ERBIL, Kurdistan Region - James Robbins, Institute for World Politics dean and a former special assistant in the Office of the Secretary of Defense under the George W. Bush administration, spoke to Rudaw following fierce clashes between the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and the Syrian army in Aleppo this week, calling the divisions “very damaging” to regional and Syrian stability.
Robbins said the US supports integrating the SDF into the Syrian Arab Army while protecting Kurdish rights, and maintained that Syrian infighting only benefits external actors.
He confirmed the US continues behind-the-scenes diplomacy to deescalate the conflict between the Syrian army and SDF.
Robbins also said the US would likely reject Turkey's demands to disarm the SDF given the group’s key counterterrorism role.
This interview has been lightly edited for clarity.
Rudaw: I'd like to start with the latest developments, the [government] Syrian Arab Army are moving towards Deir Hafer. As you know, the SDF forces are located in that area. What is your reading of these developments and what can be expected?
Robbins: Well, the United States is interested in maintaining the stability of the region, number one. This infighting that occurred recently between the Syrian National Forces and the SDF was very damaging to the process of creating stability and peace in Syria. It's good that the two sides have disengaged and that the United States was able to mediate a ceasefire and a disengagement, and these types of fights only benefit the external forces. They don't benefit the Syrian people; only outsiders like to see this type of fighting.
So the United States would like to see in the future an implementation of the agreement from March of last year, where the various forces can come together under the single banner inside Syria, while at the same time maintaining the rights of the minority communities inside Syria and in this case, particularly the Kurdish groups who need to have their rights maintained. So that's really the US perspective.
You mentioned the US mediating for the ceasefire over Syria. But, you know, we saw the US silent during the conflicts in the Sheikh Maqsood and Ashrafiyeh neighborhoods. Why was the US silent [about] these conflicts?
Well, again, the United States wants to be a trusted mediator. It's really sad when there are friends on both sides and they're fighting. The United States has been working with the Kurdish groups for over a decade in the anti-terrorism fight against ISIS, and have very good relationships, and would like to see the rights of the Kurdish groups inside Syria maintained and honored by the new government.
At the same time, the United States wants to see the success of the new government and has tried to set up a framework whereby all of the groups can work together towards a future of prosperity inside Syria. So if the United States was silent, it was simply because it's a very difficult issue that requires careful mediation amongst our diplomats.
The end result seems to be good. I mean, it seems like a ceasefire is holding. It seems like the rights of the people inside Aleppo are being honored, and hopefully we can continue that. But I am certain that the United States is continuing its mediation and diplomatic efforts behind the scenes, even if there aren't public statements coming out every day.
OK but what type of ceasefire? … I'll start with this question: the Syrian Arab Army forces moved toward Deir Hafer. This is not a ceasefire, right?
Well, it's true that there's still some fighting going on. But again, the United States is against this and would like to see all sides … stop the fighting. Again, only external forces - whoever they may be - benefit from this type of infighting. It doesn't help the Syrian people. It doesn't help the Kurdish people inside Syria. This type of division can only be in the interest of outsiders. So to the extent that there's still some fighting going on the United States is trying to make sure that it stops.
Okay, moving Syrian Arab Army forces toward any other area of Syria and [triggering] conflicts and tensions with the Kurdish army forces - [how does this] affect the reactivation of ISIS?
Well, this requires a political solution, ultimately. The United States is still committed to the anti-terrorism fight against ISIS and will and will continue that strongly with its allied groups in the region, particularly the SDF. And you know, one hopes that the on the political side that a resolution can be achieved. ISIS obviously is not going to be part of that political resolution. ISIS has been driven out of the country.
I want to ask a question about the friendship between US and Kurdish forces, the SDF. [Will it continue] or will it end? Because we saw the stopping or silence of the US at the battle of Masood and Ashrafiyeh [Kurdish majority neighborhoods in Aleppo.]
The US and SDF have been working together for some time. I think that there's a very good relationship there, and I know that the White House doesn't want to see anything that will negatively affect the US Kurdish partners inside Syria.
So again, what you're interpreting is silence. There's diplomacy going on behind the scenes. The United States is trying to create conditions whereby this violence no longer happens. Again, it's a political question.
And I think the United States has been effective in trying to bring about a decline in the violence. Yes, there's still some going on, but [US Envoy to Syria] Ambassador [Tom] Barrack has made statements saying that both sides need to stop their violence in the area and work towards an integration of the armed forces of Syria into one command.
So that would go a long way to solving the political differences. But it's also bearing in mind that the rights of the Kurdish people inside Syria need to be honored, and that people need to be able to live in peace and security. I mean, it's a difficult solution to this problem, but the pathway is clear, and that's what the United States has been working on.
The attack on these two Kurdish neighborhoods came after the meeting between the delegations of Syria and Israel in Paris. According to the media [reports], there is an intelligence agreement between these two countries. The question is, what did the Syrian authority agree to do with Israel and Turkey in exchange for removing, or moving out, the internal security forces from Sheikh Maqsood and Ashrafiyeh neighborhoods.
Well, this is what I was talking about external forces being interested in the fighting. Whether there was such an agreement is unclear. I mean, there have been reports like that. But what's clear is that if there is fighting between, say, the Syrian National Army and the SDF - that it does not benefit Syria. And such external agreements or interference, if it exists, should not happen. I know that the United States is against any kind of external interference within Syria, because it doesn't benefit the Syrian people.
So while it's unclear whether such side deals were being made, what is clear is that such deals should not be made - that the main parties should be the only ones that are negotiating peaceful progress, and peaceful means towards progress.
And the key issue is the integration of the SDF under the umbrella of a larger Syrian force. How that happens whether they maintain their autonomy or whatever the format takes, that's really the main thing that needs to be negotiated.
And any kind of external interference in this process is something that's against the interests of Syria and definitely against the interests of the United States.
There was some footage of violence against the Kurdish fighters by the Syrian Arab Army … A [female] Kurdish fighter [was] thrown from a high building by the Syrian Arab Army. [Yet] a European delegation gave $700 million to Damascus for reconstruction. How do you read that, the $700 million for reconstruction?