Another dark hour for Syrians

The Telegraph, December 3 2024

There’s truth to the above but that doesn’t mean the efforts are genuine. [HTS leader] Joulani has the backing of powerful interests to depose Assad and become Emir of Syria, but one able to be repackaged to Western audiences.  Reports of his showing a softer side, courting Christians, Alawis, and the like (rumor of him appointing a Christian bishop as governor of Aleppo) are a ploy to win wider international support and present as a legitimate leader, while muting his salafist past.

Simplicius the Thinker, December 6, 2024 (abridged)

The Telegraph’s creative headline writers underscore a point I made in my previous post, that political propaganda is twin sister to advertising. But even those taken in by the propaganda blitz of a decade ago – whereby Islamist terrorists funded by the West, Gulf States, Turkiye and Israel were cast as ‘rebels’ or ‘moderate Islamists’ cheered on by almost all Syrians in a popular uprising against a detested ‘regime’ – must now see that jihadists sweeping through northwest Syria had to have poured over the border from Turkiye to reinforce those foolishly allowed, by Russia’s signing off on the Astana Agreements, to remain in Idlib as part of a brokered truce .

Which is to say a rebranding of head-chopping zealots as “diversity-friendly” cannot obscure the truth, other than to the irremediably credulous, of Syria once again being overrun by the proxy forces of a US-led West as happy to arm, train and bankroll al-Qaeda/ISIS cut-outs in Syria as it is to do the same with Banderite Nazis in the Ukraine.

Of several parallels – and more ominously, points of fusion – between the wars in the Middle East and against Russia, one is the use of proxy forces Washington pretends to detest: a charade dictated by canny accountancy ¹ and by domestic pushback, after Iraq and more importantly Vietnam, against young Americans coming home from distant lands in flag-draped coffins.

Hindsight is a fine thing. But even at the time there were many, including the Iranians, who saw Astana – which froze the ‘civil war’ to allow ‘rebels’ routed with Russian aerial help in 2015/16 to stay in Idlib under Turkiye’s watchful eye – as asking for trouble. Erdogan could not be trusted.

Historically, Qatar owned Al-Jazeera is not trustworthy on Syria. But one of several difference between now and a decade ago is that the Arab League is, for now at least, standing by Damascus.

As usual the situation was complicated by messy realpolitik. It’s not that Moscow was naive to the games Ankara plays in pursuit of a ‘strategic ambiguity’ – stay in NATO/buy Russia’s S-400s … denounce Israel’s genocide/sell it the oil to enable it … apply to BRICS/help the US obstruct it in Central Asia – which makes sense up to a point. ² (And duplicity, in a variant on the frog and scorpion fable, is in Erdogan’s DNA.) Whether that will come back to bite the man is a different matter. Not only was Russia less powerful then. More specifically it needed Ankara onside. For now it still does, though to a diminishing extent,.

Be that as it may, we are where we are, and where we are looks dire for Syrians. The speed at which the terrorists have taken Aleppo and now Hama has dismayed all who see this long and dirty war of US hegemony for what it is. A Syrian army (SAA) which fought so bravely a decade ago appears to have fled without a fight. Que pasa?

I’m relying here on two texts I urge readers to consult, since I will be brutally brief. One is the first twenty-three minutes thirty of this Alexander Mercouris podcast late on December 5. He says the SAA collapse stems from demoralisation as a result of Damascus corruption. He draws short of accusing Assad of kleptocracy but rightly insists that, if corruption is proven, the buck stops with the president.

He adds that Putin and Lavrov are irked by Assad, as indicated by the absence of his name in their public statements on Syria. This does not, however, equate to Syria being abandoned by Russia. As I’ve argued before and will do so again, neither Moscow nor Tehran – nor for that matter Beijing – can afford to let Damascus fall to Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham.

Which is to say, to Washington.

A complementary argument comes from my second recommend. Writing today on his substack, Simplicius the Thinker focuses – Syrian Crisis Analysis: SAA on Verge of Collapse? Or Have Jihadists Overplayed Their Hand? – on the jihadists having changed their MO. Citing another Telegraph piece by Elijah Barnier …

… the ideological forces leading the offensive have shifted tactics. Unlike the widespread brutality of their actions in previous years, they now use negotiation to achieve swift and strategic gains. Their focus is on controlling territory by facilitating the withdrawal of Syrian army forces without prolonged fighting, a pragmatic approach that enables them to expand their influence with minimal resistance.

… Simplicius adds:

In short: one can see the traces of a very well-developed hybrid campaign that spans both military, political, and ideological spheres. This has extended to being a critical component of Hama’s capture, wherein HTS reportedly made overtures to the Ismailis in Salamiyeh, a town at Hama’s vital eastern flank, to put down their arms peacefully, allowing Hama’s encirclement:

Of course there’s a lot more to be said – such as that not only can neither Russia nor Iran allow Damascus to fall but both, despite obvious distractions vis a vis Kiev and Tel Aviv, are in strong positions. Russia’s air-force, not much needed in the Ukraine, is far more powerful than in 2016; its fleet larger, its planes more modern, its pilots more combat experienced.

For its part Iran, having on October 1st shown the USA and Israel what it can do …

In its capacity to slice through Iron Dome and David’s Sling, Tehran has telegraphed in sterner terms than those of April that Zionist impunity is over. No Western asset in the Middle East is untouchable. Be it an RAF base in Cyprus supplying intel for the IDF, a US warship in the eastern Med, the oil fields of Arab autocracies, ships in the Hormuz choke point or, indeed, the apartheid state itself – all are vulnerable …

US Neocons & Israel’s far Right: Part 1

… knows that Israel knows that, should it attack elite brigades now on their way to Syria, there will for the first time be immediate consequences for the Zionist regime.

Interesting times. Here I’ll leave it, but will be keeping a close eye on what unfolds. Meanwhile, in this most tumultuous of weeks, there are events in Georgia and South Korea to catch up on.

* * *

1. Remember how US Senator Lindsey Graham defended the $billions sent to Kiev (to be black-holed in that mire of sleaze, though the contractors had been paid so any loss was to US taxpayers) as “the best money we’ve ever spent” since it meant Ukrainians dying to further US goals. Graham is GOP but, in the blue corner, Antony Blinken urges Kiev to lower its conscription age so 18 year-olds may bleed out in an unwinnable war to keep Russia tied down. Neither Graham nor Blinken have ever seen active service.
2. On strategic ambiguity making sense up to a point, the risk is of gaining a reputation for duplicity. Erdogan has done just that.

   Maybe Russia, armed with its actual wonder weapons (as opposed to the imaginary Western ones) will decide it’ll deal with the consequences of the Turkish straits being opened to NATO warships. Maybe Moscow decides it has enough other oil and gas customers, and it’ll take the hit by forgoing the exports to Türkiye and southeastern Europe. And there are other nations willing to help Russia bypass sanctions — although not in the EU customs union like Turkey.

   Conor Gallagher,  Erdogan Backstabs His Way Into Center of Middle East Conflict