U.S. circles speak of a “beautiful story” that President Donald Trump is seeking to realize in Syria. Responding to pressure from friends in the region, he agreed to lift sanctions on the country and give President Ahmad al-Sharaa the opportunities needed to pull Syria out of the depths of isolation and back into engagement with the international community and the global financial system.

Yet Washington concludes that constraints emanating from U.S. allies are distorting that story and threatening its appeal.

According to Syrian sources, U.S. special envoy to Syria Tom Barrack and U.S. Central Command leader Admiral Brad Cooper had to lead efforts with al-Sharaa and the leader of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), Mazloum Abdi, on Monday to reach a “truce” that halted hostilities around neighborhoods in Aleppo. The incident appeared serious enough to prompt U.S. intervention with its two allies to prevent a deterioration that could derail the efforts of Trump, his administration, and the U.S. Congress to put Syria on a path to recovery.

Ironically, the clashes between the SDF and Syrian security forces were partially triggered by Turkey’s dispatch of a large, high-level delegation to Damascus. Turkey, a long-standing U.S. ally whose president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, shares mutual admiration, understanding, and accommodation with Trump, sent the foreign and defense ministers along with the intelligence chief. The visit and its statements appear to have generated conditions that ignited the situation in Aleppo, sending fiery signals - perhaps above all to Washington.

The event marks a setback in a U.S. effort to produce a “deal” ending the dispute between the SDF and Damascus. Washington sponsored an agreement between the two sides last March, intended to enter into force by the end of this month. The Aleppo clashes and the parties’ contradictory narratives expose the fragility of implementing the agreement. From the day it was signed until now, Barrack’s calls in favor of Syria’s unity and the integration of all components into the structures of its new governance have not sufficed to guide the Kurdish allies toward the path Washington envisions for Syria.

Damascus and the SDF leveraging the American ally may be contributing to a blockade preventing the feasibility of an agreement that seemed difficult, if not impossible, to implement. Through Barrack, Washington has endorsed centralized governance, which President al-Sharaa insists upon to run Syria. Nothing from Washington suggests support for Kurdish statehood championed by Abdi, whether as decentralization or federalism. European capitals, despite France’s ties with Syria’s Kurds, have similarly not signaled divergence from the Damascus-Washington track on the SDF’s role within the new Syrian government.

Turkey’s delegation visit to Damascus may have been a strategic message ahead of Trump’s meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Florida on December 29. The Aleppo clashes, reportedly initiated by the SDF, may likewise have aimed to send messages to the same occasion and interlocutors. Washington’s swift intervention via the Barrack–Cooper duo, the officials most directly engaged with Abdi and his forces, suggests it understood those messages and preferred to freeze the battlefield and reposition politically on its own terms.

Israel is likely playing a role in disrupting the “beautiful story” Washington imagines for Syria. The Aleppo clashes convey messages seeking a U.S. stance that recalibrates plans failing to account for all parties’ interests within the envisaged deal between al-Sharaa and Abdi. Trump thus faces a difficult choice in appeasing allies through a deal that cannot satisfy everyone. Between Damascus, Tel Aviv, and Ankara-and Trump’s inclination to reduce U.S. burdens in Syria - lies a complex equation, within which the SDF continues to search for a position it once occupied, when U.S. patronage transformed the dream of Kurdish secession, even if cloaked, into a reality that seemed within reach.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the writers are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Annahar