Tag: Syria

  • Turkey and Its Syria: A United Front Against the Kurds?

    Turkey and Its Syria: A United Front Against the Kurds?

    As Iran’s influence over northern Arab states wanes and Russia, once the region’s dominant power broker, finds itself severely diminished, Turkey—or Türkiye—has begun to reassert itself after a prolonged period of restraint. With its alliance solidified with Azerbaijan, Turkey has carved out a strategic foothold in Syria, where a coalition led by Ankara now commands key territories. In this reconfigured landscape, Turkey seems poised to wield the same influence in Syria that Iran once held under Assad. Yet Turkey’s ambitions in Syria go beyond expansionism. For Ankara, a stable, centralized Syrian government—free from Kurdish control—has become essential not only to securing regional dominance but to safeguarding its own national security.

    Syria’s dominant rebel faction, which seized control of Damascus with Turkey’s blessing, has swiftly restored order to the city and appointed a new prime minister to head the country’s transitional government. Mohammad al-Bashir, the newly named premier, previously managed an administration in Idlib under the auspices of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the most formidable of the rebel groups now occupying Damascus and other critical cities. It is evident that the new government will closely align with Turkish interests, with Ankara’s primary objective being the removal of Kurdish forces, who currently control a significant portion of northern Syria.

    The Kurds, an ethnic group long settled in the rugged highlands straddling the borders of Turkey and the Arab states, have endured centuries of persecution and repression at the hands of various occupiers. Though most Kurds are Sunni Muslims, they have faced suspicion from both Sunni and Shia communities alike. The colonial division of the Middle East by the British and French in the early twentieth century left the Kurdish homeland fractured, divided among four states, with Turkey claiming the largest share. From the outset, relations between the Kurds and Turks have been fraught with animosity. What began as a simmering conflict soon escalated, with Turkey deploying brutal tactics to suppress the Kurds, while Kurdish militant groups retaliated with attacks on Turkish cities. Despite these tensions, Turkey ultimately maintained control over the Kurdish population within its borders, though the Kurds, united by a pan-Kurdish identity, sought refuge in Syria and Iraq. As the central governments in both countries weakened, the Kurds expanded their influence, breathing new life into the vision of a pan-Kurdish state—one that has, predictably, caused unease in Ankara. Following the outbreak of the Syrian civil war, Kurdish forces found new strength, securing territory with the support of international allies united in the battle against the Islamic State.

    Turkey’s attacks on the Kurds have remained relentless, even as the Kurds fought alongside international forces against the Islamic State. However, the conflict in Syria took an unexpected turn after the Syrian civil war, with the ousting of Assad and the rise of Turkish-backed militants in Damascus. This shift led to an intensification of Turkey’s assault on Kurdish forces. In northern Syria, Turkish airstrikes have continued to target Kurdish positions, while the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army has clashed with the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), who receive U.S. support. According to the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, at least 218 people were killed in just three days of fighting between these two forces in Manbij, northeast of Damascus. 

    A far more urgent concern is the potential downfall of the Kurdish militias, which could lead to the Islamic State’s resurgence. If these forces’ survival is threatened, the fate of the prisons—housing numerous ISIS fighters—will no longer be a priority. The collapse of these Kurdish-run prisons could trigger a dangerous wave of ISIS attacks, both within Syria and potentially beyond, creating a significant dilemma for the Trump administration.

    Northeastern Syria is a region of remarkable ethnic diversity, home to significant Arab, Kurdish, and Assyrian populations, alongside smaller communities of Turkmen, Armenians, Circassians, and Yazidis. Contrary to common portrayals, it is not solely inhabited by Kurds. Supporters of the region’s administration argue that it functions as an officially secular polity with aspirations of direct democracy, grounded in the principles of democratic confederalism and libertarian socialism. These ideals promote decentralization, gender equality, environmental sustainability, social ecology, and pluralistic tolerance for religious, cultural, and political diversity—values reflected in its constitution, society, and political framework. The administration sees itself not as a separatist entity but as a model for a federalized Syria, advocating for decentralization rather than outright independence. Both partisan and non-partisan observers have praised the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES) as the most democratic system in Syria, citing its open elections, commitment to human rights, and defense of minority and religious freedoms within the region.

    The government in Damascus, however, is a stark contrast. The Sunni Islamist militants, who have proven their governance in the small northern-western part of the country, have left minorities deeply suffering under their rule, prompting comparisons to the Taliban’s Afghanistan. Despite the assurances from HTS leaders that they aim to create a government that upholds the rights of minorities and women, such claims are met with skepticism. Should Turkey and HTS succeed in establishing a legitimate government with a fair constitution, the Kurds may be compelled to join and accept Turkish dominance. However, if governance mirrors that of Idlib, where minorities suffered under harsh rule, the Kurds will likely resist, continuing the fight.

    On most occasions, Turkey—and the Turkish-backed government now exerting control in Syria—will likely resort to military force to annex Kurdish territories, particularly in the wake of Trump’s decision to withdraw U.S. forces, which has left the Kurdish military considerably weakened. Turkey perceives the Kurds as an ongoing threat to its strategic interests in Syria, and for Ankara, conflict appears to offer more leverage than peace. As a result, Turkey’s overarching goal to dominate Syria and dismantle the Kurdish region could spark more  confrontations, further destabilizing an already fractured nation.

  • Is Syria Entering a New Era of Peace?

    Is Syria Entering a New Era of Peace?

    After thirteen years of devastating civil war—claiming around 600,000 lives and displacing six million—rebels have seized Damascus, ending Bashar al-Assad’s authoritarian regime. Once a symbol of unshakable power, Assad has fled, leaving behind a nation scarred by his rule and the violence that defined it. The Islamist coalition Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) is now administrating Damascus. Their triumphant march through Syrian cities is marked by the hoisting of a new flag—a poignant echo of the 1930s nationalist movement against French colonial rule. This banner, now embraced by crowds and draped along Damascus’s streets, signifies more than a regime’s collapse; it is a declaration of an era’s end.

    For decades, the Syrian Arab Republic operated less as a democratic state and more as a personal fiefdom under the Assad dynasty. Yet, as the dust settles, the flag’s promise of renewal carries an unspoken question: will this new chapter fulfill the dreams of a fractured nation, or will it lead to yet another uncharted and precarious path?

    A fragile yet palpable sense of hope has begun to spread across Syria in the wake of Assad’s official ouster from the war—a moment that feels almost surreal to a population accustomed to despair. For those who once fled the carnage, enduring the indignities of life as migrants, the news signals the faintest possibility of a return, however uncertain, to a land they scarcely recognize. In liberated cities, the crackle of celebratory gunfire fills the air, and once-omnipresent statues of Assad are toppled with theatrical fervor. Rebels parade captured allies of the former regime through the streets, as the nation’s official flag—its somber hues now synonymous with repression—is replaced with the green-bannered emblem of the opposition. It is a victory both symbolic and intoxicating.

    This moment is being hailed as another hard-won victory for the Arab Spring’s enduring mission to unseat entrenched dictatorships across the Arab world. Yet the cost of this triumph is staggering: thirteen years of relentless conflict, nearly half a million lives lost, and the displacement of more than half of the population—a scale of human suffering that defies comprehension. The rebels’ lightning-fast march from their stronghold in Idlib to Damascus, achieved in a mere two weeks, has drawn inevitable comparisons to the Taliban’s startlingly swift seizure of Kabul. In Syria’s case, the speed of the advance lays bare the hollowed-out power of Assad’s government and the waning influence of its embattled backers, Russia and Iran

    Syria’s descent into chaos was never simply a civil war; it was a stage upon which global powers enacted their rivalries. The United States, Israel, and a constellation of Sunni states found themselves embroiled in a proxy confrontation against Russia and Iran, each seeking to reshape the region’s political contours to their advantage. Now, with reports suggesting that President Bashar al-Assad has fled to Russia alongside his family, the once formidable Russia-Iran axis seems on the brink of relinquishing its tenuous hold over Syria’s fractured state.

    Amid the shifting alliances and fractured ambitions of Syria’s long war, Turkey has emerged as the unequivocal victor in a geopolitical chess that drew in superpowers and regional actors alike. What began as a conflict shaped by American support for liberal factions and the staunch backing of Bashar al-Assad’s regime by Russia and Iran—complicated further by the shadowy maneuvers of Israel and the Sunni bloc—soon morphed into a theater where Ankara played a decisive hand. Faced with the dual pressures of a staggering migrant crisis and an emboldened Kurdish presence along its southern border, Turkey deftly repositioned itself from a peripheral participant to a central player, reshaping the war’s trajectory in ways that no other power could.

    Under Turkey’s strategic direction, Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)—a Sunni Islamist organization deemed a terrorist group by the United States—cemented alliances with Turkish-backed factions, forging a cohesive and well-supported coalition. Operating from its stronghold in Idlib, HTS received Turkish logistical and tactical support, including training that bolstered its capacity to wage a coordinated campaign. As these forces advanced with astonishing speed, ultimately seizing control in Damascus, Turkey’s influence in Syria became unmistakable. This ascendancy not only underscores Ankara’s newfound leverage but also signals a revival of Turkey’s long-diminished prominence in the complex power dynamics of the Middle East.

    Will the rebels’ triumph herald a lasting peace in Syria? The answer, steeped in the country’s deep-seated divisions, remains elusive. Even as the official government signals a willingness to cooperate with the rebel coalition and promises elections, skepticism pervades. A significant segment of the population—primarily Alawites and Shias—continues to rally behind Assad, their allegiance rooted in sectarian solidarity. Adding to the complexity is the Christian minority’s apprehension toward the Sunni Islamist factions that now dominate the coalition. Distrust runs deep, and it is far from certain that a religiously aligned organization can effectively navigate the intricacies of Syria’s fractured social fabric.

    For the Sunni rebels, forging alliances with these wary communities poses a daunting challenge. Within their own coalition, cracks are already visible, with the specter of internal discord looming and threatening to unravel their fragile unity. Adding to the precariousness is the broader geopolitical chessboard. The risk of another civil war hangs heavy over this uneasy settlement. For now, the promise of peace remains as tenuous as ever, a fragile hope in a nation scarred by relentless conflict and irreconcilable divisions.

    The fall of the Assad regime and the rise of a new administration in Damascus have been met with widespread approval across the globe. The United States and France, two of the West’s most prominent actors in Syria, have openly expressed support for the shift in power. Turkey, meanwhile, has welcomed the outcome, as has Saudi Arabia, which now champions the Sunni-led takeover. Israel, too, seems content, having played a role in Assad’s decline through its strikes on Hezbollah, and now looks favorably upon the prospect of a Sunni populist government in Damascus.

    Despite the optimistic global response, a pressing question lingers: can Syria’s deeply divided population come together under the new administration? Should the proposed government adopt a Sunni Islamist constitution, could this herald yet another chapter of turmoil, akin to the upheavals that followed other Arab Spring uprisings? The answer remains uncertain, as the country’s fractures, both sectarian and political, threaten to undo even the most well-intentioned reforms.

  • How long will Syria remain a battleground?

    How long will Syria remain a battleground?

    After Sunni Islamist rebels captured Aleppo, the Syrian civil war once again grabbed international attention. The conflict, which began in 2011 between Syria’s official government under authoritarian leader Bashar al-Assad and the opposition, has now lasted almost 14 years, claiming nearly 600,000 lives and displacing at least 10 million people. It has filled headlines at various points over the years and shows no signs of slowing down. The civil war in Syria has undoubtedly become one of the biggest disasters in the 21st century and a significant benchmark in modern warfare. While, on the surface, the war appears to be a power struggle between Assad and the opposition, a closer examination reveals a deeper dynamic. The war involves numerous parties, each pursuing its own interests, and Syria has become a battleground for various countries.

    President Bashar al-Assad’s Ba’athist government receives political and military support from its Shia partner, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and its long-time ally, Russia, another authoritarian regime. The Lebanese Hezbollah group, the Palestinian PFLP-GC, and other factions also actively back the regime. Since September 30, 2015, Russia has deployed military assets in Syria, conducting a major air campaign against anti-government forces at Assad’s request. The U.S. and its regional allies have criticized Russia’s military actions. However, these regional allies soon pursued their own interests in the war. In November 2015, Turkey, a U.S. ally, clashed with Russia over alleged airspace violations and Russian bombings of areas in Syria that were supported by Turkey’s anti-government factions. Meanwhile, the United States did not align with Turkey and ran its own operations.

    The Syrian opposition, represented politically by the Syrian National Coalition, receives financial, logistical, and sometimes military support from Sunni-majority states allied with the U.S., particularly Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a Kurdish-majority group fighting against Assad in northern Syria, receive military and logistical support from NATO countries, except Turkey, due to their historic rivalry. Instead of helping them, Turkey fights the SDF and has captured a significant amount of territory from them.

    Besides the superpowers and their factions, from 2014 to October 2017, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), a group internationally recognized as a terrorist organization, controlled a significant portion of Syria’s territory. During this period, Western nations, including the U.S., Russia, Britain, and France, conducted direct military actions against ISIL in Syria and Iraq. Now, ISIL has shrunk to only a few desert pockets.

    As of December 2024, five key countries are directing the war in Syria: the United States, Russia, Turkey, Iran, and Israel. Despite its war in Ukraine, Russia remains a staunch supporter of Assad’s regime. Even after Islamist advances in Aleppo, Russia continues to send support to Assad, signaling its long-term plans in the region. By the summer of 2023, Russia had maintained 20 military bases and 85 other military points in Syria, with plans to enhance infrastructure to strengthen its military presence and capabilities.

    As Iran seeks to cement Shia dominance in Syria, engage in a power struggle with Israel, and ensure Assad’s regime remains strong, it actively supports Shia militants in Syria. Neighboring Lebanon and Iraq, though not directly involved, serve as havens for militants, effectively acting as breeding grounds for various Shia armed groups.

    The United States remains present in Syria, albeit with reduced involvement compared to earlier years. It operates a small portion near the Jordanian and Iraqi borders and supports rebel factions in the region. The U.S. maintains strong ties with Kurdish forces, now the second-largest military group in Syria, who control significant territory in the northeast.

    Turkey, a NATO member and nominal U.S. ally, pursues its own agenda in Syria. Opposed to both Assad and the Kurds, Turkey has seized and controls large areas in northern Syria, creating a buffer zone. Turkish forces have clashed with Kurdish groups, and Ankara reportedly has ties to Sunni Islamist factions, including HTS, which recently captured Aleppo. Turkey’s primary goal is to establish a Sunni, anti-Kurdish opposition  presence in the region.

    Israel remains highly active in Syria, viewing Iranian involvement in the country as a direct threat. Israeli forces frequently target Iranian officials and Hezbollah members operating in Syria, particularly those linked to attacks on Israel. If opportunities arise, Israel may also seek to expand its territorial control in the region.

    What is the future of the Syrian civil war? When will it end? How long will it last?

    The answer is that it will continue. Syria has already collapsed, but the war will persist as long as foreign powers maintain their interests in Syria. A complete takeover by Assad, as seen in the past, is unlikely. Russia and Iran, Assad’s key allies, are deeply entangled in other wars and face significant financial strains, limiting their ability to recapture all the territory back.

    The United States, under leadership like Trump’s, is unlikely to deploy troops actively to support the rebels against Russia and Iran. However, the U.S. will not entirely abandon the Opposition and Kurds, as they align with American interests in the region.

    Meanwhile, Turkey will remain a major player, continuing its support for HTS and other anti-Kurd factions. The conflict is evolving into a three-way war, with Assad’s official army, supported by Russia and Iranian-backed Shia militias, on one side; Kurdish forces and U.S.-backed militias on another; and HTS, Turkey, and Sunni militias on the third.

    These factions will continue to clash, ensuring that Syria endures more bloodshed and tears in the years ahead.

  • Resurgence of Syria’s Rebel Islamists: Trouble Brewing Again?

    Resurgence of Syria’s Rebel Islamists: Trouble Brewing Again?

    The Syrian civil war is once again drawing global attention as Islamist groups in northwest Syria conquer Aleppo by defeating the official Syrian army. Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the Islamist militant group leading the Syrian Salvage Government from Idlib, has announced its victory and shared images from Aleppo, Syria’s historic and second-largest city. Although HTS is not directly affiliated with the former Islamic State, its victory in Aleppo has raised global concerns about Syria potentially falling under renewed Islamist rule, reviving the horrific memories of the Islamic State.

    The Sunni Islamist faction HTS views this advancement as a major victory over the Shia-dominated Assad regime and his sponsors, Iran and Russia. Taking Aleppo is not only a strategic victory for the rebels but also an emotional one. The city has been a focal point in Syria’s civil war for over a decade. The 2016 battle for Aleppo, in which Assad’s forces recaptured the city, turned the civil war in his favor. Now, Aleppo is once again under the control of Islamists. Many people are fleeing Aleppo, fearing that Islamist factions could revive the horrors of ISIS’s reign. They consider Assad’s oppressive rule a lesser evil compared to the horror that Islamist control would bring.

    Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) launched a major offensive earlier this week. Within three days, they reached Aleppo, exposing the weakness of the official army’s defense. This marked the first time in four years that insurgents captured territory around the city’s outskirts. On Friday afternoon, Turkish media reported that jihadists and allied factions had seized significant portions of Aleppo. In response, Syrian government forces based in Damascus launched at least 125 airstrikes and shelled rebel-controlled areas in Idlib and western Aleppo. However, there has been no significant progress in their favor.

    Damascus expects more Russian military equipment to help it navigate the current situation. However, doubts persist due to Russia’s ongoing war with Ukraine, where it faces shortages of ammunition and personnel. While  Russia itself is relying on North Korean soldiers to reinforce its forces in Ukraine, questions arise about how much assistance it can offer Syria. Iran and Hezbollah, Assad’s key allies, have also suffered significant setbacks in their conflict with Israel, which has caused heavy losses. Although they recently brokered a ceasefire, the lull allowed Syria’s Salvation Government to seize the opportunity to act. Meanwhile, Palestine supporters on social media are accusing Israel, the United States, Turkey, and HTS of forming a possible alliance. 

    HTS’s capture of Aleppo has escalated the civil war, which began in 2011 and continues to tear Syria apart. The war is likely to see further developments, possibly becoming a battleground for world powers. Currently, the rebels cannot unite with other groups against Damascus due to ideological differences. HTS may team up with Turkey and its groups within Syria to confront the Kurds, who control significant territory. This shift could overshadow the ongoing struggle between the rebels and the Assad regime.

    The future of Syria likely involves a divided nation with shifting borders. HTS, the militants in Idlib, have tried to demonstrate their ability to govern but face accusations of suppressing dissent and relying heavily on dwindling international aid to meet civilians’ needs. For now, the militants are more focused on expanding the battlefield than on addressing the people’s needs and The people of Syria find themselves caught between a rock and a hard place.

  • Why Doesn’t the Islamic World Have a Superpower to Challenge Israel?

    Why Doesn’t the Islamic World Have a Superpower to Challenge Israel?

    The conflict between Muslims and Jews has historical roots extending over centuries, primarily driven by religious differences rather than just territorial disputes. This is why the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict attracts worldwide attention and involves Muslims and Jews globally. Social media is abuzz with propaganda from both sides. However, on the ground, Israel has a significant advantage as a sovereign state with advanced project management, while Hamas, which governs Gaza and initiated the fresh wave of conflict with terrorist attacks in Israel, finds itself on the defensive with only weakened support from Iran. The conflict appears to be heavily skewed in favor of one side, with the Hamas side suffering greatly.

    In terms of international politics, Israel receives support from superpowers like the United States, the United Kingdom, and France, while countries like Russia, China, and India maintain a more neutral stance. This support provides Israel with a substantial advantage. On the other hand, Hamas and Gaza mainly receive backing from Iran, whose capabilities are in question. This raises the question: why are there no superpowers in the Arab or Muslim world capable of challenging Israel?

    The answer lies in U.S. supremacy in a unipolar world. Although there is widespread anger and calls for solidarity with Hamas across the Islamic world, which stretches from Morocco to Indonesia, these are largely limited to public statements. This situation represents a clear victory for U.S. diplomacy, which has either aligned powerful countries with U.S. interests or severely weakened others. A powerful or superpower country typically has strong leadership, economic influence, political influence, strong international alliances, and a strong military, but few countries in the Islamic world possess all these features combined. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Turkey are considered powerful countries within the Islamic world today, but they are all aligned with the United States. Turkey is a NATO member with tight ties to the U.S., while Saudi Arabia and the UAE are highly reliant on business with the U.S., and their leadership maintains strong connections with U.S. diplomats. They also have military defense pacts with the U.S. Qatar, one of the wealthiest Islamic countries, also maintains a close relationship with the U.S. Despite their connections with Islamist leaders and organizations, and their roles in mediating with groups like Hamas and the Taliban.

    All the countries that previously challenged Israel are now weakened and humbled by U.S. strategies and diplomacy. Egypt, home to the largest army in the Middle East and the leader of last century’s Arab movements against Israel, along with Libya, Iraq, and Syria – countries that once challenged Israel—have lost the leadership capable of making such decisions. They are experiencing severe economic decline and face significant domestic challenges. Now, it seems that the Islamic Republic of Iran is currently the only major power from the Muslim world still challenging Israel. However, Iran has also been economically weakened by strong U.S. sanctions and faces serious domestic issues. Iran has been stunned and humbled by Israel through severe attacks. While Iran has vowed revenge, it has not taken any significant actions that are visibly effective. Nonetheless, Iran has not completely withdrawn from its ideological commitment to opposing Israel, unlike other states. Iran continues to fund organizations fighting against Israel, and Qatar is also reported to be providing support. Despite these efforts, no one is currently able to effectively challenge Israel, highlighting the weakness of the Islamic world outside of its elaborate organizations.

    As Israel is not ready for a truce, it seems likely that Gaza will be systematically annexed by Israel. This outcome appears inevitable. The stance of Islamic countries, which avoids a regional war, may bring peace, but it is clear that the position of Muslim governments does not reflect the sentiment of their populations. This could lead to a revival of terrorist organizations like ISIS in the Islamic world, which would bring more challenges in the region.

  • Will the Gaza Conflict Cause ISIS and Al-Qaida Revival?

    Will the Gaza Conflict Cause ISIS and Al-Qaida Revival?

    Palestine is an emotional issue for global Muslims. People who support Muslim solidarity across borders, from the United States to Indonesia, are now feeling angered. So-called rich Islamic countries and secular nations can’t do anything about the Gaza conflict, while the media in these countries continue to report Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide. The governments follow the strategy of avoiding animosity with Israel or the United States, but they are not blocking media coverage of the conflict in Gaza, and the media continue to celebrate it as usual. While Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, the state outlets of Middle Eastern governments, strongly propagate the Gaza issue, their own governments can’t do anything about it. Political analysts believe this situation will drive more young Muslims, who are desperate due to various conditions including the situation in Gaza, towards radical Islam, and they are easily swayed by Islamist organizations that fight against mainstream opinions, laws, and governments. The Islamic population feels betrayed by the world, and the media stoke emotional factors, which, combined with tough living conditions and unemployment, as well as patriotic far-right movements opposing Islamism in the West, create what is considered the perfect ground for the revival of the Islamic State, Al-Qaeda, and similar groups.

    Security services across the Middle East, including the Gulf countries, fear that the ongoing conflict may lead to a flow of radicalized youth to ISIS and al-Qaeda through social media groups. These individuals might travel to regions controlled by these groups, where they could receive training and indoctrinate more young people to conduct terrorist attacks. The United Nations has published a series of reports highlighting how major extremist groups are exploiting the war in Gaza to attract new recruits and mobilize existing supporters, even though both al-Qaeda and ISIS have condemned Hamas as apostates for decades.

    Officials and analysts are reporting an increase in Islamic militant extremism in various areas. An ISIS branch in the Sinai desert has recently become more lethal, and rising attacks by the group in Syria have raised concerns, with several plots thwarted in Jordan. In a recent attack, seven Syrian soldiers were killed in an ISIS ambush in Raqqa province, northern Syria, with 383 fighters from government forces and their proxy militias killed since the beginning of the year, according to the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Last month, Jordanian security services uncovered a plot in Amman when explosives detonated while being prepared by extremists in a poor neighborhood. Subsequent raids led to the detention of a network of predominantly young men who were apparently radicalized by ISIS propaganda. Reports from India indicate that the Islamic State is trying to recruit Muslim youth willing to fight against the nation and Israel. In Turkey, authorities arrested dozens of people last month to combat an increased threat from an ISIS affiliate with a strong presence there. Meanwhile, al-Qaeda’s branch in Yemen has launched a new effort to inspire followers to attack Western, Israeli, Jewish, and other targets. The issue extends beyond existing terrorist organizations, as increasingly radicalized youth may choose to join new groups or form their own in areas historically free from such threats, due to the borderless nature of the internet.

    The Gaza war may serve as a seminal cause for radicalizing the next generation of jihadis, as they are increasingly exposed to volatile images and videos from Gaza through the internet. Although the immediate consequences may not be apparent, they are likely to manifest over the coming years. The conflict has significantly heightened the terrorism threat and elicited a strong emotional reaction. Regional officials emphasize the impact of continuous exposure to images of suffering from Gaza, available 24/7 on television and the internet, describing the conflict as a ‘Push Factor’ that encourages extremist violence across the Middle East and beyond. According to Palestinian health officials, more than 38,000 people have died in the Israeli offensive into Gaza, with about half of those identified being women and children. 

    A vast regional occupation by the Islamic State, similar to their previous control stretching from Iraq to Syria, is expected to reestablish itself. Despite the opposition forces in this area being highly equipped and prepared for battle, ISIS has launched over 100 attacks on government forces and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in Syria in recent months, with violence peaking in March at levels not seen in several years. ISIS cells are operating at higher levels than before. Kurdish forces opposing ISIS face severe challenges from the armies of Turkey, Iraq, and Syria. In this complex war zone, combined with poor governance, the presence of individuals willing to fight and die for the cause could contribute to the creation of a caliphate and expansion into new areas. As more Islamic factions demand separate regions and attempt to overthrow democratic governments, anarchy is resulting. Consequently, the emergence of a more effective caliphate can be expected.

    Islamic extremist groups are inundating the internet with material that supports Gaza, Hamas, and Islam, while inciting anger towards Jews, Israel, the United States, and even Islamic Gulf countries. They are spreading instructions for bomb-making, violence, coups, and Islamic methods of killing, which easily influence the youth. The foundational ideas of Islamizing the world and killing infidels are more aggressively propagated through the internet than ever before. A new generation is growing up with an ideology that threatens peaceful coexistence in many countries. As more Muslim countries descend into anarchy, radicalization becomes increasingly feasible, and the revival of notorious Islamist terrorist organizations seems imminent, posing a growing risk to global stability.

  • What’s next for Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Islamic Republic?

    What’s next for Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Islamic Republic?

    It was a significant week for Israel; they humiliated Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Islamic Republic all in the same week. They killed Hamas’s political chief, Ismail Haniyeh, at a safe house during his visit to the Iranian capital, Tehran, just hours after killing Hamas’s military commander, Mohammed Deif, at a safe house in the Lebanese capital, Beirut. The Qatar-based official’s death is likely to affect progress in talks for a ceasefire and hostage release deal, which were already faltering. It appears that Israel is gaining the upper hand, with Arab countries uninterested in regional escalation, and the UN is a big humor.

    Hamas, which began the conflict with a brutal attack on October 7th by crossing into Israeli territory, is now facing severe repercussions. Their leaders are being consistently assassinated, even as they flee to Syria, Iran, or Qatar. Hamas’s plan to negotiate using hostages has already failed, and the people of Gaza, who initially celebrated the attack, are now suffering the most. According to Hamas authorities, the death toll in Gaza has approached 40,000 and the situation seems far from being resolved, as indicated by Netanyahu’s address to the U.S. Congress.

    Ismail Haniyeh, who lost all his family members in Israel’s retaliatory actions, was an important figure in the Hamas movement. While Hamas will likely regroup and survive, this war has left them with a leadership vacuum. Salah al-Arouri, considered one of Haniyeh’s deputies, was killed in a strike in Lebanon in January, and Marwan Issa, Hamas’s deputy military chief, was reportedly killed in Nuseirat in March. On Thursday, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) confirmed that an airstrike in Khan Younis last month successfully targeted Hamas’s military chief, Mohammed Deif.

    In the past, Hamas used a secret ballot in Gaza, the West Bank, Israeli prisons, and abroad to choose their political chief, but that is currently impossible. Instead, Khaled Meshaal, who is currently the head of the Hamas office in the Palestinian diaspora and was Haniyeh’s predecessor, is likely to step back into the role, at least as the acting politburo leader. Khalil al-Hayya, a Qatar-based deputy who has led Hamas’s ceasefire negotiation team, is from Gaza and is reportedly well-regarded by officials in Tehran, which positions him well to succeed Haniyeh.

    Even if a peace-seeking leader were to emerge within Hamas, peace in Gaza remains elusive. Prime Minister Netanyahu has consistently affirmed that the military operation will continue until all Hamas militants are eliminated. Israel claims to have eliminated half of the leadership of Hamas’s military wing, including six senior brigade commanders and more than 20 battalion commanders, and to have killed or wounded 14,000 militants. With the collapse of the hostage deals Hamas was relying on, it is becoming evident that this is the endgame for Hamas.

    Hezbollah, engaged in conflict with Israel alongside Hamas, is facing significant setbacks despite their control over certain territories. They have suffered major losses from Israel’s targeted strikes, with the most recent incident involving the death of a key militant leader who was believed to be secure in a residential area of Beirut. This event is a humiliation not only for Hezbollah but also for Lebanon. Last week, Hezbollah reportedly sent a warning through U.S. mediators that any strikes on Beirut would cross a red line and lead to retaliation against Tel Aviv. Despite this warning, Israel seems to have disregarded it and continues its hunt of Hezbollah leaders, exacerbating the group’s troubles.

    The Guardian of Hamas and Hezbollah, Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei, led the prayers over the coffins of Haniyeh and his bodyguard, who were draped in traditional black and white Palestinian scarves. Iran is also facing turmoil due to escalating tensions with Israel. Many believe that the death of former Islamic Republic President Ebrahim Raisi was planned and executed by Israel, along with other reported deaths from targeted killings. Despite attempts at retaliation, Iran has been unable to take effective action against Israel. However, Iran appears to be increasingly enraged. Speakers at Haniyeh’s funeral, which was attended by Khamenei, Iran’s new president Masoud Pezeshkian, Revolutionary Guards chief Gen. Hossein Salami, and senior members of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, vowed to avenge his death. While Israel has already launched a new wave of attacks in Lebanon, Iran’s response is of significant interest. It remains to be seen whether Iran will continue its proxy warfare using militants in Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen, or if it will escalate to a direct conflict with Israel or engage in combined warfare similar to the 1960s.

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu doesn’t have any worries on escalating situations and they announced on Thursday that his  country is fully prepared to respond to any aggression from any party. Although international officials have limited influence over Israel and Iran, they are working to de-escalate the cycle of retaliation and prevent a broader conflict.

  • How Humiliating is Syria’s Parliamentary Election?

    How Humiliating is Syria’s Parliamentary Election?

    The Syrian Arab Republic, a country under the dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad, is in ruins. Assad, who has been president since 2000, does not appear to be stepping down anytime soon. Despite his hunger for power having destroyed the country, split it apart, and caused people to be exiled,  he remains in control. Even though he is authoritarian, he loves elections. He always conducts elections on time, but makes sure it favors him. Last Monday, he conducted a parliamentary election for the 250 seats. Undoubtedly, the election is designed to favor Assad’s party, the Ba’ath Party, which has been in power since the 1963 coup d’état. They even hold reservations, making it easy to gain a majority. Opposition parties in parliament do not have much influence and are mostly aligned with Assad. The real opposition is at real war with the Assad regime. Election results have not come out yet, as time is needed for manipulation, because the new parliament has the duty of amending the constitution to remove the presidential term limit, favoring Assad to rule as long as he wishes.

    This time, 1,516 candidates approved by the government are competing for the 250 seats in the People’s Assembly. Approximately 8,151 polling stations were set up in 15 voting districts within government-held areas. The competitive part of the Syrian election process occurs before the polling starts, when a voted-on list of Baath Party candidates is sent to the party’s central command, allowing them to run in the election. The elections are essentially decided once the Baath Party list is finalized. Once the list is completed, we can check the results, and you will see that almost all of them will be in Parliament. To the public’s advantage, the number of incumbents who made the final list this year was relatively low, suggesting a reshuffling within the Baath Party. Western countries and Assad’s critics have no doubts that the polling in government-held areas in Syria is neither free nor fair.

    While Syria faces many war-driven issues, the economy is the main topic of discussion among the public during the election. The poll took place as Syria’s economy continues to deteriorate after years of conflict, Western-led sanctions, and dwindling aid due to donor fatigue. The value of the national currency against the dollar has reached new lows, sparking food and fuel inflation and making the country one of the toughest places to live on earth. Almost a year ago, the government partially rolled back its subsidy program to save the economy, while the government doubled public sector and pension wages to keep officials and influential civil servants on their side. In the Druze-majority southern province of Sweida, anti-government protests have occurred regularly for nearly a year due to economic misery, leading many to call for a boycott of the polls. Nevertheless, candidates primarily emphasized general slogans such as national unity and prosperity.

    After casting his ballot in Damascus, Assad spoke to reporters about the vote and how parliament could serve as a platform for national dialogue in the country. This remark could be marked as one of the most ironic comments of the year. This vote marks the fourth in Syria since mass anti-government protests in 2011, originally a call for democracy that escalated into an ongoing civil war. Syria’s 2024 parliamentary election excludes rebel-held northwest Syria and the country’s northeast, which is under the control of the U.S.-backed, Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces. Notably, unlike presidential elections, millions of diaspora Syrians, whose numbers have significantly increased since the civil war, are not eligible to vote for legislators, ensuring that only those favorable to the regime will cast votes. Therefore, it’s an election merely for the sake of having one. Congratulations, Assad; we don’t even need the results to be published.

  • Israel’s Attack on Syrian Consulate: Further Escalation of Tensions?

    Israel’s Attack on Syrian Consulate: Further Escalation of Tensions?

    The recent phase of the Israel-Hamas conflict began with Hamas’s attack on Israeli civilians, sparking an ongoing cycle of violence. With the death toll now exceeding 30,000, tensions between Israel and Hamas, essentially a proxy conflict involving Iran, have reached a critical point. Targeting Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, two major supporters of Hamas, Israel has escalated its military activities in Syria. The reported Israeli airstrike on Iran’s embassy in Syria, which claimed the lives of senior commanders among its casualties, is a noteworthy show.  On this occasion, There is concern that if Iran bypasses intermediaries like Hezbollah and Hamas, it may resort to direct warfare, potentially involving Syria and Lebanon in a wider conflict.

    Israel has a history of targeting Iran’s military installations and its proxies in Syria, but the recent attack on the consulate marked the first direct strike on Iran’s expansive embassy compound. Since Egypt’s peace agreement with Israel, Iran has emerged as a leading voice among Islamic communities seeking retribution against Israel. Many Muslims worldwide perceive Iran as the foremost advocate for Muslim solidarity and retaliation against Israel. While tensions have been high, direct warfare between the two nations has been avoided in recent years. However, the latest incident has raised concerns about the potential for Iran to enter the conflict directly.

    Observers note that the Israel-Hamas conflict is transcending local boundaries, with Israel conducting operations into Lebanon and Syria to target Hezbollah, an organization linked to Hamas. Additionally, there have been renewed attacks by Iranian-backed militias on U.S. and Israeli targets in Iraq. Recent Israeli strikes in Syria have resulted in significant casualties among Syrian forces and Hezbollah, marking the highest death toll since the Israel-Hamas conflict began in October.

    Tehran has vowed a strong response to the consulate attack. Earlier reports from Iran’s ambassador to Syria, Hossein Akbari, indicated that five to seven individuals, including diplomats, tragically lost their lives. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps confirmed the deaths of seven Iranian military advisors, including senior commander Mohammad Reza Zahedi, from its elite Quds Force. Israel typically refrains from commenting on its military actions in Syria, but The New York Times reported that four unnamed Israeli officials acknowledged Israel’s responsibility for the attack.

    Iran’s U.N. mission swiftly condemned the strike on their embassy, denouncing it as a “Flagrant Violation” of international law and the U.N. Charter. They stressed the threat it poses to regional peace and called for condemnation from the U.N. Security Council, asserting Iran’s right to respond decisively. Hezbollah echoed this sentiment, promising retaliation against the perpetrators.

    A number of Muslim countries denounced the incident, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq, Jordan, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, and even Russia. Though it raised concerns about rising tensions, the U.S. state Department did not expect this to have an impact on negotiations to release Israeli captives held by Hamas. 

    The UN expressed deep concern but deferred comprehensive remarks for later. Ali Vaez, a senior adviser at the International Crisis Group, noted the significance of the strike in targeting both individuals and the location.

    Israel typically refrains from commenting on its targeted assassination strikes, although Iranian media openly acknowledged the loss of high-ranking figures. Last year, Israel targeted Sayed Reza Musawi, the IGRC head of logistics in the Levant, among others. In the recent strike, Brig Gen Mohammad Reza Zahedi and his deputy, Gen Haji Rahimi, were killed, along with Brig Gen Hossein Amirollah, the chief of general staff for the al-Quds force in Syria and Lebanon.

    Iran has pledged retaliation following Israeli airstrikes that demolished the Iranian consulate in Damascus, resulting in the deaths of at least 11 people. However, the likelihood of a full-scale war between Iran and Israel remains low at present. While both nations have been involved in numerous conflicts in the past, they currently appear to prefer targeted strikes over outright warfare. Some experts speculate that Israel may expand its operations to Lebanon, Syria, and possibly Yemen, but a direct conflict with Iran appears improbable. Iran is unlikely to deploy troops to Lebanon or Syria, as both countries are suffering by Israel. Consequently, the conflict is expected to persist as a proxy war characterized by targeted killings.

  • The Downfall of Syria: 13 Years of Struggle for Power End to Ruin

    The Downfall of Syria: 13 Years of Struggle for Power End to Ruin

    After thirteen years, Syria is still at war. One of the worst humanitarian crises of the twenty-first century, bringing Syria, a country rich in historical legacy, to complete collapse. Amidst the continuous turmoil, a number of state-sponsored and non-state organizations have emerged, each contributing to the obstruction of Syria’s development and the enormous exodus of its citizens.

    Big Rallies were visible in the divided Idlib region on the occasion of the 13th anniversary of Syrian Conflict, a region under the control of rebels opposed to Bashar al-Assad. Notably, alongside chants against Assad, protestors also voice opposition to jihadist leaders in the area. Currently, Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), formerly affiliated with al-Qaida, exerts significant influence over much of the northwest, including Idlib. People don’t find any difference between Assad and separatist now, they all treat them the same. People slowly understand what they wish for and what they fight for will never reach them. Idlib is witnessing a lot of protests as the people discontent, Recent weeks have witnessed numerous protests against HTS leader Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, sparked by the death of an individual while in the group’s custody. 

    There were protests at the 13th anniversary that took place outside of Idlib as well. Hundreds of people gathered to commemorate the occasion in the government-held city of Sweida in the south. This comes after about seven months of anti-government demonstrations in the wider Sweida region, which is mostly home to the Druze minority in Syria and has up until now mostly stayed out of the conflict. 

    It all started in March 2011, when nationwide demonstrations against Bashar al-Assad’s government gained traction and resulted in sizable assemblies in favor of democracy. Assad crushed the protest by using force. The intense persecution carried out by the regime sparked the Syrian insurgency and gave rise to armed opposition groups like the Free Syrian Army. By mid-2012, the fighting had intensified and become a full-fledged civil war. 

    Understanding the multipolar conflict in Syria requires deliberate effort. Various foreign nations, including the United States, Iran, Russia, and Turkey, have provided support to different factions involved. Russia has conducted airstrikes and ground operations in Syria. Meanwhile, the international coalition led by the United States, has primarily focused on combating the Islamic State while occasionally backing anti-Assad forces such as the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and the Revolutionary Commando Army. Turkey, supporting the Syrian National Army (SNA), has controlled parts of northern Syria since 2016 and has engaged in conflicts with the Assad regime, the Islamic State, and the SDF.

    The Kurds, a significant factor in the region, have shifted their alliances over time. They are against Turkey and joining forces with the United States against the Islamic State, they also fought alongside the SDF against Assad. In 2019, Kurdish leaders in Rojava, a region within Syria, brokered a significant agreement with the Assad government, prompted by the U.S. withdrawal from Syria. This agreement aimed to secure Syria’s support in repelling Turkish forces invading Syria and targeting Kurds. However, by 2023, the primary military conflict had transitioned from the Syrian government versus rebels to clashes between Turkish forces and factions within Syria.

    Turkish forces intensified their attacks on Kurdish forces in the Rojava region, launching airstrikes and ground assaults against the Syrian Democratic Forces starting in October 2023. These actions were purportedly in retaliation for the Ankara bombing, which the Turkish government attributed to assailants from northeastern Syria.

    While people died or living in the worst living conditions, Numerous political analysts, military strategists, and journalists strongly believe  that the Syrian Civil War is fundamentally rooted in a geopolitical rivalry between Russia and the United States, along with their respective allies in the region, concerning natural gas pipelines traversing Syria en route to European markets. The United States and its allies proposed the construction of the Qatar–Turkey pipeline, aiming to diminish Europe’s reliance on Russian natural gas, particularly crucial during winter months when many European households depend on Russian supplies. Conversely, Russia and its allies sought to thwart this project and instead promote the Iran–Iraq–Syria pipeline.

    Syrian President Bashar al-Assad rejected Qatar’s Proposal to construct a $10 billion Qatar-Turkey pipeline through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, and Turkey. Allegedly, this refusal prompted clandestine CIA efforts to instigate a Syrian civil war, with the objective of pressuring Assad to step down and facilitate the installation of a pro-American leader who would endorse the pipeline deal. Leaked documents from 2009 indicate that the CIA commenced funding and supporting opposition factions in Syria to incite civil unrest.

    Russia supports Assad’s opposition to the Qatar-Turkey pipeline, favoring the promotion of the Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline, which would bolster Russia’s allies and enhance Iran’s economy. However, such business ventures in Syria have come at a significant human cost. The United States needed only some dates to start the project. There was hate fuming in Syria on Assad’s Addiction to power. Taking advantage of the situation, the United States has raised the Syrian Democratic Forces and other factions to challenge Assad’s regime.

    There are suspicions that even the Islamic State might have been a product of US intelligence, akin to the Taliban in Afghanistan. In this volatile scenario, various parties have vested interests: Turkey, Israel, Russia, Iran, everyone has blood on their hands.

    Syria has undergone fragmentation, with various entities asserting control and pursuing their own interests. The Assad regime still holds sway over most of the territory, officially recognized as the Syrian Arab Republic, and maintains influence in key cities like Damascus. Assad’s support network includes powerful allies such as Russia, Iran, China, and surprisingly, some Arab nations including Saudi Arabia.

    In northeastern Syria, the independent Administration of North and East Syria (AANES), also known as Rojava, serves as a de facto independent entity. Rojava aspires to autonomy inside Syria’s federal and democratic structure, not total independence. The area is divided into autonomous sub-areas that include Afrin, Jazira, Euphrates, Raqqa, Tabqa, Manbij, and Deir Ez-Zor. In the midst of the ongoing Rojava conflict in 2012, it gained de facto autonomy, with the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), the country’s recognized armed force, playing a crucial role. 

    The region has widespread support for its dedication to independent, pluralist, egalitarian, feminist, and universal democratic ideals in discussions with different groups and parties. Significant Kurdish, Arab, and Assyrian communities coexist with lesser ethnic Turkmen, Armenian, Circassian, and Yazidi populations in northeastern Syria, which has a diversified population.

    If the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES) succeeds in facing various challenges, including authoritarian tendencies, corruption, conflicts with Turkey, Kurdish forces, and Islamic State factions, there could be a possibility of a Syrian partition akin to the examples of Germany, Vietnam, and Korea. This scenario might entail a split between a Russia-backed Assad-controlled Syria and a West-backed AANES-controlled Syria.

    Apart from the Assad and Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) administrations, there exists the Syrian Interim Government (SIG), established by the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces, serving as an alternative governance structure in Syria. The SIG claims to be the sole legitimate government representing the Syrian opposition, challenging the authority of the Council of Ministers of the Syrian Arab Republic. Headquartered in Azaz, Aleppo Governorate, the interim government exercises indirect control over certain areas within the country. Turkey is in support of SIG and the weird United States who already made the situation complex also supports SIG sometimes.

    The Syrian Free Army (SFA), also known as the New Syrian Army (NSA) or Revolutionary Commando Army, is a Syrian opposition faction that controls territory near the Jordan–Syria border. It has received training from the United States Army and has been stationed at al-Tanf. Established as an expansion of the Allahu Akbar Brigade by defectors from the Syrian Arab Army and other rebels during the Syrian Civil War, the New Syrian Army aimed to drive out the Islamic State from southeastern Syria. 

    The Syrian Salvation Government, established in early November 2017 in Idlib Governorate, serves as a de facto alternative to the Syrian opposition’s governance. It was formed under the leadership of the Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) rebel coalition. Following its inception, tensions emerged between the Syrian Salvation Government (SSG) and the Syrian Interim Government (SIG), leading to reports of HTS unilaterally dissolving several SIG-supported local councils across northwestern Syria. While HTS officially declares its independence from the civilian administration of the Salvation Government, labeling their relationship as a “partnership” aimed at providing security and an alternative to the Ba’athist government, some analysts challenge this assertion. They argue that HTS maintains control over the SSG’s security and economic sectors, using the SSG as a political facade.

    Interestingly, these opposing factions do not cooperate or attempt to form a unified government, despite not being opposed to the idea of a united Syria. While major opposition factions with ties to the United States receive financial or military assistance, they fail to forge alliances among themselves. This raises suspicions about the true interests of the United States in the region, especially as Russia remains steadfast in supporting Assad’s official government. As we delve deeper into the situation, questions arise about the possibility that the Islamic State’s foreign vehicles and weapons may not be coincidental.

    The once prominently featured brutality of the war has now given way to an uneasy stalemate. As aspirations for regime change diminish and peace negotiations prove fruitless, some regional governments are reconsidering their opposition to engaging with Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad. With the government reclaiming control over much of the country, Assad’s grip on power appears increasingly secure.

    The conflict has taken a devastating toll, with estimates ranging from 470,000 to 610,000 violent deaths, making it the second deadliest conflict of the 21st century after the Second Congo War. International organizations have accused all involved parties—including the Assad government, IS, opposition groups, Iran, Russia, Turkey, and the U.S.-led coalition—of severe human rights abuses and massacres. This war has led to a significant refugee crisis. The number of refugees may have surpassed 6 million with the majority moving to Turkey. Across the political spectrum in the country, refugees have faced considerable blame, particularly for exacerbating the economic downturn. And all over Europe they are not welcomed like Ukrainians.

    Syria remains without a visible political solution. the urgent need to prioritize peace efforts to counteract the dire trends afflicting the nation. The UN estimates that 16.7 million Syrians will require humanitarian assistance or protection this year, marking the highest figure since the conflict began. Nearly 90% of Syrians live in poverty, according to UN data. UNICEF reports that almost 7.5 million children in Syria will require humanitarian aid in 2024. 

    A harsh punishment meted out to those who desire a democratic government.