QAMISHLI, Syria (North Press) – Kurdish politicians say the Kurdish issue in Syria has undergone profound transformations over the past 69 years, evolving from demands for recognition of Kurdish identity and cultural and political rights into a central component of discussions about Syria’s future and the shape of its political system.
The shift has unfolded alongside major developments within the Kurdish political movement since the establishment of the country’s first Kurdish political party in 1957.
On this day in 1957, a group of Kurdish political figures founded Syria’s first Kurdish party. The founders included Nur al-Din Zaza, the party’s first president, alongside Osman Sabri, Hamza Nuwairan, Abdul Hamid Darwish, Sheikh Mohammed Issa, Rashid Hamo, Mohammed Ali Khoja, Shawkat Hanan, and Khalil Mohammed.
The party’s bylaws, published in Kurdish at the time, defined it as a progressive, liberation-oriented and democratic movement. Its platform called for a democratic political system in Syria, recognition of the Kurdish people’s political, social and cultural rights, and support for Kurdish struggles in Iraq, Iran and Turkey.
Political observers and Kurdish leaders say the movement has since experienced multiple phases of expansion, fragmentation and restructuring, shaped by both domestic and regional factors that have influenced the trajectory of the Kurdish cause and its position within Syria’s political landscape.
Fundamental Shift in the Kurdish Position
Abdul Salam Ahmad, a Kurdish politician and representative of the Autonomous Administration in Lebanon, said the Kurdish issue has reached a pivotal stage unlike any previous period.
“The Kurds have moved from demanding recognition of their identity, cultural rights and an end to discriminatory policies such as the Arab Belt project and the exceptional census, to possessing a political and administrative experience embodied by the Autonomous Administration,” Ahmad told North Press.
“That transformation has made the Kurds a key actor in the Syrian equation rather than a minority merely demanding its rights.”
Ahmad described Decree No. 13 as a relative shift from denial and restriction toward legal recognition of Kurdish identity and some cultural rights. However, he argued that the decree remains only an initial political step and cannot constitute a comprehensive solution unless those rights are firmly enshrined in Syria’s constitution.
He also noted that the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) have emerged as a major actor in northeastern Syria and have played a role in discussions surrounding the restructuring of Syria’s military institutions, contrasting sharply with the absence of organized Kurdish representation during the rule of the al-Assad regime.
“The establishment of Kurdish military brigades alongside the Internal Security Forces (Asayish) reflects a qualitative shift in the Kurdish position—from the margins to becoming a political and security actor within Syria,” he said.
A History of Splits and Realignments
According to Ahmad, the Kurdish political movement in Syria has experienced a long history of internal divisions since the founding of the first Kurdish party in 1957.
He argued that competition for leadership positions and organizational influence, rather than deep ideological disagreements, was often the primary driver behind splits. Regional rivalries among Kurdish political movements in Iraq’s Kurdistan Region also played a significant role.
Ahmad highlighted the 1965 Jumaiya Conference as a turning point, describing it as the first major organizational split within the Kurdish Democratic Party in Syria.
“That conference established a culture of fragmentation within Kurdish party structures, where personal or regional disputes frequently led to the formation of new parties rather than being resolved within existing institutions,” he said.
He added that the post-2011 period introduced a new factor that reshaped the Kurdish political landscape: differing positions toward the Autonomous Administration and Kurdish military forces. This led to new political alignments between supporters and critics of the Autonomous Administration project.
According to Ahmad, the Syrian Kurdish movement evolved along two principal tracks. The first stemmed from the Kurdish Democratic Party founded in 1957 and gave rise to most traditional Kurdish parties. The second emerged with the founding of the Democratic Union Party (PYD) in 2003, which later became the dominant political and military force in northeastern Syria through its Autonomous Administration project and military alliances.
Regional Kurdish Influence
Ahmad said Syrian Kurdish parties have been heavily influenced by major Kurdish movements in Iraq, Turkey and Iran, adopting concepts such as Kurdish nationalism, self-determination, democracy, federalism and autonomous administration.
Many Syrian Kurdish parties also borrowed organizational models from broader Kurdish experiences and received political and organizational training outside Syria, strengthening cross-border political ties.
However, Ahmad noted that regional Kurdish rivalries were also imported into Syria.
“Competition among Kurdish movements in neighboring countries was reflected in political alignments and divisions within the Syrian Kurdish movement, contributing to the proliferation of parties and differing political positions,” he said.
He argued that this influence deepened after 2011, particularly with the emergence of Kurdish armed groups and the establishment of the Autonomous Administration and the SDF, which benefited from regional expertise and networks in building military, security and administrative institutions.
He explained that “the development of the Kurdish political movement in Syria cannot be isolated from the broader Kurdistan framework, as this interaction has contributed to shaping the political and organizational identity of Syrian Kurds on the one hand, and to transferring some regional divisions into Syria on the other, which has made the relationship between the Syrian and Kurdish dimensions one of the most complex relationships in the course of the Kurdish movement in Syria.”
One of Syria’s Most Complex Political Issues
Midas Azizi, a member of the political bureau of the Kurdish Progressive Democratic Party in Syria, said the Kurdish issue has passed through multiple stages since the founding of the first Kurdish party.
“For decades, Kurds faced policies of exclusion, discrimination and denial that targeted their national, cultural and political identity,” Azizi told North Press.
“These experiences have made the Kurdish issue one of the most complex questions in Syrian political life.”
He said recent developments in Syria and the broader region have elevated the Kurdish issue from a marginalized domestic concern to a matter of regional and international significance.
“It is no longer possible to ignore it or treat it as a peripheral issue,” he said. “It has become part of broader political discussions about Syria’s future, the structure of the state and the nature of its political system.”
Azizi believes the Kurdish issue has entered a phase focused on achieving a fair political settlement that guarantees constitutional rights for Kurds and ensures their meaningful participation in building a new Syria.
“After 69 years of organized Kurdish political activity, the Kurdish issue remains one of the central questions linked to Syria’s future,” he said. “It can no longer be returned to the era of denial and marginalization. However, the nature of a final solution will depend on a comprehensive national consensus among Syrians and on wider regional and international developments.”
Structural Challenges
Azizi said the Kurdish political movement faced structural challenges from its earliest days, including disagreements among founding leaders over political slogans, methods of action, relations with the state and ties to the broader Kurdish national movement.
The lack of strong institutional traditions, coupled with security restrictions and political persecution, transformed these disputes into long-term fragmentation, he argued.
According to Azizi, divisions were fueled not only by political and organizational disagreements but also by personal rivalries, struggles over influence and leadership, weak institutional mechanisms and limited internal democracy.
“Many of these splits were not the result of fundamental ideological differences but rather of personal calculations and narrow organizational interests,” he said.
He added that major Kurdish political forces also contributed to the phenomenon by recognizing breakaway factions and incorporating them into political alliances in order to strengthen their own representation.
Double-Edged Influence
On the role of broader Kurdish political movements, Azizi said “The Kurdistan parties had a great impact in shaping the path of the Kurdish political movement in Syria at the intellectual and political levels, as well as in political alliances and alignments,” explaining that this influence carried both positive and negative aspects at the same time.
“They contributed valuable political and organizational experience, strengthened Kurdish national awareness and provided various forms of political and media support,” he said.
At the same time, he argued that competition among Kurdish parties in neighboring countries often translated into polarization within the Syrian Kurdish political arena, with local parties aligning themselves with different regional camps.
“That dynamic deepened internal divisions and weakened efforts to establish an independent and unified Syrian Kurdish political reference,” Azizi said.
“The peculiarity of the Syrian Kurdish reality and the difference in its political circumstances from the rest of Kurdistan did not prevent the continued influence of Kurdistan parties on the orientations of many Syrian Kurdish parties, whether through intellectual and ideological influence or through direct political and organizational relations.”
He concluded that regional Kurdish movements have had a dual impact: providing support and experience on one hand, while transferring regional disputes into Syria’s Kurdish political sphere on the other, ultimately affecting the movement’s unity, effectiveness and political decision-making.