SYRIA

Post-Modern Colonialism: The Scandalous Barter of the SDF and Hamas

By Mahir Engizek

December 22, 2025

Source: Originally published by Z. Feel free to share widely.

Image courtesy of MAHİR ENGİZEK

On the blood-soaked map of the Middle East today, behind visible diplomatic crises and high-pitched rhetorical wars, one of the most pragmatic and shocking negotiations in history is being conducted. This bargain is a clandestine bridge built between the founding reflex of the Republic of Turkey, characterized by anti-Kurdish animosity, and the existential security doctrine of the Israeli state, centered on the liquidation of Hamas. 

The concept of “necropolitics” formulated by Achille Mbembe, defined as the authority to dictate who may live and who must die, constitutes the common ground between these two states. The modern state no longer defines its sovereignty merely through borders, but through the absolute transition of power over the biological and political existence of societies. 

For Turkey, Northern Syria and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in Rojava represent the laboratories where this sovereignty is tested through systemic violence; for Israel, the same applies to Gaza and Hamas. However, the outputs of these laboratories are being bartered today at a secret table. This involves the constriction of Hamas’s maneuvering space in exchange for opening the fate of a people in Rojava to occupation. 

To comprehend this process, one must transcend the shallow interest calculations of classical realist theories and examine the biopolitical continuity within the depths of the state mind. While Turkey and Israel have historically sought to design the region through strategies like the “Containment Doctrine,” they have coded the rise of non state actors, particularly dynamics like the Kurdish Freedom Movement that produce 

systemic alternatives, as an “ontological threat” to their own nation-state paradigms. 

For Ankara, the Kurdish question is no longer a matter of border security but a fear of awakening from a century-old unitary state fantasy. The deliberate destruction of the 2013-2015 resolution process and the subsequent development of the concept of total war have reduced Ankara’s entire foreign policy to a single knot: breaking the international legitimacy of the SDF. 

On the other hand, in the post-October 7 period, Israel has defined Hamas not just as a military rival, but as the spearhead of Iran’s regional hegemony search and a structure that undermines its own social security. At this point, the paths of the two states intersect in seeing each other’s enemies as “bargaining chips.” The logic operating here is the reflection of the state’s disciplinary power, as defined by Michel Foucault, onto the international plane. Turkey intends to use Israel’s immense influence over the United States security bureaucracy as a lever to terminate Washington’s strategic partnership with the SDF. 

In return, Israel demands that Turkey limit its indirect influence, financial flows, and political representation capacity regarding Hamas. This is a “threat exchange” rarely seen in the history of international relations. Two states place two resistance centers 

from different geographies on the scales of a balance; they offset the dose of severity in one with a promise of flexibility in the other.

This is an attempt to turn the freedom demands of peoples into intelligence files to be shelved in colonial metropolises. Especially considering the Mossad-CIA cooperation behind the international conspiracy of February 15 against the Kurdish People’s Leader Abdullah Öcalan, it is clear that the current negotiations are a rehearsal for a new wave of conspiracy. This historical continuity between security bureaucracies operates independently of the ideological rhetoric of political powers and keeps that cold monster known as the “reason of state” perpetually alive. 

This new phase of colonial necro-power is a totalitarian reasoning based on depopulating geographies, expropriating identities, and criminalizing resistance. Every drone operation by Turkey against Rojava feeds from the same theoretical root as Israel’s blockage strategy in Gaza: the exceptionalization of life. 

Giorgio Agamben’s concept of “homo sacer” manifests today in the flesh both in the villages of Rojava and among the ruins of Gaza. The state deems all forms of violence permissible in these areas it has declared outside the law and derives legitimacy by making this violence a subject of negotiation with another colonial power. 

Ankara’s rhetoric criticizing Israel’s genocidal attacks in Gaza while approaching back-door diplomacy with the proposal “remove the protective shield over the SDF in exchange for Hamas” is the very picture of the moral bankruptcy of modern politics. This bankruptcy is the shared sin of not only these İwo states but all regional guardians of capitalist modernity. 

The “Democratic Confederalism” model offered by the Kurdish Freedom Movement rises precisely against this necropolitical bargain as the “defense of life.” Against the alliance of death established by states, the life alliance formed by peoples around democratic modernity is the true antidote to these secret tables. 

The security apparatuses of Turkey and Israel act like two master players in a chess game, inciting the ancient peoples of the Middle East against one another. In this game, it is not pawns but the very existence of peoples that is sacrificed. Israel opening space for Turkey’s neo-Ottoman expansionism to break Iranian influence in the Syrian theater, in return for Turkey serving Israel’s regional recognition and security concerns by marginalizing Hamas, is a project to transform the region into a heap of “secured ghettos.” 

This project carries a character that destroys social ecology, targets the women’s liberationist paradigm, and institutionalizes fascism. What the Turkish state sanctifies as a “Survival Issue” is actually the possibility of the Kurdish people’s free will breaking colonial chains. For Israel, “Survival” means the total paralysis of the Palestinian people’s resistance capacity and the suppression of the awakening in the Arab street. Therefore, this hidden frequency between Ankara and Tel Aviv stands as a “strategic barricade” against the revolutionary potential of the peoples. 

The mortar of this barricade is mixed in interrogation chambers, isolation systems in prisons, and concrete walls on border lines. Both states provide diplomatic protection for each other’s extrajudicial executions by placing their own “internal enemies,” who are actually peoples seeking freedom, into the universal parenthesis of terrorism. 

The philosophical background of this dark synthesis is the “positivist-nationalist” mind inherited from the Enlightenment and applied in its crudest form in the Middle East. This mind views differences as “malfunctions” to be destroyed. The multi-identity, secular, and egalitarian order established by Kurds in Rojava is the greatest nightmare of this mind. The apartheid regime of Israel and the monist-assimilationist regime of Turkey feed on each other’s dirty methods to end this nightmare. 

When the technological surveillance systems of one combine with the demographic change and ethnic cleansing practices of the other, what we face is the “absolute control society.” This control is not only military but also ideological. The religious referenced resistance of Hamas and the paradigm-oriented freedom struggle of the SDF are being attempted to be melted in the same pot by the states. Yet, while one is a tool for gaining power within the system, the other is a revolution that radically rejects the system. Even though Turkey knows this subtle difference, its attempt to put both in the same terror bag is an effort to increase the bargaining power of the exchange offered to Israel. This is being staged in the most vulgar, most professional, and most shocking form of the state mind. 

THE INTELLIGENCE NEXUS, PROXY WARS, AND THE THEATER OF SECURITY 

The anatomy of this secret bargain is not just a diplomatic exchange but also a contemporary reincarnation of the historical accumulation of Middle Eastern deep state apparatuses centered on MIT and MOSSAD. The international conspiracy carried out against Kurdish People’s Leader Abdullah Öcalan at the end of the 1990s is the most concrete and bloody proof of how cooperation between these two services can transform into a “strategic destruction apparatus” against the free will of peoples. 

The current “Hamas-SDF exchange” negotiations are a digitized and multi-layered continuation of that day’s conspiracy. When Ankara sits at the same table with Israel, to which it appears ideologically diametrically opposed, it actually meets on a colonial common ground: the sacrifice of all social values for the survival of the state. 

At this point, Turkey’s discursive protection of Hamas is actually a “geopolitical credit” it has accumulated to strengthen its hand at the bargaining table with Israel. This credit is designed as capital to be spent on liquidating the revolutionary gains in Rojava. 

Israel’s security doctrine is based on creating subservient or at least manageable areas of instability while weakening the surrounding Arab states. However, the “Democratic Nation” paradigm built by the Kurdish Freedom Movement in Rojava is a radical alternative that does not fit Israel’s strategy of inciting micro-nationalisms but instead takes the brotherhood of peoples as its basis. 

For this reason, for Israel, the SDF has only been able to receive occasional tactical support on a rhetorical basis and has never reached the status of a strategic ally. Ankara reads this reality very well and sends the following message to Israel: “The real danger for you is a democratic awakening you cannot control; come, let us soothe your security concerns regarding Hamas with my Islamist card, and you help me end my Kurdish nightmare.” 

This is a complete “fascist synchronization.” The reflection of this synchronization on the ground is the silence of Israel while the occupying Turkish army bombs the civilian infrastructure of Rojava, and the deep harmony between Turkey not withdrawing trade ships from ports while Israel levels Gaza. 

The definition of “sovereignty” discussed by Carl Schmitt within the framework of “Political Theology” finds life today in the “spaces of exception” these two states offer each other. Turkey has created a “gray zone” in Northern Syria completely outside of international law. The war crimes, demographic engineering, and occupation practices committed in this region use the exact same methods as Israel’s settler colonialism in the West Bank and Gaza. Both states legitimize their own lawlessness in the mirror of the other. 

Ankara creates a “norm of complicity” by saying to Israel, “Just as you declare Hamas a terrorist organization and besiege Gaza, I melt the PKK/YPJ in the same pot and besiege Rojava.” When this norm is combined with the silence of global powers like the EU and Russia, a distribution table similar to a new “Yalta Conference” emerges in the Middle East, ignoring the will of the peoples. 

At this table, Turkey’s promise to relax support for Hamas is also a confession of how easily Islamist ideology can be instrumentalized for state interests. While the representatives of Political Islam in Ankara perform Palestinian literature in the squares, they share coordinates in the kitchen with Israel on how to destroy the gains of the Kurds. This situation is not just hypocrisy but the necropolitical character of the state mind that is “above ideologies.” 

The Kurdish Freedom Movement defines this process as the “crisis of the regional agents of Capitalist Modernity.” Indeed, both states attempt to overcome their internal crises, such as economic collapse and regime blockage in Turkey, and political-social division and security vulnerabilities in Israel, only through these bloody exchanges against structures they have coded as external enemies. 

This nexus at the intelligence level is not limited to operational information sharing; it is also a “transfer of method.” Israel’s assassination technologies and targeted killing strategy are the fundamental philosophy used today by Turkish drones when targeting vanguard cadres and civilian leaders in Rojava. Both states carry out a “technological fascism” aimed at surrendering the body of society by targeting the brain of resistance centers. 

This technological superiority creates a “security theater” on the ground; in this theater, civilian deaths are coded as collateral damage while the freedom demands of peoples are imprisoned in the parenthesis of terrorism. However, the curtain of this theater is torn every time by the self-defense resistance of the YPG, YPJ, and SDF in Rojava and the unyielding stance of the Palestinian people. Because Ankara and Tel Aviv see this truth, they radicalize the bargain further, promising each other absolute destruction. 

The presence of Iran, which is in search of regional hegemony, is another common source of motivation for these two states. While Turkey is disturbed by Iran’s expansionism in Syria in the past and now in Iraq and other countries, Israel sees this as a direct existential threat. However, because the Kurdish struggle for freedom offers a third way that serves neither Turkey’s expansionism nor Iran’s sectarian hegemony, it is the primary target for liquidation for both colonial powers. 

The “Hamas for SDF” exchange is actually an attempt by all status quo powers in the region to push everything that is popular and democratic out of the system. At this point, going beyond professional analysis, it must be said: this bargain is the last great alliance of the colonial monsters of modernity. The ecological, women’s liberationist, and democratic system established by the Kurds in Rojava stretches both the mental and structural boundaries of these colonial monsters. 

Ankara is actually seeking a kind of absolution with this exchange offered to Israel and

searching for a return ticket to the Western system in the region. The promise to restrict the financing and logistics of Hamas’s military and political wings is a lever used to break the perception of Turkey as an unreliable ally in the Western world. 

At the other end of this lever stands the removal of the SDF from American protection and a green light for Turkey’s new wave of occupation under the name of fighting terrorism. This is the most shocking, most naked, and most immoral geopolitical gamble carried out over the blood of peoples. What states call “national interest” at this table is leaving one people, the Kurds, without status, and leaving the other people, the Palestinians, without resistance by imprisoning them in a ghetto. 

THE LIQUIDATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THE RADICAL RESPONSE OF DEMOCRATIC MODERNITY 

This secret negotiation traffic between Turkey and Israel is not just a search for a regional alliance, but also the final liquidation of that fictional structure called “International Law” on a global scale. Hegel’s arrogant definition of the state as “the march of God on earth” has transformed today into a “death machine” in the personae of these two states. 

Ankara and Tel Aviv, while trading in each other’s files regarding the SDF and Hamas, are actually constructing a new rule of the global system: “The sovereign defines the enemy and legitimizes all forms of violence by pushing them outside the law.” This is now a post-modern stage of colonialism where the Geneva Conventions or United Nations norms have become mere ornaments, and the “law of the jungle” is blended with digital and military technology. 

The place where this universe is most nakedly visible is the attempt to destroy the living spaces established by the SDF in Rojava and the resistance lines in Gaza by placing them in the parenthesis of terror. Turkey’s equation of “Kurds in exchange for Hamas” is actually a “survival package” offered to each other by the two outposts of Western imperialism in the region. The Kurdish Freedom Movement defines this process as the “Third World War of Capitalist Modernity.” 

In this war, the fronts are no longer just between armies; they are between the status quo of states and the search for democratic confederalism by peoples. Turkey’s actions last year in cutting off water in Rojava, bombing schools and hospitals, and targeting civilians and civilian settlements with drones were produced in the same theoretical laboratory as Israel’s policy of total siege and starvation in Gaza. The name of this laboratory is “Necro-Politics.” The state must create disposable lives to sustain its own existence. Kurds and Palestinians are being pushed into the category of disposable lives at this bargaining table. 

However, at this point, the “Third Way” strategy of the Kurdish Freedom Movement is the greatest obstacle to this bloody exchange. This strategy, which relies on neither Turkey’s neo-Ottoman expansionism nor Israel’s regional entrenchment, is a system built by the self-power of peoples. 

Turkey’s expectation from Israel to “mobilize anti-SDF lobbies over Washington” is an effort to stifle the ideological victory won by the Kurds through diplomatic means. Israel, in return for Turkey deporting Hamas leadership or cutting off financial resources, promises that it can convince neo-conservative wings within the US to give a “green light” to Turkey’s occupation of Rojava. This is the buying and selling of the freedom demands of peoples like trade commodities in colonial capitals.

From a philosophical perspective, this secret synchronization between Turkey and Israel is the end of the “universal human rights” fairy tale of the Enlightenment in the dusty deserts of the Middle East. As Walter Benjamin said, “The tradition of the oppressed teaches us that the ‘state of emergency’ in which we live is not the exception but the rule.” 

The demographic change and the attempt to erase Kurdish identity from the earth implemented by Turkey in Afrin and Serekaniye is a carbon copy of Israel’s settler colonialism practices in Palestinian lands. Both states derive legitimacy for their own crimes by covering the crimes of the other. Ankara’s heroic speeches saying “Israel is a murderer” are merely an “illusion curtain” used to make the domestic and Islamist public forget the genocidal policy it carries out against the Kurds. Behind this curtain, a professional exchange process is being conducted where the heads of MOSSAD and MIT share coordinates and bank account numbers over the SDF and Hamas files. 

At this point, it is necessary to clarify the stance of the Kurdish Freedom Movement and the SDF against this shocking exchange in professional terms: this movement is not just a military structure but a historical subject aiming for the democratization of the Middle East. Every decision coming from the secret table of Turkey and Israel is actually a blow to the democratic future of the Middle East. 

The liquidation of the SDF means the revival of barbaric structures like ISIS and the region being thrown into dark tunnels once again. The bargain conducted over Hamas is an attempt by state security bureaucracies to domesticate the Palestinian people’s legitimate right to resistance. These two colonial powers are so afraid of the united struggle of peoples that even in the deepest moments of crisis, they do not hesitate to extend a “saving hand” to one another. 

In conclusion, this hidden bridge established between Turkey and Israel is the expression of the modern state mind in its most pathetic form. The peoples of the region, including Kurds, Arabs, Armenians, and Assyrians, are the only power that can prevent the states from sitting at this bloody bargaining table. The “Democratic Modernity” paradigm is the radical defense of life, ecology, and women’s freedom against this “death bargain” of the states. 

Ankara’s demand for Rojava in exchange for Hamas is the last gasp of a system destined for the dustbin of history. From the perspective of the Kurdish Freedom Movement, as this shocking bargain is deciphered, the lies marketed by states under the name of “security” will collapse and the common will of peoples to live together will prevail.

IMPERIALIST TURKIYE OUT OF SYRIA!

Syrian Kurdish YPG should stop delaying Syria integration, Turkey says

"The YPG/SDF must stop its policy of playing for time," Fidan told a joint press conference with his Syrian counterpart Asaad al-Shibani in Ankara.

KURDS, DRUZE, ALAWITES & CHRISTIANS WANT A PLURALIST DECENTRALIZED STATE

Members of Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) stand guard as Women’s Protection Unit (YPJ) and Kurdish internal security forces conduct a security operation in al-Roj camp, Syria, April 6, 2025

.(photo credit: REUTERS/Orhan Qereman)ByREUTERSAUGUST 13, 2025 16:18

The Kurdish YPG militia, which spearheads the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), should stop "playing for time" and abide by its integration agreement with the Syrian government, Turkey's Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said on Wednesday.

NATO-member Turkey has been one of Syria's main foreign allies after the ousting of Bashar al-Assad last year, while it considers both the SDF and YPG as terrorist organizations.

The SDF, which controls much of northeast Syria, signed an agreement with Damascus in March to integrate into the Syrian state apparatus.

"The YPG/SDF must stop its policy of playing for time," Fidan told a joint press conference with his Syrian counterpart Asaad al-Shibani in Ankara.

"Just because we approach (the process) with good intentions does not mean we don't see your little ruses," Fidan said.

KURDISH FIGHTERS from the People’s Protection Units (YPG) run across a street in Raqqa, Syria in July. (credit: GORAN TOMASEVIC/REUTERS)Fidan visited Damascus last week, following clashes between the SDF and Syrian government forces in Manbij and Aleppo, and after weeks of tensions between Israel and Syria over fighting between Druze and Bedouin forces around Sweida last month.

Turkey views the YPG as an extension of the PKK"A new era has begun in the region and there's a new process in Turkey. They should benefit from those positive developments," Fidan said, referring to the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) militant group's decision to disarm and disband.

Turkey views the YPG as an extension of the PKK but the YPG has said the disarmament call of jailed PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan did not apply to it, contradicting Ankara's view.

"We witness some developments in Syria that we find hard to tolerate," Fidan said. "We see that members (of the YPG) who came from Turkey, Iraq and Iran have not left Syria."

Shibani criticized the SDF for holding a conference which called for a review of the constitutional declaration issued earlier this year by Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa and said it sought to exploit the events in Sweida. He also called the conference a violation of the agreement to integrate the SDF into state institutions.

The SDF has been in conflict with Turkey-backed Syrian armed groups in northern Syria for years. Ankara has carried out several incursions against the YPG in the past and controls swathes of territory in northern Syria.

PKK Dissolution: The Long Goodbye To Vanguardism

By Blade Runner

May 22, 2025

Source: Freedom News

Montecruz Foto CC BY-SA 3.0

The move reflects a broader strategic vision embracing gender liberation, pluralism, and local democracy

The formal announcement of the PKK’s dissolution has sparked mixed reactions among Turkey’s Kurds and international supporters. However, it has been years in the making and comes as no surprise to long-term observers of the Kurdish movement and readers of Abdullah Öcalan‘s theory of Democratic Confederalism. The shift had been indicated months earlier and signifies a strategic transformation aligned with a broader vision of autonomy beyond the state, the party, and the armed struggle.

The Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) was founded in 1978 and launched an armed struggle in 1984, demanding Kurdish autonomy. Turkey responded with harsh military repression, and the two sides became entangled in a bloody conflict that lasted for decades. Over the course of this war, between 40,000 and 50,000 people were killed, including civilians, PKK fighters, Turkish soldiers, police, and village guards. The 1990s were particularly brutal, marked by widespread village burnings, forced displacements affecting up to 3 million people, and systemic human rights abuses. Despite several attempts at ceasefires and peace talks, the violence periodically escalated—especially after the collapse of negotiations in 2015, when renewed urban warfare brought heavy casualties to cities like Cizre and Sur.

Since Öcalan’s capture in 1999, the Kurdish freedom movement has gradually shifted away from traditional models of armed vanguardism, nationalist statism and Stalinist rigidity. While the PKK maintained its armed forces—particularly in the mountains of Iraqi Kurdistan—its ideological orientation increasingly prioritised social transformation over military confrontation.

This shift found structural expression in the formation of the Kurdistan Communities Union (KCK) in the early 2000s: an umbrella of organisations with a decentralised and horizontal character. The KCK encompasses a wide array of communities, political parties, citizen initiatives, committees, and grassroots institutions across Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran. It represents a deliberate move away from the rigid, centralised model of the vanguard party, in favour of a networked configuration grounded in direct participation and local autonomy. 

In Turkey, the KCK has been politically active in coordinating cultural, social, and municipalist initiatives. It has succeeded in winning local councils and electing candidates to mayoral positions. The Turkish state has responded with sustained repression, including mass arrests of alleged “KCK members” over the past decade.

In this new worldview, the space for a hierarchical party structure like the PKK has been steadily shrinking. Öcalan’s February 2025 call for the PKK to formally dissolve was met with support from officials within Kongra-Gel, the legislative body of the KCK that claimed that this step “marks the beginning of a broader democracy movement—one that includes women, workers, and environmental activists”, thus being more aligned with the framework of Democratic Modernity.

Democratic confederalism was first articulated within the PKK and found its most visible, though partial, implementation in Rojava. Where the PKK once contributed to ethnic polarisation within Turkey and even among Kurds, the Rojava model now emphasises the transition to plurality, feminism, and decentralisation. For over a decade, the region has resisted Turkish invasions, ISIS offensives, regime hostility, and international neglect, all while pushing the social and political revolution. Like the Zapatistas—whose influence is evident across the movement—Kurdish cadres have redefined and demystified the idea of armed struggle. Central to this paradigm is Jineology—the “science of women”—which frames women’s liberation as the foundation of any meaningful revolutionary process.

Turning Point

The decision to end the cycle of armed polarisation with the Turkish state could signal a turn toward a more contemporary revolutionary horizon—one grounded not in elite substitution, but in mass participation. Rojava, too, is entering a new phase. The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) have signed an initial agreement with Syria’s central government to initiate negotiations for formal recognition of the region’s autonomous status—not as an independent nation-state, but as a decentralised component of a reimagined Syrian polity. Though past efforts were blocked under Assad, shifting power dynamics have reopened the possibility of dialogue. The ideas of confederalism and gender liberation may now be closer than ever to broader realisation and territorial grounding. Despite the grave dangers from negotiating with the jihadist Syrian regime, the Kurdish administration continues to push forward, seeking recognition as a self-governing entity within a fractured and centralised region.

This evolution naturally coincides with the PKK’s disbandment. In Turkey, these developments may challenge the regime’s foundational narrative. For decades, Ankara has used the PKK’s designation as a terrorist organisation to justify military operations, political repression, and the targeting of Kurdish organisations, journalists, and international allies. It has claimed that all Kurdish structures—from the PYD to the YPG/YPJ and the SDF—are fronts for the PKK. With the PKK now dissolved, the legal rationale for this strategy is weakened. Though state discourse may persist, its credibility—especially internationally—could erode. This could offer Erdoğan the opportunity to pivot toward a political approach that acknowledges Kurdish autonomy in exchange for domestic stability and constitutional leverage. Ankara’s recent pledges of financial support to Kurdish-majority regions—which comprise roughly 15–20% of Turkey’s territory and are home to an estimated 12–17 million people—may be signs of this shift.

The big question is whether the Turkish authoritarian regime will allow such a democratic approach, or whether it will force the Kurdish movement back into armed insurgency. In the past, the PKK attempted several times to withdraw its forces from Turkey, but each time the process was disrupted by the Turkish state.

What comes next is uncertain. The history of betrayal runs deep, and the risks of co-optation or renewed repression remain. Yet the Kurdish movement has demonstrated extraordinary adaptability, rooted in lived resistance and revolutionary imagination. If this is the end of the party, it may well mark the beginning of something deeper: a stateless alternative struggling to survive amid the ruins of the patriarchal nation-state.

Turkey stresses opposition to decentralisation in Syria

Reuters
Thu, May 1, 2025


Turkish President Erdogan visits Italy


ANKARA (Reuters) - Turkey rejects any plans that undermine the central government in Syria or threaten its sovereignty and territorial integrity, Turkish sources said, responding to demands from Kurds for Syria to adopt a decentralised system of government.

Turkey backed rebels against former President Bashar al-Assad for years and is seen as the closest foreign ally of Syria's new Islamist leaders, vowing to help them rebuild and stabilise a country devastated by 14 years of war.

Ankara sees decentralisation demands by Syria's Kurds as a threat because of what it says are their cross-border links to Kurdish militants in Turkey, while it looks to end a decades-old conflict with the outlawed Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) militia. WHICH DECLARED IT'S DISSOLUTION TO PUT FORWARD PEACE TALKS

Rival Syrian Kurdish parties, including the dominant Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in the northeast, agreed at a meeting on Saturday on a common political vision for the country's Kurdish minority and decentralisation, a call rejected by Syria's leadership.

Turkish sources elaborated on comments by President Tayyip Erdogan, who said on Wednesday that decentralisation demands in Syria were "nothing more than a raw dream".

"Turkey does not accept any initiative that targets Syria's territorial integrity, that will damage its sovereignty, or that allows weapons to be carried by others not in the Syrian central authority," a Turkish Foreign Ministry source said.

Turkey, a NATO member, views the U.S.-backed SDF as a terrorist organisation.

Ankara welcomed a March deal between the SDF and Damascus to merge Kurdish-led governing bodies and security forces with the central government, but said it must also ensure the dismantling of the YPG militia spearheading the SDF, and of the SDF's chain of command.

PROVIDING 'SPACE'

The source said Turkey had provided "the necessary space" for Damascus to address Turkey's concerns over Kurdish militants in Syria. Ankara has previously warned of military action if its concerns are not alleviated.

A Turkish defence ministry source said on Wednesday that demands for autonomy could harm Syria's sovereignty and regional stability.

"We cannot consent to the disintegration of Syria's territorial integrity and the deterioration of its unitary structure under any guise," the source told a briefing in Ankara.

"We are against autonomous region and/or decentralised rhetoric or activities, just as is the new Syrian administration."

Late on Wednesday, Turkish Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Oncu Keceli said all regional countries must contribute to Syria's security and stability, calling on Israel to halt "its air strikes that harm the unity and integrity of Syria".

Israel has been mounting air strikes inside Syria, which Turkey has called an unacceptable provocation to harm Syria's unity in the post-Assad era. Ankara has been a fierce critic of Israel since it launched the Gaza war.

Ankara also wants all Western sanctions imposed on Syria to be fully lifted and for U.S. troops stationed in the northeast to withdraw.

(Reporting by Tuvan Gumrukcu; Editing by Aidan Lewis)

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for KURDS

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for YPJ

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for YPG

 

KURDISTAN

The revolution in North and East Syria after the fall of Assad

By Chris Slee

Published 29 January, 2025

The revolution in North and Eastern Syria began in 2012 among Kurds living there, but spread to involve other nationalities in the area.

The Kurds were oppressed under the Bashar al-Assad regime. Many were denied Syrian citizenship. Land was taken from Kurds and given to Arab settlers. The Kurdish language was discriminated against. Kurdish political organisations were repressed.

The outbreak of the revolution in other parts of Syria in 2011 weakened the regime and allowed Kurdish political organisations to operate more freely.

In July 2012 there was an uprising in Kurdish areas, led by the Democratic Union Party (PYD). There was little resistance from Assad regime troops, most of whom surrendered without a fight.

In Kobani, for example, a mass of people assembled outside the army base as a delegation informed soldiers that if they gave up their weapons, their safety would be guaranteed. The soldiers agreed. Some returned to their homes in other parts of Syria, while others stayed in Kobani.1

Rojava revolution

The Kurdish area of North and East Syria is known as Rojava (meaning western Kurdistan). The uprising came to be referred to as the “Rojava revolution”.

The PYD initiated the creation of democratic structures. Base level organisations were called communes. In the countryside, a commune might be a village. In the cities, a commune might comprise a few hundred households on the same street. Each commune elected representatives to a higher level body.2

The PYD promotes equality for men and women. For example, communes and other organisations were required to have male and female co-chairs. The PYD also promotes the inclusion of all ethnic and religious groups in the democratic structures.

The PYD led in the creation of armed forces to defend the revolution. They created the People’s Protection Units (YPG) and Women’s Protection Units (YPJ). The latter is an all-women armed force.

In the rest of Syria, the popular uprising turned into a civil war. Peaceful protests were violently repressed. So, many opponents of the regime took up arms.

The problem was that weapons and money for the rebels came from Turkey and the Gulf States, who tended to support the most reactionary rebel groups, including Arab chauvinists hostile to Kurdish rights and Islamist groups hostile to religious minorities and the secular PYD. Turkey was particularly opposed to Kurdish self-determination and supported groups that were hostile to Rojava.

Daesh

The PYD distrusted both the Assad regime and many of the rebel groups. It tried to stay out of the fighting between the regime and the rebels. However, Rojava came under attack from some Turkish-backed groups. In 2014 Rojava was attacked by Daesh, or the so-called Islamic State.

Daesh captured large areas of Iraq and Syria, including Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, after the Iraqi army collapsed there. Daesh also attempted to capture Kobane, but was driven back by Kurdish fighters and some Arab Free Syrian Army fighters.

Worried about the rise of Daesh, the United States formed an alliance with the YPG and YPJ to fight against Daesh. This was paradoxical, because the US was also supporting Turkey in its war against the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in Turkey and northern Iraq.

The PYD follows the ideas of imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan. The Turkish government views the PYD and PKK as essentially the same. Yet the US was supporting Turkey against the PKK while supporting the YPG and YPJ against Daesh.

Over the next few years Daesh was driven out of North and East Syria. The alliance between the YPG and YPJ and some Arab groups led to the formation of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). As the war against Daesh continued, more Arabs joined the SDF. With each successful push against Daesh, more areas populated by Arabs came under SDF control.

To highlight the multi-ethnic character of North and East Syria, the Kurdish name Rojava was replaced by Democratic Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES). On the other hand, Turkey named its Syrian proxies the Syrian National Army.

In 2018, Turkey invaded Afrin, a predominantly Kurdish area in northern Syria. The SDF resisted the Turkish invasion of Afrin for more than two months, but the light weapons of the SDF were no match for the aircraft and tanks of the Turkish armed forces.

Although helping the SDF fight Daesh, the US did not help the SDF fight the Turkish invasion of Afrin. This showed the limitations of the alliance: the US has no interest in defending the revolution.

In 2019, Turkey invaded a strip of land along the border in northern Syria. Since then, Turkey and its SNA proxy have continued their attacks on AANES-controlled areas.

Syria’s future

Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) became the dominant force in Idlib province, in north-western Syria. HTS was allied with Turkey, but not totally under Turkey’s control; it was relatively independent. In November 2024, HTS launched an offensive against the Assad regime, leading to its rapid collapse.

At the same time, Turkey and the SNA stepped up their attacks on AANES. They captured some areas west of the Euphrates river, including the towns of Tal Rifaat and Manbij. These forces are currently trying to cross the Euphrates, but the SDF is resisting this offensive. There is a battle for control of the Tishrin dam.

Meanwhile, AANES is putting forward its ideas for the future of Syria as a whole. They call for a National Dialogue Congress, which would involve “political and social organizations, as well as ethnic, religious and cultural groups” that could develop a “common social contract”.3

They also call for the liberation of the areas under Turkish occupation and for the new government in Damascus to join them in this struggle.

HTS is unlikely to agree to AANES’s proposals, but there is hope that they will gain an audience among the Syrian people beyond the north and east.

Based on a talk given to an online discussion about Syria organised by the moderators of the Marxmail discussion list.

• 1

  Revolution in Rojava, by Michael Knapp, Anja Flach, and Ercan Ayboga, Pluto Press, 2016, page 54

• 2

  Revolution in Rojava, p.87

• 3

  “Peoples’ Assembly of North-East Syria presents six principles for Syrian Constitution”, ANF English https://anfenglishmobile.com/rojava-syria/peoples-assembly-of-north-east-syria-presents-six-principles-for-syrian-constitution-77461

KURDISH RESISTANCE

KCK Besê Hozat: The Third World War is raging and the Middle East is being redesigned

Besê Hozat said that "The Third World War is raging and has reached a decisive stage. The region is being redesigned, and in this redesign, Israel is being tried to be turned into the primary hegemonic power of the region."


ANF
NEWS DESK
Thursday, 2 January 2025, 07:50

In the second part of this in-depth interview, Besê Hozat, co-chair of the KCK Executive Council, analyzed the current redesign of the region through war, which also threatens to spill over into Iraq.

The first part of this interview can be read here.

In the Middle East, the center of the Third World War, the war continues with full intensity. In Syria, the Baathist regime has fallen and HTS has been brought to power. What kind of plan is being implemented in Syria and what role do regional powers such as Turkey and Iran play in it?

The Third World War is raging and has reached a decisive stage. The region is being redesigned, and in this redesign, Israel is being tried to be turned into the primary hegemonic power of the region. In fact, the Greater Middle East Project itself is such a project, in which a new shape is given to the region on the basis of Israel’s interests. Ethnic, sectarian, and religious conflicts are used as a fundamental weapon in the implementation of this project. The war in Gaza, the war in Lebanon, the war that is currently intensifying in Syria, the collapse of the regime, the seizure of power by HTS in Damascus, the gradual spread of the war to Iraq, the intensification of the war in Iran, which is the main target, and Turkey becoming a center where the war is intensifying, this whole process is a redesign process for the region.

This is the general framework within which it is necessary to evaluate the developments. One needs to see and foresee the consequences for the peoples and must decide on how to struggle accordingly. HTS came to power in less than two weeks. It overthrew the more than 60-year-old Baath regime and seized power in Damascus. But this did, of course, not happen based only on HTS’s own power. This was an international plan that is being led by America, Britain, and Israel. And Turkey was also included in this plan. Turkey was given the lead in the implementation of this plan. Now they are drunk on the supposed feeling of victory. They act as if they have made a great conquest, as if they have conquered Syria, as if they have taken over everything, and have created a great area of dominance in the Middle East. There is such a mentality in the government, in the ruling media, and in their circles of power. But that is not the truth. The truth of the matter is that Turkey has become like a donkey being driven into a minefield. This is the essence of Turkey’s situation.

A plan was made, and Turkey was given a role in the implementation of this plan. But looking at it, one will realize that a conspiracy was hatched against Turkey. By using Turkey, they broke Iran’s influence in Syria. Iran suffered a serious blow. They already did in Lebanon, as a heavy blow was dealt to Hezbollah. Now in Syria, Iran’s influence has been broken through Turkey. Turkey was very eager to fill the vacuum left by Iran and wants to fortify itself instead of Iran. It was only with this thought in mind that they were immediately ready to go along with the plan, without realizing what was really happening around them, without calculating, and without being aware of the depth of the plan and the consequences it would lead to. They were just focused on Iran’s neutralization and liquidation in Syria and on replacing it, turning Syria into a province, as it was during the Ottoman period. That is exactly what they are discussing intensely at the moment. A Syria under Turkey’s sovereignty will become an area that Turkey will utilize, exploit, and benefit from based on its interests. By establishing its hegemony over Syria, it will have established hegemony over the region to a large extent. For one hundred years, Iran and Turkey have been engaged in a great rivalry, a war for hegemony in the region, and now this is how they think they will succeed. By eliminating Iran’s influence and hegemony in the region, Turkey is trying to pave the way for shared hegemony in the region with Israel. It is now dreaming, longing, seeking, and striving for this.

But Turkey must know that they won’t allow it to swallow Syria. These ambitions of Turkey will be crushed. If it tries to swallow Syria, Turkey will suffocate on it. Israel will not share its hegemony in the region with Turkey. The international hegemonic powers have no interest in sharing the regional hegemony between Israel and Turkey. At the moment, a plan is being implemented to make Israel the main hegemonic power in the region, to put Turkey at its service, to break Iran’s hegemony in the region through Turkey, and then to break Turkey’s influence and put it at the service of Israel. At the moment, a deliberate perception is being developed in Turkey as if it has achieved a big victory. This is being developed deliberately. Trump’s praise for Erdoğan, calling him a “very clever, smart man”, is meant to develop this perception. As if Turkey really is a big winner in the region, a succeeding power. When Trump says this, he turns around, laughs, and mocks him. Israel turns around and mocks Turkey. Turkey is caught in a big trap. Now they are using Turkey, and when they are finished with them, they will relegate them to the place they have predestined for them. As soon as Turkey shows any resistance against this, they will stir up Turkey from within. They will intervene in Turkey with all means. This is how this government is trying to deceive society, the democratic forces, and the opposition. And the opposition has also fallen for it. It is trying to be a part of this and almost competes with the government. It will go to Damascus, offer municipal services, and improve relations. Instead of criticizing the government’s policies, pushing forward a peaceful policy and a reconciliatory policy, the opposition supports the current government’s policy and is almost eager to be a part of it. There is blindness. Turkey is one of the biggest losers in the current situation.

The winners of this process are the capitalist hegemonic powers, America, Britain, and Israel. Turkey does not see this. For years, it has based and focused its entire policy on the Kurdish genocide. There is nothing it will not do to genocide the Kurds. It has created a lot of counter-structures under the name of the SNA and has brought together a bunch of gangs and mercenaries, all the remnants of ISIS. Actually, SNA is ISIS itself. And Turkey is driving them against the Kurds. At the same time, it is trying to ensure that HTS takes a similar position. For this it is in constant contact with Damascus, Washington, London, and so on. They are trying to secure the support of all these powers. It is trying to dismantle the autonomous self-administrative system in northern Syria and genocide the Kurds and the people of North and East Syria. With this policy, it searches to dominate Syria, establish its hegemony in the region, and share hegemony in the region with Israel. But this is a great (self-)deception. Currently, the Turkish state is conducting a wrong, unrealistic, irrational, and dangerous policy. And this will be a huge loss for Turkey. It has become the losing side.

You have highlighted that the Turkish state is doing everything in its power to crush the revolution in Rojava and has therefore intensified its attacks. How can the resistance at the political, social, diplomatic and military level of the peoples of North and East Syria, the self-administration and the defense forces against these attacks be evaluated?

We are currently witnessing a glorious resistance in Rojava, as well as all of North and East Syria. I commemorate with great respect, love, and gratitude all the fallen fighters of the SDF, YPG, and YPJ, as well as all of our patriotic people who have fallen martyrs in this resistance, and wish a speedy recovery to the wounded.

Our people are mobilizing for this war and resistance everywhere. All the peoples of North and East Syria are resisting according to the strategy of the revolutionary people’s war. This is extremely meaningful. They have taken sides with the SDF and are in great resistance on the front and everywhere. This is what befits the peoples of Northern and Eastern Syria. Only through resistance can they ensure and secure their existence and freedom. There is no other way. The concrete example of what is meant when we say that one’s existence and freedom can only be protected through freedom can be seen today in North and East Syria. From young to old, people are mobilized and resisting. I congratulate and salute this will of our people to resist. It is indeed extremely meaningful and valuable. They need to continue this resistance strongly and to strengthen it further. Of course, our people in the other parts of Kurdistan and abroad, as well as our international friends and all democratic forces, should take part in strengthening this resistance and stand by the peoples of North and East Syria. They need to participate in and support this resistance in every sense. A valuable assumption of responsibility can already be seen in northern Kurdistan, with the vigils in defense of Rojava that have been set up in Nisebin (tr. Nusaybin) and Pirsus (tr. Suruc), and hundreds of people, thousands of people, are participating in these actions. They have been going on for more than two weeks now, and more actions are about to come. There have also been demonstrations and many statements. The people of northern Kurdistan are demonstrating their stance and attitude of embracing Rojava, participating in and supporting this resistance both in the cities and metropolises of Turkey. This is meaningful. I salute and congratulate this resistance and the resistance of the people of northern Kurdistan, but one must also underline that this is not enough. This needs to be further strengthened. Not hundreds, not thousands, but tens of thousands of people should participate in the vigils to defend Rojava. Hundreds of thousands of people should participate. All along the borders, there should be vigils for the defense of Rojava. With the participation of tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of people, it should turn into total resistance, and all our people, regardless of their age, everywhere should be on their feet. The people of northern Kurdistan should contribute the most to this defense.

If the Democratic Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria in Rojava cannot ensure and protect its existence and freedom, there will be no ground for a democratic solution in northern Kurdistan. These developments condition each other. Without a democratic solution in northern Kurdistan, it is not possible for Rojava’s democratic autonomous system to maintain its existence and freedom. The Kurdish question is all-encompassing and not a partial question. Therefore, the embrace of the Democratic Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria and the Rojava Revolution in the four parts of Kurdistan is the embrace of our people’s own existence and freedom. Therefore, our people, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of people in the four parts of Kurdistan, particularly in northern Kurdistan and abroad, should be on the streets continuously and defend the Rojava Revolution, stand by the resistance in Rojava, participate in it, and be part of it.

The Rojava Revolution is a women’s revolution, and it built a system that is centered on women. Women have paid a great price and contributed a great deal to this system. The existence and future of this revolution are crucial for women’s freedom. Not only Kurdish women, but all women must embrace this revolution. The same accounts for the youth and the ecological struggle. That needs to be emphasized.

Syria must be able to establish a democratic, constitutional system based on democratic, autonomous regions. Such a system, such a solution, would prevent sectarian conflicts, religious conflicts, and ethnic-nationalist conflicts. It would play a fundamental role in the democratization of the region, in the democratic and fraternal co-existence of peoples. Currently, the Kurds are pioneering this; the peoples of North and East Syria are pioneering and practicing this. In this sense, Turkey’s interest also lies here. Turkey’s interest lies in reconciliation and agreement with the Democratic Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria. If Turkey had a rational state of mind, it would be based on agreement and reconciliation with the Democratic Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria. It would be based on a democratic solution in northern Kurdistan, would take a democratic, peaceful solution with the Kurds as a basis, and most crucially would take negotiations with Rêber Apo as a basis. This would make Turkey a great power in the region. In other words, if Turkey wants to be an influential power in Syria and in the entire Middle East, then it must come to an agreement and reconciliation with the Democratic Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria. This is the only way to find a solution in Syria. Otherwise, Syria will turn into a ground for conflict. It has already started; there is a massacre of Alawites and of the Druze, and there is the genocidal attack on the peoples of North and East Syria. Sectarian conflicts and religious conflicts are already flaring up.

Monist, oppressive, centralized, fascist nation-state systems only bring conflict. They bring ethnic conflicts, sectarian conflicts, and religious conflicts, and this causes great losses. These systems were never suitable for the region. That is what was clearly shown throughout the course of one hundred years. The region did not come out of war; it did not come out of conflicts. If there is to be a nation state, it must be restructured in a way that is sensitive to democracy and democratic self-governments, and a new paradigm must be developed in this sense. The situation in Syria is before our eyes. It is obvious that things are going to get messy. They broke Iran’s influence in Syria, but one should not take Iran too lightly. Iran will not easily leave Lebanon, Syria, or Iraq. Everyone is trying to redeploy their forces according to the new conditions and trying to organize themselves. They are trying to organize themselves. The situation is becoming more dangerous; the course is evolving into a more dangerous process. The only thing that can prevent this is the solution put forward by Rêber Apo. In this last meeting, he once again showed his will and capability in a very striking way. Rêber Apo has developed extremely important and valuable evaluations.

We would like to talk about how the wave that began on October 7 with the war in Gaza and has now broken over Syria continues to roll. After the developments in Syria, all eyes are on Iraq, where many expect a similar situation. There is much talk about the activities of the Turkish state in Iraq. Is there the same danger for Iraq as for Syria?

Turkey is also conducting an imperial, neo-Ottomanist policy in Iraq. Throughout the years, its policy in Iraq and Syria has been quite similar to each other. Turkey is trying to achieve the goal it has set in its Misak-i Milli (national pact). In this course, it is trying to establish its hegemony over Iraq. This is what this latest agreement with Iraq and their memorandum mean. The invasion and annexation attacks are carried out for this purpose. It has been organizing itself very intensively in Iraq. Especially in recent years, it has been organizing itself in military, economic, and political dimensions and is trying to increase its influence and widen the occupied area. It is organizing Turkmens who are close to it, and has taken many people from former core settlement areas of the Ottomans and hardcore nationalists and settled them in the occupied regions. It created an armed force there. There are such efforts in Kirkuk, Mosul, and Til Afer, and it has turned Bashiqa into the center of this.

Iraq is facing economic difficulties, as Turkey is trying to seize all the markets of Iraq. This is how it is trying to ensure its economic hegemony over Iraq. It has been using water as a trump card against Iraq for years and is trying to take over Iraq on this basis. It is using water as blackmail to get concessions from Iraq. With Iraq’s approval and legitimization of these annexation attacks of the Turkish Republic, it established military bases in the places it entered, and now it is trying to fortify those bases. It has accelerated its Misak-i Milli policy, trying to realize this goal and also trying to establish its sovereignty and hegemony over Iraq. The rapprochement of the governments is also part of this, as well as the so-called ‘Development Road Project’. That is why we said this project is a trap; one must not fall for it. We have also made various calls and warnings to Iraq on this issue. Turkey’s aim is to achieve the Misak-i Milli goals and establish its sovereignty over Iraq. Step by step, it has tried to walk this path in its own way. And now with what Turkey did in Syria, many of the relations it had with Iraq, the discussions they had, and many of the arguments and discourses it used were deciphered and revealed. Turkey had been unmasked. Now, many people in Iraq, inside and outside the state, inside and outside the government, are gradually realizing what kind of deceiving and fooling state Turkey really is, that its main goal is to establish its hegemony in the region. They started to see the true face of these neo-Ottoman policies, which is expansionism, occupation, and annexation.

Turkey is gradually making a serious mess in Iraq. Not only with these kinds of efforts, but now it is again organizing ISIS inside Iraq. It is also trying to mobilize ISIS. It is trying to pit the Shiite wings and sections against each other and is trying to foment sectarian conflict in Iraq. It is also trying to fuel the Sunni-Shiite conflict. Turkey is taking the lead in Iraq to eliminate Iranian influence. Just as it played the active role in Syria together for the international powers, it is now playing a similar leading role in Iraq. As far as we follow and observe, many people in Iraq are gradually realizing this. It is already late, but still not too late. Iraq made big mistakes and fell into Turkey’s trap. That agreement with Turkey was very wrong. It caused great damage to Iraq. As it was putting the PKK on the list of banned organizations. It solely served Turkey’s interest. The legitimization of Turkey’s occupation and annexation causes great damage to Iraq. It is very important for Iraq to draw conclusions from what has happened. Iraq’s agreement with Turkey must be terminated. The PKK must be removed from the banned list. An attitude must be taken against Turkey’s occupying and annexationist policies. Turkey needs to be expelled from Iraq, and its further leading role in the occupation of Kurdistan must be prevented. For this, the politics of a serious struggle must be carried out. Iraq must be able to put forward this will. Otherwise, Iraq itself will become a tool of Turkey’s neo-Ottomanist, expansionist, occupying, and annexationist policies. We have always said this, and we still need to say it again.