Exclusive – Al-Hasakah
The recent agreement between the Kurdish-led authorities in northeast Syria and the interim administration in Damascus has been widely described as “historic.” Many view it as a potential framework for a new social contract in Syria, one that could pave the way for a more inclusive and democratic future after decades of authoritarian rule.
Considering this development, +963 spoke with Ilham Ahmed, Co-Chair of the Foreign Relations Department in the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES), to discuss the implications of the agreement, shifting U.S. policy, and regional challenge:
Why was this agreement signed now between the interim Syrian administration’s head, Ahmed Sharaa, and SDF Commander Mazloum Abdi?
This agreement is the result of extensive negotiations between us and the interim Syrian administration, with U.S. mediation. The signing date had been agreed upon in advance.
Read also: Syria Moves Toward Stability: Al-Sharaa Agreement with Abdi and the Path Forward
How do you see U.S. policy changes, especially with Donald Trump’s return, affecting support for the Autonomous Administration? What are your strategies if the U.S. withdraws from northern and eastern Syria?
U.S. policy toward Syria remains uncertain, which presents ongoing challenges. Despite Trump’s return, Washington’s current approach largely continues the previous administration’s policies. So far, the U.S. remains committed to fighting ISIS, and there has been no official discussion of a military withdrawal. However, American forces will not stay indefinitely.
The priority should be a comprehensive political solution for Syria—one that establishes an elected government representing all communities, ensures stability through transitional justice, and strengthens democracy. The U.S. presence has helped maintain regional stability and prevent the resurgence of extremist groups. If Washington decides to withdraw, the process should be carefully planned and gradual to avoid chaos. A sudden power vacuum, as seen in Afghanistan, could trigger new instability.
Are you concerned about Trump’s close ties with Russia?
U.S. support for the SDF is not linked to any agreements with Russia. The decline of Russia’s influence in Syria following Assad’s weakening has allowed other regional players, particularly Turkey, to expand their presence. At the same time, we have seen ISIS regain activity, alongside the growing influence of radical groups seeking to impose their ideology. These developments make the situation even more complex and pose serious risks for Syria’s future.
Read also: U.S.-Led Coalition and SDF Conduct Joint Military Drills in Eastern Syria
How do you respond to Turkish pressure?
We believe that progress in Turkey’s internal peace process would positively impact Syria. The U.S. has pressured Turkey to halt its military operations in northern and eastern Syria, but so far, these efforts have only led to temporary solutions rather than a lasting peace.
There are opportunities for Turkey to play a truly strategic role in the future, if it chooses to seize them by improving its relationship with the Kurdish people, addressing the Kurdish issue, and advancing democracy within its borders. We do not see Turkey as an enemy, but we have legitimate concerns about its aggressive policies toward us.
Do you see a future where the Foreign Relations Department of the Autonomous Administration is no longer needed? Would you consider a role in Syria’s future government or step away from politics?
I will make that decision when the time comes. However, when Syria achieves lasting stability, when displaced people can return home safely, and when true security is restored, I plan to dedicate myself fully to my core cause: women’s rights. My focus will be on working alongside women to achieve gender equality and ensure they have full access to their rights.
What is the Autonomous Administration’s stance on recent events in Syria’s coastal region?
These actions violate fundamental human rights. Holding former regime officials accountable is necessary, but targeting civilians, restricting their freedoms, and turning the conflict into a sectarian struggle are extremely dangerous.
We have seen a rise in inflammatory rhetoric targeting specific communities, Alawites, Druze, Kurds, and Christians. Some media platforms have become enablers of this division, openly hosting figures who spread hate speech. This not only fuels further violence but also places responsibility on the Damascus government to put an end to these campaigns.
