Bandar Al-Himedi Daham is a member of al-Shammar, one of the biggest Arab tribes in Syria and he is now the commander of Al-Sanadid Force, an unofficial army of 4,500 fighters, combating the Islamic State (ISIS). In this interview with Rudaw, Al-Himedi says the goal of his force was initially to defend their territory against ISIS without any political agenda. But now the situation has changed and their leaders pursue political goals.





Al-Himedi’s force has partnered with the Kurdish YPG on several occasions to fight ISIS militants, including in the Hasakah province. Despite his good ties with the Kurds, Al-Himedi rejects federalism for Syria if it leads to the country’s partition. Al-Himedi reveals that he has asked the international coalition and Iraqi government to allow his force to join the Mosul offensive in order to help defeat ISIS and protect members of the Shmmar tribe who live on the other side of the border.





Rudaw: What is the political agenda of Sanadid, and your objectives?





Bandar Al-Himedi: Sanadid is a force that was created out of the need for self-defense. Our tribe members resorted to arms in order to protect this region from the danger of ISIS. That is why we did not have any political objectives or any political agenda initially. But in light of the recent events, the success this force has achieved, and the changing dynamics in the situations on the ground, the political leadership is going to determine what our objectives are. I am a military person. What I know is that we have taken up arms for self-defense purposes.





Our tribe members resorted to arms in order to protect this region from the danger of ISIS. Our tribe members resorted to arms in order to protect this region from the danger of ISIS.



Did the Kurds support you in forming the Sanadid Force?





The history of our relationship with the Kurds will further strengthen mutual trust. This even reflects on the war fronts. Our faith in Kurds is rooted in our historic relations and our past alliance. We have had an alliance with the Kurds in every crisis. ISIS attacked our region where Kurds, Arabs and Assyrians live. It is because of this and the danger of terrorism that we had to form an alliance with all the parties of the region. But our alliance with the Kurds is a different thing. We formed an alliance with the Kurds right at the beginning of the formation of the Sanadid Force, and this alliance was directly against ISIS. Before the advent of ISIS, there were small terrorist groups in the region, and we were able to repel their danger in light combat. Hence, we did not have an official alliance. But our alliance with the Kurds became official, only with the advent of ISIS.





Will political disagreements affect your alliance with the Kurds?





We are a defensive force. We are not doing politics, which is why political disagreements will have no effect on our alliance, which is an alliance on the war fronts, not a political alliance. Political events will not be influencing us in a way to change or withdraw from our alliance with the Kurds or other parties.





ISIS has been weakened and on the defensive. How do you see the post-ISIS phase?





I am sure that the destruction of ISIS is approaching. I think the end of 2016 will be the end of ISIS. I believe the film is nearing its end. Regarding the post-ISIS phase and the changes that will ensue, this is a political subject. I only talk about military matters.





Will the Sanadid Force remain or join another force after ISIS?





I do not think we will join another force. We were initially a defensive force, but the situations have now changed. We have become more influential on the ground, have our own experience, and are protecting a large area. We have had a role in weakening ISIS, and thank God, we have been successful. If we compare our operations with those in the rest of Syria, we have been most successful, and the areas where we have been operating have seen the least damage. In other words, we have asserted our presence, and will be waiting for political changes so that our politicians can make the necessary decisions.





I think the end of 2016 will be the end of ISIS. I think the end of 2016 will be the end of ISIS.



Observers think that there will be new problems and old issues will resurface after the demise of ISIS. How would you confront these issues?





I think there will be problems after the demise of ISIS, and these problems will become bigger in Iraq and Syria. I hope these problems will not cause any change in our alliances, as we have been partners in the war against ISIS so far.





There is news of some kind of negotiation with the Kurds in Syria, claiming that the Autonomous Administration and the government of Damascus will be negotiating under Russia’s supervision. What information do you have about this?

I do not have much information about this. But Sheikh Al-Himedi Daham has tried internal and external reconciliations. He asked the opposition groups to rely on him so he can reconcile them with the Syrian government, for Syria cannot endure further destruction. Sheikh supports negotiations in every way. This is our biggest hope. We are tired of the internal struggles that we have in Syria.





Do you have relations with the Americans?





We did not have relations in the beginning, but when I became a member of the administration for the Democratic Syrian Forces, I met with the international coalition about three or four times. I asked them for some special support to the Sanadid Force. I told them about the military experience of the force. We as the Shammar Force were on the front lines of the war at the time. But the Americans distanced themselves from here after the conditions of the war changed.

When I became a member of the administration for the Democratic Syrian Forces, I met with the international coalition about three or four times. When I became a member of the administration for the Democratic Syrian Forces, I met with the international coalition about three or four times.

What were those changes? Can you discuss them?





I do not wish to talk about those reasons [changes]. But we initially met with the forces from the international coalition. They are now away from our region. Once I met with them, I told them that if they wished to besiege ISIS, they had to support the Sanadid Forces. The Americans are closely aware of our military capacity, our experience, and our foreign relations. They know what we are capable of. “We are soldiers. We cannot make decisions,” said the Americans when we asked them for support. But they promised us that they would let Washington know about our demands. After this, the events changed. The Americans were engaged with Turkey, and the Minbaj war. I felt that they were busy doing other things.





Have you received any parts of the support which the US gave to the Democratic Syrian Forces?





We have not received support from the US in any way, shape or form. The US has only provided ammunition to the Democratic Syrian Forces, and the ammunition was only being provided at the start of the war, which was insufficient. And we received only a small part of this military support.





Do you have relations with the Russian force that is in Syria?





We do not have any such relations.





A war broke out in Hasaka between the Kurdish forces and the Syrian Regime’s forces a while ago. What was your position on this?





We neither directly nor indirectly interfered in this matter. We tried to deescalate the situation, as our region is more stable than anywhere else in Syria, especially as Qamishlo and Hasaka have not seen devastation. That is why we are determined to keep wars away from these cities, so that their stability is not shaken.





There is the question of declaring a federal system for the north of Syria. How do you look at this issue? Do you support it?





Even if we directly support a federal system, the support would be to the real meaning of federalism, and as far as we understand the concept of federalism, it is not about dividing Syria. But if federalism were to take other directions or forms, we would be against it.





We understand that federalism is an extension of an autonomous system, which has been successful in our region, solving some problems and protecting the region from devastation. We saw that it was a successful project, and what we know is that federalism is a development of an autonomous system.





The Shammaris have had relations with Saudi Arabia throughout history. How is your relationship with Saudi Arabia?

We have not had any relations with Saudi Arabia ever since ISIS emerged.





The idea of an alliance came up when we realized that the Shammari youth were fighting ISIS with PYD guns. The idea of an alliance came up when we realized that the Shammari youth were fighting ISIS with PYD guns.



Your forces are tribal and you have a tribal system, but the Autonomous Administration, in which the PYD is the main force, is a secular organization. You have two different world views, how can you fit in together?





As I said before, what initially brought us together was confronting terrorism and warding off the danger on our region. We did not think of our different philosophies. The idea of an alliance came up when we realized that the Shammari youth were fighting ISIS with PYD guns. We saw that our brothers from PYD were armed and had the idea of protecting the region; the situations imposed this alliance without us thinking of our different political philosophies. The situations have now changed. Now we have political authorities led by Sheikh Al-Himedi Daham.





Do you have any plans to take part in Mosul offensive?

We have officially asked that we take part in Mosul offensive, as you all know that our tribe members live in Mosul. We have asked the international coalition, and have also sent a letter to the Iraqi government, asking them that we be allowed to participate in Mosul offensive with 1,500 fighters. We have stressed our participation in the offensive. After all, Mosul is relevant to us, as the bulk of ISIS is there. In other words, the end of Mosul war is the end of ISIS. We think that the liberation of Mosul will mark the demise of ISIS. That is why Mosul is important to us in all aspects, and we should take part in its offensive, but they have not replied to us yet.