The Syrian army's operation against the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), launched in Aleppo in the first week of January, upended Syria’s political and security landscape and map. The Kurdish group now finds itself squeezed into a part of Hasakah province, after having been driven out of Aleppo, Deir ez-Zor and Raqqa. It has also been forced to sign the Ceasefire and Full Integration Agreement on 18 January, after dragging its feet to implement a 10 March 2025 agreement requiring it to integrate its forces into the Syrian army.
After a spate of fierce fighting, a four-day ceasefire was declared on 20 January, following a meeting between Ahmed al-Sharaa and SDF Commander Mazloum Abdi in Damascus. The SDF is now reviewing the proposals put forth at that meeting and will give its response in two days.
Those who follow events in Syria closely understand that developments there have implications for the entire region and the concept of a ‘new Middle East’. They also know that the influence of external actors—with Türkiye, the United States, Israel, and Saudi Arabia among the most important and with the US playing a central role—plays a key role in determining Syria's future.
Despite several misgivings, the SDF is most likely to respond positively. But if the SDF rejects the agreement, fighting will resume, which would negatively impact the surrounding countries with Kurdish populations. Renewed hostilities would result in all sides sustaining heavier casualties. At the moment, the ceasefire holds. But it is tenuous, with pockets of fighting continuing in different areas.
Emerging differences
This can be attributed to emerging differences within the ranks of the SDF, YPG, and PKK. Abdi is seen as more realistic and malleable to Washington’s demands. However, groups under the influence of PKK cadres in Qandil have taken a hardline stance in favour of continuing the fight.
