Asharq Al-Awsat Tours Hasaka and Qamishli where Kurds, Syrian Regime Vie for Control

Syrian Kurds take part in a rally in the Syrian city of Qamishli in support of the independence referendum . (AFP)
Syrian Kurds take part in a rally in the Syrian city of Qamishli in support of the independence referendum . (AFP)
TT
20

Asharq Al-Awsat Tours Hasaka and Qamishli where Kurds, Syrian Regime Vie for Control

Syrian Kurds take part in a rally in the Syrian city of Qamishli in support of the independence referendum . (AFP)
Syrian Kurds take part in a rally in the Syrian city of Qamishli in support of the independence referendum . (AFP)

Pharmacist Abdulhakim Ramadan, 52, lives with his family in al-Hasaka province in northern Syria. He lives in a city that has been divided between Syrian regime and Kurdish control. His house faces the recruitment center in the middle of security zone that is controlled by the regime. His pharmacy is located on Palestine Street at the dividing line between regime regions and regions under Kurdish autonomous rule since 2014. The Kurdish zones are controlled by the Democratic Union Party (PYD) and Arab and Christian forces.

Ramadan has been a pharmacist since 1992 and, on daily basis, he moves between his residence to his pharmacy amid heavy security measures imposed by the regime and Kurds. He complains about the several military checkpoints set up by both sides.

The presence of the two sides in the area has not been without incident.

Ramadan told Asharq Al-Awsat how clashes had erupted in the past between the regime forces and Kurdish Asayesh near his pharmacy.

“We were trapped for several hours. We could not get out or move due to the severe clashes,” he recalled.

The regime has been striving to take over the area where his pharmacy is located because it is at the heart of Hasaka city’s trade center.

The regime withdrawal from several Syrian regions at the beginning of 2013 gave the Kurds the chance to form local committees in three areas where they make up the majority of the population. The Hasaka and Qamishli cities are one of these areas, in addition to Ain al-Arab (Kobane) in the eastern Aleppo countryside and Afrin city in the northern Aleppo countryside.

Afrin has since January 20 come under a fierce Turkish offensive to expel Kurds from the border area with Turkey. Afrin has been under Kurdish control since 2012.

The Syrian regime has kept two security zones in Hasaka and Qamishli. The zone in Hasaka starts from Qamishli Street in the west and includes the president’s square, government buildings, the judicial palace, municipal headquarters and part of the main market. The zone ends at the military neighborhood in the east.

Palestine Street divides central Hasaka between regime- and Asayesh- controlled areas. The Asayesh are local Kurdish police. Both of these forces deploy checkpoints on either side of the central market. The Asayesh have set up checkpoints near each regime military checkpoint.

Ramadan describes the scene as a “sealed military zone,” saying that the checkpoints should be removed from the city.

The local authority has become in charge of managing the people’s daily lives and various services in the city. It has even introduced Kurdish into school curricula and formed institutions that operate independently from regime circles. These institutions collect taxes from the people and issue official papers. Ramadan revealed that he pays taxes to both the regime and local authority because his pharmacy lies between the regime- and Kurdish- controlled areas.

Suad, a woman in her early 50s, lives near the municipal headquarters in central Hasaka. She describes living in the city as living in “a state within a state” due to the presence of semi-autonomous authorities within the regime’s security zone.

“On the surface, the zone is controlled by the regime, but it is actually managed by the local authority. The truth is, no one knows who is ruling us,” she told Asharq Al-Awsat

Divided city

The situation in Qamishli in the northeastern most point in Syria is not much different than the one in the Hasaka province.

The regime still controls a security zone that includes security headquarters, part of the main city market and Qamishli’s sole airport, which is the only link between the province and the rest of Syria.

A walk along the central market’s main street takes you to an Asayesh checkpoint. Nearby are semi-autonomous administrations. A walk further down the road and you are stopped by a traffic policeman, who stands by the local post office. The office is only meters away from another Asayesh checkpoint. Walking further, you come across a square with a statue of late ruler Hafez al-Assad. North of this point lie the regime’s security agencies, intelligence units, security forces and police.

Asaad Abou Rawand owns a pastry shop that is located just in front of the square with Assad’s statue. He said that the presence of state institutions and regime headquarters serves the citizens in the area.

“My shop is located in the middle of the security zone. Meters west are the regime forces and traffic police. Meters east are he Asayesh members, who work for the local administration. The two sides are in agreement and they do not intervene in the people’s affairs,” he said.

“Customers come to us and they can buy the tastiest sweets without being harassed,” he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

The PYD and semi-autonomous parties had in March 2016 announced a federal system in the regions under their control in northeastern Syria. The region, called Democratic Federation of Northern Syria, was divided into three administrations: Al-Jazeera in the northeast, which includes Hasaka and Qamishli, the north central Euphrates that includes al-Raqqa, Tal Abyad and al-Tabaqa, and Afrin in the northwest.

Fawza Youssef, head of the joint executive authority for the Democratic Federation of Northern Syria, said that the regime has a “limited” presence in the security zones in each of Qamishli and Hasaka.

“They do not have the authority to interfere in the people’s lives because the administration is the real manager of the region. There is no relationship between them unless urgent issues emerge that directly affect the people,” she said.

In Qamishli, the Asayesh controls the majority of the city and has set up headquarters at government institutions. The regime and national defense militia controls the security zone and Qamishli airport. The Sootoro, a Christian force allied with the regime, controls the Christian neighborhoods in central Qamishli.

Kurdish opposition figure and Qamishli resident Saraj Kalash, 52, said that the intelligence and security agencies are almost not operational in the city.

“The better term is that they are sleeping. There have been no reports of arrests, raids or patrols,” he sad.

The regime has limited its role to judicial circles and civilian affairs, he explained.

Each military side has designated the border of their areas of control with checkpoints. The Asayesh do not intervene in the areas under Sootoro control to avoid any clash. Clashes had erupted in 2016 between them when the former attempted to seize control of Qamishli’s Christian neighborhood.

Kalash said that the ties between the PYD and Syrian regime are clear.

“The party controls all institutions and resources in the region, including the economic, social, political, security and civilian aspects of the people’s daily lives,” he added.

Criticism

Before the eruption of the revolt against the regime in 2011, the Kurds, who make up 15 percent of the Syrian population, complained of marginalization by the ruling Baath party.

Haifa al-Arbo, co-governor of the al-Jazeera province, said: “We as Kurds are not concerned with who will rule Syria in the future as much as we care about building a political system based on federal rule and de-centeralized politics.”

“We are a part of Syria and we do not want to secede from it,” she stressed.

The opposition Kurdish National Council, which is part of the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces, has criticized the PYD’s ties with the Syrian regime.

Council member Bashar Amin said that the local Kurdish administration “does not have complete freedom in taking decisions because it still has ties with the regime. It acts in coordination with it, especially in central issues.”

Analysts and journalist Alan Hassan said that the relationship between the PYD and regime appears “murky” in the media alone. The two sides in fact have common interests in having the regime presence in Qamishli and Hasaka.

“The regime withdrawal from Hasaka would cut off ties between it and the local administration. The latter does not want to secede from Syria and the regime does not want to abandon this territory, which is rich in oil and gas,” he explained.



From India-Pakistan to Iran and Ukraine, a New Era of Escalation

The Iron Dome, the Israeli air defense system, intercepts missiles fired from Iran, over Tel Aviv, Israel, 17 June 2025. (EPA)
The Iron Dome, the Israeli air defense system, intercepts missiles fired from Iran, over Tel Aviv, Israel, 17 June 2025. (EPA)
TT
20

From India-Pakistan to Iran and Ukraine, a New Era of Escalation

The Iron Dome, the Israeli air defense system, intercepts missiles fired from Iran, over Tel Aviv, Israel, 17 June 2025. (EPA)
The Iron Dome, the Israeli air defense system, intercepts missiles fired from Iran, over Tel Aviv, Israel, 17 June 2025. (EPA)

By Peter Apps

As India’s defense chief attended an international security conference in Singapore in May, soon after India and Pakistan fought what many in South Asia now dub “the four-day war”, he had a simple message: Both sides expect to do it all again.

It was a stark and perhaps counterintuitive conclusion: the four-day military exchange, primarily through missiles and drones, appears to have been among the most serious in history between nuclear-armed nations.

Indeed, reports from both sides suggest it took a direct intervention from US Secretary of State Marco Rubio to halt an escalating exchange of drones and rockets.

Speaking to a Reuters colleague in Singapore, however, Indian Chief of Defense Staff General Anil Chauhan denied either nation had come close to the “nuclear threshold”, describing a “lot of messaging” from both sides.

“A new space for conventional operations has been created and I think that is the new norm,” he said, vowing that New Delhi would continue to respond militarily to any militant attacks on India suspected to have originated from Pakistan.

How stable that "space" might be and how great the risk of escalation for now remains unclear. However, there have been several dramatic examples of escalation in several already volatile global stand-offs over the past two months.

As well as the “four-day” war between India and Pakistan last month, recent weeks have witnessed what is now referred to in Israel and Iran as their “12-day war”. It ended this week with a US-brokered ceasefire after Washington joined the fray with massive air strikes on Tehran’s underground nuclear sites.

Despite years of confrontation, Israel and Iran had not struck each other’s territory directly until last year, while successive US administrations have held back from similar steps.

As events in Ukraine have shown, conflict between major nations can become normalized at speed – whether that means “just” an exchange of drones and missiles, or a more existential battle.

More concerning still, such conflicts appear to have become more serious throughout the current decade, with plenty of room for further escalation.

This month, that included an audacious set of Ukrainian-organized drone strikes on long-range bomber bases deep inside Russian territory, destroying multiple aircraft which, as well as striking Ukraine, have also been responsible for carrying the Kremlin’s nuclear deterrent.

All of that is a far cry from the original Cold War, in which it was often assumed that any serious military clash – particularly involving nuclear forces or the nations that possessed them – might rapidly escalate beyond the point of no return. But it does bring with it new risks of escalation.

Simmering in the background, meanwhile, is the largest and most dangerous confrontation of them all - that between the US and China, with US officials saying Beijing has instructed its military to be prepared to move against Taiwan from 2027, potentially sparking a hugely wider conflict.

As US President Donald Trump headed to Europe this week for the annual NATO summit, just after bombing Iran, it was clear his administration hopes such a potent show of force might be enough to deter Beijing in particular from pushing its luck.

“American deterrence is back,” US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told a Pentagon press briefing the morning after the air strikes took place.

Iran’s initial response of drones and missiles fired at a US air base in Qatar – with forewarning to the US that the fusillade was coming – appeared deliberately moderate to avoid further escalation.

Addressing senators at their confirmation hearing on Tuesday, America’s next top commanders in Europe and the Middle East were unanimous in their comments that the US strikes against Iran would strengthen Washington's hand when it came to handling Moscow and Beijing.

Chinese media commentary was more mixed. Han Peng, head of state-run China Media Group's North American operations, said the US had shown weakness to the world by not wanting to get dragged into the Iran conflict due to its “strategic contraction”.

Other social media posts talked of how vulnerable Iran looked, with nationalist commentator Hu Xijn warning: "If one day we have to get involved in a war, we must be the best at it."

LONG ARM OF AMERICA

On that front, the spectacle of multiple US B-2 bombers battering Iran’s deepest-buried nuclear bunkers - having flown all the way from the US mainland apparently undetected - will not have gone unnoticed in Moscow or Beijing.

Nor will Trump’s not so subtle implications that unless Iran backed down, similar weapons might be used to kill its Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei or other senior figures, wherever they might hide.

None of America’s adversaries have the ability to strike without warning in that way against hardened, deepened targets, and the B-2 – now being replaced by the more advanced B-21 – has no foreign equal.

Both are designed to penetrate highly sophisticated air defenses, although how well they would perform against cutting-edge Russian or Chinese systems would only be revealed in an actual conflict.

China’s effort at building something similar, the H-2, has been trailed in Chinese media for years – and US officials say Beijing is striving hard to make it work.

Both China and Russia have fifth-generation fighters with some stealth abilities, but none have the range or carrying capacity to target the deepest Western leadership or weapons bunkers with conventional munitions.

As a result, any Chinese or Russian long-range strikes – whether conventional or nuclear – would have to be launched with missiles that could be detected in advance.

Even without launching such weapons, however, nuclear powers have their own tools to deliver threats.

An analysis of the India-Pakistan “four-day war” in May done by the Stimson Center suggested that as Indian strikes became more serious on the third day of the war, Pakistan might have taken similar, deliberately visible steps to ready its nuclear arsenal to grab US attention and help conclude the conflict.

Indian newspapers have reported that a desperate Pakistan did indeed put pressure on the US to encourage India to stop, as damage to its forces was becoming increasingly serious, and threatening the government.

Pakistan denies that – but one of its most senior officers was keen to stress that any repeat of India’s strikes would bring atomic risk.

"Nothing happened this time," said the chairman of the Pakistani joint chiefs, General Sahir Shamshad Mirza, also speaking to Reuters at the Shangri-La dialogue in Singapore. "But you can't rule out any strategic miscalculation at any time."

For now, both sides have pulled back troops from the border – while India appears determined to use longer term strategies to undermine its neighbor, including withdrawing from a treaty controlling the water supplies of the Indus River, which Indian Prime Minister Modi said he now intends to dam. Pakistani officials have warned that could be another act of war.

DRONES AND DETERRENCE

Making sure Iran never obtains the leverage of a working atomic bomb, of course, was a key point of the US and Israeli air strikes. Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agreed that the dangers of a government so hostile to Israel obtaining such a weapon would always be intolerable.

For years, government and private sector analysts had predicted Iran might respond to an assault on its nuclear facilities with attacks by its proxies across the Middle East, including on Israel from Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, as well as using thousands of missiles, drones and attack craft to block international oil exports through the Strait of Hormuz.

In reality, the threat of an overwhelming US military response – and hints of an accompanying switch of US policy to outright regime change or decapitation in Iran, coupled with the Israeli military success against Hezbollah and Hamas, appear to have forced Tehran to largely stand down.

What that means longer term is another question.

Flying to the Netherlands on Tuesday for the NATO summit, Trump appeared to be offering Iran under its current Shi'ite Muslim clerical rulers a future as a “major trading nation” providing they abandoned their atomic program.

The Trump administration is also talking up the success of its Operation ROUGH RIDER against the Iran-backed Houthi militia in Yemen.

Vice Admiral Bradley Cooper, selected as the new head of US Central Command, told senators the US military had bombed the Houthis for 50 days before a deal was struck in which the Houthis agreed to stop attacking US and other international shipping in the Red Sea.

But Cooper also noted that like other militant groups in the Middle East, the Houthis were becoming increasingly successful in building underground bases out of the reach of smaller US weapons, as well as using unmanned systems to sometimes overwhelm their enemies.

“The nature and character of warfare is changing before our very eyes,” he said.

Behind the scenes and sometimes in public, US and allied officials say they are still assessing the implications of the success of Ukraine and Israel in infiltrating large numbers of short-range drones into Russia and Iran respectively for two spectacular attacks in recent weeks.

According to Ukrainian officials, the drones were smuggled into Russia hidden inside prefabricated buildings on the back of trucks, with the Russian drivers unaware of what they were carrying until the drones were launched.

Israel’s use of drones on the first day of its campaign against Iran is even more unsettling for Western nations wondering what such an attack might look like.

Its drones were smuggled into Iran and in some cases assembled in secret there to strike multiple senior Iranian leaders and officials in their homes as they slept in the small hours of the morning on the first day of the campaign.

As they met in The Hague this week for their annual summit, NATO officials and commanders will have considered what they must do to build their own defenses to ensure they do not prove vulnerable to a similar attack.

Judging by reports in the Chinese press, military officials there are now working on the same.