Syriac Union Party Co-Chair Sanharib Barsom: Unity of Components Conference can serve as model for nationwide Syrian conference

BETH ZALIN, North and East Syria — In a powerful reflection of the region’s rich social and ethnic tapestry, the Unity of the Components of North and East Syria Conference was held on 8 August 2025, in the city of Hasakah, North and East Syria, under the slogan Together for a Diversity that Strengthens Our Unity, and a Partnership that Builds Our Future.

Sanharib Barsom, Co-Chair of the Syriac Union Party (Gabo d’Ḥuyodo Suryoyo, SUP), was present and spoke at length with Suroyo TV about the background and objectives of the conference. Below the embedded video is a transcript of Barsom’s assessment, shortened and summarized below for readability.

Carlos Hanna: What were the political reasons and security considerations for organizing the Unity of the Components of North and East Syria Conference in Hasakah? Why now?

Sanharib Barsom: Because of the way the new Syrian rulers have given form to their government, issue laws and decrees, and implemented the constitutional process over the past eight months since coming to power. There was no genuine involvement of the various political forces and components in Syria. This exclusionary approach to government persists. Therefore, we wanted to make our position known and demonstrate that the government’s approach is a misguided one. We wanted to emphasize the urgent need to involve Syria’s diverse voices in governance and decision-making.

In North and East Syria, we have our independence and are not at the mercy of the government. Here, we can operate freely. Therefore, we can freely gather, hold conferences, and express our views and criticism. Here, we can demonstrate that we, the peoples of North and East Syria, demand our rights as peoples in Syria as a whole, and that we want a role in the governance of the country.

For example, the new constitution does not acknowledge the existence of different peoples. This acknowledgement is very important to us.

On the other hand, there are negotiations between the central Syrian government and the Autonomous Administration. These have not gotten off to a good start, and little real result has been accomplished. The Unity of Component Conference is a message to the central government: “This is our vision, these are our demands.” Our vision and demands are incorporated in the final statement of the Conference.

CH: Was the Conference an answer or response to direct threats, military developments on the ground, or a planned strategic move?

SB: From our side, there are no threats. Not to any party. We pose no threat to the government’s position. Our question is with cooperation, with how to recognize each other, how to discuss a system of decentralization, how to achieve recognition of the various population groups. I believe these are key issues that can be resolved for all of Syria.

The current prevailing mentality within the government is to impose a central government, to impose its jurisdiction over all regions of Syria by force and by instilling fear. We saw this in Suwayda, where the Druze asked for decentralized rule and for security and policing to be in the hands of the people of the region. We saw how the central government reacted with killings.

This way of governing Syria is unacceptable. The Autonomous Administration is present and working. There is no way back to the pre-2011 political authoritarian system. What we see, unfortunately, is that the new government has adopted Assad’s style of governing. They want total control, deciding who to appoint as ministers, parliamentarians, in government commissions, and enacting their own laws. This is wrong and has led to massacres.

The Unity of Components Conference sends a message: “Listen to us! The path you [government] are taking will not lead to any political or security solutions for Syria. We want all peoples to be able to identify with the new Syria.”

CH: Was there external influence to organize the Conference?

SB: No. It was a grassroots conference, a need from within, from the people of North and East Syria themselves. The Syriac-Assyrian people were represented by various parties, independents, and Church representatives. The same applied to the Arab, Kurdish, Yezidi, and Armenian components. There was a large turnout and presence from all ranks, movements, parties, youth, and women’s organizations.

It was a conference by and for the peoples, organized by the Autonomous Administration. We think this model can be organized on a national Syrian level.

CH: The Conference was held under the slogan “Together for a Diversity that Strengthens Our Unity, and a Partnership that Builds Our Future.” Can you elaborate on the slogan and explain how it can be implemented in practice?

SB: It comes down to recognition. Recognition of the plurality of cultures and peoples. Denying — as Assad did and is happening again now — the recognition of the rights and identity of peoples only leads to conflicts and new wars. That is why, in the conference’s final statement, we emphasize the role of the diverse peoples as the foundation for a new and stable Syria. That’s what we wanted to convey to the new government. They can implement our demands and resolve for the better.

However, if the Syrian government acquiesces to Turkey and its negative policies, there will be no solution. The Turkish policy is counterproductive. Not only for North and East Syria, but for all of Syria. We saw this with regard to the planned talks in Paris. Turkey was behind the halting of these negotiations by pressuring the central government and preventing the negotiating team from traveling to Paris.

Our conference is very important in light of such policies. And we will continue to hold such conferences until we are granted our rights at the national level.

CH: Did the Conference have a wider audience, i.e. not only a message to the government but also to the international community and regional powers?

SB: Our message was primarily aimed at the central government. But we saw that the Conference also received considerable international attention and was widely discussed and analyzed.

CH: Syria’s Foreign Minister said in a statement that the armed conflict in Suwayda is being used for a separation agenda. How do you think Damascus and Ankara understood the Conference’s message?

SB: Their perspective is flawed, as are their actions on the ground. No one is demanding the partition of Syria. If the people in North and East Syria and Suwayda demand decentralized government, but the government interprets this as partition … then my conclusion is that they simply want to impose a strong central authority. This offers no solution and only creates more problems.

This is in Turkey’s interest, which has a vested interest in keeping the people in North and East Syria down. The same applies to Suwayda. What has become clear is that Turkey’s political agenda is dominant and being implemented.

There has been an international reaction to this, including from the UN Security Council reaffirming UN Security Council Resolution 2254. No country can challenge this decision. If UNSC Resolution 2254 — from 2015 and still valid — is used as the basis for a solution for Syria, it will force many countries, including the Syrian government, to act accordingly.

CH: Regarding Turkey, we saw Turkey’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan accuse the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) of failing to honor the March 10 agreement between President Ahmad al-Sharaa and SDF Commander Mazloum Abdi. What do you think of Fidan’s statements?

SB: This is not true. We know what really happened. Talks were supposed to be held in Paris. These were blocked by Damascus. Talks were supposed to resume this month. Damascus withdrew again. The final statement from our Conference expresses support for and confidence in the 10 March agreement.

Where things go sour, is that Turkey demands that the SDF lay down its arms, surrender, and integrate as individuals into the Syrian Army. This is unacceptable. Let the SDF be treated like the other groups. We have seen militias, including those backed by Turkey, integrate into the Syrian Army as a whole. Not as individuals, and without disbanding. Instead of a name, they now have a number, but they are the same militias, not divided and not dissolved. Why should the SDF not be treated the same? As a whole, but part of the Ministry of Defense?

CH: If the SDF is integrated as a whole into the Syrian Army, will it have its own responsibilities and tasks, such as responsibility for the security in North and East Syria?

SB: Definitely, that will be its primary mission. But, if necessary, the SDF can also be deployed elsewhere as part of the Syrian Army.

CH: The Pentagon published a report stating that the Syrian government remains weak and that terrorist elements, such as Hurras al-Din, still exist within its ranks. The report also states that the current situation in Syria prompts the US to strengthen the SDF in North and East Syria and that it remains important for American security. Do you think this is as an American encouragement for the Unity of Components Conference?

SB: The Americans haven’t said anything official about the Conference, neither negative nor positive. But they will certainly also factor in what is happening on the ground here in their policy. The American position before Suwayda is different than afterward. The American position before the Syrian government’s withdrawal from negotiations with the SDF and the Autonomous Administration differed from that afterward. They noted the government’s policies, their negative aspects, and what happened in Suwayda, i.e. the bloody massacres perpetrated there by the General Security Forces.

This has led to a different perspective on the government’s part, and the US now has a tougher stance toward the government. We now expect the US and other countries to increase pressure on the Syrian government and to involve all peoples in democratic and inclusive governance of the country.

CH: Druze leaders and Alawites gave speeches at the conference in Hasakah. What was their message?

SB: The Conference was organized for the peoples of North and East Syria, but as representatives of peoples throughout Syria, they wanted to congratulate us on the Conference’s advocacy for democracy and inclusivity, not only for the northeast but for all of Syria. The Druze and Alawite leaders also have a vision for what Syria should look like, which they wanted to share with us at our Conference.

We actually see that many Syrians support the Conference’s outcomes. This provoked a fierce reaction from the government, backed by Turkey. We also see that the government and Turkey attempted to incite tensions between the different population groups. But they will not succeed. They cannot simply waive the democratic will of the peoples.

CH: What are the next steps to be taken to ensure that the adopted goals do not remain just ink on paper?

SB: First, the demands outlined in the final statement will serve as the basis for the negotiations with the government. Second, this is an initial conference that can serve as a model for a national conference.

It has given hope to many Syrians beyond the borders of North and East Syria. Hope and confidence that they too can have a voice in their Syria. This was one of the most important outcomes of the Conference. It is not a dissenting voice, not against this or that people or party, but a voice for all components of Syria to come together in dialogue, for equality and democracy. Many prominent figures from various components have endorsed the Conference’s outcomes.