How Jewish-Kurdish Models Transform the Region

The Middle East is a region where time began to flow earliest in human history—and where it has most often paused. This land has been a cradle of divine revelations and the decrees of tyrants, the mercy of prophets, and the cruelty of emperors. Sacred in place, tragic in time, this region has collapsed and rebuilt itself countless times—yet it has never achieved lasting peace. Today, as Syria enters a new phase not through revolution but collapse, we find ourselves searching for a new way to restore order in the Middle East. This path lies not only in military power—models that Iran and Turkey have imposed on native communities—but primarily in forging social relations and social contracts among its people, based on the peaceful coexistence of multi-ethnic and multi-religious communities.

The fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime has created a power vacuum now filled by Salafi-jihadist groups like Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). This gap is not merely a change in leadership—it is a sign of a much deeper, more dangerous threat. HTS effectively represents the re-emergence of ISIS ideology, and its very existence is rooted in hostility toward all forms of diversity—Jews, Alawites, Christians, Druze, Kurds, and even secular Sunni Arabs. Thus, HTS poses not just a threat to Syria and the Kurds, but to the entire region and, particularly, to Israel and the Jewish people.

The collapse of state structures in Syria has set off a broader geopolitical fracture across the region. As centralized authority disintegrates, indigenous communities are either turning to radical alternatives or building their own self-governance models. This shift highlights the failure of authoritarian regimes, but also the growing determination of communities to create peaceful, alternative structures. This moment represents not just the collapse of a regime but the potential birth of a new Middle East—one shaped by its indigenous peoples.

At this critical juncture, the peoples of the region—especially the Jewish people, whose fate is historically and geographically intertwined with the Middle East—can seize a historic opportunity to transform the hostile status quo. They must recognize that traditional security paradigms alone cannot achieve lasting peace, particularly in addressing the enduring crises of the region. In other words, Israel cannot secure its future through military deterrence alone. It must also forge new relationships grounded in moral, cultural, and political foundations. In this context, the modern Kurdish movement stands as a beacon for peace and coexistence, exemplified by its multi-ethnic, multi-religious, and inclusive model in Rojava.

The Rojava model represents one of the few structures that can contribute to peace and security for all peoples in the Middle East, including the Jewish people. This model supports regional stability and offers a unique, modern example of coexistence.

The Rise of Salafi-Jihadism and the Threat to Peace

We should recognize that groups like HTS, bordering Israel, are not merely local violent actors but central drivers of regional radicalization with global implications. The ideological orientation of these groups frames anti-Semitism not merely as a historical bias, but as a divine mission. In their worldview, Israel is not just a political adversary, but a “religious corruption.” Therefore, HTS’s dominance in Syria poses not only a geographical challenge for Israel but also an existential threat to both Israel and the Jewish people. While Israel’s military capability can partially neutralize this threat, each decade of temporary victory merely delays the inevitable reemergence of similar ideologies in more adaptive and dynamic forms. The persistence of such challenges underscores the limitations of purely security-oriented regional strategies. What is urgently needed is a political and social foundation capable of transforming—and eventually eliminating—the conditions that breed such radicalism.

In this context, the Rojava model in northeastern Syria, which prioritizes democratic nation-building, gains significant importance. It serves not only as a potential strategic partnership but also as one of the most powerful moral and political models, defying Salafi-jihadist extremism and sectarian hostilities. Based on democratic self-governance and a social contract established since 2012, Rojava’s model has evolved into a society-centered political mechanism that transcends the framework of a traditional state models.

Its core features include constitutional gender equality, pluralism, and peaceful coexistence between Kurds, Arabs, Syriacs, Armenians, and Turkmens—all of whom participate in decision-making processes. Moreover, it promotes secularism, preventing religious and sectarian identities from becoming instruments of political domination, while fostering bottom-up democracy through a decentralized system of communes, councils, and federations. This model promotes equal representation for all peoples, strengthening prospects for regional peace. For the Jewish and Kurdish peoples—two ancient communities that have long struggled to sustain their identities—Rojava offers a unique opportunity for security, peace, and partnership. This model can also serve as the foundation for broader alliances that could eventually include Arabs, Turks, and Persians in an inclusive vision of coexistence.

The Abraham Accords and the Rojava Model: Complementary Approaches

This inclusive vision embodied by the Rojava model is echoed in other initiatives and treaties across the Middle East. Notably, the 2020 Abraham Accords marked a critical turning point, demonstrating that peace in the region is not merely aspirational—it is already underway. While this agreement has initiated normalization between Israel and certain Arab states at the diplomatic level, the Rojava model offers a complementary grassroots embodiment of similar principles. Although the Abraham Accords and Rojava developed independently, the core values underlying both—peace, mutual recognition, and a shared future—converge in meaningful ways.

The Abraham Accords represent a top-down state-to-state initiative, while Rojava exemplifies a bottom-up people-to-people model. Yet, each approach converges at a vital point: promoting peace in the Middle East not as an abstract ideal but as tangible progress. The Abraham Accords symbolically evoke the legacy of the region’s three monotheistic religions—principles that find practical expression in Rojava’s pluralistic governance. Therefore, the grassroots model in Rojava not only complements the Abraham Accords but also reinforces regional stability.

The Abraham Accords represent a top-down, state-to-state initiative, while Rojava exemplifies a bottom-up, people-to-people model. Yet both approaches converge at a vital point: promoting peace in the Middle East not as an abstract ideal, but as tangible progress. The Abraham Accords symbolically evoke the legacy of the region’s three monotheistic religions—principles that find practical expression in Rojava’s pluralistic governance. Thus, the grassroots model in Rojava complements the Abraham Accords by advancing their core objective—regional stability.

In this context, the Kurdish people—and the Rojava model in particular—offer both a geopolitical opportunity for broader regional cooperation. The Jewish people, together with the Kurdish people, could pioneer a new vision of peace through a strategic alliance that also includes Druze, Alawite, Arab, Armenian, Turkmen, Turkish, and Persian communities in building a shared future. It is especially important to recognize the divisive role played by certain regimes in Ankara and Tehran, which have sought to create ideological and political cleavages between Kurdish, Jewish, and Arab peoples, often aligning with extremist interests. Anti-Semitic rhetoric from leaders such as Erdoğan not only threatens Jewish community but also undermines the diverse, multi-ethnic, multicultural, and multi-religious legacy of Middle Eastern society. Such rhetoric sabotages the dialogue and cooperation that both the Abraham Accords and the Rojava model aim to foster.

The hostile status quo of the Middle East can only be transformed through the collective will of its peoples to peacefully coexist. Jews and Kurds, with their shared experiences of persecution and their aspirations for self-determination and peace, can help lead the way through inclusive engagement against extremist threats. To this end, the social contract exemplified in Rojava, and the diplomatic framework of the Abraham Accords offer complementary paths toward achieving the peace that remains the greatest security for all.

—

The author has worked for Kurdish-language media outlets in Europe, including Roj TV, Sterk TV and ANF. His work has taken him to Rojava, Syria, Iraq and many countries.