The Basque trade union LAB published an article on Rojava on its webpage.
The article titled “Rojava Kurdistan Today: Resistance and a Horizon of Hope” reads as follows:
“The experience of Rojava, in northern and northeastern Syria, cannot be understood as a merely conjunctural phenomenon arising solely from the collapse of the Syrian state. Rather, it is the historical outcome of decades of oppression, internal colonialism, and the systematic denial of the rights of the Kurdish people. Since 2012, and especially following the defeat of the Islamic State, Rojava has become an international reference point for its attempt to build a form of self-government based on direct democracy, ethnic and religious pluralism, gender equality, and a communal economy. However, in 2026, this project is facing its most critical moment.
In recent years, the fragile balance that had allowed the survival of the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES) has collapsed. The gradual withdrawal of U.S. support—always limited and conditional—along with a new international alignment in favor of restoring the Syrian state’s control, has left the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in a position of extreme weakness. In this context, the central government in Damascus has launched a rapid and effective military offensive, enabling it to regain strategic territories and symbolic cities such as Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor, as well as control over energy resources and key border crossings.
The ceasefire signed in January 2026 has not brought about a genuine political solution, but rather a tense pause within a process of forced recentralization. In practice, the agreements promote the gradual dismantling of Kurdish autonomous structures and their integration into the Syrian state apparatus, hollowing out the self-government built over more than a decade. Although the possible participation of Kurdish representatives in central institutions is envisaged, these concessions appear symbolic and fragile, offering no real guarantees for the preservation of collective rights or of the democratic model developed in Rojava.
For the Kurdish people, this setback is not merely territorial or administrative: it is a direct attack on a political experience that simultaneously challenged state authoritarianism, patriarchy, and extractive capitalism. The loss of autonomy entails the erosion of fundamental social gains, especially for women, who had achieved unprecedented levels of political participation and self-defense through the co-chair system, women’s councils, and the YPJ. Reports also point to forced displacement, selective repression of political cadres and activists, and a deliberate attempt to dismantle the community networks that sustained everyday life.
Despite this critical scenario, the Kurdish response has not been one of resignation. Political and social leaders in Rojava insist that they will defend their project “at any price” and call for strengthening internal unity in the face of what they interpret as a new phase of historical dispossession. There is a clear awareness that what is at stake goes beyond Syria: the dismantling of Rojava sends a deterrent message to any attempt to build democratic and emancipatory alternatives in the Middle East.
Recurring accusations of “collaboration with imperialism” directed at the Kurdish movement deliberately oversimplify a complex reality. The tactical alliance with the United States responded to an immediate need for survival in the face of the Islamic State and never implied ideological or political subordination. In fact, the ultimate abandonment of Rojava clearly demonstrates the instrumental and ephemeral nature of that relationship. The Kurdish project was never integrated into an imperial strategy, and its anti-capitalist, feminist, and anti-statist orientation has always been uncomfortable for all regional and international powers.
The future of Rojava, in strictly institutional terms, is uncertain. It is possible that the project will be defeated as an autonomous administrative structure. However, even in that case, its legacy is already irreversible. Rojava has shown that it is possible to articulate democratic, pluralist, and feminist forms of self-government under extreme conditions of war, embargo, and isolation. It has demonstrated that self-determination does not necessarily have to translate into the creation of a new nation-state, and that oppressed peoples can build political power from below without reproducing new hierarchies.
For all these reasons, the current situation demands more than analysis: it demands active solidarity. The defense of Rojava is not an identity-based or local issue, but a struggle that speaks to all those who, anywhere in the world, aspire to more just, egalitarian, and democratic societies. Supporting the Kurdish people today means denouncing repression, making their situation visible, demanding international guarantees for their collective rights, and defending the right of peoples to decide how they wish to organize their lives.
Rojava may be being suffocated militarily and politically, but its example remains alive as a horizon of hope. In a world marked by the advance of authoritarianism and the crisis of global capitalism, the Kurdish experience continues to pose an uncomfortable and radical question: what happens when peoples stop asking for permission to govern themselves? The answer, although threatened today, remains a source of inspiration and a powerful reason not to look the other way.”