Syria and Turkey won, but the Kurds did not lose; besides Turkey they now have a second state

Assad had no sociological ground or basis for remaining in power in Syria for so many years. What kept him standing was tyranny and some of his international allies. When in 2011 almost the entire Syrian people gradually rose up against him, the days of the Assad regime seemed numbered. But when his international allies rushed to his aid, even at the cost of massacres and genocide, the situation changed, and instead of a constructive sociological ground he continued to survive with a destructive and annihilating power.

The moment the international powers and his allies became busy with their own affairs, he had no support left with which to resist the people. At a moment when Russia was busy in Ukraine, Iran, Hezbollah and Israel in Gaza, and the US with its own priorities in its own election interval, the collapse of the Syrian regime and its replacement by a new power truly based on its people took only 11 days. What followed was spent on the consolidation of the new regime that formed.

Now, with the current having turned very harsh against the SDF, which had for years established, with weapons again received from the US and with support received from Israel, a control contrary to sociology, against the flowing river, in the eastern neighborhoods of Aleppo and east of the Euphrates, and with sociology fully liberated, it could not possibly hold out any longer. The SDF no longer had any reason or sociological ground to administer a geography whose people were mostly Arab, against these people and now even against the Syrian central government. That is why it took no more than 10 days for the Syrian government to establish control in these regions.

In fact this process could have been completed in less than 10 days, but at every step the Syrian army advanced giving the SDF one more chance to think again. With the rapid crossing over to the government side of the Arabs within the SDF and even some Kurds, the army of hundreds of thousands, which until now had turned into an urban legend, also turned into a sheer dream and vanished.

SHARA'S STRATEGIC MIND AND LEADERSHIP

In fact this ground had disappeared as of the very first day of the Syrian revolution. But the year in between gave a good opportunity both to himself and to the whole international community to see this reality in all its clarity. In the management of the process, Ahmed al-Sharaa's patient, dignified and intelligent approach, his leadership in managing the process, clearly stood out. With his approach that did not rush, did not panic and did not make noise, he used time as the best weapon. As Sharaa's adviser Ahmed Muwaffaq Zeidan put it: "When he met Mazloum Abdi, he signed an agreement envisaging the integration of the SDF into the army within a year. Yet Sharaa knew very well that the SDF would not integrate. Because the SDF controlled a quarter of Syrian territory: the oil, the rivers, the dams and the agricultural lands. But this agreement was not a goal; it was a move to gain time: to build a real army.

When the moment of decision approached, Sharaa acted not with the logic of the front but with the mind of the state. To close the southern front, he balanced Israel with a temporary security agreement. At the same time he prevented the multiplication of fronts by launching an operation against residual elements in the coastal region. He forced Lebanon to act with shared intelligence information. By coordinating with the tribes he prepared the ground to strike the SDF where it stood.

Then the suitable international moment came. The US was immersed in its great rivalry with China, and Syria's unity had become part of broader geopolitical calculations. Sharaa used this moment skillfully. Washington was neutralized by Turkey-Saudi Arabia pressure; Syrian oil was brought back onto the agenda with economic promises attractive to American companies. For Trump is a man not of slogans but of deals.

Internally, the SDF's real point of support was targeted. The SDF is not a force that stands on its own; it is an American card. Its real backbone on the ground is the Arab tribes in the east. While internal contradictions deepened with practices such as conscription and the drafting of women and children, Sharaa did not intervene. He let the fire burn itself. Thus the SDF was exposed not as a 'force of freedom' but as a force of occupation; the entry of the Syrian army ceased to be a 'threat' and turned into a 'demand of the people.'"

At the end of the day, a process that looked very difficult was completed, just like the Syrian Revolution completed on December 8, with the least harm and the least bloodshed for all sides.

In the situation reached today, Sharaa has never regarded this victory against the SDF as a victory won against the Kurds. Moreover, even at the moment when he could deliver the final fatal blow to the SDF, he gave it another chance. In the latest situation he repeated that, if Mazloum Abdi complies with the conditions, he will remain faithful to an agreement that again recognizes him and opens a space of existence for him within its borders.

SHARAA'S CONCERN IS ONE STATE, ONE ARMY, ONE SYRIA

It must be noted that Sharaa does not regard this success especially as a success against the Kurds and takes maximum care not to offend the Kurds in any way because of it. This shows how loyally he adheres to the Islamic perspective to which he is bound in managing the process. He belongs to an Islamic understanding that accepts not the slightest distinction between Kurds and Arabs, between Arabs and Turks. He is someone who can never be called an Arabist.

When he says "The Kurds or their rights are not a matter of bargaining; they are an essential component of the state," he is by no means concerned to give anyone a sweet word. Indeed, he made these words, and the declaration of rights he published for the Kurds afterwards, at a moment when he was strongest against the SDF and could, if he wished, advance to the end. He stresses that his concern is never the Kurds but ensuring the unity of Syria's homeland, state, flag, army and authority, which is the most natural behavior of a state. What is beyond natural and peculiar to an Islamic state is showing the utmost respect for the cultural identity of its citizens.

THE KURDS DID NOT LOSE, THEY WON, BUT TO WHOM DO WE NEED TO EXPLAIN?

Unfortunately, this sensitivity, which Sharaa has displayed in abundance, becomes the subject of exactly the opposite quarrels between nationalist Turks and nationalist Kurds in Turkey. Some are turning Sharaa's fight, which he insistently says is not against the Kurds, into material for the gratification of their own feelings.

Truly, however little those fighting against Sharaa in the name of the SDF represent the Kurds today, the great majority of them are Kurds. Their defeat, their rout, the new situation formed against them is giving rise, among other Kurds who until now were separated from them by mountains of distance, to a fellow-feeling and then to the hardest possible outcome, identification with the SDF and even with the PKK. This is hard to understand, but it is not without a psychological explanation. The spiral of fellow-feeling that forms before the sight of someone constantly getting beaten up, even if as the result of its own mistakes and even its own betrayal, though one has for years hated the PKK and regarded its cause and its fight as false, is a serious paradox and of course a problem. Our only remedy against this paradox is to hold our tongues a little. But to whom shall we say it, who will listen to this advice?

THE SDF DID WRONG AND LOST

Those who promised it land in Syria were not the owners of this land; they were thieves of this land. They too had a share in these lands, of course, but it did not all belong to them, and now the true owners of the land have come. It is of course not easy for masses who have been run after a vain fancy for years to accept this with precisely this clarity. A wretched tongue emerged, such as Şiwan Perwer's, weeping because America has sold them out again and again and continually.

What did you expect from America? It is precisely now that it is time to feel remorse and weep in repentance for having expected anything at all, and for having expected that it would take someone else's right and give it to you.