letter once again confirmed that Damascus ultimately aims to recapture “every inch” of northeast Syria from the “terrorist” SDF.
Unlike other armed groups in Syria’s protracted civil war, the SDF has not fought directly with the regime. The Syrian Kurds did not join the initial uprisings against the regime in 2011, enabling Damascus to relocate forces hitherto based in the Kurdish regions to other fronts, giving the Kurds there unprecedented autonomy in the process.
However, there is no reason, given its record, to believe that the regime will grant the Kurdish regions legal autonomy or self-governance in the long run nor recognize existing autonomous institutions in northeast Syria as legitimate.
Following these latest threats, the SDF called for renewed dialogue. The group has twice tried in vain to negotiate a settlement with Damascus to retain some of its hard-won autonomy.
More recently, the SDF claimed the Syrian regime, as well as Turkey, is responsible for a series of bombings aimed at destabilizing the northeast to undermine its de-facto autonomy.
This could be the preamble to direct regime action against the SDF to reclaim the one-third of Syrian territory under its control, which includes most of the country’s natural resources and fertile land.
However, a major attack is unlikely, at least for now, as the regime is currently dedicating its resources to the reconquest of the northwest province of Idlib, which is controlled by the jihadist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) – the latest iteration of al-Qaeda’s former Syrian offshoot Jabhat al-Nusra.
Last week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov argued that the Syrian conflict is essentially over and that the country “is returning to normal peaceful life gradually”.
“Separate hotbeds of tension only remain on the territories uncontrolled by the Syrian government, for example, in Idlib and the eastern bank of the Euphrates,” he said.
Lavrov’s conflation of Idlib and SDF-controlled northeast Syria was noteworthy considering the SDF has focused on fighting ISIS and was never part of the opposition that tried to topple the Syrian regime. It has instead focused on governing its own regions and combating ISIS.
The foreign minister also reiterated Russia’s support for the restoration of Syrian sovereignty, which in reality means the regime reconquering the entire country and resubjugating its population under its brutal rule.
“It is only natural for Lavrov to equate Idlib Province with north Syria or Rojava, even though the two are very different in their social composition and the way they are ruled,” Professor Joshua Landis, a noted Syria analyst and Director of Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma, told Rudaw English.
“Although one is dominated by Arab Salafi-Jihadists and protected by Turkey and the other is dominated by the Kurdish supporters of ‘democratic confederalism’ and protected by the United States, to Russia they are similar,” he said.
“In Lavrov’s eyes, they are both foreign proxies, which illegally resist Damascus’s sovereign authority.”
Furthermore, the Syrian regime and its Russian ally “will not rest until they have pacified both regions”.
“Russia and Damascus view both to be ruled by illegitimate, foreign-backed insurgencies,” he said.
Northeast Syria is in an extremely precarious position since the Syrian regime, Turkey, and Russia “all have an interest in driving American troops out of north Syria and pacifying the Kurds”.
At the same time, the Syrian regime opposes Turkey’s presence in the country. It recently claimed the ‘safe zone’ agreement reached between the United States and Turkey in northeast Syria constitutes a “blatant attack” on Syria’s sovereignty.
Landis ultimately doubts there will be a major Russian-backed regime escalation in northeast Syria – if the United States retains a military presence there.
“Although neither Damascus nor Russia can hope to take the US on directly, they will do everything in their power to destabilize north Syria,” he said.
Comments
Rudaw moderates all comments submitted on our website. We welcome comments which are relevant to the article and encourage further discussion about the issues that matter to you. We also welcome constructive criticism about Rudaw.
To be approved for publication, however, your comments must meet our community guidelines.
We will not tolerate the following: profanity, threats, personal attacks, vulgarity, abuse (such as sexism, racism, homophobia or xenophobia), or commercial or personal promotion.
Comments that do not meet our guidelines will be rejected. Comments are not edited – they are either approved or rejected.
Post a comment