The US is ensuring there is proxy force that would keep the situation under control while the US went with limiting their footprint in the Middle East. Israel in Lebanon against Hezbollah, the Saudis in Yemen against the Houthis, Barzani in Iraq (not secure anymore), SDF in Syria.Mazloum Abdi has told U.S. reps that they should not count on him if they expand the war to confront Iranian-backed militias in Syria and Iraq. If he's telling the truth (I doubt it), he must not be long for this world as the head of Syrian PKK, or may be the plan is to keep that organization safe and away from Iran's targeting, in case of clashes. Well they have bases inside Iran anyway, if Iran doesn't see them as a threat to itself, they are very happy to use it as a trump card against Turkey. It's very hard to develop a plan in juggling all of these possibilities.
My thesis that U.S. is preparing for a full-on war with Iran (despite most analysts thinking the opposite as they see the dem admin actually accommodating Iran based on superficial evidence), can be partially refuted if they stop Israel from making this a long-term thing and don't extend and elevate the level of engagement with Houthis, and militias in Syria (I say "partially", because if they don't do it now, they can always come back and do it later; so to fully refute it we have to see concrete steps by U.S. for rapprochement through JCPOA. As what I see is the exact opposite in U.S. abandoning JCPOA, I count this as an evidence for my hypothesis, based on the fact that a nuclear Iran will not be tolerated {since the risks of spillage with a nuclear Iran is real and unsustainable, unlike NK}, and on the other hand without JCPOA Iran will have no choice but to develop nuclear weapon). Since for U.S. and Israel to safely engage with Iran they have to clear its proxies first, this means moves against this goal will weaken my hypothesis, and naturally moves in keeping with this goal will strengthen it.
U.S. state department has opted to manifest a picture of what opinion on this matter (extending the war & carte blanche for Israel to continue) inside its halls are, as discordant and hesitant. But you never know if that's propaganda or real leaks. But sometimes the discord is real until an order to the contrary comes from some place else. I'd love to know where that some place is which can stifle any kind of discord so fast. Like how they have been avoiding the word "ceasefire" like the plague in a very wide geography. Would love to see how that's coordinated and where the actual decisions are made, or if it's only signalled from a central committee and everybody else recognizes the signals and conforms organically.
The problem with SDF is that they know very well that suddenly the US could be forced to leave the region and they are flirting with everybody else in the same time ensuring that they don't fall on their asses. They are talking with Assad on SDF being included into the SAA as an autonomous force. YPG is already working with Assad and Russia on the west of Euphrates because there is no US presence there so they need a guarantor. YPG joining SAA would be would be the worst case scenario both for the US and the YPG because this means US would be out of proxies in the area so they will be forced to work with Turkiye and make compromises and the YPG would lose its protector so they will become an open target for the Turkish military and eventually annihilated in a couple of months.
The only safe exit for them would come if Assad face charges in international court, his replacement agrees on autonomous region for them, accepts US presence and limit relationship with Russia and Iran. Of course this is not possible so they are searching for an Iraqi connection in the name of Talabani that would not cooperate with Turkiye and would be the perfect replacement for Barzani's controversial politics that are shy of fully cooperating with PKK/YPG because Turkiye got him by the balls. Talabani family historically got good relationship with Iran and the Shiite groups. They also managed to play very good for different actors in the same time. The question here is the following: "Would Bafel Talabani ditch his relationship with Iran for power in KRG, joining of the KRG in Iraq and SDF controlled area in Syria under US protection?" I think yes. He is dumber than his ancestors.
The conclusion for Turkiye is that there are two important points. First is control over the province of Latakia, effectively cutting YPG forces from the sea and keeping a proxy in KRG that would contribute to the right balance of power so Talabani is far from the power there. The SDF will die without legitimation and legitimation can come in two ways. Joining the Assad government = annihilation by Turkiye or trough Talabani (what the US is pushing for) = Talabani will die before that even happens (Yasar Guler effect).
I am encouraging everybody to watch this video which is informative on the situation. The video also has EN subtitles: