Stagnation of March 10 agreement between military focus, marginalization of rights

The March 10, 2025 agreement was signed in Damascus between the Syrian Democratic Forces and the transitional government in Syria, aimed at enhancing national unity, ensuring constitutional rights, ceasing hostilities, facilitating the return of displaced persons, and managing vital resources.
Despite the agreement topping the agenda of international meetings, including those at the White House and trilateral meetings involving the United States, Turkey, and the transitional government, and despite international support for its implementation, national and media discourse around the agreement remained limited, often focusing on the military-security aspect represented by the integration of the Syrian Democratic Forces into official structures.

In reality, the follow-up on the implementation of the other seven key provisions faced a clear stagnation and did not receive the same level of media or political attention.

 Among the most prominent of these items:

Rights of political participation and non-discriminatory citizenship for all Syrians, including full recognition of the Kurdish component and ensuring the constitutionality of its rights, which has been absent from official and legal discussions.

A ceasefire across all Syrian territories, which has not materialized into tangible implementation on the ground, amid ongoing military tensions in various regions of the country, including the continued targeting of areas and positions of the Syrian Democratic Forces by the transitional government forces.

Integrating civilian institutions, including border crossings, airports, and oil and gas fields, as these areas remain outside the framework of actual implementation.

The return of the displaced and ensuring their protection, despite the country's urgent need for this issue after years of displacement and destruction.
Supporting counter-terrorism efforts as part of national unity, which is a broad framework that has not seen clear practical steps in policy development at the security or social level.

While the military-security integration clause was a prominent focus in official statements, the social, political, and economic clauses remained marginalized in media and presidential discourse, prompting some observers to say that "the discussion was limited to the military aspect only, while the rest of the agreement remained a low priority."

Reasons for the stalemate and the echo of field events

Media reports have indicated that progress in implementing the agreement has faced obstacles on the ground, including differing viewpoints between the parties regarding the mechanisms of implementation and a waning political momentum after the signing. Clear timelines for the provisions were also not established, which led to a noticeable slowdown in official procedures, despite the readiness of representatives from North and East Syria.

This stagnation has emerged with the continuation of military operations in parts of Syria, including the attacks witnessed in North and East regions of the country, carried out by the transitional government forces and factions recently engaged under its military umbrella, as well as other acts of violence in the south, such as in Sweida, in addition to tensions in areas with diverse sectarian and demographic compositions.

These events are evidence that the battlefield has not yet transitioned to a state of complete stability thru which comprehensive political agreements can be implemented.

Turkey's role in the discussion about the agreement's key points

In the same context, the continuous statements of Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan indicate that part of the implementation of the agreement has been framed within the context of Turkish pressure on North and East Syria.

On the other hand, officials in the Turkish authorities, including Erdoğan and Hakan Fidan, adopt positions demanding the full integration of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) within the Syrian state under certain conditions and within a unified security framework, raising discussions about whether the focus of some regional parties on a specific aspect of the agreement contributes to delaying the implementation of other provisions.

The March 10, 2025 agreement remains an important political milestone in the course of the Syrian crisis, but according to observers, it remains contingent upon comprehensive implementation that goes beyond the military-security dimension to include citizenship rights, resource management, displacement resolution, ceasefire, and broad political participation.

They assert that the absence of clear discussion and action regarding these provisions in the media and government discourse so far indicates that the country still faces significant challenges in turning the agreement into a tangible reality that serves the comprehensive stability and unity of Syria.

ANHA