HTS-SDF agreement: Reactions, expectations and tasks

At a time when reactions were growing against the massacres of Alawites in the cities in the west of the country by the HTS forces, which are in charge of the interim administration in Syria, news came that an agreement had been signed between the HTS administration and the SDF (Syrian Democratic Forces). This agreement, which sets the framework for the form and process of Kurdish participation in the new government in Syria, has also led to some reactions against the SDF among those who are outraged by the massacres of the HTS. In fact, this agreement was a breathing space for HTS and Colani, who were in serious trouble because of the massacres. However, considering that the guarantor of this agreement is the US imperialism, with which the Kurds continue to cooperate, it is not difficult to understand that its timing was not incalculable. Therefore, it is important for the labourer and people's forces who want democracy and peace for the country and the region to read the process correctly and focus on their own duties and responsibilities before reacting against the Kurds.

Before turning to the content of the HTS-SDF agreement, it is important to note the following: This agreement was signed after the meeting between the US Central Command (CENTCOM) commander Kurilla and the SDF commander Mazlum Abdi after his visits to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Israel. In this regard, we can say that the HTS-SDF agreement is a continuation of the US imperialism's policy of reshaping the region (Middle East) around Israel and the Gulf countries. The timing of the agreement was based on a two-dimensional calculation, such as forcing Colani, whose international support had decreased due to the massacres, to reach an agreement within a framework desired by the USA and to give Colani a breathing space.

If we look at the agreement, the framework of which was determined on the basis of 8 articles, it is clear that the article "Supporting the fight against the remnants of Assad and all threats to security and unity" was included in the text on the basis of the needs and demands of the HTS, which wants to create a space of legitimacy for itself in the face of the massacres.

The most controversial point in the text of the agreement is 'the integration of all civilian and military institutions in north-eastern Syria into the state administration, including border crossings, airports, oil and gas fields'. This is because Erdogan's government in Turkey and its supporters read this article as the liquidation of the SDF and the abandonment of the areas it controls. Kurdish forces, however, say that this article means the integration of the SDF and its military and civilian institutions into the central administration. Considering the US and Israel's position to continue their cooperation with the Kurds, it is clear that this article aims at a compromise between the SDF and the HTS leadership on the basis of mutual concessions (SDF joining the Syrian army on the basis of regular troops, joint control of ISIS camps and prisons, sharing of oil and natural gas revenues, etc.).

The text also contains articles that emphasise democratic rights, such as 'guaranteeing the right to representation and political participation on the basis of merit, regardless of religious or ethnic origin' and 'recognising the Kurdish community as an integral part of Syria and guaranteeing its constitutional rights'.

Of course, the extent to which the HTS regime, which committed massacres against Alawites at the first opportunity, will accept these democratic rights is a serious question mark, and it is necessary to wait for the constitutional text to be prepared to answer this question. PYD foreign relations spokesman Salih Muslim says that these articles of the agreement are/will be democratic gains not only for the Kurds, but also for the Alawites, Druze and Yazidis - which places an important responsibility on the Kurds, who represent the democratic side of the agreement against HTS, in terms of the participation of these forces in the process.

The most critical article of the agreement is Article 8, which states that 'committees will work on the implementation of the agreement until the end of the year'. The work of these committees will determine how much of the agreement will be implemented or not.

This agreement allows the US imperialism to keep the HTS under control and to continue its cooperation with the Kurds, which it needs in the regional construction, within certain limits and in a way adapted to the new era. At the same time, this step, which is in line with Ocalan's call for the dissolution of the PKK, serves to make it easier for Trump to negotiate with Erdoğan and to bind Turkey more closely to its political axis in the Caucasus, the Black Sea, the Eastern Mediterranean and the Balkans.

It is clear that although there is a text of agreement between the HTS and the SDF, the balances in the region and the power relations between the parties will determine which articles of this text will be implemented and to what extent.

At this point, the question of what attitude the forces of labour and democracy should take in the face of these developments gains importance. In his theses on the right of nations to self-determination, written in 1916, Lenin points out the limits of solving democratic problems such as the national question under imperialism: "Under the conditions of imperialism, not only the right of nations to self-determination, but all the basic demands of political democracy can only be partially realised, and then only in a distorted and exceptional way. However, he goes on to say that this does not mean that socialists should 'abandon the urgent and decisive struggle for all these demands', but rather that they should 'extend and intensify the struggle for all kinds of basic democratic demands'.

Undoubtedly, today we are facing a political situation in which the imperialists and regional reactionaries, from the Kurdish question to the massacres against the Alevis and Christian minorities, raise all kinds of democratic rights and problems on the basis of their own interests and try to instrumentalise them for these interests. In such a political situation, it is not surprising that there are many developments, such as the agreement between HTS and SDF, which confuse the forces of labour and democracy and even cause reactions. However, this situation does not change the fact that there is no way to eliminate this confusion unless the forces of labour, democracy and the people ensure the broadest unity of the struggle for the basic democratic rights. Because we can only eliminate the developments that we do not like by ensuring the strength and unity of a struggle that can change them. This is what the political tasks of the forces of labour and democracy should focus on today.