A US Shift Marked Kurdish-Led Forces’ Fall from Power in Syria

 Syrian government forces patrol inside the al-Hol camp as smoke rises from an arms depot explosion in northeastern Syria's Hasakeh province, Syria, Wednesday, Jan. 21, 2026, after the withdrawal of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). (AP)
Syrian government forces patrol inside the al-Hol camp as smoke rises from an arms depot explosion in northeastern Syria's Hasakeh province, Syria, Wednesday, Jan. 21, 2026, after the withdrawal of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). (AP)
TT

A US Shift Marked Kurdish-Led Forces’ Fall from Power in Syria

 Syrian government forces patrol inside the al-Hol camp as smoke rises from an arms depot explosion in northeastern Syria's Hasakeh province, Syria, Wednesday, Jan. 21, 2026, after the withdrawal of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). (AP)
Syrian government forces patrol inside the al-Hol camp as smoke rises from an arms depot explosion in northeastern Syria's Hasakeh province, Syria, Wednesday, Jan. 21, 2026, after the withdrawal of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). (AP)

Two tumultuous weeks saw the fall from power in Syria of the Kurdish-led force that was once the main US partner there, as Washington shifts its backing to the country's nascent government.

Analysts say the Syrian Democratic Forces miscalculated, taking a hard stance in negotiations with the new leaders in Damascus on the assumption that if a military conflict erupted between them, Washington would support the SDF as it had for years when they battled the ISIS group.

Instead, the Kurdish-led force lost most of its territory in northeast Syria to a government offensive after intense clashes erupted in the northern city of Aleppo on Jan. 6. Washington did not intervene militarily and focused on mediating a ceasefire.

By Wednesday, the latest ceasefire was holding, and the SDF had signed onto a deal that would effectively dissolve it.

Elham Ahmad, a senior official with the de facto autonomous administration in the Kurdish-led northeast, expressed surprise to journalists Tuesday that its calls for intervention by the US-led coalition against ISIS “have gone unanswered.”

Experts had seen it coming. "It’s been very clear for months that the US views Damascus as a potential strategic partner," said Noah Bonsey, senior advisor on Syria with the International Crisis Group, according The Associated Press.

US President Donald Trump has strongly backed the government of interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa, a former opposition leader, since his forces ousted former President Bashar al-Assad in December 2024 following years of civil war. Under al-Sharaa, Syria has joined the global coalition against ISIS.

US envoy to Syria Tom Barrack in a blunt statement Tuesday said the SDF’s role as Syria's primary anti-ISIS force “has largely expired" since the new government is "both willing and positioned to take over security responsibilities.” The US is not interested in "prolonging a separate SDF role,” he said.

Stalled negotiations led to gunfire

As al-Sharaa sought to pull the country together after 14 years of civil war, he and SDF leader Mazloum Abdi in March 2025 agreed that the SDF's tens of thousands of fighters would be integrated into the new army. The government would take over key institutions in northeast Syria, including border crossings, oil fields and detention centers housing thousands of suspected IS members.

But for months, US-mediated negotiations to implement the deal stalled.

Syrian government officials who spoke to The AP blamed fractured SDF leadership and their maximalist demands.

Syria’s ambassador to the United Nations, Ibrahim Olabi, said Abdi on several occasions agreed to proposals that the group’s more hardline leaders then rejected.

“Then he stopped agreeing to things and started saying, ‘I have to go back’ (to consult with other officials), which obviously didn’t work with us and the Americans," Olabi said. “We wanted to spend a week in one room and get everything done.”

A senior Syrian government official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment publicly said Barrack slammed his hand on the table during one negotiating session and demanded that Abdi clarify whether he wanted to continue with the agreement. Barrack declined to comment via a spokesperson.

Ahmad with the Kurdish-led administration accused Damascus officials of dodging meetings and said those that occurred "were only possible because of the Americans pushing Damascus to come and join.”

Talks were always likely to be thorny. The SDF's Kurdish base was wary of the new government, particularly after outbreaks of sectarian violence targeting other minority groups in Syria.

There was “a major disagreement over a huge substantive set of questions around the future of Syrian governance, how decentralized or centralized it should be,” Bonsey said.

Meghan Bodette, director of research at the pro-SDF Kurdish Peace Institute think tank, said the impasse came down to an “astronomical” gulf in political outlook.

Damascus sought to create a centralized state, while the (Kurdish-led authorities) wanted to keep maximum local autonomy through decentralization and institutionalizing minority rights, she said.

Integrating forces was especially tricky

Much debate focused on how the SDF forces would be integrated into the new army.

The senior Syrian official said SDF leaders at one point proposed integrating Syrian government military groups into their forces instead.

He said the government rejected that but agreed to keep the SDF unified in three battalions in northeastern Syria along with a border brigade, a women’s brigade and a special forces brigade.

In return, the government demanded that non-SDF military forces have freedom of movement in the northeast and that SDF divisions would report to the Ministry of Defense and not move without orders. The senior official said Abdi asked to be named deputy minister of defense, and the government agreed.

At the last negotiation session in early January, however, SDF commander Sipan Hamo — seen by Damascus as part of the hardline faction — demanded that the northeast brigades and battalions report to a person chosen by the SDF and that other forces could only enter the region in small patrols and with SDF permission, the senior official said. The government rejected that.

SDF officials did not respond to request for comment on details of negotiations.

Aleppo was a turning point

Days after that session, clashes erupted in Aleppo.

Olabi, the ambassador, said the Syrian military's success in limiting civilian casualties in Aleppo was another key to the diplomatic breakthrough with the SDF.

Syria's military leadership appeared to have learned lessons from confrontations elsewhere in which government-affiliated fighters carried out sectarian revenge attacks on civilians.

In Aleppo, the military opened “humanitarian corridors” so civilians could flee.

“If Aleppo had gone wrong, I think we would be in a very different place,” Olabi said.

After Syrian forces captured the Arab-majority oil-rich provinces of Raqqa and Deir Ezzor from the SDF, the two sides announced a deal. SDF would retain a presence only in Hasakeh province, the country's Kurdish heartland. And SDF fighters would be integrated into the army as individuals.

Bonsey said the SDF had been warned during negotiations that their effort to maintain their dominant role in the northeast conflicted with geopolitical shifts.

They ended up accepting a deal that is “much worse” than what was on offer just two weeks ago, he said.



Bandar Abbas, Iran’s Trade Hub on Hormuz Thrust to Frontline of US War

Fishermen check their nets and small boats on the seashore in the port city of Bandar Abbas, in southern Iran on August 10, 2026. (AFP)
Fishermen check their nets and small boats on the seashore in the port city of Bandar Abbas, in southern Iran on August 10, 2026. (AFP)
TT

Bandar Abbas, Iran’s Trade Hub on Hormuz Thrust to Frontline of US War

Fishermen check their nets and small boats on the seashore in the port city of Bandar Abbas, in southern Iran on August 10, 2026. (AFP)
Fishermen check their nets and small boats on the seashore in the port city of Bandar Abbas, in southern Iran on August 10, 2026. (AFP)

With a long shoreline on the Strait of Hormuz, Iran's southern trade hub of Bandar Abbas has found itself at the frontlines of the war with the United States, with residents struggling to revive livelihoods battered by months of fighting.

Like elsewhere in Iran, economic strain has squeezed households since US-Israeli strikes triggered the Middle East war on February 28. But unlike much of the country, the port city of around half a million people has remained exposed to fighting even after an April 8 ceasefire brought relief elsewhere.

But despite a lull in hostilities in July, residents still feel squeezed. Saeed Tajik, 42, used to work at a shipyard before losing his job and turning to driving a taxi.

"The prices of housing and food have become extremely high. Almost all the basics -- rice, yoghurt, and oil -- have doubled," said Tajik.

Fuel shortages have long been common in southern Iran, where authorities restrict supplies in an effort to curb widespread fuel smuggling.

But now, "the queues have become longer ... it happens that we wait in the long line for fuel only to get told 'there is none' upon arriving," Tajik said as he drove past a station where motorists waited under the punishing summer heat.

Hormuz has emerged as a central flashpoint after an April ceasefire and June framework deal failed to resolve disagreements between Washington and Tehran over the future management of the strait.

During the war, US strikes hit bridges, highways and railway infrastructure around Bandar Abbas until mid-July, in what analysts saw as attempts to cut off the city and disrupt Iranian military logistics in the south.

- 'Nothing left' -

Inside the city, under a towering concrete statue of two armed men with their arms trained towards Hormuz waters, economic strains play out in long queues snaking outside petrol stations and soaring prices squeezing shoppers in local markets.

The city's repeatedly hit airport remained largely closed until August 15, leaving travelers facing arduous road journeys, sometimes combined with flights and boat crossings.

Outside the city, construction crews still toil under the sweltering summer sun to repair the Gachin bridge, split by a US strike, as cars rumble along a dusty detour below.

Along the waterfront, traditional wooden vessels known as lenjes sit moored alongside fishing and commercial boats, part of a centuries-old trading network linking southern Iran with Arab states across the Gulf.

Arash Tondro, 45, used his lenj to carry Iranian fresh and dried fruit to the United Arab Emirates and return with household goods and other imports.

"My income dropped to zero at the beginning of the war," said Tondro, who later rerouted some trade through Oman's Khasab port as regional seaways were disrupted and "many of the lenjes were hit by drones".

After the UAE suspended trade with Iran on Tuesday following a missile attack on a ship that Tehran denied carrying out, Tondro said he was again unsure how his work would be impacted.

"People in the south mostly rely on trade or fishing. If you take the sea and trade away from them, there is practically nothing left. We don't have agriculture here; whatever there is comes from the sea," he said.

- 'No sales' -

As night falls and August's oppressive heat begins to ease, fish vendors set up along a busy street, laying out shark, tuna and shrimp as the smell of the day's catch hangs in the humid air.

Among them is 22-year-old Anoush Mallah, who recently moved onto the street after soaring rents forced him to close his shop in one of the city's bazaars.

"Business has been terrible since the war started. There are no sales, it's very weak," he told AFP.

"People are short of money. The fishermen aren't going fishing either."

Many fishermen around Bandar Abbas only began returning to sea in recent weeks, after months ashore for fear of being caught in the crossfire of US-Iran fighting.

Diplomatic efforts have so far failed to end the war. For Mallah, the uncertainty only adds to the strain.

"Let it (the war) start and get some result; right now, we're just left in limbo," he said.


The Ethiopian Dam Dispute and Egypt’s ‘Right to Self-Defense’

Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty. Photo: Foreign Ministry
Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty. Photo: Foreign Ministry
TT

The Ethiopian Dam Dispute and Egypt’s ‘Right to Self-Defense’

Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty. Photo: Foreign Ministry
Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty. Photo: Foreign Ministry

Over the past two weeks, Egypt has repeatedly stressed its right to prevent any actions by Addis Ababa on the Nile River that could harm its water interests, stressing that it possesses the “right to self-defense” over Ethiopia’s Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD).

According to experts who spoke to Asharq Al-Awsat, Egypt’s signaling means that it “will not hesitate to use all legitimate means to safeguard its water security.”

They explained that the message is a stern warning to Ethiopia and suggests that Cairo is seeking to shift from a policy of protesting Ethiopian measures to preventive deterrence, aimed at stopping the establishment of a new status quo on the Nile.

New Egyptian Warning

Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty said that “Egypt will not allow the construction of additional dams ... that affect its water interests,” stressing Cairo’s commitment to a legally binding agreement that guarantees its water rights.

In a television interview on Wednesday evening, Abdelatty said that Egypt does not oppose African countries’ right to development, noting Cairo’s participation in dam and infrastructure projects in several Nile Basin states. However, he stressed the need to balance the right to development with the rights of downstream countries.

He also underscored Egypt’s commitment to protecting its water interests. “We have the right to self-defense to protect our interests and water security,” said the minister. “We will not accept any agreement regarding the Nile River unless it is legally binding,” he reiterated.

Mohamed Hegazy, a member of the Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs and a former assistant foreign minister, says the right of self-defense is protected under international law after all peaceful means have been exhausted.

According to Hegazy, the core message is that Cairo still prefers agreement and negotiation, but it no longer accepts using negotiations to impose a fait accompli.

He argued that the most significant aspect of Abdelatty’s statements is that they send three simultaneous messages - Rejection of unilateral measures, rejection of additional dams, and insistence on the right of self-defense to protect water security.

Hussein El-Behairy, an African affairs expert at the National Center for Middle East Studies, said the minister’s recent statements reaffirm Egypt’s right to defend its historical and water rights in the Nile by whatever means the Egyptian state deems appropriate to preserve what Egyptians view as a matter of life and death.

Ethiopia’s Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). Reuters

Escalating Egyptian Position

This is the third time Egypt has signaled the possibility of using its “right to self-defense” and preventing dam construction on the Nile.

On August 16, Egypt’s state news agency quoted an unnamed Egyptian official as saying that Cairo “will neither accept nor allow any party to control the flow of Nile waters to downstream countries,” stressing that the Egyptian state possesses multiple tools capable of protecting its people’s interests in the Nile.

The statement came in response to remarks attributed to Ethiopian Minister of Water and Energy Habtamu Itefa concerning the construction of additional dams on the Nile and control over water flows to downstream states, namely Egypt and Sudan.

Earlier, on August 4, Egyptian Minister of Water Resources and Irrigation Hani Sewilam stated during a press conference that Egypt “will not allow the construction of new Ethiopian dams on the Nile River.”

He said: “It is well known that Ethiopia has plans to build additional dams, but will the Egyptian state allow this? No.”

According to Hegazy, the ball is now in Ethiopia’s court. If Addis Ababa agrees to resume serious negotiations leading to a legally binding agreement on GERD, the crisis can be contained.

However, if Ethiopia continues to create new realities on the Nile, the scope for a diplomatic solution will narrow, making risk management and deterrence a more prominent part of Egypt’s strategy.

El-Behairy does not expect the escalation to pave the way for new negotiations on GERD unless the Ethiopian government is willing to make concessions in response to Cairo’s demands. These demands include reaching a legally binding agreement that guarantees Egypt’s water rights during periods of drought and severe drought, and providing Egypt with information regarding the operation of the dam in a manner that does not harm its water interests.


Train to Nowhere? South Korea’s Lonely Push for Peace with the North

A locomotive is seen at the Woljeong-ri Station in Cheorwon, Gangwon Province, in South Korea, near the demilitarized zone separating North and South Korea on August 10, 2026. (AFP)
A locomotive is seen at the Woljeong-ri Station in Cheorwon, Gangwon Province, in South Korea, near the demilitarized zone separating North and South Korea on August 10, 2026. (AFP)
TT

Train to Nowhere? South Korea’s Lonely Push for Peace with the North

A locomotive is seen at the Woljeong-ri Station in Cheorwon, Gangwon Province, in South Korea, near the demilitarized zone separating North and South Korea on August 10, 2026. (AFP)
A locomotive is seen at the Woljeong-ri Station in Cheorwon, Gangwon Province, in South Korea, near the demilitarized zone separating North and South Korea on August 10, 2026. (AFP)

Near the heavily fortified frontier dividing the Korean peninsula, the abandoned Woljeong-ri station is being recast as a symbol of South Korea's hopes to reconcile with the North.

But plans to reconnect South Korea's northernmost station to the rail network come at an awkward moment, as Pyongyang ignores Seoul's overtures while the South's old ally Washington pursues its own talks with Pyongyang.

A turbulent few days have raised doubts about the role of South Korea in any diplomatic push, despite President Lee Jae Myung's dovish line on the North since taking power last year.

US President Donald Trump abruptly scaled back annual military drills with Seoul this week, calling them "inappropriate and hostile" towards the nuclear-armed North.

He also berated South Korea for not helping in his war against Iran and said he would meet the North's leader Kim Jong Un this year.

North Korea then fired around 10 short-range ballistic missiles on Thursday, while Kim's powerful sister mocked Seoul's "master-servant" relationship with Washington.

The developments have overshadowed the Lee administration's outreach, including the Woljeong-ri project aimed at "eventual" reconciliation.

The modest station -- originally located inside today's demilitarized zone (DMZ) -- once sat on a line linking Seoul to Wonsan, but was destroyed during the 1950-53 Korean War. It was reconstructed at its current site in the border town of Cheorwon in 1988.

It is now an attraction for visitors to the nearby DMZ separating the two countries, and the line's former terminus -- Wonsan -- lies in North Korea.

Its history, however, underscores how vulnerable such hopes are to the politics of the peninsula.

Work began in 2015 but ground to a halt just a year later after North Korea's fourth nuclear test.

The latest reboot inspires more skepticism than hope for some in Cheorwon.

"It seems like they keep trying to reconcile with North Korea (through the railway project), but from our point of view, it isn't really practical," said resident Moon Jae-yong, 70.

- Lonely push for peace -

South Korea's reconciliation program eventually aims to restore rail links, such as Woljeong-ri, with the North.

Lee has also said he is ready for talks with Pyongyang without preconditions, including on formally ending the Korean War, which concluded with an armistice.

His unification minister said in July that Seoul had shifted from prioritizing denuclearization to curbing the expansion of North Korea's nuclear program.

But Pyongyang -- emboldened by support from traditional ally China, and Russia, whose invasion of Ukraine it is backing -- has been unmoved.

It has repeatedly declared itself an "irreversible" nuclear state and labelled Seoul its "most hostile" enemy.

The US leader may be trying to revive diplomacy to record a foreign policy win ahead of November's midterm elections, with many voters disenchanted by his intervention in the Middle East.

That has sidelined Seoul, with Lee voicing respect for Trump's decision and pledging to "do his utmost" to support his peacemaking efforts.

South Korea is "reasonably afraid that it gets sidelined -- China, Russia and now America are all engaged with Pyongyang in different ways, while Seoul is not," Vladimir Tikhonov, Korean Studies professor at the University of Oslo, told AFP.

"So, Seoul is desperate to get some opening with North Korea. But it can do very little, so far."

- Impossible dream? -

That leaves the rail project standing as a symbol of South Korea's lonely push for peace.

Along the disused line from Woljeong-ri towards Baengmagoji station to the south -- the section to be restored under the peace project -- vegetation crowds both sides of the tracks, nearly swallowing a stone wall.

"The iron horse wants to run," a sign reads, alongside a phrase in English: "We want to be back on track."

Preparing infrastructure in the South now could save time if inter-Korean links are eventually restored, said Lim Eul-chul, a professor at Kyungnam University.

"But realistically, it is virtually impossible under the current circumstances, and everyone knows that," he told AFP.

With few options on North Korea, Seoul has turned to projects it can "pursue unilaterally", Lim said.

The project also aims to boost tourism along the border, where residents face frequent disruptions and security risks.

Pyongyang sent trash-filled balloons and broadcast unsettling noises across the border during the administration of Lee's hawkish predecessor, Yoon Suk Yeol.

Kim Sun-hee, 70, described them as "like scraping cement, or even ghost-like noises. It was really frightening".

A bombed-out locomotive from the Korean War remains near Woljeong-ri station as a reminder of the division.

It is "heartbreaking to see", said visitor Ahn Seung-hyun.