It’s all about implementation
A conversation with Xerîb Hiso

The future of the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES) in a post-Assad Syria is the subject of intense negotiations. While signs of alignment emerge - such as the 10 March agreement between Mazloum Abdi and Ahmad Sharaa - AANES has also made its opposition clear, notably rejecting Damascus’ 13 March constitutional declaration.

To learn more about AANES’ perspective on current dynamics, Syria in Transition spoke with Xerîb Hiso, co-chair of the Democratic Union Party (PYD).

The agreement signed between Damascus and the SDF is a landmark in Syria's modern history as it is the first time that Kurdish cultural and political right have been acknowledged at such a high level. Many regarded the agreement as a media win for Sharaa but a political win for the SDF. Do you agree with this reading?
Hiso: Yes, there are political and media sides to it. Media draws attention, but the political side is what matters more. This agreement was a historical political agreement that we see positive. At the same time, we wonder if it will be realised on the ground. The sooner this can happen, the more hope there is for Syria’s society and all its people. With this deal, Syria is at a new level. But it has to be implemented. And the will of all the different people and components must be implemented so that our fate becomes a shared fate. Neighbouring states have just worked to increase the war and chaos here. This deal is like the emergence of new hope for all people. Everyone here welcomed it.

To seasoned observers the practical terms of the agreement re-establishes the kind of relationship between the AANES and the central government in Damascus that existed under Bashar Assad. Is this a correct reading? If not, what's new?
Hiso: No, these relationships don’t resemble each other. Assad did not see it as worth it to make any deal. He did not see it as worth it to acknowledge the will of the Syrian people – or the Kurdish people. He refused cooperation – the idea of working together to solve something. He was lost in a politics of denial. The relationship we are establishing now doesn’t resemble that of before. Our relationship with Damascus is important. Maybe our approach, thinking and ideology differs from theirs. But for a people that has been shaken by war, that has put all its resources into war, it is a valuable thing to build a free society, to get out of this chaos, to achieve a day when we live in freedom and dignity. We have struggled a lot. This means a relationship can be built. The deal signed expresses this new mode of relations. The transitional government agreeing to sign this deal shows maybe they have the intention to solve the problems. Solutions can never be unilateral, but when two sides come together and sign such a protocol publicly, it gives hope. This is a key difference to before. Assad just wanted a security-based relationship. No politics. Currently our relation has high-level political aspects. This is crucial.

The merger of the SDF into the new Syrian army is a complicated matter that was one of the stumbling blocks in previous rounds of negotiations with Damascus. How was this issue resolved? How does the current SDF leadership envisions its role in Syria's security architecture going forward?
Hiso: The military topic is important. Everyone is asking about it and making their own evaluations. This topic exceeds you and I. It is a military/security topic. Before, Assad was unwilling and unaccepting. But this was also Russia’s fault. Russia did not want to solve the problem. Russia’s purpose and existence there was just to try to get Syria back to its pre-2011 state. It had no interest in solving problems. Russia ignored the facts on the ground: that the SDF was a national force that had fought successfully and carried out a historical resistance with the young men and women from all components. This strength became a factor on the ground. But in Syria, Russia also did not want the Damascus government to accept or recognise this. Today, the transitional government in Damascus sees our strength, history and force. The SDF waged a big struggle as a Syrian force, and a democratic force, for the unity and protection of Syrian land. Military committees will evaluate these topics. We stick to the political side. The military side is on them.

General Mazloum Abdi and other Kurdish leaders have spoken about the need for a decentralised system in Syria enshrined in the constitution. The government in Damascus meanwhile insists on a centralised state. What would a compromise look like? Is there grounds for optimism that a solution could be found before the end of the year?  
Hiso: The centralisation under the nationalist, chauvinist and Nasserist Baath regime took Syria into chaos. Ultimately, its oppressive and centralistic mentality led to its collapse from the inside. It has now been over three months that HTS is in power. Their approach expresses continuation of this Baathist method. The chauvinistic Baath government that ruined Syria. This mentality and approach is being replicated with the transitional government’s desire for centralisation. Although the new government prioritises religionism rather than nationalism. A centralised state will bring more problems to Syria. Our idea is for Syria to become decentralised and diverse, with its political forces and components. It can be a new democratic force in the Middle East. The Syrian people sought to make a revolution. We can become an example of how revolutionary principles and values can actually be realised. A successful revolution should not see a centralised state established. It should be a democratic, decentralised state. This is what Syria currently needs. There is currently a lot of effort going in to achieve this, from all political and social sides. All components: Syrian, Arab, Kurd, Druze, Turkmen, Christian… we can all live together and know each other better. But to build a centralised system is to disrespect the revolution. The revolution is no one’s property. You cannot put yourself in a high position and take power off the back of the revolution. This is ruining the value of the revolution. HTS is facing contradictions because it is not able to merge with society, and society is not able to merge with HTS. This is a point of danger and difficulty for Syria. When the [SDF-Damascus] deal occurred and this relationship was established, things changed. A new base was built inside Syria. We should protect this deal. It will enable a decentralised, diverse and democratic Syria.

Imprisoned PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan has recently called for an end to the PKK's armed struggle. Followers of Kurdish politics in the region are beginning to speak about a reconfiguration of the relationship between Kurds, Turks, and Arabs, and that a new era of peace, cooperation, and prosperity is on the horizon. Do you agree with this view? If so, what is the role of Syria's Kurds in this new era?
Hiso: Ocalan made a historical call for peace and a democratic society. This call was impactful. It drew a lot of attention from the general public. We see a period of peace, freedom, brotherhood and dialogue as positive. We were very happy. But everything lies in its implementation and practice. Ocalan has called ceasefires many times before. For 26 years he has been within four walls, struggling for freedom and peace; for a day to come when these can exist. He stated: “I am ready for this. I work for this.” In 1993 he also wanted a process like this to occur, but it was blocked. He is now trying to begin a new process. We hope it will be successful. Peace in Turkey and northern Kurdistan will positively impact Syria. If Syria progresses, Turkey progresses. Their situations are interconnected. We are neighbours. Turkey is present here. It has invaded and occupied land here. When progress in Turkey occurs, automatically there are political and military repercussions here, in terms of Turkey’s interventions and modes of operation. We take Ocalan’s address seriously. We join the view that peace should emerge and relations should strengthen for a solution to be built so that war and conflict and violations are stopped. A stage of fraternity.