This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/17/world/middleeast/syria-kurds.html

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Syrian Kurds Hope to Establish a Federal Region in Country’s North Syrian Kurds Hope to Establish a Federal Region in Country’s North
(about 2 hours later)
BEIRUT, Lebanon — Syrian Kurdish parties are working on a plan to declare a federal region across much of northern Syria, several of their representatives said on Wednesday, to formalize the semiautonomous zone they have established during five years of war and to create a model for decentralized government throughout the country. BEIRUT, Lebanon — Syrian Kurdish parties are working on a plan to declare a federal region across much of northern Syria, several of their representatives said on Wednesday. They said their aim was to formalize the semiautonomous zone they have established during five years of war and to create a model for decentralized government throughout the country.
The move, still under discussion by Kurdish and other parties in the area, would fall well short of declaring independence, and it would most likely rile the Syrian government and the main Arab-led opposition group. They have both declared their opposition to federalism, seeing it as a step toward carving up Syria. If they move ahead with the plan, they will be dipping a toe into the roiling waters of debate over two proposals to redraw the Middle East map, each with major implications for Syria and its neighbors.
It would also be likely to intensify Turkish concerns over the growing areas of Syria along its border that are controlled by a Syrian-Kurdish militia. Turkey considers Kurdish groups its most dangerous enemy after years of conflict with its own Kurdish population. One is the longstanding aspiration of Kurds across the region to a state of their own or, failing that, greater autonomy in the countries where they are concentrated: Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria, all of which view such prospects with varying degrees of horror.
But Russia has said it supports such a system. The United States has also pushed for decentralization, and it has presided over the establishment of an autonomous regional government in Iraq. The other is the idea of settling the Syrian civil war by carving up the country, whether into rump states or, more likely, into some kind of federal system. The proposal for a federal system has lately been floated by former Obama administration officials and publicly mulled over by Secretary of State John Kerry, but rejected not only by the Syrian government but by much of the opposition as well.
The Syrian Kurdish plans come as a new round of peace talks is underway in Geneva, talks that both Russia and the United States have pushed for in their efforts to broker a political solution to the Syrian civil war. Both of the global powers have backed Kurdish aspirations. Russia has lately been advocating Syrian Kurds to have a greater role in the talks. The United States has supported Iraq’s Kurds for decades, and it has been arming and offering air support to Kurdish-led Syrian groups to fight against the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL. What Syrian Kurdish officials described was likely to alarm many of the other Syrian combatants: a federal region on all the territory now held by the Syrian Democratic Forces, a Kurdish-led group supported by the United States military against the Islamic State militant group, also known as ISIS or ISIL. Some of the officials said it would even expand to territory the Kurds hope to capture in battle, not only from ISIS but also from other Arab insurgent groups — some of them, like the Syrian Democratic Forces, backed by the United States.
Kurdish officials said that federalism, not just for their areas but for all of Syria, is the only way to keep the country from disintegrating. They emphasized that the entity would not be called a Kurdish region but rather a federal region of northern Syria, where Arabs and Turkmen would have equal rights. But Syrian Kurdish officials sought to play down the move, saying it was nothing radical and portraying it as an effort to keep an already tattered, bloody and divided Syria from disintegrating further.
“Federalism is going to save the unity of a whole Syria,” said Ibrahim Ibrahim, a spokesman for the Democratic Union Party, or P.Y.D., the leftist Syrian Kurdish party that plays a leading role in the Kurdish areas of Syria.“Federalism is going to save the unity of a whole Syria,” said Ibrahim Ibrahim, a spokesman for the Democratic Union Party, or P.Y.D., the leftist Syrian Kurdish party that plays a leading role in the Kurdish areas of Syria.
He cautioned that the details of the federal region were still being discussed and that there was no date for announcing it. The discussion is about the possibility of a federal system not only for Kurdish-majority areas but for all of Syria, according to Mr. Ibrahim and three other officials and P.Y.D. members, who were all briefed on the talks or participated in them.
The zone would include all of the areas controlled by the Syrian Democratic Forces, a group led by and largely made up of Kurdish militias, but also including Turkmen and Arab fighters, said Idris Nassan, a Kurdish politician in the Syrian town of Kobani, near the Turkish border. They emphasized that the entity would not be called a Kurdish region but rather a federal region of northern Syria, where Arabs and Turkmens would have equal rights.
Several dozen Kurdish parties and other organizations from the area, including Arab and Turkmen representatives, have met in Hasaka, in northern Syria, to decide on the details of a formal declaration, Mr. Naasan said. And they strongly hinted that it was not their idea, but that it was being pushed by the Americans and other powers. A former senior administration official, Philip Gordon, and others recently floated a proposal to divide Syria into zones roughly corresponding to areas now held by the government, the Islamic State, Kurdish militias and other insurgents.
The United States views the Syrian Democratic Forces as its most effective ally on the ground in its fight against the Islamic State. But Arab opposition groups, including some of the rebel factions also supported by the United States and its allies, view them with suspicion because of the de facto nonaggression pact they have long had with the Syrian government. The Kurdish discussions about northern Syria are becoming public just as a new round of United Nations-sponsored peace talks, heavily promoted by the United States and Russia, gets underway in Geneva, aiming to broker a political solution to the Syrian civil war.
The group’s main fighting force is the Y.P.G., the Kurdish abbreviation for the People’s Protection Units, which Turkey sees as an extension of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or P.K.K., a separatist Kurdish group declared a terrorist organization by both Turkey and the United States. The Syrian Kurdish move — still under discussion by Kurdish and other parties in the area — would fall well short of declaring independence. But it is still likely to rile both the Syrian government and the main Arab-led opposition group, the High Negotiation Committee. They have both declared their opposition to federalism, seeing it as a step toward a permanent division of the country.
Nawaf Xelil, a former spokesman for the Democratic Union Party, the Syrian Kurdish leftist group that organized the Y.P.G., said that the autonomous region would be for all of northern Syria and would guarantee equal rights for Arabs and Turkmen. It would also be likely to intensify Turkish concerns over the growing areas of Syria along its border that are controlled by a Syrian-Kurdish militia. Turkey considers Kurdish groups its most dangerous enemy after years of conflict with its own Kurdish population.
Asked what would happen to areas of northern Syria currently controlled by insurgents — Islamic State in eastern Aleppo Province and, to the west, a range of groups from the Qaeda-linked Nusra Front to United States-backed rebels — he said that the aim was to “liberate” those areas. But Russia has said it supports such a system. The United States has also pushed for decentralization, and it has presided over the establishment of an autonomous regional Kurdish government in Iraq.
Any Kurdish drive to seize those areas would be certain to bring a response from Turkey, which sees a segment of insurgent-held northern Aleppo Province as a buffer zone, preventing the Kurds from unifying the two blocks of Syria they already control. The Syrian Democratic Forces have taken some of the area from insurgent groups, which view those advances as conquering rebel areas on behalf of the government with the help of Russian airstrikes. Both of the global powers have backed Kurdish aspirations. Russia has lately been advocating for Syrian Kurds to have a greater role in the Geneva talks. The United States has supported Iraq’s Kurds for decades and has been arming and offering air support to Kurdish-led Syrian groups to fight against the Islamic State.
The Syrian Kurds may even be seen as too modest in their demands by their counterparts in neighboring countries.
Kurdish ambitions for a state — they say they are the world’s largest ethnic group without one — have been stoked by the America invasion of Iraq, and then the chaos of the Arab Spring revolts and the value of Kurdish fighters to the American-led forces fighting the Islamic State in both Syria and Iraq.
Some Kurds in Iraq have been agitating for a new push for statehood to coincide with the 100th anniversary in May of the Sykes-Picot Agreement that divided the Middle East among the colonial powers along often illogical boundaries.
But Syrian Kurds have always stressed that they want only the right to local autonomy in Syria. Their fragile alliance with some of the Arabs and Turkmens in Kurdish-majority areas depends on that. One Turkmen group taking part in the discussions put out a statement on Wednesday saying that it supported the federal region that would most likely be approved.
As for the rest of Syria, federalization could prove far more complicated. It is hard to conceive of Washington approving a plan that would formally establish areas still run by the Islamic State as part of a Syrian federation.
The government-held area stretches in a relatively distinct bloc from Damascus north through Homs and the coast, but only a narrow strip of territory connects it to the government-held part of Aleppo, Syria’s largest city. And while most of the country’s population is there, many moved to the region to avoid airstrikes, and do not necessarily support the government of President Bashar al-Assad.
The area held by insurgents apart from the Islamic State includes both Western-backed rebels and the Nusra Front, an offshoot of Al Qaeda, with a range of Islamist groups in between. They are currently tussling for control of various parts of their territory in Aleppo and Idlib Provinces.
Mr. Ibrahim, who acts as a spokesman in Europe for the P.Y.D., cautioned that the details of the federal region were still being discussed and that there was no date set for announcing them.
The zone would include all of the areas controlled by the Syrian Democratic Forces, a group led by and largely made up of Kurdish militias, but also including Turkmens and Arab fighters, said Idris Nassan, a Kurdish politician in the Syrian town of Kobani, near the Turkish border.
Kurdish groups have made no secret of their plans to “liberate” areas in northern Syria currently held by rebel groups, the Islamic State and the Nusra Front. But any Kurdish drive to seize those areas would be certain to bring a response from Turkey, which sees a segment of insurgent-held northern Aleppo Province as a buffer zone, preventing the Kurds from unifying the two blocks of Syria they already control.
A Turkish official, speaking on the condition of anonymity in accordance with protocol, did not comment about the buffer zone, but affirmed that Turkey was still in favor of a single, unified Syria and rejected any notion of a federation. He said all parts of Syrian society should decide the future structure of the country along with a new constitution as part of a political process.A Turkish official, speaking on the condition of anonymity in accordance with protocol, did not comment about the buffer zone, but affirmed that Turkey was still in favor of a single, unified Syria and rejected any notion of a federation. He said all parts of Syrian society should decide the future structure of the country along with a new constitution as part of a political process.