Syria's Kurds: From the Margins to Fragile Autonomy

A fighter from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) participates in a demonstration in the northeastern Syrian Kurdish-majority city of Qamishli on December 28, 2018, against threats from Turkey to carry out a fresh offensive following the US decision to withdraw their troops. Delil souleiman / AFP
A fighter from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) participates in a demonstration in the northeastern Syrian Kurdish-majority city of Qamishli on December 28, 2018, against threats from Turkey to carry out a fresh offensive following the US decision to withdraw their troops. Delil souleiman / AFP
TT
20

Syria's Kurds: From the Margins to Fragile Autonomy

A fighter from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) participates in a demonstration in the northeastern Syrian Kurdish-majority city of Qamishli on December 28, 2018, against threats from Turkey to carry out a fresh offensive following the US decision to withdraw their troops. Delil souleiman / AFP
A fighter from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) participates in a demonstration in the northeastern Syrian Kurdish-majority city of Qamishli on December 28, 2018, against threats from Turkey to carry out a fresh offensive following the US decision to withdraw their troops. Delil souleiman / AFP

Syria's Kurds, who have asked for regime help to face a threatened Turkish offensive, have seen their prospects of increased autonomy change over the course of the war, Agence France Presse reported.

Concentrated in the north, Kurds make up around 15 percent of Syria's population.

The Kurds had been stripped of their nationality following a controversial census in 1962.

They have suffered decades of marginalization and oppression by the ruling Baath party and have long pushed for their cultural and political rights, said the report.

When Syria's conflict erupted in 2011, the Kurdish population generally sought to adopt a position of neutrality.

The head of the regime, Bashar al-Assad, made conciliatory gestures towards the Kurds from the earliest days of the conflict, granting citizenship to 300,000 people -- a key demand for half a century.

In 2012, regime forces withdrew from Kurdish-majority areas in the north and east, paving the way for Kurds to consolidate control on the ground.

They have since established self-rule in many of these zones.

In 2013, the Democratic Union Party (PYD) -- the political branch of the powerful People's Protection Units (YPG) -- announced the establishment of a semi-autonomous region.

In 2016, Kurdish authorities unveiled a "federal region" for this territory comprising three cantons: Afrin in Aleppo province, Jazira (Hasakeh province) and Euphrates (which includes parts of Aleppo and Raqqa provinces).

The initiative looked like de facto autonomy, provoking hostility from Syria's mainstream opposition forces and neighboring Turkey.

At the end of 2016, the Kurds gave themselves a "social contract" -- a kind of constitution for their "federal region".

A year later residents of Kurdish regions elect their own municipal councillors.

Kurdish fighters have been one of the most effective forces fighting ISIS in Syria, with air support from a US-led coalition, AFP said.

At the start of 2015, they ousted ISIS from Kobane on the Turkish border after more than four months of fierce fighting.

The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), an alliance of Kurdish forces and local Arab militiamen was created in October 2015.

Dominated by the Kurdish YPG, it has been the main ground force battling ISIS remnants in eastern Syria.

In October 2017, they ousted ISIS from its de facto Syrian capital, Raqqa, and by the end of 2018 they were still fighting die-hard militants near the Iraqi border.

In January 2018, the US-led coalition announced it was working to create in northern Syria a 30,000-strong border force comprised of Kurdish and Arab fighters, around half of whom would be retrained SDF fighters.

But Ankara accuses the YPG of being the Syrian offshoot of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) which has waged a three-decade rebellion in Turkey's southeast.

On January 20, 2018, Turkey launched an air and ground operation against the YPG-held enclave of Afrin, taking control of it on March 18.

On December 19, US President Donald Trump ordered the forthcoming withdrawal of some 2,000 US soldiers deployed in Syria, who have been fighting the ISIS alongside the YPG.

In the following days Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan sent troop reinforcements to the border between Turkey and the Syrian Kurdish regions in preparation for a possible offensive after the withdrawal of American troops.

On December 28, the Syrian army said it had entered the northern city of Manbij, 30 kilometers from the Turkish border, after the Kurds asked regime forces to deploy in areas it already withdrew from earlier this year.



The 911 Presidency: Trump Flexes Emergency Powers in His Second Term

FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump attends a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz (not pictured) at the White House in Washington, D.C., US, June 5, 2025. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump attends a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz (not pictured) at the White House in Washington, D.C., US, June 5, 2025. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo
TT
20

The 911 Presidency: Trump Flexes Emergency Powers in His Second Term

FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump attends a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz (not pictured) at the White House in Washington, D.C., US, June 5, 2025. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: US President Donald Trump attends a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz (not pictured) at the White House in Washington, D.C., US, June 5, 2025. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo

Call it the 911 presidency.
Despite insisting that the United States is rebounding from calamity under his watch, President Donald Trump is harnessing emergency powers unlike any of his predecessors.
Whether it’s leveling punishing tariffs, deploying troops to the border or sidelining environmental regulations, Trump has relied on rules and laws intended only for use in extraordinary circumstances like war and invasion.
An analysis by The Associated Press shows that 30 of Trump’s 150 executive orders have cited some kind of emergency power or authority, a rate that far outpaces his recent predecessors.
The result is a redefinition of how presidents can wield power. Instead of responding to an unforeseen crisis, Trump is using emergency powers to supplant Congress’ authority and advance his agenda.
“What’s notable about Trump is the enormous scale and extent, which is greater than under any modern president,” said Ilya Somin, who is representing five US businesses who sued the administration, claiming they were harmed by Trump’s so-called “Liberation Day” tariffs.
Because Congress has the power to set trade policy under the Constitution, the businesses convinced a federal trade court that Trump overstepped his authority by claiming an economic emergency to impose the tariffs. An appeals court has paused that ruling while the judges review it.
Growing concerns over actions
The legal battle is a reminder of the potential risks of Trump’s strategy. Judges traditionally have given presidents wide latitude to exercise emergency powers that were created by Congress. However, there’s growing concern that Trump is pressing the limits when the US is not facing the kinds of threats such actions are meant to address.
“The temptation is clear,” said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center’s Liberty and National Security Program and an expert in emergency powers. “What’s remarkable is how little abuse there was before, but we’re in a different era now.”
Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who has drafted legislation that would allow Congress to reassert tariff authority, said he believed the courts would ultimately rule against Trump in his efforts to single-handedly shape trade policy.
“It’s the Constitution. James Madison wrote it that way, and it was very explicit,” Bacon said of Congress’ power over trade. “And I get the emergency powers, but I think it’s being abused. When you’re trying to do tariff policy for 80 countries, that’s policy, not emergency action.”
The White House pushed back on such concerns, saying Trump is justified in aggressively using his authority.
“President Trump is rightfully enlisting his emergency powers to quickly rectify four years of failure and fix the many catastrophes he inherited from Joe Biden — wide open borders, wars in Ukraine and Gaza, radical climate regulations, historic inflation, and economic and national security threats posed by trade deficits,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said.
Trump frequently sites 1977 law to justify actions
Of all the emergency powers, Trump has most frequently cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to justify slapping tariffs on imports.
The law, enacted in 1977, was intended to limit some of the expansive authority that had been granted to the presidency decades earlier. It is only supposed to be used when the country faces “an unusual and extraordinary threat” from abroad “to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.”
In analyzing executive orders issued since 2001, the AP found that Trump has invoked the law 21 times in presidential orders and memoranda. President George W. Bush, grappling with the aftermath of the most devastating terror attack on US soil, invoked the law just 14 times in his first term. Likewise, Barack Obama invoked the act only 21 times during his first term, when the US economy faced the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression.
The Trump administration has also deployed an 18th century law, the Alien Enemies Act, to justify deporting Venezuelan migrants to other countries, including El Salvador. Trump's decision to invoke the law relies on allegations that the Venezuelan government coordinates with the Tren de Aragua gang, but intelligence officials did not reach that conclusion.
Congress has ceded its power to the presidency
Congress has granted emergency powers to the presidency over the years, acknowledging that the executive branch can act more swiftly than lawmakers if there is a crisis. There are 150 legal powers — including waiving a wide variety of actions that Congress has broadly prohibited — that can only be accessed after declaring an emergency. In an emergency, for example, an administration can suspend environmental regulations, approve new drugs or therapeutics, take over the transportation system, or even override bans on testing biological or chemical weapons on human subjects, according to a list compiled by the Brennan Center for Justice.
Democrats and Republicans have pushed the boundaries over the years. For example, in an attempt to cancel federal student loan debt, Joe Biden used a post-Sept. 11 law that empowered education secretaries to reduce or eliminate such obligations during a national emergency. The US Supreme Court eventually rejected his effort, forcing Biden to find different avenues to chip away at his goals.
Before that, Bush pursued warrantless domestic wiretapping and Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the detention of Japanese-Americans on the West Coast in camps for the duration of World War II.
Trump, in his first term, sparked a major fight with Capitol Hill when he issued a national emergency to compel construction of a border wall. Though Congress voted to nullify his emergency declaration, lawmakers could not muster up enough Republican support to overcome Trump’s eventual veto.
“Presidents are using these emergency powers not to respond quickly to unanticipated challenges,” said John Yoo, who as a Justice Department official under George W. Bush helped expand the use of presidential authorities. “Presidents are using it to step into a political gap because Congress chooses not to act.”
Trump, Yoo said, “has just elevated it to another level.”
Trump's allies support his moves
Conservative legal allies of the president also said Trump’s actions are justified, and Vice President JD Vance predicted the administration would prevail in the court fight over tariff policy.
“We believe — and we’re right — that we are in an emergency,” Vance said last week in an interview with Newsmax.
“You have seen foreign governments, sometimes our adversaries, threaten the American people with the loss of critical supplies,” Vance said. “I’m not talking about toys, plastic toys. I’m talking about pharmaceutical ingredients. I’m talking about the critical pieces of the manufacturing supply chain.”
Vance continued, “These governments are threatening to cut us off from that stuff, that is by definition, a national emergency.”
Republican and Democratic lawmakers have tried to rein in a president’s emergency powers. Two years ago, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House and Senate introduced legislation that would have ended a presidentially-declared emergency after 30 days unless Congress votes to keep it in place. It failed to advance.
Similar legislation hasn’t been introduced since Trump’s return to office. Right now, it effectively works in the reverse, with Congress required to vote to end an emergency.
“He has proved to be so lawless and reckless in so many ways. Congress has a responsibility to make sure there’s oversight and safeguards,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who cosponsored an emergency powers reform bill in the previous session of Congress. He argued that, historically, leaders relying on emergency declarations has been a “path toward autocracy and suppression.”