Leaked: US accused of betraying Kurdish forces amid mounting criticism. Sources familiar with the discussions say a meeting held in Damascus on 19 January between Mazloum Abdi and Ahmed al-Sharaa (al-Julani), attended by US envoy Tom Barrack, exposed deep divisions over the future of the Autonomous Administration in north-eastern Syria — and what Kurdish officials describe as a troubling betrayal in Washington’s stance.
According to informed sources, al-Julani demanded that the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) — the Kurdish-led force that partnered with the US in the fight against ISIS — surrender their weapons and that their fighters be absorbed into the Syrian Arab Army strictly as individuals, not as an organised force. He reportedly argued that the SDF had “outlived its purpose”, claiming that counter-terrorism would now be handled jointly by Damascus and Washington.
Al-Julani also objected to the presence of women fighters within the SDF, particularly those who do not conform to conservative dress codes, insisting that any future Syrian army would consist exclusively of men aligned with a specific ideological framework.
Abdi rejected these demands outright, stressing that gender equality is a core and non-negotiable principle of the administration he represents. He emphasised that women and men serve on equal terms within the SDF, sharing both rights and responsibilities.
Participants in the meeting described Barrack as impatient and intent on forcing a rapid agreement. He reportedly urged Abdi to show flexibility, warning that delays would complicate matters amid rising regional instability.
Abdi dismissed such gestures as betrayal while military operations against Kurdish areas continued. He made clear that he was not negotiating for personal power, but for a democratic Syria grounded in pluralism and shared national ownership. Any attempt to restore centralised, one-party rule under new labels, he warned, would be unacceptable.
Sources say al-Julani accused Abdi of inflexibility and even proposed handing over administrative and security control of Hasake and Qamişlo to him personally — an offer Abdi reportedly rejected, reiterating that Kurdish demands were rooted in collective rights and sacrifices, not transactional deals.
At another point, al-Julani reportedly demanded the dissolution of the Christian “Sutoro” forces. Abdi responded by reminding those present of a prior US-brokered agreement to integrate SDF forces as organised units — an agreement he said Damascus had violated.
When al-Julani argued that circumstances — and Washington’s position — had changed, Abdi rejected the claim, stressing that binding agreements do not dissolve with shifting political winds, noting that the American envoy himself had witnessed those commitments.
Barrack then reportedly warned of a wider regional confrontation, citing threats posed by the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) — an Iraqi state-backed militia network that previously fought ISIS alongside the SDF — and cautioned that refusal to integrate rapidly could lead to “serious losses”.
Abdi categorically rejected any proposal that would see SDF forces deployed outside Syria or used against the PMF. He stressed that Kurdish forces would not be drawn into sectarian or proxy wars driven by external agendas.
He also reminded the US envoy that the PMF had fought ISIS alongside the SDF, and that the United States itself had acknowledged their role, rejecting what he described as an attempt to turn former partners against one another for shifting geopolitical interests.
The meeting reportedly concluded with Abdi stating:
“I will return to Rojava to defend my people’s rights and our land. We will not surrender Kurdish rights in Syria — even if it costs me my life.”
The Ottoman state’s decision to arm and deploy Kurdish tribal forces against the Greeks of Asia Minor was a profound historical mistake whose consequences are evident to this day. By weaponising communal divisions for short-term control, the authorities not only enabled the destruction of ancient Greek communities but also entrenched cycles of violence, dispossession and mistrust that outlived the empire itself. The policy delivered no lasting stability: the Greeks were eradicated from Asia Minor, yet Kurdish groups—once used as instruments of state violence—were later marginalised, repressed and denied the very autonomy they had been promised. This strategy of divide and rule hollowed out social cohesion, poisoned intercommunal relations and laid the groundwork for enduring instability across Anatolia and the wider region. The legacy is clear in today’s unresolved ethnic tensions, historical grievances and recurring conflicts, demonstrating that the use of proxy violence against civilian populations may achieve immediate aims, but ultimately undermines the state, corrodes legitimacy and perpetuates insecurity for generations.
