Syria, Kurds, and Transitional Justice

Dedication

On May 3, 2025, we lost a critical figure in the struggle for peace and democracy in Turkey. Sırrı Süreyya Önder was not only a representative of peace processes and an influential artist, but also gave hope and strength to millions of oppressed people, from the working class to Kurds to LGBTI+ communities. This article is dedicated to his memory, in the hope that one day we can all see each other through the compassionate eyes he had. Oxir be.

Five months after the fall of the Assad regime, Syria’s future remains uncertain. Daily developments reshape the region’s political landscape. Negotiations continue between Haya’at Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS), the Rojava administration, and other stakeholders. However, disturbing reports of violence persist, including persecution of Alawites and torture of transgender individuals in HTS-controlled areas. Despite these human rights abuses, HTS continues its push for international legitimacy.

Amid this shifting balance of power, Syria’s path forward remains contested: Will it lean toward renewed authoritarianism, evolve into a pluralistic democracy, or settle for a compromise influenced by external powers? Transitional justice (TJ)—a framework grounded in human rights—offers a path toward genuine peace and inclusion. Effective TJ requires embracing all Syrian groups, including the Kurdish-led Democratic Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (DAANES), or Rojava.

Transitional Justice for Kurds

Transitional justice fosters peace, justice, and coexistence in societies torn apart by conflict, particularly in regions where significant societal fractures or human rights violations have occurred. It rests on four key pillars: truth, justice for past atrocities, reparations for victims, and the prevention of future abuses. Without adequately addressing these, Syria risks further cycles of violence and discrimination.

Indeed, there is still a long way to go in applying this to the Syrian process. What we have learned from examples worldwide clearly shows that every case is unique. Recognizing and addressing those unique characteristics is crucial for a comprehensive peace and justice framework. Yet, Syria’s unique challenges complicate the application of TJ. Political agendas within interim governments, the Kurdish administration, and foreign powers often conflict, potentially marginalizing local needs and voices crucial for genuine justice. Although this might mean that Syrians and people living worldwide may have the opportunity to push for a more inclusive Syria, such interference might hinder local, heterogeneous voices and needs, which may be the only way to establish justice.

Central to these debates is whether HTS will recognize the rights and identity of Kurds, whose historical marginalization has often gone unaddressed. The first step of recognition must begin with understanding the Kurdish context. Both Westerners and the regional powers perceive Kurds through a reductionist, orientalist lens. Kurds are either viewed as extensions of populous peoples such as Arabs, Persians, and Turks, or their culture, language, and political rights are insufficiently recognized.

Kurdish History and Identity

Comprehending Kurdish identity necessitates an exploration of two interrelated political and sociological contexts. Due to realpolitik and recent history, Kurds are a key component of Syria. Historically, Kurdish movements have championed democratization over separatism, as demonstrated by Rojava’s inclusive governance approach, which collaborates closely with Arabs, Syriacs, Turkmens, and Yazidis.

At the same time, Kurds are part of another context that goes beyond Syria for many historical, political, and sociological reasons. This context can also be called the Kurdistan context. It is evident that before rigid nation-state borders, Syrian Kurds have preserved strong familial and cultural bonds with Kurdish communities in Turkey and Iraq. Years of systemic discrimination and violence, particularly heightened during the emergence of ISIS, have reinforced these transnational ties.

The social dynamic between Kurds and Syrian Arabs has deteriorated due to the extensive violations of fundamental rights and the abuses that Kurds have endured since the early republican era up until 2011. Furthermore, the ongoing discrimination faced by Kurds in neighboring countries has impacted the Kurdish issue. After the rise of ISIS, the Rojava Autonomous Administration’s interactions with Kurdish movements in Iraq and Turkey motivated Syrian Kurds to establish solidarity with these communities. During the ISIS assaults on Kurdish regions, Iraqi and Turkey Kurds offered significant help in combating ISIS.

In essence, the Kurds’ self-identification as part of both Syria and the larger Kurdish context comes from their historical experiences, particularly concerning Arab nationalism and the prevailing monolithic viewpoint, which is the only thing that has not been destroyed in the 14 years of conflict. The Kurdish challenge emerges from decades of Arab nationalist policies and governance frameworks that have disregarded Syria’s diverse societal fabric.

Acknowledging this dual identity is essential. For Syria’s transitional justice to be unique and therefore practicable, it must tackle both local integration and the wider cultural and historical contexts relevant to the Kurdish population. It also involves moving away from the Arab-centric framework of the previous government.

This conversation about identity holds significant importance. If the anticipated transitional justice in Syria is to offer true justice for Kurds, it is crucial to understand and authentically consider their distinct needs. Achieving lasting and effective peace for everyone in Syria hinges on addressing the requirements arising from both of these contexts. At this preliminary stage of the process, it is essential to emphasize that for the transition to be inclusive of all Syrians, the Damascus government must adopt a different political stance compared to that of its predecessor and acknowledge that Syria is not solely an Arab nation.

Turbulent Process and Vague Transition

Certainly, not every case of conflict has a clear transition. TJ can also be discussed in the context of aparadigmatic cases, such as ongoing conflicts, occupied territories, and stable or unstable democracies. Current events, such as massacres of Alawites, competing international and regional interests, and ambiguous relations between Damascus and minority groups, illustrate this uncertainty. Establishing effective TJ mechanisms may take decades, marked by instability and setbacks.

Building societal resilience is vital. Although it is not a widely held view, understanding the longevity and volatility of these processes enhances societal resilience. Communities must increase dialogue, share experiences, and foster inclusive public spaces. Yazidis, who have historically endured repeated genocides (74 times throughout their history) yet preserved cultural resilience through communal and religious practices, offer valuable insights for other Syrian communities seeking durable peace.

Co-constructing Societal and Legislative Foundations

Kurdish issue in Syria, much like in other countries, arises from the denial of Kurdish existence, language, and culture. To resolve this issue, it is essential to address the historical denial of Kurdish identity on both the state and societal levels. Solutions that only focus on state interventions are inadequate, as they may alienate victims by relying on legalistic and elitist approaches. Critiques of mainstream transitional justice (TJ) mechanisms are relevant here; overly legalistic methods, dominated by the state and ruling elites, often fail to resonate with society and may overlook the experiences of victims, in this case, the Kurds. 

While nationalist ideologies are prevalent among Syrian Arabs, the deep-seated insecurities embedded in the collective memory of the Kurdish people remain vivid. Therefore, it is crucial to incorporate transitional justice frameworks at the societal level as well. A significant step toward this goal is to emphasize coexistence and equal citizenship, creating the necessary mechanisms to support this vision. Imposing peace and justice from above, rather than fostering it from the grassroots level, risks perpetuating the root causes of conflict in the long run. 

Particularly, alternative approaches to retributive justice, such as restorative justice, demonstrate that in countries like South Africa, Ireland, and Rwanda, political violence or segregation have somehow re-emerged. This resurgence has often stemmed from transitional justice practices that were not sufficiently integrated into society.

Local Practices over Foreign Models

In the Syrian context, rather than a structured transition guided by the conventional pillars of transitional justice (TJ), we are witnessing a fluid and unpredictable process shaped by a wide range of both legitimate and non-legitimate actors. Syrian Kurds have a range of political views on the future of Rojava, despite their collective memory and shared struggle having predominantly led to a demand for federalism at the minimum level.

Syria’s transitional process should prioritize flexible, community-driven practices rather than rigid foreign frameworks. Like all the other cases, Kurdish communities have also diverse justice needs shaped by numerous intersecting experiences such as sexual violence, linguistic and cultural oppression, or wartime disabilities. Addressing these varied injustices requires culturally relevant approaches.

It is essential to act on grounded principles rather than adapting dogmatic TJ mechanisms. Although cultural codes influence practices such as truth commissions, reparations, and memorialization, there is a need for locally emerging practices that are shaped within the framework of transitional justice (TJ) principles. In global examples, many mechanisms aimed at social confrontation—usually rooted in restorative justice principles—have emerged locally without precedent. Local reconciliation practices, such as Kurdish Rûspî or Arab Sulha methods, offer valuable models. Similar approaches have successfully promoted collective and individualistic reconciliation in Rwanda and Sierra Leone. Embracing these local mechanisms, supported by fundamental TJ principles, can create inclusive justice processes sensitive to local realities and intersectional needs.

Echoes of an Unending Discussion

The primary challenge in Syria involves shaping a justice process guided by grassroots mobilization and human rights norms rather than relying solely on conventional transitional justice (TJ) pillars. A victim-centered, bottom-up approach is essential. Justice must be defined by the Kurdish people’s lived experiences and articulated needs.

Retributive justice alone is insufficient for addressing the complexities of the Kurdish experience. Frameworks such as restorative justice, which recognize justice as a social phenomenon and open more space for the perpetrator and the victim, might be helpful in such contexts. The extraordinary harm caused by war needs to be addressed by solutions that do not rely on ordinary time settlements. Approaches emphasizing collective reconciliation and public involvement offer a more effective path. Justice should unfold in accessible public spaces, fostering community-level reconciliation essential for sustainable peace. Only in Syria, where justice is brought to the streets and accessible to all, can we talk about sustainable peace and, therefore, a successful process.

Promoting this dialogue publicly through the language of peace and equality is crucial, particularly in areas dominated by nationalist narratives. Successful transitional justice requires broad public support and alignment with cultural realities. Without this alignment, Syria risks replicating persistent instabilities seen in regions like Iraqi Kurdistan.

Finally, international solidarity and advocacy remain vital. Developed countries, already involved in Syria’s political dynamics, must acknowledge their roles responsibly, supporting Syrians’ rights to self-determination without imposing external agendas. Syrian efforts must prioritize adaptable, culturally sensitive approaches that are open to uncertainty yet grounded in grassroots justice and reconciliation.