The Guardian view on Syria’s crisis: Islamic State fighters are not the only concern | Editorial

In little more than a fortnight, a dramatic Syrian government offensive appears to have undone over a decade of Kurdish self-rule in the north-east and extended President Ahmed al-Sharaa’s control. The Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) held around a quarter of the country and many critical resources – but were forced out of much of it within days. Though the SDF has effectively agreed to dissolution in principle, it has not shown it will do so in practice: a worrying sign for a fragile truce. A peaceful resolution is in everyone’s interests. Forcible integration by Damascus would risk breeding insurgency.

The US relied upon the SDF in the battle against Islamic State. But Donald Trump has embraced “attractive, tough” Mr Sharaa – a former jihadist who had a $10m US bounty on his head until late 2024. The US administration became increasingly frustrated at the SDF’s failure to implement last spring’s agreement to integration into the new army, apparently due to internal divisions. Tom Barrack, the US special envoy to Syria and ambassador to Turkey, wrote this week that the rationale for partnership with the SDF had “largely expired” because Damascus was ready to take over security responsibilities.

If the US has turned its back on the SDF, the second abandonment in this crisis is the western failure to deal with the tens of thousands of suspected IS members and their families held in previously SDF-run prison camps such as al-Hawl – including their own nationals. The EU says that alleged breakouts are of “paramount concern”. In a country already struggling to recover from decades of Assad family dictatorship and years of civil war, which saw brutal sectarian violence involving government or allied forces last year, the risks are immense – and extend beyond the region.

The US says it is transferring up to 7,000 of the most hardened fighters to detention in Iraq. Whatever they have done, they should be protected from torture, forced confession and execution. Women are reported to be among the most fanatical inmates, and to have raised their children accordingly. But years of dire conditions, without serious investment in deradicalisation, have increased the dangers they pose to others. Some of the foreign nationals held – like Shamima Begum, who was 15 when she left the UK to join IS – were stripped of their citizenship. But the British state cannot so easily shed its responsibility. Because countries hoped the issue would remain someone else’s, the threat has only grown. These detainees should be repatriated and dealt with by their own governments.

Whatever the security capacity of the Syrian state – and Mr Sharaa’s forces went after IS as rivals before targeting them as an insurgent group – the country’s long-term prospects will be bleak without a brighter political horizon. That means inclusivity, dialogue, transitional justice and elections. Damascus has rightly reaffirmed the language and cultural rights of Kurds in recent days, but shows little sign of tolerating political organisation by minorities which might threaten the centralised rule that it seeks.

The volatility of Syria’s situation highlights the shamefulness of a third abandonment: Europe’s treatment of Syrians who managed to escape the country. While the country’s future remains in grave question, Austria and others are now pushing for their repatriation to a place that will take an estimated $200bn to reconstruct, where their safety and rights remain fragile at best. Those governments must think again.