SDF-Interim Govt agreement eases tensions, Iran faces choice between strike, negotiation

Observers noted that the agreement signed between the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and the Interim Government in Syria marks a pivotal step in preventing a new military confrontation in the country, at a time when debate is intensifying over the likelihood of a “limited strike” between the United States and Iran. Meanwhile, indirect negotiation channels continue, amid differences within Washington and Tehran over the escalation ceiling and the chances of reaching an agreement that could spare the region from a wider conflict.

SDF-Interim Govt agreement eases tensions, Iran faces choice between strike, negotiation
13 February, 2026   11:10
NEWSDESK 

This morning’s newspapers covered the agreement reached between the Syrian Democratic Forces and the Interim Government in Syria, as well as the rising debate over the potential confrontation between the United States and Iran.

On the Negotiation Table

Okaz newspaper considered the agreement between the Interim Government in Syria and the SDF as a model for prioritizing political solutions over the logic of war, emphasizing that wars reflect a failure to manage disagreements, while resorting to dialogue remains the least costly option for the population.

The newspaper noted that the recent understanding defused a potential conflict that could have opened a new chapter in the civil war, stressing that negotiation remains the safest way to prevent Syria from sliding into further chaos.

What Would a War with Iran Look Like?

Al-Arab newspaper addressed possible scenarios of a military confrontation between Washington and Tehran, suggesting that the most likely outcome is not a full-scale invasion, but rather a limited and calculated strike aimed at reshaping the terms of negotiation. It added that US military reinforcements in the Middle East coincide with ongoing indirect negotiation channels, describing this as “militarizing diplomacy,” where the threat of force is used to improve negotiation terms, not to cancel them.

The newspaper explained that the debate in Washington revolves around one camp that calls for exploiting what it perceives as a decline in Iran’s deterrence to extract broader concessions, and another that prefers to use existing pressures to reach a political agreement without sliding into a prolonged war, especially amid domestic considerations for US President Donald Trump.

From “Death to America” to Betting on Negotiation: Shocking Shifts in Iranian Public Mood

Annahar newspaper focused on shifts in Iranian public sentiment toward negotiations with the United States, noting that political and societal positions have undergone notable changes following recent protests and security escalations.

It highlighted that indirect negotiation rounds in Muscat have sparked internal divisions, between those fearing that any agreement would strengthen the regime’s grip, and those seeing it as an opportunity to ease economic pressures and avoid a military confrontation.

A-H 

ANHA