Damascus must choose dialogue over conflict to integrate the SDF and rebuild Syria’s future amid Turkish military and diplomatic pressures.

Since December, Turkey’s proxy groups—chief among them the Syrian National Army (SNA), aligned with Hayʼat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)—have escalated attacks against the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in northern Syria. One of the fiercest battlegrounds has centered around the Tishreen Dam, which has been inoperative since December 10 due to damage sustained during these clashes. As a result, over 413,000 people across the Manbij and Kobani regions have been left without essential water and electricity. This humanitarian crisis underscores the far-reaching toll of Ankara’s military ambitions.

Turkey’s approach extends beyond battlefield tactics. Under direct orders from Ankara, diplomatic efforts led by Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan and National Intelligence Agency (MİT) Chief İbrahim Kalın are reinforcing military operations. The Turkish government’s overarching strategy aims to prevent any integration of the SDF into Syria’s military and to dismantle the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES). Turkish officials have pressured Syria’s interim government, currently led by Ahmed al-Sharaa, to marginalize Kurdish political influence in any new national framework.

The AANES, on the other hand, has sought a peaceful resolution, advocating for its military wing, the SDF, to be incorporated into a unified Syrian military. However, Ankara views this as a direct threat to its regional interests. Turkey has bolstered its proxy forces with artillery strikes, air support, and intelligence coordination. In tandem, it hopes to exploit divisions within the SDF, particularly among Arab tribes and allied factions, to weaken Kurdish cohesion.

For its part, Damascus appears increasingly aligned with Turkish objectives, believing that coordinated pressure from both Turkish-backed forces and the Syrian military will force the SDF into submission. This assumption, however, overlooks key realities. The SDF is a formidable entity with deep local support and a track record as the West’s primary ally in the fight against ISIS. Any attempt to disarm or disband the SDF through military means is likely to trigger a prolonged insurgency—a prospect that Syria, already battered by years of war, cannot afford.

Recognizing the SDF’s political and military role offers a more pragmatic path forward. If Damascus were to negotiate terms that grant the SDF formal autonomy within a unified military structure, it could unlock significant diplomatic opportunities. This would enhance Syria’s credibility among Western nations, potentially facilitating the removal of sanctions. The arrangement between Iraq’s national army and the Kurdish Peshmerga serves as a compelling precedent, demonstrating that cooperative integration can foster both stability and mutual benefit.

Despite sporadic skirmishes, HTS and Kurdish forces have largely avoided direct confrontation throughout Syria’s ongoing conflict. This tenuous détente suggests that current threats from HTS leader Ahmed al-Sharaa’s administration may be more strategic posturing than a declaration of total war. Integrating the SDF, even as a semi-autonomous bloc within the Syrian military, would strengthen Damascus’s negotiating position domestically and internationally. Without such compromise, however, continued hostilities would exact a steep price from all parties involved—particularly from the civilian population.

Both sides need to acknowledge the economic and human costs of military escalation. Steps toward reconciliation have already been initiated by the SDF, which has raised the Syrian national flag, restored regime-held “security squares” in Qamishli and Hasakah, and dispatched a delegation to Damascus to negotiate further terms. Now, it is incumbent upon the interim government led by Ahmed al-Sharaa to respond in kind. Declaring a ceasefire in critical zones—such as the Tishreen Dam and Qaraqozak Bridge, where vital infrastructure is imperiled—would signal a meaningful commitment to peace.

The broader challenge lies in Syria’s fragmented societal fabric. A sustainable peace will require cooperation across the country’s diverse ethnic and religious groups: Sunni Arabs, Kurds, Assyrians, Armenians, Turkomans, Alawites, and Yazidis. Rebuilding Syria’s shattered institutions and infrastructure will depend on a shared recognition that dialogue, not armed confrontation, offers the only viable path forward.

Jwan Shekaki, a journalist reporting from Qamishli in northeastern Syria, provided valuable insights.