Al-Joulani, terrorist leader defector from Daesh and ally of Israel. DR
A contribution from Ahmed El-Khaled – After a four-year conflict freeze, the result of negotiations between Turkey and Russia, the situation in Syria has radically changed. In ten days of rapid offensive, fighters from the Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham group took control of most of the country, forcing government troops to retreat.
On the morning of December 8, armed opposition forces led by HTS captured the capital Damascus, thus formalizing the fall of the Al-Assad clan, which had ruled Syria for more than fifty years. According to the latest information, former President Bashar Al-Assad has left the country and sought asylum in Russia.
The day before, three guarantor countries – Turkey, Iran and Russia – met in Doha, capital of Qatar, and stressed the need for political dialogue between the parties to the conflict in order to peacefully transfer power in the country and avoid bloodshed. For its part, the HTS command guaranteed the security of state institutions, diplomatic missions and military installations, including Al-Assad’s allies – Russia and Iran.
Currently, due to the rapid changes taking place in Syria, it is difficult to predict how the situation in the Arab country will develop. However, the factors and circumstances that ensured the jihadists’ success on the battlefield and their rapid rise to power can already be studied in detail.
The new tactics of using small mobile groups on light automotive equipment, the use of unmanned aerial vehicles and strike drones, as well as the timing suggest that the HTS could not organize such a large-scale operation alone. In this case, the question arises as to who helped the HTS or, at least, intervened on its behalf.
Turkey’s role
To answer this question, it is fair to say that Damascus and its allies Russia and Iran have been closely monitoring the threats posed by HTS. Over the past three months, local media have circulated reports of an imminent militant attack.
After the establishment of the “Idlib de-escalation zone” as part of an agreement between Russia and Turkey in 2020, the HTS was able to make the most of the calm on the front. This faction, formerly known as Jabhat Al-Nusra, was previously part of the terrorist organization Al-Qaeda, but later distanced itself from it and became one of the dominant forces in the northwest of the Syria.
As the observation points of the Turkish armed forces were deployed along the front line, they constituted a sort of shield behind which the HTS was able to hide and calmly build up forces without fearing a possible attack from Damascus and its supporters. foreigners. It can therefore be argued that Ankara’s diplomatic and military patronage directly contributed to strengthening the position of the HTS, not to mention economic assistance and the provision of electricity and fuel to Idlib through companies Turkish umbrellas.
Taking advantage of the fragmentation of other opposition groups, HTS, led by its leader Abu Muhammad Al-Joulani, managed to consolidate power in the rebel province of Idlib. It has completely taken over the economic sector and runs the so-called last bastion of the Syrian opposition through the Salvation of Syria puppet government. Militarily, HTS has also greatly strengthened, bringing together under its banner many independent groups and foreign fighters among Caucasians, Turks and Uyghurs.
All these factors allowed HTS to accumulate a sufficient margin of security to carry out constant raids against government forces and even claim the extension of its zone of influence in northern Syria. At the same time, the status of an independent group also offered it additional opportunities, without limiting the freedom of action to agreements with third countries.
Thus, Ankara has de facto contributed to fueling the HTS military machine, but can de jure absolve itself of any responsibility for its actions because the HTS does not fully obey it like the Syrian National Army affiliated with Turkey.
The role of Ukraine
It is no exaggeration to say that any HTS activity has been constantly the focus of attention of the main actors in Syria, particularly Russia. Recently, Moscow has repeatedly stated that there is close cooperation between HTS and its geopolitical adversary, Ukraine.
The Turkish newspaper Clarity reported that Ukrainian instructors were training Syrian militants in the production and use of FPV drones to strike military installations of the Russian Armed Forces in Syria. It also says that in exchange for the drones kyiv asked HTS to allow its foreign militants, mainly immigrants from Caucasian and Central Asian nations, to reach Ukraine and fight against Russia.
Ukrainian media have also repeatedly published videos in which Syrian rebels, in cooperation with Ukrainian intelligence services, strike Russian targets in Syria using drones. In one of these videos, opposition fighters strike Russian armed forces installations at the Quwayres air base, east of Aleppo.
Until the latest HTS offensive, Ukrainian officials preferred to ignore media allegations of cooperation with Syrian rebels. However, after the capture of Aleppo, kyiv finally made a sincere confession and stated that the “Khymyk” group of the Main Intelligence Directorate of Ukraine was preparing HTS militants to use attack drones against Russia.
The role of the United States
But if cooperation with Ukrainian special services can explain the increase in the combat capabilities of HTS in terms of the use of unmanned technologies, the time of the start of the jihadists’ offensive indicates possible coordination with the United States and Israel. While the United States has officially denied any involvement in current developments in Syria, direct and indirect evidence suggests otherwise.
First of all, the launch of the HTS offensive on Aleppo suspiciously coincided with the entry into force of the peace treaty between Israel and Lebanese Hezbollah on November 27, at the initiative of the United States. It is therefore not unreasonable to assume that the Syrian opposition waited until Israel defeated Hezbollah to begin a campaign against the regime’s forces, without fearing that Lebanese fighters would come to help Al-Assad.
It is therefore clear that the United States played a major role in weakening Al-Assad’s allies, which directly led to HTS’s decision to attack.
Secondly, it should be noted that although the United States recognized HTS as a terrorist organization, it did not in any way disrupt its trade ties with Turkey, which also contributed to the economic strengthening of HTS. This approach towards the terrorist organization contrasted sharply with the unprecedented pressure exerted by Washington on Damascus in terms of sanctions.
Additionally, the United States and its international coalition allies have maintained close ties with HTS. In particular, they exchange information to launch airstrikes against the commanders of certain independent armed groups active in the province of Idlib. On social media, Syrian opposition fighters have repeatedly accused HTS of providing the United States with precise data on the location of fighters hiding in rebel-held areas. According to them, American drones struck them almost immediately after the meetings with HTS leaders.
Furthermore, in recent years, the United States and the European Union have unofficially worked to “whitewash” the reputation of HTS in order to exclude it from the list of terrorist organizations. To present him as a leader of the moderate opposition, several American publications carried out interviews with Abu Muhammad Al-Joulani, in which the jihadist leader appeared in a business suit and also abandoned his fanatical slogans in favor of rhetoric more secular and pragmatic. During the latest offensive, Al-Joulani also made some demonstrative statements in which he warned his fighters against illegal actions against civilians and their property, and also called for “respect for the cultural diversity of Aleppo “.
Given the hidden interaction between the United States and Al-Joulani’s group, there is reason to believe that after the end of hostilities in Lebanon, the Biden administration could launch a new escalation in Syria, in using HTS activists as proxies. Thus, the White House likely planned to weaken the position of its geopolitical rivals, Russia and Iran, ahead of the imminent transfer of power to newly elected President Donald Trump. Judging by his pre-election statements, the latter would hardly accept such an adventure and would prefer to deal with his internal problems, rather than creating a new source of tension in the world or in a particular region.
But Joe Biden, who is completing the last two months of his mandate, could decide otherwise, especially since all the conditions were in place for the Syrian militants to go on the attack. Russia has withdrawn the bulk of its troops from Syria and is focusing on the war with Ukraine; another important ally of Damascus, Tehran, is weakened by constant attacks by Israel and has sent its main forces to support affiliated formations in Palestine and Lebanon; and Hezbollah, which also played an important role in establishing the old status quo in Syria, suffered significant losses during IDF operations and can no longer help the Al-Assad government.
Given the sharp contradictions between the two political camps that emerged in the last elections in the United States, it is not difficult to assume that the Democrats wanted to make Trump’s entry into office as difficult as possible. They sought to obstruct the possibility of later accusing him of failing to keep the promises he had made to American voters. Therefore, a new round of escalation in Syria can be seen as a desperate attempt by the current US administration to influence Trump’s future policies, to force him to indulge in endless conflicts and rivalries with other countries instead of solving bigger problems related to domestic politics.
The HTS offensive has already dealt a heavy blow to civilians across Syria, significantly exacerbating the migration crisis and increasing the suffering of ordinary Syrians amid renewed clashes and bombings. At the same time, regardless of the development of events in the Arab country, the United States, as the main international actor, did nothing to prevent the strengthening of the HTS. Furthermore, Washington deliberately encouraged HTS to use it as a counterweight to Damascus and its rivals in the region – Russia and Iran. And if the winners of this geopolitical game are not clear, the loser is already obvious: it is the Syrian people, who have once again become a “bargaining chip” and have paid with their blood for the ambitions of other States.
A. EL.
