Shafaq News
The understandings reached between the
Syrian government and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) are entering a
critical phase as interpretations of the March 10, 2025, agreement collide, and
implementation remains stalled. While the pact does not explicitly set a
binding deadline, observers familiar with the negotiations say the working
assumption among stakeholders is that the timeline for meaningful progress will
be reached by the end of 2025.
Although Damascus and the SDF continue to
describe the agreement as the only framework governing arrangements in
northeastern Syria, political and military developments point to significant
challenges in translating its provisions into practical measures. Disagreements
over implementation mechanisms and conflicting interpretations of the text have
produced what both sides acknowledge as a growing crisis of confidence.
Each party has accused the other of
slowing the process and obstructing progress, while joint committees remain
engaged in discussions on implementation, particularly regarding military
integration and the future shape of the Syrian state. These efforts have yet to
yield tangible results.
A direct military confrontation has not
occurred so far. Officials from the Syrian Democratic Council, the political body
associated with the SDF, have sought to downplay the significance of the
deadline, arguing that the agreement does not impose a narrow or rigid
timeframe. They have said that decades of accumulated crises require patience
and sustained political will.
Nonetheless, with the end of the year
approaching and no measurable progress on the ground, the agreement is
increasingly seen as facing a decisive test.
Read more: Syria: deal struck on SDF integration, Kurdish rights in constitution
The political deadlock has coincided with
rising security tensions, intensifying concerns that prolonged mistrust could
push the situation toward a broader military confrontation. Recent security
developments have weighed heavily on negotiations, particularly repeated
incidents along contact lines near the Tishreen Dam and Deir Hafer, east of
Aleppo.
The SDF reported that two of its fighters
were wounded when a suicide drone detonated as they were assisting civilians.
It accused factions linked to the Syrian government of carrying out the attack
and described the targeting of rescue teams as a serious escalation and a
violation of international law. The SDF said it holds Damascus responsible for
the consequences while affirming its right to defend its forces.
Syrian officials, in turn, have said that
what they describe as SDF procrastination and efforts to buy time are
increasing risks on the ground. Turkiye has also accused unnamed states of
encouraging the SDF to resist integration into the Syrian army, warning that
such efforts would be futile.
These tensions are unfolding against a
broader backdrop of instability, marked by increased activity by ISIS in desert
regions and urban areas. US forces have redeployed and reinforced some of their
positions in eastern Syria without announcing new withdrawals, adding further
complexity to an already fragile security environment.
A recent attack in Palmyra, in which two
US soldiers and a civilian were killed by an ISIS operative, underscored the
persistent threat posed by the group.
Unpublicized negotiation channels have
failed to ease security tensions, while consistently optimistic statements by
US envoy Tom Barrack have not aligned with developments on the ground. Despite
Damascus sending a new formal proposal to SDF commander Mazloum Abdi, core
disagreements remain unresolved.
Sources told Shafaq News that Damascus has
agreed in principle to incorporate SDF forces into the Syrian army as organized
divisions reporting directly to the defense minister, an approach intended to
absorb the forces into the state military structure without immediately
dismantling their internal organization.
In exchange, the Syrian government insists
on what it describes as a non-negotiable requirement: allowing the Syrian army
and internal security forces to deploy and operate throughout northeastern
Syria under Syrian law, because the area falls within the country’s sovereign
territory. Syrian officials regard Abdi’s rejection of this deployment as the
primary obstacle to progress.
The SDF has said it submitted a
comprehensive proposal outlining steps and mechanisms for integration into the
army and state institutions, but has not yet received an official response.
In official statements, the Syrian
government has reaffirmed its rejection of any arrangement that undermines the
principle of “one Syria, one army, and one government,” firmly opposing
federalism or any form of territorial division. It maintains that SDF fighters
must join within established constitutional and legal frameworks, not as an
independent entity.
The SDF, by contrast, is calling for a
decentralized system of governance and an integration process that preserves
its organizational structure and combat role. It argues that the March
agreement carries political weight beyond security or technical arrangements
and could form the basis of a new political and constitutional trajectory.
Damascus has outlined several concerns
regarding the SDF, including what it views as separatist tendencies, control
over oil resources, and attempts to maintain a cohesive military force within
the national army—an arrangement Syrian officials have described as a “ticking
time bomb.” It has also expressed unease over regional outreach, including a
visit by an SDF delegation to Beirut and a meeting with Hezbollah, which the
SDF said was introductory and part of broader engagement with Lebanese political
and cultural actors.
The SDF, meanwhile, has voiced security
and political concerns about the transitional government, citing what it
describes as an overlap between ISIS elements and forces loyal to Damascus, the
rise of extremist rhetoric, and fears that the government does not seek genuine
power-sharing. It has also indicated confidence in the stance of the US-led
international coalition backing it.
With the deadline drawing closer and
security tensions showing no sign of easing, the March agreement remains
suspended between signed commitments and a highly complex reality, as the
coming weeks will determine whether dialogue can still prevail or confrontation
will intensify.
Anti-Kurdish and anti-SDF slogans raised
during demonstrations marking the first anniversary of Bashar al-Assad’s regime
fall have highlighted the challenges facing the agreement.
Written and Edited by Shafaq News Staff.
