As we discussed last month[1], the Syrian government's military invasion of the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES) did not annihilate the revolutionary forces that built it. However, it did call into question its fundamental pillar: a direct, multi-ethnic democracy based on the coexistence of peoples. ---- The trauma is severe for the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF, the AANES armed forces), who had to abandon the territory they had liberated at the cost of their lives from ISIS, due in particular to the defection of Arab tribal forces. The French media widely circulated images of jubilant crowds in the cities of Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor tearing down statues of women who had liberated the city from ISIS. Some even concluded that the military offensive by the transitional government was a liberation for the Arab peoples and that, therefore, the AANES's multi-ethnic revolutionary project was at best a failure, at worst a front for a Kurdish-dominated project. Conversely, these events reinforced criticism of the multi-ethnic project within the Kurdish political landscape, favoring a nationalist solution.
A Disparate Armed Forces
Let's begin by providing some context. At the start of the civil war, we can roughly distinguish four camps: the forces of the Assad regime, the anti-Assad opposition (including Islamist and non-sectarian forces), the Kurdish forces, and the forces of the Islamic State. The SDF is a coalition of military forces that emerged as the Kurdish military forces liberated the Arab areas under the control of the Islamic State. Faced with the heinous crimes of ISIS, integration into the SDF appears to be the best option for the Arab tribal forces, who see it as an opportunity to gain a degree of autonomy. The other Arab component of the SDF comes from the forces opposing Bashar al-Assad. Within the opposition coalition, the rise of Islamist influence will eventually exclude the marginalized non-sectarian forces. Since the ideological project of the Arab Nationalist Movement (ANAS) is compatible with their ideal of a free Syria, they joined the SDF.
Caption: In March 2026, the conference of women from Northeast Syria, representing the multi-ethnic administration, reaffirmed "the need to recognize linguistic and cultural diversity as a sacred duty managed by the community without interference from the central state."
Credit: Pydrojava.org
The shifts in allegiance among the tribal forces in January were neither spontaneous nor natural. The United States had used its support for Kurdish forces against ISIS to exert pressure against the multi-ethnic project and for the strengthening of an ethnic Kurdish camp based on an alliance between the Kurdish left and the Syrian branch of Barzani's center-right party, a Kurdish ally of the US in Iraq. Turkey will also view the establishment of a multi-ethnic autonomous administration based on the principles of a democratic nation-principles it opposes on its own soil-with great suspicion. A long-term effort has therefore been undertaken by Turkish intelligence, aided, starting in 2025, by the new Syrian regime, to win over the Arab allies of the Kurdish forces, notably through promises of financial support, pressure, and threats. Since the tribal forces were the least ideologically committed to the autonomous administration, they preferred to defect to the victor's side and now enjoy the favor of Western arbiters in the region. Nevertheless, some Arab forces remain within the SDF. These are the secular forces opposing the Assad regime and those of the Jabour tribe who support the political project of a federal and pluralistic Syria.
Diverse populations
Scenes of jubilation were observed in Deir ez-Zor and Raqqa following the departure of the SDF. These cities were central strongholds of ISIS in Syria, but also the areas furthest from the historical sphere of influence of the Kurdish left. In addition to being the site of regular clashes between still-active ISIS cells and the security forces of the Syrian Arab Nationalist Movement (SANMSM), ethnic and religious prejudice is rife there. In Assad's Syria, Kurds were treated, at best, as second-class citizens. And many officials in the Syrian transitional government were notorious for their hateful rhetoric towards them. Moreover, the feminist revolution was more recent, less deeply rooted, and viewed as foreign by a significant segment of the population. Apart from a few allies, such as NGOs, the Kurdish revolutionaries initially had no connections among Arab women. When the troops of the transitional government entered Deir ez-Zor, it wasn't women who were demonstrating in the streets.
Caption: During Akitu, Syriacs celebrate their millennia-old heritage, while the new Syrian government seeks to erase minority cultures, in contrast to the pluralistic experience championed in the Northeast by AANES, which encourages coexistence and the expression of peoples.
Credit: Levi Clancy
The French press, even left-leaning outlets like Mediapart, portrayed AANES as a Kurdish entity whose Arab populations were supposedly liberated by the new government's military offensive. In doing so, it accomplishes two things. First, it amplifies the narrative of the new reactionary regime, which seeks to discredit the multi-ethnic confederalist project and exacerbate conflicts among the peoples of Syria. This framing is also that of the imperialist powers operating in Syria. Turkey, of course, but also Israel, which hopes to exploit the Kurds as an anti-Arab minority that must be defended. The second is to perpetuate a colonial view of the Middle East. Peoples there are reduced to their ethnic makeup and deprived of any political project that transcends ethnic lines or ideological divisions within their own ranks. Thus, Arab populations are reduced to supporters of the new jihadist government, while Kurdish populations are reduced to a people fighting solely for their rights. Peoples are thus essentialized, their conflicts appearing inevitable and masking the culpability of local and global imperialisms.
It is indeed possible to point out the errors made by the Kurdish left in constructing its multi-ethnic project. But our criticisms must not obscure the major obstacles posed by the war and the maneuvers of imperialist forces seeking to partition the Middle East, for whom a multi-ethnic project is a threat. It would be a mistake to view this experiment, or the very project of a democratic nation built on a multi-ethnic organization, as a failure. UCL has stood by this project for the emancipation it represents. Its survival now depends on its ability to maintain itself and spread throughout Syria.
Corentin (UCL International Relations Committee)
Submit
[1]"Rojava: Crushing or Adapting," Alternative libertaire no. 369, March 2026. https://www.unioncommunistelibertaire.org/?Rojava-Ecrasement-ou-adaptation
https://www.unioncommunistelibertaire.org/?Nord-Est-syrien-Le-confederalisme-democratique-en-question
_________________________________________
Source: A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten