I watched about half the video (only the intro really touches on the infighting plans). I agree with his premise about the infighting but what we're seeing now is basically the opposite of it. The US leaving SDF to fall means that there won't be constant infighting in northern Syria over the oil. Maybe the freed ISISrael fighters can help destabilize the region but I wonder if they can really surpass a directly US-armed SDF. Of course this would all change if the Syrian regime decides to attack Lebanon or Iran which is very possible. But they could have done that while leaving SDF in the north. Defeating the US proxy now just seems nonsensical from empire POV, but I might be missing something.

Kevork's views on Assad are a bit too romanticized for me. Assad was much more unpopular than for example Khamenei in Iran, because whereas Iran has a majority Shia population, Assad was heavily favoring the small Alawite sect he belonged to with cushy government jobs and heavily cracking down on others. Besides his logistical support for the Palestinian and Lebanese resistance (which was mostly out from his Iran alliance, and not ideologically) Assad didn't have much going for him.