KOCHI: When news broke on December 8 on the sudden collapse of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad regime, even veteran West Asian watchers were aghast. For, Assad’s abdication came barely 12 days after a motley mix of rebel groups led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) launched an offensive against the powerful autocrat. Assad, who ruled the country with an iron fist for 24 years, was hitherto considered invincible. The last time he faced a real threat of being toppled was in 2011 at the height of ‘Arab Spring’ – a series of pro-democracy uprisings against autocratic Muslim regimes in west Asian and north African regions. But Assad crushed the unrest by unleashing a reign of terror on protesters, torturing and killing thousands, many of them civilians.
Russia and Iran supported him, offering political and military counterweight against the Western game to inject democracy by force. Russia, as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, used its veto power to shield the Assad regime from sanctions. Iran’s Shia theocratic regime entrusted Hezbollah to support Assad – who belongs to the minority Alawite sect of Shia Islam – to cling on to power in a Sunni-majority country. Given Assad’s brutal control over the seat of power in his war-torn nation, experts found the news of a lightning rebel advancement resulting in his ouster a bit incredulous. As Kremlin spokesman Dimitry Peskov put it: “What happened surprised the whole world, and we are no exception here.”
24-year rule crumble in 12 days?
By design or coincidence, the regime change happened in less than a fortnight. The rebels’ blitzkrieg started on November 27 from the western districts of Aleppo. In the intense fighting that followed, dozens of casualties were reported from both sides but the rebels eventually seized several villages as well as some strategic towns, including Base 46, the largest Syrian regime army base in the region. In just three days, the rebel fighters advanced to the city of Aleppo, which is Syria’s second largest with two million residents, and captured it in a lightning-fast offensive. This was a turning point as it was the first time the rebels managed to set foot in the city since the 2016 battle in which government forces took control of the city.
The next in line to fall was Hama, which has a strategic location from a military point of view because it lies in west-central Syria providing direct supply lines between Damascus and Aleppo.
Dara, the birthplace of the 2011 uprising, and Homs fell over the next two days. Finally, on December 8, Damascus came under the control of rebel groups. What was conspicuous was the absence of resistance from Assad’s forces as the rebels advanced and took control of key cities. It was as if Assad’s troops were advised to acquiesce without trying to put up a fight. By the time the rebels entered the Syrian capital, Assad had fled, reportedly under Russian orders. He is said to be in Moscow now along with his family.
While there are too many invariables to the Syrian puzzle, the primary reason the rebels’ onslaught succeeded seems to be the lack of military support from Russia and Iran, as the two countries were mired in wars of their own making. Russia is locked in a costly, complicated and protracted war with Ukraine while Iran is nursing losses after it was boxed into a corner by Israel, which crippled Tehran’s proxies Hamas in Palestine and Hezbollah in Lebanon, and is now fixated on the last of Iran-backed groups, the Houthis of Yemen. So, the central nervous system of the Assad regime failed to get energy infusion from both Iran and Russia.
Iran, the biggest loser
For almost four decades, Syria served as Iran’s central command base in the region, which is strategically crucial for Iran’s axis of resistance. Iran enjoyed seamless access to Syrian territory, shipping ports and airports – as if Syria was a province of Iran. Tehran controlled military bases, missile factories, tunnels and warehouses that served the supply chain for its network of militants spread across the region and beyond. From Syria, Iran was able to funnel weapons, cash and logistical support to Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and other militants in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and Iraq.
With the fall of its ally in Syria, Iran is probably the biggest loser in the geopolitical game that is still playing out. Assad’s removal also marks the collapse of a regional axis which Tehran had been painstakingly building and nurturing over several years, with the strategic support of Moscow. Losing the vital Syrian corridor is a serious blow to Iran’s ability to service its proxies. Iran’s axis of resistance spectacularly caved, though supporters believe Tehran will be able to regroup with the help of its still-functional proxies in Iraq and Yemen.
Is it really a setback for Russia?
Russia is heavily invested in Syria, where it has set up two of its only military outposts outside the former Soviet Union. The Tartus naval base and Khmeimim air base in Syria have been key to the Kremlin’s operations in Africa and West Asia. Assad’s unexpected fall has dealt a body blow to Russia’s influence in the region. For now, Russia has withdrawn its military assets from them though it claims it is not abandoning the bases. Moscow will now have to recalibrate its strategies, which will largely depend on HTS’ stand.
Meanwhile, reports in some Russian media outlets claim the Russians are negotiating with the leaders of HTS to have its Syrian military bases intact. Curiously, the outfit has not yet formally asked Moscow to pack up and withdraw.
Despite the poor optics, Russia chose to play down its loss in Syria and signalled it is willing to work with the new authorities. After a studied silence, this is what Putin said: “On the whole, we have achieved our goal. It is not for nothing that today many European countries and the United States want to establish relations with them (Syria’s new rulers). If they are terrorist organisations, why are you (the West) going there? So that means they have changed…. You want to portray everything that is happening in Syria as some kind of failure, a defeat for Russia. I assure you, it is not. And I’ll tell you why. We came to Syria 10 years ago to prevent a terrorist enclave from being created there.”
Turkish games
Turkey is perhaps the biggest stakeholder in the regime change. It currently hosts about 3.5 million Syrian refugees and is keen to see normalcy return so as to send the Syrians back. Ankara, however, is expected to seek greater control over northern Syria, which it already occupies. Turkey controls a sizable chunk of northern Syria, which it calls ‘security zone’, with the help of the Syrian National Army, an Islamist militia supported by Ankara.
Turkey, which reportedly provided weapons and logistics support to the rebels for the latest offensive, is now actively negotiating to seal trade pacts. Days after the HTS took over Damascus, Turkish transport minister Abdulkadir Uraloglu said Turkey was ready to strike a maritime demarcation agreement after a permanent government is formed in Damascus. Such an agreement under international law will set the tone for formal exploration of oil and hydrocarbons.
Behind Turkey’s alacrity to support the HTS is its unease with Kurdish militants on its border. Turkey considers the Kurdish YPG militia as an extension of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which has been waging insurgent warfare against the Turkish state since 1984. Complicating matters, the Kurdish YPG is an offshoot of US-allied Syrian Democratic Forces. The US has been playing deaf to Turkey’s demand to stop funding YPG. Experts say Turkey’s ultimate goal is to topple the Kurdish Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria, where the Democratic Union Party, an offshoot of PKK, is in control.
Without mincing words, Turkish president Tayyip Erdogan said last week that Kurdish militants in Syria will have to lay down their weapons or “be ready to be buried”. According to Ankara, the Kurdish YPG militia has no place in Syria’s future. How it will play out will depend on the response of the US and HTS.
By proactively responding to developments in Syria and engaging with the new players there, Turkey wants to take Iran’s place in the country. It is also likely to lead the reconstruction efforts that are likely to start after the new rulers settle down.
US unable to hide footprints
The timing of the attack on the Assad regime by the rebels in Syria shows military precision and advance intelligence about enemy positions and troop strength, leaving enough hints about support from a major foreign power. For context, the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken revealed that Washington was in ‘direct contact’ with HTS, formerly known as Jabhat al-Nusra, an al-Qaeda outfit proscribed as a terrorist organisation by the US government.
Not just that, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Barbara Leaf said on record that the Joe Biden administration has decided to lift the $10 million bounty it had announced for information about HTS chief Ahmed al-Sharaa, also known as Abu Mohammad al-Jolani.
The US wouldn’t comment on it but unconfirmed reports suggest the HTS cadre received training by US forces while weapons were sent to them through Turkey. No wonder, many observers see US imprints all over Assad’s fall. Of particular interest is the fact that HTS was never targeted by the US or its staunch ally Israel even though the latter unleashed hundreds of air strikes inside Syria after Assad’s removal. Intriguingly, HTS hasn’t said a word against Israel’s aggression in Syria, including its pushing deep into the buffer zone of Golan Heights, Syria’s tallest mountain range that is extremely critical for military operations.
As for the US, it is still keeping its limited number of forces – around 900 – to protect some northeastern oil fields, centred around the Syrian cities of Hasaka and Deir Ezzor, though the proceeds from the oil trade is pocketed by the Kurdish forces that control the region. The US support for the Kurds remains a thorn in its equation with Turkey.
Perfect cover for Israel
For Israel, the regime change could offer a tactical advantage as it considerably weakened Iran’s influence over Syria, from where Tehran used to target Tel Aviv through its proxies spread across the region. Moving fast, Israel launched hundreds of airstrikes inside Syria to kill its air force and naval capabilities. Reports say entire squadrons of fighter jets, radar and missile systems, and weapons depots, including chemical arms, were destroyed. Among the demolished military assets were six Soviet-era missile ships.
For the record, the Israeli government said that its intent was to stop extremists from accessing the deadly weapons which could be used to target Israel. To top it all, Israeli forces pushed deeper into a 155 square mile ‘demilitarised buffer zone’ established after the 1973 Arab-Israeli war located east of the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.
The new situation gave Israel the perfect excuse for its territorial aggression. Israel does not believe HTS will adopt a confrontationist approach towards it in the short term, though the Islamist outfit is keeping its cards close to its chest.
What happens now
Despite the establishment of an interim government, there are concerns about internal divisions among various factions. The coalition led by HTS comprises elements ranging from hardcore Salafists to Syrian nationalists in the Free Syrian Army. The political and religious differences within the rebel coalition could lead to limited skirmishes or another civil war. To avoid that, HTS leaders will have to strike power-sharing agreements with the other players.
Apart from HTS, the other prominent players in the region who were trying to dislodge Assad include Islamic State, Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces, and the Turkey-backed Syrian National Army. HTS’ success in governing will depend, to a large extent, on how it will manage these battle-hardened militant groups. It already has a problem at hand as Turkey has given an ultimatum to the Kurds to stand down and disband their outfits.
Syria is in churn with multiple actors fancying their chances though the US appears to be on the ascendant. Much would depend on president-elect Donald Trump’s interest in taking the strategic advantage forward. Which way Syria would eventually swing and whether it would give room for parasites like Al-Qaeda and Islamic State to breed and multiply, only time can tell.
