According to KurdPress, Syrian affairs analyst Kurdiyar Dariei, in a note titled “War Tents in Hasakah; Have the Limits of Relying on Tension Become Clear?” examined the political dimensions of recent developments in Hasakah province and wrote that the establishment of “war tents” in the outskirts of Hasakah under the guise of tribal representation was not a purely local event, but rather occurred at a sensitive time, coinciding with negotiations between Damascus and the autonomous administration of northern and eastern Syria, as well as rapid regional developments.

He believes that from the very beginning, the atmosphere surrounding these movements was accompanied by tense rhetoric, suggesting that the region was on the verge of a new confrontation, but the course of developments showed that some of these actions ended through dialogue, some of the tents were collected, and other gatherings, despite continuing to raise demands, failed to create a new reality on the ground.According to the analyst, the main question is not why these tents were set up, but why the goals expected by their organizers were not achieved. In his opinion, the reason for this is that the developments in Syria are no longer managed solely on the basis of the balance of local forces, and the east of the Euphrates has become an area where the interests of the United States, Russia and Turkey converge, and one of the most important axes of negotiations between Damascus and the autonomous administration; therefore, any attempt to change the balance outside the framework of macro-agreements faces regional and international limitations.

Dariei also emphasized that recent experience has shown that using tribal discourse in political conflicts alone is not capable of creating legitimacy or changing existing realities.Pointing out that the tribes are important social and national pillars of Syria, he clarified that they cannot be summarized in a political movement or discourse, and any attempt to present the developments in the region as a confrontation between Arabs and Kurds is inconsistent with the reality of social diversity in the Syrian peninsula and can deepen social gaps. The analyst further wrote that the autonomous administration should not consider the reduction in the scope of these movements as a political victory, because lasting stability cannot be achieved only by neutralizing the means of pressure, but also requires strengthening the participation of all social components and eliminating administrative and political weaknesses that provide the basis for exploitation by political rivals.He also noted about the Damascus government that restoring control over northern and eastern Syria is not possible solely through military means, and any centralized structure that ignores the characteristics of the region and the rights of its residents will pave the way for a repeat of the crisis.

Darii concluded by emphasizing that recent developments show that the Kurdish issue remains a key factor in stability in Syria, and that any approach that ignores this issue or looks at it solely from a security perspective will not be able to achieve lasting peace. In his opinion, the future of Syria depends on the formation of a political project based on the acceptance of ethnic and cultural diversity and the real participation of all components of society; an approach that can prevent the recurrence of crises similar to the "war tents" in the future.