USA - Middle East: Donald Trump severely compromised U.S foreign policy in the Middle East

During the presidential election campaign of 2016 Donald Trump quickly made headlines with his bold statements on domestic and foreign issues. He would repeal and replace Obamacare, build a great southern wall “to keep the bad guys out,” rebuild the aging American infrastructure and turn the fight with the Islamic State into high gear by “bombing the shit out of them.”

Trump’s controversial travel ban, aimed at monitoring and decreasing the arrival of Muslims from a number of Middle Eastern countries for so-called security reasons, caused a major uproar as thousands of people took to the streets across the States to voice their concerns over the direction this new administration was taking their country. Although the first draft was dismissed,  the administration made it clear that it would put it forward again as the threat was real and it was only a matter of time before an attack took place without the necessary precautions. The American Supreme Court recently decided to allow certain parts of the ban to be implemented although there are still ambiguous terms in there that will cause problems in the near future.

President Trump’s unique insights on how to revitalize the American economy would lead to the withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord as there was no convincing argument regarding global warming. The (non-binding) agreement was extremely hard on the United States’ coal mining industry while other global powers such as India and China could even increase their emission output. The Dakota Pipeline project that was put on hold because of environmental concerns was restarted despite protests and concerns from several politicians. As the whole world continues to put its hope in renewable energies, the Trump administration sticks to coal and oil and now even has plans to expand its fracking operations, something that was deemed too expensive before and could potentially be dangerous to the countries’ water supplies although these concerns are dismissed because at the moment there haven’t been any conclusive studies.

After taking office, Trump was quick to resurrect and push through an arms deal with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, worth over one billion dollars, which was tabled under the Obama administration because it was considered immoral as the ordnance might be used in the Syrian conflict as well as Yemen. The Trump administration had no such qualms as it was “a great deal” that would result in a major boost of the American economy and a much-needed win for the president. Trump was also quick to pick the Saudis’ side in their beef with Qatar as the Wahhabi kingdom moves to send a clear message through the Arabian peninsula that working with its regional nemesis Iran would be very unwise. Interestingly the rest of the administration was more hesitant to declare a side as Qatar hosts an important American base that provides the U.S. with a foothold in the region.

Trump also took the gloves off in the fight against the Islamic State as the air campaign against the terror group was intensified and additional forces were sent to provide training and indirect fire support in the campaigns in Mosul and Raqqa. This escalation resulted in a noticeable increase in civilian casualties, something the previous administration tried to avoid. Although it has to be said that this number could only increase as the fighting would intensify in urban areas, dropping heavy ordnance on civilian infrastructure when it is known that civilians are used as human shields sends the wrong message to the people you’re trying to liberate and get on your side, period.

The Trump administration’s attitude towards the Assad regime has changed a number of times as they initially wanted him gone, then wanted him to stay to provide some stability in the transition period (when it still looked like the status quo was still somewhat in effect). However after the chemical attack in Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province the administration called Assad unfit for office and even fired Tomahawk missiles toward a Syrian airbase “to send a clear message,” only to declare a few months later (by Rex Tillerson) that Assad’s future should be determined by Russia, effectively declaring that Russia was in the driving seat from then on. This constant shifting does not inspire confidence in the US’ long-time allies and the proxies it is backing on the ground.

Trump’s newest attempt to show his diplomatic prowess may very well be the final nail in the coffin for the American influence in the Syrian conflict and the region. By ending the CIA-funded arming program in support for these groups it can only spell certain doom for them as the American-supplied Anti-Tank Guided Missiles (ATGMs) are an essential part of the rebels’ strategy in holding the Assad forces at bay. Even worse is that it was done to mend the relationship with Russia, a backer of Assad, which could be perceived by the rebel groups as a form of betrayal. What few moderate groups remain in Syria are now at risk of disbanding completely or being absorbed by more radical groups such as Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham. This group is one of the dominant factions in the opposition and currently moves to secure its hold over the other rebel groups in Idlib province.

It is very possible that this initial dismay could turn into an anti-American (or anti-western) attitude which could lead to an effective recruiting ground for terror groups that aim to carry out attacks against western installations or assets in the region or even on their home turf. This could lead to a difficult relationship with its regional partners, for example the kingdom of Jordan, as they could get caught in the crossfire. Other partners who are have been looking for opportunities to increase their influence and role in the region, Turkey and Israel, might even distance themselves further from the Trump as they begin to set their own course that serves their own interests best, rather than looking towards the U.S. for approval.

It looks like Trump’s policy of ‘America First’ is becoming reality, but not the way he intended…By charting a course for the U.S. that serves its own agenda this administration will continue to alienate the country from its allies and erode the foundations of several important institutions it was one a prominent member of… ‘America First’ could very well become ‘America Alone’ while other countries move in to fill the vacuum.

= = = = = = = = 

If you have any questions, remarks or constructive feedback on the content or my writing, please do not hesitate to leave a comment. I would love to use this platform to interact with people to discuss topics like these and gain new perspectives and improve on my writing skills.

Lebanon Refugee Crisis: the next possible hotspot in the Middle East?

Lebanon’s prime minister al-Hariri stated that his country urgently needed more international help in order to provide for the 1,5 million Syrian refugees that are currently living there.

Almost seven years into the Syrian conflict the number of refugees continue to be a major cause for concern for the region and the international community. More than 5 million Syrians have fled the country and are living in camps across the region, with around 3 million Syrian refugees living in camps in Turkey, 1,5 million in Lebanon and the remainder living in Jordan, (southern) Iraq and Egypt or moving even further away in an attempt to reach Europe and the US.

Adding to this, around 6 million Syrians are currently displaced inside Syria, living in areas under control of the different factions . This number is truly astounding when the population of Syria had been estimated to around 17 million people in 2014. This would mean that almost two-thirds(!) of the Syrian population are currently (in)directly forcibly displaced by the ongoing conflict.

Hosting and providing for the refugees in Lebanon hasn’t been an easy task. Lebanon has been trying to deal with a slowing economic growth and numerous other domestic problems, but at the moment the population of Lebanon has increased by twenty-five percent only through the refugee influx, which has put a tremendous strain on available resources and services. Although the situation hasn’t gotten out of hand up until now, the atmosphere is definitely changing.

Lebanese people are growing tired of the continuous presence of Syrians in the streets, looking to sell anything they can or offering themselves for low-paying labour jobs. They also believe that the government is currently doing more for them than their own people. This could potentially become a very dangerous situation when the necessary international aid does not arrive in the needed quantities to start supporting the Lebanese government and relieve the tension in its society. An example of this is when a short while ago two separate incidents occurred in the camps where fires broke out and dozens of tents, along with all the people’s belongings went up in flames. Several people, among which children, were severely injured. The incidents were classified as unfortunate accidents due to a technical malfunction of hardware. Thanks to humanitarian organisations operating in the country efforts were made to rebuild the necessary number of tents to help the people affected by the disaster.

People could easily start taking matters into their own hands when the situation is not properly addressed by the Lebanese government and the international community. Targeted assaults, forced entry into the camps and arson are only a few things that come to mind of what could happen… What is even worse, an escalation or lack of initiative could reignite the sectarian violence that has cast a shadow over the country’s recent history and to this day hasn’t been truly settled.

When Lebanon was under colonial rule after the Great War, the Maronite Christian community had a strong working relationship with the French and gradually became the dominant faction in politics after its independence in the 1940s. During the Cold War several Arab groups were inspired by the ideas of socialism and pan-Arab ideologies which led to an increasing polarized society. When clashes broke out in 1975 these Arab groups were (in-directly supported by the Soviet-Union(’s allies in the region) while the Christian communities were supported leaned towards the West. It didn’t take long before Syria and Israel joined the fray and the US (as part of their Cold War’s containment policy) became indirectly involved.

In the 1980s Israel invaded Lebanon to stamp out insurgents that were attacking from there and an international force had to be sent to intervene. It was only in 1990 that hostilities officially came to an end through the Taif Agreement but to this day tensions are high, clashes are frequent in several parts of the country between communities and parts of the Taif Agreement haven’t been implemented or followed. 

= = = = = = = = 

If you have any questions, remarks or constructive feedback on the content or my writing, please do not hesitate to leave a comment. I would love to use this platform to interact with people to discuss topics like these and gain new perspectives and improve on my writing skills.

Syria: Ceasefires are an effective part of the Assad-coalition’s strategy

When the Syrian Uprising escalated into nation-wide violence and numerous groups were formed to protect their communities and fight the Assad government, momentum was on the opposition’s side as it didn’t take long before Assad loyalists were starting to lose control of large territories and were ousted from numerous cities across the country.

The Syrian Arab Army’s initial strategy was to keep a force in all corners of Syria to be able to hold onto the claim that the regime had not lost control of the country. There was still an SAA presence in the cities of Aleppo, Qamishli, Hasakah, Deir ez-Zour and Daraa although the majority of these cities were under the control of rebel groups as well as a large part of the surrounding countryside.

It was in the western part of the country that numerous pockets of rebel hold-outs began to form. The Assad loyalists began to besiege this pockets to avoid them from linking up with one another, defeat them quickly if the opportunity should arise or just force them to surrender by either bombing or starving them into submission. This tactic seemed to work as these fronts remained mostly static and could there for be manned by less experienced troops while the heavy lifting would be done by the air force and time itself…

The Syrian Arab Army had to prioritize its military efforts as it had to fight off rebel offensives on numerous fronts and it was struggling to keep all the fronts manned effectively. In Syria every man of fighting age has to serve several years in the armed forces and it could in theory gather an effective fighting force in a short amount of time. The problem was that many men refused to answer the call to arms to fight for the regime and joined the opposition or fled the country to avoid being conscripted and forced to fight. There were also numerous defections of servicemen among all branches and ranks that joined the opposition in their struggle against the regime. This resulted in a depleted fighting force on which the Assad regime had to rely to do the fighting. It could count on its most elite units of the republican guard, composed of mostly Shia men, to fight fanatically for the survival of the regime as well. But there was still a need for more men and therefor patriots, opportunists and those willing to fight for fame and loot were organised into units as National Defence Forces. Efforts were also made to attract and organize additional paramilitary forces that would be willing to fight for the regime, among which the Lebanese Hezbollah paramilitary and the Palestinian paramilitary group. But it still wasn’t enough as Assad forces were still too spread thin.

To effectively besiege this numerous pockets, a lot of preparation logistics and manpower was needed to make sure that those who were besieged couldn’t get out, were checked at any attempt as they would try to break out and to make sure that nothing could get in or out of the area, whether it were supplies, weapons, fighters, refugees, food or medicine. It basically came down to numbers, if you have to besiege a hundred fighting men you almost certainly need twice that number to keep them in there. As there were a few dozen rebel pockets across western Syria with several dozen fighters in each of them who were looking for a fight, the numbers quickly show that the Assad regime would be in trouble sooner than later. It would need an effective strategy to make sure that it could keep the opposition in check with as many men as possible while ceding as little territory as possible.

Thus began a truly ingenious part of warfare, the juggling of treaties and forces to keep a delicate balance while contact was established with the regime’s allies abroad. Whenever a crisis arose, the Assad regime was quick to announce a ceasefire in another part of the country for an amount of time that allowed government forces to redeploy and assist in ongoing operations there. This strategy was a vital part of the regime’s efforts and was used time and time again. Often terms were agreed upon which the regime would later not enforce, humanitarian convoys to rebel pockets were often stopped, delayed and even looted of some of its supplies. When the agreement was then dissolved and fighting resumed, the regime would already have troops in place to fight on. The rebel forces were too fragmented to counter the strategy. For most of the people in these pockets it must’ve been a relief to know that for a short amount of time no bullets and bombs would fly around them. One can only imagine how the situation on the ground could’ve been if the opposition would have declined the ceasefires and continued to keep the pressure on the regime’s forces.

Even now, with the numerous de-escalation zones implemented across Syria, I personally see mostly gains for the regime’s forces. It gives their forces precious time to regroup, rest, resupply and be trained to use better equipment sent by their international backers. It also allows them to secure vital territory in other parts of the country which strengthens the regime’s position during the peace talks.

 For the rebels though, it spell mostly doom. The opposition remains too divided to this day, moderates and more radical groups continue to bicker among themselves for territory and influence. In Idlib, which is considered by many the heart of the opposition movement in western Syria, clashes continue to break out between its prominent factions. A lull in the fighting is the worst thing that can happen to these undisciplined troops as they can no longer focus on the fight against the enemy and soon after they will begin to appreciate the calm and the lack of gunfire, they’ll begin to think of friends and family, or they’ll simply grow bored with the situation or each other.

= = = = = = = = 

If you have any questions, remarks or constructive feedback on the content or my writing, please do not hesitate to leave a comment. I would love to use this platform to interact with people to discuss topics like these and gain new perspectives and improve on my writing skills.

Syria: Why Israel is not interested in peace as of yet.

The Syrian Civil War has presented Israel with a number of opportunities to help it solidify its influence in the region. It is arguably one of the few surrounding countries that has actually benefitted a lot from the turmoil. Whether the FSA, ISIS or the SDF have the upper-hand in Syria doesn’t matter much to Israel as these factions are not allied to its most important enemies in the region.

The conflict weakened an enemy, since Syria and Israel are technically still at war with one another, that has provided valuable support to another threat to Israel in neighbouring Lebanon, the Hezbollah group. The idea that the Assad regime could be replaced by a more moderate government that would frown upon supporting an international labelled terror group is something that would strengthen Israel position while it would ultimately weaken its nemesis’ position… Iran.

Israel has provided valuable support to the FSA’s southern front in terms of weapons and supplies and even resorted to occasionally bombing regime positions. It has also gradually expanded its influence along the Golan Heights border region by supporting the population there, creating an additional buffer zone. If the Assad government could be forced to terms at some point in the conflict, it is very much possible that Israel would want Syria to release its claim from the Golan Heights for all eternity, strengthening its position in the region even more by securing valuable resources, fresh water, for itself in the future.

Now that more and more de-escalation zones have been installed across Syria, including to the south, Israel must realize that the war has entered an entirely new phase, as all parties are moving to secure as much territory as possible from ISIS, taking one more player off the board.

I am convinced that Israel has too much to gain from a weakened Syria and will seek ways to keep the fighting in the southern part of the country going, one way or another. The Israelis are a patient people and have been playing the long game all along.

= = = = = = = = 

If you have any questions, remarks or constructive feedback on the content or my writing, please do not hesitate to leave a comment. I would love to use this platform to interact with people to discuss topics like these and gain new perspectives and improve on my writing skills.

Iraq: What to do now, post-ISIS, in Iraq?

Mosul has been liberated after almost nine months of gruesome fighting and Iraqi forces move to secure its western borders and attack the last ISIS-pocket in the Hawija region. In Syria the terror group is losing ground fast in central Syria as Assad forces are gaining ground fast and moving east in an effort to lift the siege on Deir Ez-Zour while Raqqa is being attacked by US-backed forces. Most of the self-proclaimed caliphate’s prominent commanders are dead and it’s caliph is rumoured to be dead as well.  It would seem like the once unstoppable and feared Islamic State is clinging on to life and will soon be defeated. But how does a region recover from a chapter as violent as this and how do these governments move forward without making the mistakes that could lead to a similar outcome?

The Iraqi government has a great number of hurdles to overcome if it seeks to establish itself as a credible government for its citizens, the region and the world. There’s the sectarian divide, the lack of confidence in the central government, a lack of structure, vision and compensation in the rebuilding effort in the numerous towns and cities that have to be rebuilt, insecurity on how jihadists, their families and supporters will be dealt with by the courts, if at all. And there is much, much more to needs to be addressed…

The conflict in Iraq has left a deep sectarian divide between its numerous communities and if it is not addressed in a way where it succeeds in convincing these communities to come and work together for a better future it is only a matter of time before a new group seeks to undermine the government and plunges the country into chaos once more. It is not just the Sunni, Shia but the numerous other ethnic minorities that mustn’t be forgotten now as the trauma and horror they had to suffer through has basically destroyed their trust in people that are not of their community. Kurds, Christians, Syriacs, Yazidis and Turkmen and all the others need to be involved in the new social and political process and they should be given a place to voice the concerns of their respective communities.

Confidence has to be restored in the central government by ending the widespread corruption that has caused so many problems and dissent in the Iraqi society. Launching numerous infrastructure projects could the people back to work so they can start providing an income for themselves. Roads, houses, plants would be rebuilt and the people could start to move back into a place of their own. Priority should be given to vital infrastructure and large housing projects and gradually expanding it across the rest of the area.

All the communities in Iraq need to be given the assurance that justice will be another of the top priorities of its government, by eventually putting all the jihadists whether they are Iraqi or foreigners that have been captured on trial for their crimes against the Iraqi people. They could also be put on trial in their own countries as well as the Hague. It could provide some closure for the people and would establish a credible foundation that the time of executions in dark cells and behind closed doors is over. It also sends a clear signal to the surviving members of the group and possible recruits in the region and the rest of the world. The need for a process here is because there needs to be an attempt to distinguish the hard-core believers from those who collaborated and those who were forced in the movement. For example, numerous young women were married to jihadists so that a family member could gain a more prominent position within the organization. These women and their children are now at risk of being evicted, exiled or even being killed as they are branded as a part of the organization. The exclusion and shunning of these single-parent families could result in frustrated, disconnected youths that could be preyed upon by extremist groups.

There is also the matter of the Kurdish Regional Government that seeks to become an independent state. The Iraqi Kurds’ fight against ISIS has allowed them to conquer a lot of territory which they now lay claim to. Several of these territories are disputed by Baghdad and it is unclear as of yet whether these territories will be returned to Iraqi control. Resolving these issues would go a long way to providing security for the new border regions and the population growing increasingly weary of the possibility of a new conflict.

The influence of Iran in Iraq has also be checked and its proxies in the country, the Popular Mobilisation Units (PMU) need to be disbanded. More importantly, their weapons need to be turned over to the regular Iraqi forces to avoid that these will be used to force the Iraqi government to comply with Teheran’s wishes.

The Iraqi government has to move fast and decisively because the clock is ticking. Now that victory has been declared over ISIS in Mosul the thousands of displaced people will want to return to their homes. With the city in ruins and no access to drinkable water, electricity or health services it is only a matter of time before the people will start to voice their concerns. Iraqi security forces will have to deal with this in a correct manner to avoid unnecessary escalations, since there are already reports of illegal executions by government forces of suspected jihadists in the Mosul area and it won’t be long until the finger-pointing will lead to the arrests and deaths of innocent people.



= = = = = = = = 

If you have any questions, remarks or constructive feedback on the content or my writing, please do not hesitate to leave a comment. I would love to use this platform to interact with people to discuss topics like these and gain new perspectives and improve on my writing skills.

Syria: Why Turkey is not interested in peace as of yet

The Syrian Civil war might be an absolute nightmare in terms of destruction, casualties and complexity but it would seem that the major players in the conflict have their own goals  before they will make a genuine effort to bring an end to the fighting.

There have been some serious shifts in the balance of power during this conflict and at the moment it seems that all parties involved on the ground are taking a pause to consider their next big move in order to force a breakthrough. This article is aimed at giving an overview of the factions involved that have a lot to win and lose.

Turkey is experiencing a rapid economic growth and is very much a rising star in the region and potentially, internationally as it seeks to establish new and powerful relationships with other major countries. The Turkish president Erdoğan has taken credit for the country’s surge forward and has therefor gained the support of many of its people. Some of his plans however, are perceived as a possible threat to other factions within Turkey as Erdoğan’s rule seems increasingly more authoritarian to critics in Turkey and abroad. This mounting threat to several of Turkey’s powerful institutions, among which the military establishment, led to the failed coup attempt in 2016. President Erdoğan was quick to blame the Gülen organisation, someone who was an ally of his in the past, and began to purge Gülenist supporters across all of Turkey.

Erdoğan has also stated several times that certain regions that once belonged to Turkey’s predecessor, the Ottoman Empire, should be returned to its rightful ruler and has been a cause for concern for some its allies as Turkey’s surge in nationalism starts to lean towards chauvinism and could even strain important military alliances (NATO) and future political goals (derailing or stopping the EU talks)

Turkey has also been an important player in the Syrian Civil War as it saw an opportunity to end the Assad rule and possibly install a government that would look towards Turkey for guidance and support in the future. Things didn’t exactly turn out as everyone hoped and now Syria is locked in a bloody civil war for over seven years with thousands dead and millions more displaced. Turkey has become one of the countries that has sheltered millions of Syrian refugees and continues to provide vital support for the Internally Displaced People inside the Azaz-Jarabulus-al-Bab triangle by rebuilding vital infrastructure and providing the people with large amounts of goods.

Turkey has not let its support for numerous rebel factions waver as it continues to seek new ways to insert itself in the country and establish itself as a power player in the conflict and the region. It has even led to the direct support of rebel groups in northern Syria as Turkey launched an offensive to cut off the Syrian Democratic Forces from establishing a presence along the whole length of the Syrian-Turkish border. The fact that a possible off-shoot of the Turkish-Kurdish PKK terror organization that shares parts of its ideology is a major cause for concern. The PKK continues to cause casualties in the south-eastern part of Turkey and numerous attempts of Turkish security forces at stomping it out have led to a great deal of criticism from the international community and its European allies.

It has even led to numerous deals being put on hold or being dissolved, angering Turkish president Erdoğan. The Germans for example stopped delivering weapons to the Turks as they feared these weapons were being used against the Turkish-Kurdish people. Turkey seems to have responded by expanding its domestic military production capabilities and showing its critics that it intends to follow through on the course that has been set by its government. It also recently launched a new warship and president Erdoğan stated that Turkey aims to build a large fleet with some aircraft carriers.

This has made Turkey somewhat unpredictable as it seems perfectly fine with dealing with both sides that are currently fighting in the Syrian conflict. 





= = = = = = = = 

If you have any questions, remarks or constructive feedback on the content or my writing, please do not hesitate to leave a comment. I would love to use this platform to interact with people to discuss topics like these and gain new perspectives and improve on my writing skills.

Syria: Why the Assad-coalition is not interested in peace as of yet

The Syrian Civil war might be an absolute nightmare in terms of destruction, casualties and political complexity but it would seem that the major players in the conflict have their own goals before they will make a genuine effort to bring an end to the fighting.

There have been some serious shifts in the balance of power during this conflict and at the moment it seems that all parties involved are taking a moment to consider their next big move in order to force a breakthrough. This article is aimed at giving an overview of the factions involved that have a lot to win and lose.

The Assad-coalition:

The Assad-regime

The Assad regime consists of mainly a Shia minority (and members from other ethno-religious communities who have proven their loyalty) in the government and the broad security and military apparatus that was established back in the 70s when Hafez al-Assad took power.

The Assad regime had to deal with numerous setbacks early on in the Syrian Uprising as thousands of men that were called upon to return to the barracks and take up arms against the rebels, refused to do so. They either joined the opposition groups or fled to neighbouring countries to avoid being drafted. What meagre forces that could be mustered had to be bolstered with patriotic and opportunistic men who joined the National Defence Forces and were given weapons to hold onto as much territory as possible while the regime’s elite units were rushing from one crisis to another. As much of the country’s wealth is in the hands of the privileged few, many chose to back the regime out of necessity and survival rather than duty since a defeat would result in the loss of all their assets in Syria. 

Its initial strategy to have a military presence in all corners of Syria in order to argue that it remains in control of its sovereign territory resulted in the Syrian Arab Forces being dispersed to a dangerous level. The regime was therefor forced to carefully pick and choose its battles to avoid losses that it could not replenish afterwards, or having to defend territory that it would not be able to hold. As the different opposition groups moved against Assad forces, it often came down to the commanders in the field to make the difference. For example, When Deir ez-Zour came under siege by the jihadists of the Islamic State and was under serious threat, republican guard general Issam Zahreddine was sent in to hold onto the city at all costs. His leadership skills and inspiring presence at the front lines helped the men under his command to hold onto the territory despite being under tremendous pressure. Another example is the commander of the now famous Tiger Forces, Suheil al-Hassan, his unwavering loyalty and leadership made him the ideal candidate to lead an elite unit that would be the deciding factor in numerous offensives across Syria, whether it was blocking an enemy offensive and reversing all their gains or spearheading an offensive.

Bashar al-Assad vowed to retake all of Syria many times and now, with the backing of powerful regional and global powers, it would seem that he is well on his way to do so. It seems unlikely that he will accept an agreement which would result in the division of Syrian territory or where he would be forced to share power with both moderates and the extremists. He is clearly set on taking every inch back and keep it in a tight grasp.

The true cost of the war, however, is something that might be impossible to predict at the moment. The regime has always claimed that its elaborate security apparatus was necessary to prevent extremist groups from gaining a foothold in Syria. At the moment al-Assad has managed to present himself as the defender of the Syrian people from the extremists and opportunists who would see an end to Syria if it were to serve their own goals. This had led to an increased popularity among the people, even among the people who became disillusioned with how the rebels' misconduct and mismanagement began to hurt the ideals of the Syrian Uprising. 

It could very well be that one of the causes for the Syrian Uprising could be enforced even harsher when the Assad regime regains control of Syria, leading to an all-out purge of any form of dissent against the regime. It is also unclear what kind of deals were made with its allies in exchange for the enormous amount of support in manpower, materials and logistics. It may very well be that in order for Syria's survival, al-Assad might have sold his soul and that of his country.

Hezbollah

Hezbollah has been very much dependant on the support it received from the Assad regime in terms of weapons, logistics, training and finances by acting as an access point for Iran to continue a strong presence in Lebanon and countering the Israeli influence there.

The fall of the Assad regime could have meant an end to this support as a government that looked more favourable towards the West and would not seek to continue to fund this terror organization, as designated by numerous western countries and regional allies. Hezbollah backing the Assad regime was there for a matter of survival, but of opportunity as well.

It was able to test its organization’s military capabilities by actively taking part in the fighting and launching offensives in a variety of combat zones across Syria. The experience it gained by doing this allowed the organization to boost its political presence in the region and more importantly, test out and adjust its tactics and strategies based on the successes it had in the field and send a clear signal to adversaries that it is still a force to be reckoned with.

Iran

Iran is one of the few countries that has actually managed to capitalize on the turmoil in the al-Sham region as has now more influence, both political and military, than (ever) before.

 It has (in)directly supported moves by the Shia communities to gain more political and military prominence in both theatres of war. In Iraq it was the main supporter for the Popular Mobilization Units that were eager to take the fight to ISIS forces when they were on the verge of breaking through to Baghdad. In Syria it was responsible for providing valuable strategic advice and supplementing elite Iranian forces to help turn the tide in several critical battles. One of Iran’s prominent generals and commander and of the al Quds force, Qasem Soleimani, has been Iran’s most valuable asset in the region as he was responsible for the most important offensives which Shia units launched successfully against both ISIS (in Iraq) and rebel forces (in Syria).

Iran aims to keep the Shia dominant minority in power at all costs as it has invested a lot of time and resources in the regime for its long-term strategic objectives in the region. It is there for more than likely that Iran will continue to support Assad in its efforts to regain control of the whole of Syria and therefor putting an end to the presence of western coalition forces in Syria. It has already begun its elaborate plan by launching an offensive in north-western Iraq with the help of PMU forces to gain control of an important military airbase to the south of Tal-Afar, which can be used as a launch point against future attacks across the Syrian-Iraqi border into northern Syria’s SDF territory, forcing them to fight on numerous fronts.

Iran is also moving on establishing closer ties with some of the nations in the Arabian Peninsula, which is basically its nemesis’ back yard. The Saudis have been fighting a war in Yemen for some time now and have little to show for it. Its forces have suffered embarrassing defeats at the hands of Yemeni fighters on the ground, but Saudi warplanes keep attacking Yemen’s populated areas resulting a high civilian casualties. The Saudis’ reputation has suffered internationally because of this.

Russia

Russia is the second country that managed to capitalize on the turmoil in the region as it has established itself as a prominent powerbroker in the regional theatre as well as on the international stage. Before that the country was basically ‘in the doghouse’.

Russia’s (for the most part) successful campaign has given Putin international prestige for acting decisively against international terror groups whereas the West was blamed for supporting the enemy of their enemy in order to get what they wanted, resulting in a loss of face and credibility as a major player in the conflict.

The war has also provided the Russian armed forces with a valuable opportunity to test their new equipment in a real battlefield and already suggestions for enhancements were made to make their equipment even more efficient in future warzones. It also saw the first Russian aircraft carrier of the Kuznetsov class perform in a theatre of war.

The participation in the Syrian Civil War has also provided Russia with a way to boost its economy as the new Russian hardware that is used on the battlefield, has attracted the attention of numerous would-be buyers, countries that before that were customers with western manufacturers. The cutting-edge technology and the battle performance of the newest Russian armoured vehicles and helicopters had a major impact on and off the battlefield.

Its alliance with the Syrian regime has also resulted in the agreement of having a permanent presence in the region as Russia will continue to have a military presence in the airbase and the naval base it currently uses, giving it a foothold in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea.

It is also very likely that Syria will become one of Russia’s most important trading partners in a post-conflict scenario as I think Russia will be one of the few suppliers of all the materials and hardware needed in the rebuilding effort. 





= = = = = = = = 

If you have any questions, remarks or constructive feedback on the content or my writing, please do not hesitate to leave a comment. I would love to use this platform to interact with people to discuss topics like these and gain new perspectives and improve on my writing skills.

(Middle East) Fault Lines in the Middle East: Fresh water

A basic necessity

As the population of the world continues to grow, our global reserves of natural resources are pushed to their limits in order to meet these demands. One of these resources, clean drinkable water, could have been taken for granted for too long and as it becomes more valuable year after year, it could become a serious point of contention in the near future in the region.

Historically, our species quickly understood the importance of fresh water to sustain its survival in the long term and many of the first settlements could be found next to large regional rivers, such as the Nile river in Egypt, the Euphrates and Tigris river in Mesopotamia, Indus in South Asia and the Yellow river in modern China.

Local rivers or wells could supply the fresh water that was needed in the fields or domestic usage, but as our species’ population exponentially began to increase, the demand for fresh water rose dramatically. New wells were dug across the region which lowered the ground water level and it was unable to replenish at the rate that it was pumped up, making matters worse over time. A good example of this is the Jordan river, where the water level dropped drastically in just over a decade. Where people used to be at the risk of drowning, they can now stand in the river up to their wastes.

The building of dams was also a viable option but it lead to neighbouring countries that were depending on the same river complaining about a certain amount of water that had to be guaranteed at all times, leading to regional tensions. This was the case when Turkey built a dam on the Euphrates river of which both Syria and Iraq were depending for their own needs. Intensive negotiations took place in order to ensure that all countries involved were ensured of their fair share of fresh water.

Some countries were lucky to find new large deposits of fresh water that they could start using to meet the country’s demands. Libya found a large aquifer in the southern part of the country and started an enormous project, the Great Man-Made River project, to get the necessary infrastructure in place to pump it to the coastal areas.

Desalination as a possible solution

Israel is one of the few countries in the region that is affluent when it comes to fresh water supply. Although it used to suffer from water shortages, efforts have been made to turns things drastically around. Not only was there a broad spectrum of information that was used to sensitize the population of the importance of not wasting fresh water, but new research led to large facilities where salt water could be converted into fresh water through desalination. Through this process the Israeli population could be supplies with a large amount of fresh water in a relative short of time.

The success of this project led to many other countries undertaking similar projects and in the gulf region there are now dozens of desalination plants. Problem solved? Not quite. There is still not enough information at hand whether desalination is the solution to the problem of fresh water shortages. The desalination process produces a very concentrated waste that is dumped back into the sea. Because of lack of data about the possible effects on the ecosystem and biodiversity no efforts were made to regulate how the waste should be processed before being released back into the sea (or if the concentrate should be released at all). 

Desalination is also very energy-intensive as the process basically involves pushing large quantities of water through numerous layers of membranes that filter the various unwanted elements out of the water before distributing it into the local grid. Numerous plants were also built that aimed to turn the waste from domestic usage back into usable water supplies that could be used to water crops, resulting in a system that re-uses the available water supply many times over.

Water politics

It has been proven that having control of a vital supply of fresh water provides a lot of leverage and could over time even be used as effective as any other weapon of war.

After the establishment of the caliphate, Turkey drastically cut the water flow into Syria resulting in a dramatic drop of the water level along the Euphrates’ numerous settlements. When the situation worsened the jihadists even threatened to march on the Turkish capital ‘and force them to release the water needed’. Now that the Syrian Democratic Forces control large swathes of the Euphrates river, one who is also an enemy of Turkey, it could resort to similar tactics to force the organisation to accept unfavourable terms in the future.

A similar situation could be developing between the Kurdish Regional Government and the Islamic Republic of Iran. The KRG has stated several times that there wasn’t enough water flowing into the western part of the region because Iran had altered the flow. This could be to increase pressure on the KRG for its support of Iranian Kurds who are also pressing their claim in Iran for more equality, the recognition of their cultural identity and reforms.

Israel on the other hand seized a vital region with fresh water springs from Syria during both the Six Days War and the Yom Kippur War, following treaties led to some concessions but Israel still controls two-thirds of the Golan Heights and has stated numerous times that it should remain a part of Israel. It is possible that Israel’s  (in)direct involvement in the Syrian Civil War is aimed at forcing the Assad regime to hand over control of the Golan Heights to Israel for all time. It is also in a favourable position, as I mentioned earlier, where it has a surplus of fresh water that it can use to negotiate with its neighbours to get more favourable terms on certain diplomatic issues.

Cause for concern

In certain areas, more than others in the Middle East, the prospect of having a lack of fresh water supplies to meet the demands of its population may be a very big reason for concern since it might lead to increasing unrest. It is important to note that at the moment almost all of the gulf states subsidize the availability of fresh water to its (native) citizens and that at the moment there are few regulations on its usage.

Another important note is that when the Arabic Spring movement surged across many nations of the Middle East, some countries had almost no problem with large demonstrations or were able to make quick concessions and promises that eased the minds of the groups that were taking to the streets. This was the case in Morocco and many of the gulf states, to name a few. In the event that these governments fail to address this specific problem it might lead to another crisis that might lead to a drastic shift in power.

The only thing that is sure at the moment is that fresh water is of vital importance to our species, but it would seem that it could become the new currency in the Middle East in the near future.





= = = = = = = = 

If you have any questions, remarks or constructive feedback on the content or my writing, please do not hesitate to leave a comment. I would love to use this platform to interact with people to discuss topics like these and gain new perspectives and improve on my writing skills.

Syria: How the Raqqa-offensive might backfire

For the past months the international media have been painting a pretty picture of the ongoing war against the Islamic State. The group’s territory and holdings have been significantly reduced thanks to the efforts of the international coalition. Several prominent players in the group’s organization were targeted and it became increasingly more difficult for the group to attract new recruits. The impressive flow of wealth the group once managed was also systematically targeted, which led to a great amount of fighters who became disgruntled by seeing their pay-outs reduced drastically.

More importantly is that the group’s core territory came under threat in both Syria and Iraq by the international coalition. In Iraq the Iraqi Army began its long-awaited offensive to liberate the Mosul, the largest and most important stronghold of the Islamic State in the country. In Syria the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) continue to capture more territory previously held by the terror group. Recently Tabqah was liberated and the river Euphrates was reached in several locations, isolating the city of Raqqa even more.

Although the goal is conquering Raqqa, there are still some important things to take into account. The SDF consists predominantly of Syrian Kurds who fight under the YPG-formation. This was set in motion in an attempt to defend their villages back when the Islamic State had the upper hand in the region, but it was through the Kurds’ determination, courage and sacrifices that the Islamic State suffered its first defeat at Kobanê and in other locations of the region. As the YPG continued to beat back the IS, more groups started to join the movement, and the the Syrian Democratic Forces fwas formed. As they continued to liberate more areas they set up local councils consisting of local dignitaries from the different ethnic-religious communities to govern the area together.

The SDF continues to receive more support from the United States which is something that its neighbouring country Turkey doesn’t like at all. Turkish president Erdoğan has repeatedly stated that this Kurdish faction has close ties with the Turkish-based PKK group. The fact that the SDF are receiving heavy weapons to support the push south is something that left the Turkish government fuming. The Turkish government doesn’t want to see an established zone of influence managed by Kurds on its southern border and is there for not too happy about how things are currently developing. It was because of this the Turkish government offered to take Raqqa with the FSA-rebel groups it supports.

This proposition was declined because of several reasons. These rebel groups’ battle performance wasn’t too impressive, which became painfully clear when these units tried to take the city of al-Bab from the Islamic State. After numerous setbacks Turkish forces were sent in to stop the bleeding but even then these forces suffered some embarrassing setbacks. Several of these rebel groups’ reputation had suffered as well when it was reported they used excessive violence. The fact that the Turkish progress in northern Syria was bottle-necked by both American and Russian intervention is something that Erdoğan doesn’t like at all. He clearly saw himself playing a more prominent role in this conflict and will look for new ways to insert himself once more the moment he sees his chance.

The biggest problem is that there is a certain aspect of the Raqqa-offensive that has been downplayed to a great extent, which is the humanitarian aspect. The international coalition hasn’t made any serious attempts at providing shelter, food and security for the people who are displaced because of the ongoing violence. Local sources reported for the urgent need for a better coordinated effort at a much larger scale. The administration of the Democratic Federation of northern Syria (Rojava) has become a safe haven for hundreds of thousands of people from all over Syria who were forced to flee. Recently more refugees came from Iraq’s Nineveh province when the offensive for Mosul was launched. It takes a consistent effort to shelter, feed and provide other necessary services to help these people. When thousands more will arrive because of the fighting in and around Raqqa, the situation might soon become a crisis.

The coalition doesn’t seem to have learnt any lessons from the offensive for Mosul, despite warnings from aid organisations who tried to manage the situation. It soon became clear that the prepared camps were filled to capacity and there were more people coming every day. The fight for Mosul has been going for eight months and there’s still thousands of people trapped in hostile territory, which will only lead to an even greater humanitarian catastrophe.

If we don’t want to see the same thing happening in Rojava, the SDF need to receive international humanitarian aid in order to prepare the necessary infrastructure , resources, and logistics before the offensive on Raqqa is launched. This would mean refugee camps for several hundreds of thousands of people, drinkable water, food, medicine and other means of support. These tasks have to be performed by people who are experienced in these matters which only stresses the need for more cooperation with aid organizations.

So far it looks like the international coalition, and the US in particular, are hell-bent on taking Raqqa as soon as possible. What they seem to forget is that the fight against the Islamic State is just one aspect of the conflict that is raging in Syria and that a well-established and coordinated humanitarian presence in this part of the war-torn country can play a vital role in achieving their operational goals. It could help in decreasing the amount of refugees seeking refuge in neighbouring countries, which would relieve some of the pressure on these regional partners. It could also help to set up additional de-escalation zones and could even strengthen the political position of these groups at the negotiation table, because so far the SDF weren’t invited to the table to take part in the peace process. If the humanitarian aspect of this offensive isn’t given some serious thought and the offensive starts without the necessary preparations, the SDF risks losing international political standing since it would look like they won't be able to support all these people. It could also provide the opportunity for the Assad-coalition or Turkey to open a new front and engulf this whole part of the country back into chaos.

The offensive for Raqqa has started and there is no doubt that the city will fall eventually. What the consequences will be in the long term for the SDF and the region is something time will only tell…



= = = = = = = = 

If you have any questions, remarks or constructive feedback on the content or my writing, please do not hesitate to leave a comment. I would love to use this platform to interact with people to discuss topics like these and gain new perspectives and improve on my writing skills.

Note: this is an article that was written for a small editoral office in Brussels on a voluntary basis for the Kurdish Institute's bimonthly publication of The Kurds, issue n° 95, May-June 2017

the original Dutch version is also present on my blog)
URL: http://www.kurdishinstitute.be/de-keerzijde-van-het-raqqa-offensief-bart-rombouts/

Syrië: (DUTCH) De keerzijde van het Raqqa-offensief

De afgelopen maanden schetsten de internationale media een rooskleurig beeld van de strijd tegen de Islamitische Staat. Zo werd het territorium van de groepering bijna gehalveerd door de inspanningen van de internationale coalitie. Tevens werden verschillende sleutelfiguren van de organisatie uitgeschakeld en werd het aanzienlijk moeilijker voor de groepering om nieuwe rekruten aan te trekken. De indrukwekkende stroom aan inkomsten van de groepering werd ook systematisch drooggelegd, wat tot grote ontevredenheid leidde bij de militanten die tot kort daarvoor aanzienlijke sommen geld uitbetaald werden.

Belangrijker nog is dat het kerngebied van de terreurgroep in Syrië en Irak werd aangevallen door de internationale coalitie. In Irak begon het Iraakse leger het langverwachte offensief om Mosul, het grootste bolwerk van Islamitische Staat in Irak, te heroveren. In Syrië slagen de Syrische Democratische Strijdkrachten (SDF) erin successen te blijven boeken. Zo werd de strategische stad Tabqah kortgeleden nog veroverd op de terreurgroep en wisten ze ook op verschillende plaatsen de Eufraat te bereiken waardoor de stad Raqqa steeds meer geïsoleerd raakt.

Hoewel het einddoel ongetwijfeld de verovering van deze stad is, zijn er belangrijke kanttekeningen die hierbij vermeld moeten worden. De SDF bestaan voor een groot deel uit Koerden die onder de YPG-vlag strijden. Aanvankelijk streden zij vooral om hun dorpen en steden te beschermen toen IS nog de overhand in de regio had, maar het was dankzij hun vastberadenheid, moed en opoffering dat de terreurgroep de eerste zware nederlaag leed rond Kobanê en in andere delen van de regio. Naarmate de YPG meer terrein wonnen, begonnen meerdere groeperingen zich bij hen aan te sluiten, waardoor de koepelorganisatie SDF in het leven werd geroepen. In de verschillende bevrijde regio’s werden bestuursorganen opgericht bestaande uit lokale vertegenwoordigers uit de verschillende etnisch-religieuze gemeenschappen, om samen te besturen.

Dat de SDF steeds meer ondersteuning krijgen van de internationale coalitie, zint buurland Turkije helemaal niet. Zo hamerde de Turkse president Erdoğan erop dat de Koerdische afdeling van de SDF nauwe banden zou hebben met de PKK, hetgeen weerlegd werd door de groepering en de coalitie. Dat de SDF nu ook zware wapens krijgen van de Amerikanen om Raqqa te veroveren, deed de Turkse regering dan ook steigeren. De Turkse regering ziet de invloed van de Syrische Koerden in het Syrische conflict dan ook met lede ogen aan. Om die reden bood president Erdoğan dan ook een alternatief aan om Raqqa in te nemen, namelijk met behulp van Syrische rebellen die door Turkije gesteund worden.

Dit voorstel werd echter om verschillende redenen van de hand gedaan. Zo hadden de Turkse bondgenoten o.m. aanzienlijk meer moeite om hun doelstellingen te halen op het slagveld, hetgeen pijnlijk duidelijk werd toen deze eenheden de stad Al-Bab probeerden te veroveren op de Islamitische Staat. Zelfs met directe steun van Turkse eenheden leden deze nog problematische nederlagen. Daarnaast kwamen verschillende van deze Syrische eenheden in opspraak door het gebruik van buitensporig geweld. Het feit dat het Turkse voorstel van tafel geveegd werd en de Turkse invloedssfeer in Syrië nu ingedamd wordt door zowel Russisch als Amerikaans ingrijpen, zint president Erdoğan helemaal niet. Hij had namelijk een aanzienlijk grotere rol voor zichzelf weggelegd in dit conflict en zal dan ook niet aarzelen om zijn kans te grijpen zodra deze zich voordoet.

Het grootste probleem is echter dat een bepaald aspect van het offensief bijna niet aangekaart wordt, namelijk het humanitaire aspect. Tot op heden werden te weinig inspanningen geleverd door de internationale coalitie om de mensen die het geweld proberen te ontvluchten, te voorzien van onderdak en voedsel op een schaal die nodig is om in hun behoeften te voorzien. Verschillende bronnen in de regio maakten dan ook al melding van de nood aan gecoördineerde hulp op een grotere schaal. De administratie van de Democratische Federatie van Noord-Syrië (Rojava) verleent reeds geruime tijd onderdak aan honderdduizenden mensen die het geweld in andere delen van Syrië probeerden te ontvluchten. Recent zijn er ook nog vluchtelingen uit Irak bijgekomen, sinds het Iraakse leger het offensief voor Mosul inzette. Voor al deze mensen is er al een aanzienlijke stroom aan goederen nodig om in hun levensonderhoud te voorzien – als daar nog eens meer dan honderdduizend mensen bijkomen die de gevechten in en rond Raqqa gaan ontvluchten, kan de situatie snel onhoudbaar worden.

De coalitie lijkt op dit vlak geen lessen te hebben geleerd van wat het offensief in Mosul met zich heeft meebracht, ondanks de waarschuwingen van hulporganisaties die probeerden alles in goede banen te leiden. Het werd duidelijk dat de opvangkampen te snel volliepen en het werd een kwestie van dweilen met de kraan open. Ondertussen wordt er al bijna acht maanden gevochten in en rond Mosul en zitten er nog enkele honderdduizenden mensen vast in vijandig gebied, waardoor de humanitaire situatie in de nabije toekomst alleen maar zal verslechteren.

Als we niet willen dat hetzelfde zich voordoet in Rojava, moeten de SDF nu internationale steun krijgen om de nodige infrastructuur, middelen, materieel en logistiek op te bouwen voordat de aanval op Raqqa echt ingezet wordt. Dit zou neerkomen op tentenkampen voor ongeveer driehonderdduizend mensen, het voorzien van drinkbaar water, voedsel, medische en psychologische ondersteuning, en nog een hele resem andere dingen om de overgang iets of wat te vergemakkelijken. Deze taken moeten ook uitgevoerd worden door ervaren mensen en specialisten, waardoor de nood aan samenwerking met verschillende hulporganisaties alleen maar dringender wordt.

Het lijkt er steeds meer op dat de leden van de coalitie, en de VS in het bijzonder, erop uit zijn om Raqqa zo snel mogelijk in te nemen. Wat ze echter lijken te vergeten is dat de strijd tegen de Islamitische Staat maar één aspect is van het veelgelaagde conflict in de regio en dat een goed uitgebouwde humanitaire infrastructuur een cruciale rol kan spelen voor de operationele doelstellingen in de regio. Zo kan het helpen om de regionale vluchtelingenstroom aanzienlijk te verminderen, hetgeen de druk op de buurlanden zou verkleinen. Daarnaast kan het de deur openen voor het afbakenen van aanvullende de-escalatiezones en kan het de politieke positie van deze partijen in het vredesproces versterken, want tot op heden werden de SDF niet uitgenodigd aan de onderhandelingstafel.

Indien het humanitaire aspect niet aangekaart wordt en het offensief op Raqqa ingezet wordt zonder dat de nodige voorbereidingen worden getroffen, lopen de SDF de kans om internationaal krediet te verliezen, doordat ze niet zullen kunnen voorzien in de noden van deze mensen. Daarnaast zou het als een potentieel motief gebruikt kunnen worden door zowel het Assad-regime als Turkije om in de toekomst nieuwe stappen te zetten om de bevrijde regio’s terug in chaos te storten.

Ondertussen is het offensief op Raqqa van start gegaan en er bestaat geen twijfel over dat de stad vroeg of laat zal vallen. Wat de gevolgen op lange termijn echter zullen zijn voor de regio en de SDF, zal de toekomst moeten uitwijzen.

Opmerking: Dit artikel verscheen in het magazine van het Koerdisch Instituut: De Koerden
(Jaargang 17, n°95, mei-juni 2017)
URL: http://www.kurdishinstitute.be/de-keerzijde-van-het-raqqa-offensief-bart-rombouts/

Syria: How the Syrian Uprising was hijacked

How the Syrian revolution was hijacked.

The Syrian Civil War is one of the bloodiest conflict of the 21^st century, raging across most of the country for almost eight years, killing hundreds of thousands and displacing millions. And it doesn’t look like it is going to stop any time soon.

 It all started at the start of 2011 when Arab Spring movement was gaining momentum across the region and the peaceful mass protest around Syria, calling for an end to the socio-political repression and lack of substantial economic reforms, turned violent when government security forces started arresting protesters en masse, using live ammunition and other means of excessive force to quell the movement. After that the situation spiralled out of control quickly: people took up arms to defend their neighbourhoods against bands of government loyalists that came to intimidate, kill and plunder hotspots of dissent. Army helicopters started dropping barrel-bombs on areas packed with people, causing panic, terror and killing dozens. Battle-lines were drawn across cities and neighbourhoods and people who lived side by side for years were now killing each other. The international community repeatedly demanded that Assad should step down in an attempt to de-escalate the growing level of violence, but Assad rejected this by stating that the people who had taken up arms against him were nothing more than terrorists and foreign agents that would be rooted out and dealt with.

Now almost eight years later, the war is still going on as it is without any doubt one of the most complicated conflicts we’ve seen in modern history. and it wasn’t long before the gloves came completely off and the systematic destruction of ancient buildings and historic sites, the deployment of heavy weapons against civilian areas, massacres and the usage of chemical weapons became all too real.

The question is how this situation spiralled out of control so quickly and isn’t showing any signs of settling any time soon. In order to take a critical look at the present, we often have to look back and identify the things that had a critical impact on the general situation.

When looking at different aspects of the country, it quickly becomes clear that modern Syria is very diverse in a variety of ways.

Historically the region was one of the earliest places where the human race started to build its first civilisations around 4,000 years ago. It has seen the rise and fall of numerous empires that wanted control of the region as it was at the centre of trade routes from every direction. These empires brought with them their own culture and religion which resulted in a very unique ethnic (Arab, Hebrew, Turkmen, Syriac, Kurdish) and religious (Sunni Islam, Shia Islam, Jews, Christianity) demographic composition and is represented in communities all across Syria.

Although the country is officially known as the Syrian Arab Republic, the structure of the government shows that the actual power lies predominantly with a minority, and a select few within that minority. The ruling minority consists of Alawites which is a branch of Shia Islam and came to power after Hafez al-Assad took power in 1970, installing a regime where all the important positions in the military, state security and intelligence were dominated by loyal people from the Shia community.

This security apparatus was also designed in a way that no high-ranking position had the possibility of gaining enough influence to attempt at a coup himself. It resulted in a leadership that was well insulated, protected by a broad security force that aimed to stamp out any sign of dissent, resulting in a society where one simply had to come to terms with this new way of life or risk everything by voicing his opinion too loud.

When Hafez al-Assad died in 2000 and his Bashar succeeded him there was a hope that this new leader would herald in a new era for Syria in which the socio-political repression would end and necessary reforms would be implemented. Although the first indications were hopeful as political prisoners were released and  steps were taken to introduce certain new laws, it became clear that the balance of power was to remain unchanged and that any attempts to do so would resort in severe punishment.

When the socio-political movement, which would become known in the West as the Arab Spring, gained momentum across northern Africa and saw several controversial governments fall, the people in Syria saw a chance for a similar chance and took to the streets to give voice to opinions and hopes they had to speak about in small circles behind closed doors for so long. Cities like Daraa, Damascus and Hama became some of the prominent places where thousands of Syrians marched for change.

Although the Assad government initially didn’t seem to take it too seriously, as the protest marches continued day after day government security forces suddenly responded by arresting protesters en masse and using force to break up the groups. When they arrested a number of youngsters who were part of the protest movement, violence broke out after the situation quickly deteriorated. Military vehicles appeared in the streets and security forces were ordered to shoot at the masses with live ammunition.

These actions were defended by stating that the protest movement in Syria was the work of extremists and foreign agents who were working to undermine the stability and unity of the country. There are numerous reports that the Assad government released extremists from its prisons in order for them to mingle with the movement and re-establish contact with their own movements. It is by doing this that the Assad government was able to cause the first rift in the Syrian revolutionary movement. By injecting extremist elements into the mainly democratic movement it was able to bolster its claims that extremists were moving against the state and therefor justifying its extreme measures that could be seen in the streets. It also caused the opposition to lose coherence and break up into multiple factions of moderates and more radical groups.

It is one of the oldest lessons in warfare and is still accurate today: If you succeed in dividing the opposing force into multiple smaller, less effective forces you will ultimately succeed in defeating them.

Throughout the Syrian Civil War the Assad government would exploit the rifts and animosity between rebel groups to gain a tactical or strategic advantage where it could have suffered a defeat. For example, the government would negotiate a ceasefire with certain groups in one part of the country for then to relocate a portion of the troops from that front to a another where the situation was critical. The most recent example of this strategy is, in my opinion, the instalment of these de-escalation zones across Syria, among one of them in the Idlib province, the bulk of the Assad loyalists started a new campaign shortly after to finish the conquest of the Aleppo province and attack territory held by the Islamic State who was too busy concentrating on the Syrian Democratic Forces who were working their way through Tabqah and to Raqqa.

By successfully doing this, the Assad loyalists have secured the majority of Aleppo province, cut off both the Syrian Democratic Forces moving west from Manbij and the Turkish backed Free Syrian Army groups from moving south and strengthening its position and the negotiation table.





= = = = = = = = 

If you have any questions, remarks or constructive feedback on the content or my writing, please do not hesitate to leave a comment. I would love to use this platform to interact with people to discuss topics like these and gain new perspectives and improve on my writing skills.