Syria continues to be the most intricate and volatile conflict arena in the Middle East. Hidden threats and the prospect of prolonged confrontation are pushing particularly the Kurdish actors toward a pursuit. The Kurds stand on the threshold of a new phase. While Turkey welcomed the January 30 agreement, it is also closely monitoring developments on the ground. The existence of an agreement does not mean that realities in the field change overnight.
While the possibility of a Hezbollah–HTS confrontation is being discussed, Israel is seeking to expand its influence along the coastal regions. A potential U.S. withdrawal from Syria is assessed as a development that could fundamentally alter the balance of power. The corridor stretching across Homs, Hama, Idlib, Deir ez-Zor, Shengal, Mosul, and Nineveh has become a zone where potential withdrawals and repositioning by various actors are being debated. In short, Syria has once again become the testing laboratory of the Middle East.
Uncertainties continue
While the January 30 agreement between Rojava and Damascus remains in place, uncertainties on the ground persist. Issues such as the formation of brigades, the status of oil fields, and the integration of Autonomous Administration institutions have yet to be clarified. The blockade of Kobane is also part of this ambiguity.
Turkey is closely following developments in Syria, and it is assessed that Ankara is exerting indirect pressure through al-Jolani to accelerate the agreement between the Kurds and Damascus. Whether a new leadership will emerge in Damascus or existing actors will consolidate their power remains unclear.
The rapprochement between Turkey and Damascus is directly reflected on the ground. Governor appointments, the siege of Kobane, and Turkish military activity along the Afrin–Serêkaniyê line are seen as components of this policy. The fact that the governor of Raqqa was able to travel to Girê Spî and meet with Turkish military officials is regarded as one of the most concrete examples of coordination between Damascus and Ankara.
The process that began with the January 6 Aleppo attack created a rupture that upended regional balances. Syria is, so to speak, on edge. Signals of a new period of chaos and a potential regional war are growing stronger. The century-old regional design is laying the groundwork for long-term conflicts to reemerge.
When the possibility of a U.S. withdrawal from Syria by March 2 is considered alongside the Rojava–Damascus talks, it is understood that regional risks are becoming more visible. Signals of both U.S. withdrawal and new conflict scenarios are emerging.
Moscow, which views a U.S. withdrawal as premature and risky, does not look favorably upon such a move. Washington, however, is reportedly planning to withdraw from Syria in order to open space for Israel while redeploying its troops to bases in Qatar and Hewlêr (Erbil).
As the Israeli media frequently raises the possibility of an attack on Iran, the war in Gaza and tensions with Hezbollah further complicate the picture. With rising tensions along the Lebanon–Syria line, Israel’s efforts to expand its control in the region are drawing attention.
The coastal belt—from the Lebanese border to Afrin—stands out as a potential theater for new confrontations. The possibility of a conflict between HTS and Hezbollah does not appear remote.
Possibility of an attack on Iran and risks along the Iraq corridor
Actors seeking to control Damascus do not ignore the Israeli factor. The Iraq–Shengal–Mosul–Nineveh corridor is viewed as a region where Shiite–Sunni tensions could escalate once again. Turkey is closely monitoring the developments in Syria which may extend as far as Mosul.
Although a Hashd al-Shaabi–HTS conflict is considered a low probability, such a scenario could generate serious risks across a wide stretch from Deir ez-Zor to Shengal.
Power struggle
Israel seeks to maintain control over numerous areas beyond Quneitra. A potential HTS–Hezbollah confrontation is seen as a tool that Israel could use to shift the regional balance of power in its favor. The relative calm that followed the Munich talks could quickly evolve into a renewed period of confrontation.
Leave a Reply