By Kardo Roj
QAMISHLI, Syria (North Press) – The political dynamics in Northeast Syria are likely to shift due to the re-echoing of support from the United States to continue the intra-Kurdish dialogue that will lead the region toward unity and stability. This intra-Kurdish dialogue has created significant interest among diverse Kurdish political factions with deep-rooted divisions to see its impact on the governance, regional stability, and overall Syrian conflict.
In an exclusive statement to North Press, a U.S. Department of State official underscored Washington’s commitment to this process saying that his country “supports ongoing Syrian Intra-Kurdish Dialogue and looks forward to its continued progress.”
“The dialogue complements U.S. efforts to stabilize areas of northeast Syria liberated from ISIS and to promote greater transparency and inclusivity in local governance,” the official added.
The statement reflects a strategic alignment with the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a key U.S. partner in the fight against ISIS. Yet, it also signals Washington’s broader ambition to ensure political cohesion and governance reforms in this critical region.
Background: Divided Syrian Kurds
The intra-Kurdish dialogue involves, in essence, two influential Kurdish political actors:
- 1.The Kurdish National Unity Parties (PYNK) that includes the Democratic Union Party (PYD) is the dominant political force in northeast Syria, aligned with the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).
- The Kurdish National Council in Syria (KNC): A coalition of Kurdish parties affiliated with the Turkish-backed Syrian opposition, often aligned with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq.
Tensions between these actors date back to the early years of the Syrian civil war. The PYD accused the KNC of failing to support the Kurdish-led struggle in the face of existential threats, including ISIS and Turkey. However, the KNC often criticized what it calls “the exclusionary nature” of its governance and accused it of suppressing political dissent.
These divisions have long plagued the ability of the Kurds to present a united front in negotiations over Syria’s future, diminishing their leverage with both international actors and the Syrian government.
Status of the current dialogue
The intra-Kurdish talks, initiated in 2020 under U.S. auspices, have made intermittent progress but have faced numerous challenges. Key sticking points include the distribution of political power, the integration of KNC representatives into the AANES, and the management of local security forces.
After setbacks, reports in recent days suggest a new impetus toward consensus. The two sides have reportedly agreed in principle on the importance of inclusiveness at the level of governance and equitable resource distribution. The revival of the dialogue comes against the backdrop of increased regional tensions: the Turkish military operation that started in northern Syria and growing economic pressure on the region.
Why U.S. support matters
Thus, the U.S. endorsement is important for many reasons:
- Ensuring good governance: By urging the inclusion and transparency of the AANES, the U.S. seeks to enhance the legitimacy of local governance structures as a means of providing stability to the areas freed from ISIS and providing long-term security.
- Regional tension relaxation: Kurdish unity could help decrease the tensions along the borderlines between northeast Syria and neighboring Turkey, as the latter sees PYD/YPG as an extension of the PKK, a group Turkey designates as a terrorist organization. Although the U.S. has not followed suit with this designation by Turkey, it realizes the gravity of the situation to take care of Ankara’s security concerns for broader regional stability.
- Countering ISIS resurgence: With a united Kurdish political front, the region would therefore invest more in counter-terrorism efforts. Fragmentation carries the risks of diverting resources and attention away from what is still a very present terrorist threat from ISIS, mainly through sleeper cells and insurgencies.
- Influence Syrian peace talks: A unified Kurdish stance might raise their voices in the wider Syrian peace negotiations, including UN-mediated talks in Geneva. This would bring them into a stronger position on recognition and autonomy in a post-conflict political settlement.
Challenges ahead
Yet, after all these years, some big hurdles still exist. The trust among PYNK and KNC (ENKS in Kurdish) representatives in these dialogues is fragile, building a relationship constituted years ago through mutual suspicion and accusations. Northeast Syria – where the interests of the U.S., Russia, Turkey, and the Syrian government all meet – is the most geopolitically complex region, which diminishes the chances of realizing Kurdish unity.
Of the many challenges it faces, however, Turkey is arguably the most salient obstacle. Its military interventions in Kurdish-held territory are designed to prevent a contiguous Kurdish region along its border. Ankara has also leaned on the KNC to distance itself from the PYNK, fracturing the Kurdish political landscape even further.
This is exacerbated by economic hardships in northeast Syria, further complicated by sanctions and a lack of international aid. The deteriorating living conditions have resulted in growing public discontent for the AANES, which unified governance can help alleviate.
U.S. involvement and geopolitical context
The role of the United States in backing the intra-Kurdish dialogue has been crucial. Backing the SDF and the AANES has been the lynchpin of Washington’s counter-ISIS strategy, but U.S. officials have also come to appreciate that the surest path to enduring military success in the region relies upon political stability that keeps ISIS from filling the vacuum.
The U.S. maintains its stance of supporting the AANES while navigating the delicate balance between competing regional actors, including Turkey. The U.S. is also wary of the improving clout of Russia in Syria, especially over northeast Syria. While the U.S. continues to support the SDF militarily, the political future of the region will most likely be affected by these broader geopolitical dynamics.
Outlook
The next round of the intra-Kurdish dialogue will be a real test of the political will of both sides to compromise and pledge to a joint vision for the region. With U.S. backing, there is a unique window of opportunity to bridge the division and set the ground for a more inclusive and sustainable governance model in northeast Syria.
Success is, however, anything but certain. Unity will depend not only on political concessions but also on continued international backing and a focused approach to addressing the region’s economic and security challenges.
As the world watches, the intra-Kurdish dialogue hangs in the balance as a critical barometer for the future of Syria’s Kurds and their place in the shaping of the country. For now, unity remains a journey in progress – but with cautious hope.