Syria is now moving towards reunification. Thanks to the recent successful operations of the Syrian army, the SDF/YPG forces, which had occupied vast territories in the east of the country, have capitulated and accepted the demands of the new Syrian government.
Regarding the recent developments, Turkish security expert Yücel Karauz stated in his comments to Modern.az that the clashes in recent weeks have fundamentally changed the situation in the region:
"In particular, the clashes in critical points such as the Hasakah line and the detention camp infrastructure revealed the lack of coordination, mutual distrust, and the fragility of command-and-control transitions. When this fragility is combined with the risk of escape and reorganization from the camps where ISIS members and their families are held, the regime's claim of “sustainable security” in the areas it has reclaimed is seriously weakened".
According to the expert, the main conditions for lasting stability in Syria are concentrated in 2 directions:
Security architecture: Integration of local armed forces, establishment of a unified chain of command, and effective intelligence sharing.
Political reconciliation: If a real “social contract” is not formed on issues such as local governance, language and identity rights, and revenue sharing in Kurdish regions, low-intensity conflicts will continue.
The expert emphasized that it is partially, not entirely, true that the influence of YPG/SDF has largely diminished:
"Because the reduction or withdrawal of US support on the military front, coupled with Damascus's pressure to expand its control, narrows the YPG/SDF's maneuverability. For this reason, the military weight of the terrorist organization is decreasing. The most critical point concerns ISIS camps and prisons. Any vacuum in this area brings the question “who provides security?” to the center of the process".
Y. Karauz believes that the complete withdrawal of YPG/SDF from the region is the most difficult scenario:
"Three more realistic options exist. The first scenario is integration or re-labeling. That is, it is possible for a part of the group to be incorporated into the system under the name of “Syrian army” or “local security forces” (the name changes, the personnel remain). The second option is related to fragmentation. Some groups may reach an agreement with Damascus, while others may withdraw and turn to sabotage, assassination, and smuggling networks. And finally, the integration of radical groups into northern Iraq, especially into structures close to the Qandil–Sinjar line, is among the realistic options".
The retired general explained where terrorist groups would head if they left the region and what this would mean for the security of the region, as well as Turkey:
"Terrorist groups like the YPG/SDF in Syria could go to northern Iraq, grey zones within Syria, Europe, and third countries. Due to geographical continuity, logistics lines, and existing networks, the most realistic direction is Northern Iraq. This could complicate both the Baghdad–Erbil balance and Turkey's border security. In Europe and third countries, they could establish political and financial networks. Thus, rather than direct engagement on the ground, they will pursue a “remote influence” strategy through propaganda, financing, and the diaspora".
The expert also spoke about the main risks from a regional security perspective:
"One of the main threats is the resurgence of ISIS. Security gaps and the fragility of the camp/prison system could create new opportunities for ISIS. On the other hand, the main risks that will emerge include the start of a period of cross-border terror and retaliatory strikes, and the potential for a resurgence of conflict dynamics along the Turkey–Syria–Iraq line. Smuggling, human and goods trafficking, and the struggle over local revenue sources could also intensify".
