There is no doubt that the recent general Mazloum Abdi's decision to dissolve the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) is a bold and historic one. It removes the Kurds from a path of bloodshed and confrontation with their Syrian co-national. Moreover, it embodies a fundamental shift in the approach to resolving the Kurdish issue, moving from a violent approach to a political one.
However, the positive view of the decision to dissolve the SDF cannot be seen without looking at the environment surrounding this decision and the effects that will result from it, which are related to the policies and practices that will be adopted and implemented by the various Syrian levels.
The Syrian population, including the ruling authority, forms the basis of the environment surrounding the decision. This population is divided into three major trends:
The first trend, present among supporters of a solution, begins at the top of the SDF leadership and extends to the Syrian government. This trend has been present over the past two decades, despite the war that Syria experienced during that period. The fall of the Assad regime and the rise of the new authority allowed this trend to resurface and develop through agreements between the SDF and the government, which ultimately led to the decision to integrate the northeastern military groups into Syrian state institutions.
The second trend is represented by hardliners from various Syrian backgrounds, particularly those adhering to a extremist nationalist ideology among Arabs and Kurds. This ideology was fueled by the policies of the Assad regime, which implemented the most violent and oppressive policies in areas shared by Arab and Kurdish communities. Regional and international foreign policies further exacerbated this trend, pushing both sides toward extremism. This was bolstered by three newly induced elements: funds, weapons, and political support. In this context, frequently, some local leaders sought to play a political role after being marginalized and silenced by the Assad regime.
Between the first and second divergent trends lies a third, representing a broad and unorganized spectrum of Syrians with diverse posture, often shifting and influenced by various backgrounds. Some of these backgrounds are linked to politics, ethnic and regional affiliations, while others are influenced by news and social media, creating a complex mixture. However, this third trend is generally closer to the spirit of Syrians, which is distant from extremism, desires coexistence, upholds the values of shared living and commits to civil peace, after all the disasters and hardships they have endured. This prevailing spirit is supported by a long history of coexistence, not only between Arabs and Kurds, but also as a trend that exists and extends throughout the relationship between the various components of the national community, regardless of their pre-Syrian national affiliations.
It is imperative to examine the positions, policies, and practices that will follow this dissolution, which represents a prelude to achieving deeper objectives. Dissolution is not an end in itself, but rather a means to an end, which can be defined in three key aspects: adopting a political solution approach to national life, addressing the legacy of past conflicts, and restoring the confidence to the life between Arabs and Kurds, setting a precedent for political solutions throughout the country, including sensitive areas such as the Mediterranean coast and Souwaida county.
In most cases, the role of the state authority is pivotal on both sides, because it is the main actor in formulating and implementing procedures of political, economic, and social openness required in northeastern Syria and in other regions, as well as addressing existing problems, such as the application of transitional justice, the problems of people displacement and disappearance, improving living standards, and opening up better prospects for development and progress.