Ian Welsh

The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Tag: Syrian War

Looks Like Assad Is Done

By

On December 8, 2024

Comments

Seems the Syrian army just wouldn’t fight and its allies couldn’t prop it up this time, which given the speed of the advance makes sense. This is one of the most pathetic shows of bad army moral and corruption I’ve seen in my entire life. There weren’t enough troops willing and able to fight to even make a stand at the capital.

I don’t see how Hezbollah or Iran or even Russia could have saved Assad from an army this bad. The Syrians had to be able to at least slow the enemy down. Hezbollah and Russia no longer had significant numbers of ground forces in the country and couldn’t get enough there soon enough.

This is terrible for Lebanon, Palestine, Russia, Iran and Hezbollah. Russia likely loses its Med port and airfield (if they don’t, that will be very interesting); Hezbollah lose its land route for supplies and Iran its easy ability to reach its allies. Let this be a lesson about what happens when you allow frozen conflicts. Syria was cut off from its oil fields, that was allowed to stand, and without any real fiscal capacity the Syrian military became even weaker and more corrupt.

I hope the new conquerors of Syria are more tolerant than I expect them to be.

Israel will seize another chunk of Syria. Tanks are already attacking into Syria from the Golan Heights.

Huge victory for Turkey here. I’d like to think Turkish proxy forces would help Palestine, but Erdogan has been all talk, no action so far when it comes to Gaza. This would allow him to cut off oil supplies to Israel if he wants to though.

The Kurds are going to get it in the throat, which is what happens when you ally with Israel and the US.

No tears for Assad, mind  you.

SUBSCRIBE OR DONATE TO OUR 2024 FUNDRAISER

Syrian Allies Try To Hold At Homs

By

On December 6, 2024

Comments

So, according to Magnier, who usually knows what he’s talking about when it comes to the Middle East:

Syrian government forces are expected to: 1. Leave Al Bu Kamal, Deir-ezzour, Palmira and stop at al-Qaryateyn to protect Homs. 2. Leave Daraa and retract to the limits of Damascus rural area. That will limit the defence of a larger area to a smaller area, secure Latakia, Tartous, Damascus and Homs.

Meanwhile Israel is considering annexing southern Syria.

Apparently some Iraqi militias Hezbollah forces are at Homs to fight, but HTS is still strong and is very well equipped, including with plenty of drones.

Edrogan has announced that HTS forces intend to occupy Damascus and Homs, which is a clear statement that they are his proxy forces.

Most of the Syrian army has proven unwilling to fight. The troops are ill paid, the winning army was mostly disbanded, and the army troops subsisted by setting up checkpoints and extorting people who had to pass through them. The critical oil fields are under US control, so Syria’s government is poor. Hezbollah can’t send the amount of troops they sent in the past, for obvious reasons, and Russia is occupied in Ukraine and doesn’t have nearly as many “mercenary” troops to send as it used to.

(This map makes things look better than they are. The majority of the population is no longer under Syrian government control, nor is the oil.)

If Syria falls, Hezbollah is cut off from its Iranian supply chain, and Russia wants to keep its naval and air bases. As for Iraq, they have to figure that they’re next: once HTS has secured a bigger base in Syria, or taken most of it, they will turn on Iraq, as similar forces did in the past.

The situation is developing quickly, and a lot will depend on whether and/or where Syria and its allies can halt the HTS advance.

Assad has proved himself unable to do what needs to be done. His need was to have a functional Syrian army and he failed at that. There may be good reasons for that, like lack of money and sectarian and tribal issues, but the bottom line is that the Syrian army’s willingness and ability to fight has so far been terrible.

If his allies do manage to save him, they should turn him into a figurehead and just the run the place themselves, it’s clear that he isn’t up to the job.

At the current time it seems the most likely outcome is Syria being partitioned between Israel and Turkey, perhaps with a rump Syrian state. But until we see if and where Syria and its allies manage to hold the line, it’s hard to say. All that being true, it’s also true that Syria in 2015 had been reduced far further than it is so far, so the situation is not, at least in principle, beyond rescue yet.

But Syria’s allies need to face the fact that the Syrian army is garbage and take over the war. If they don’t, the odds of success seem… bad.

SUBSCRIBE OR DONATE TO OUR 2024 FUNDRAISER

About the Syrian War & Those Rebels

By

On December 2, 2024

Comments

Let’s state the obvious bits and get them out of the way:

  • The rebels are basically Al-Qaeda;
  • They are supported by Turkey, Israel and the US;
  • The Syrian army barely fought during the initial attacks and it was very embarrassing;
  • Aleppo fell in a couple days. It may take a couple years to take it back;
  • The timing is intended to take advantage of Hezbollah’s being weakened and tied down by Israel.

Syria was losing the previous war until Hezbollah and Russia intervened. It may well lose this war if Hezbollah and/or Russia don’t send troops, but both of them have other enemies they need to worry about.

If Syria falls, Russia loses its Mediterranean naval and air bases and thus a great deal of its military reach. Hezbollah loses its main supply line to Iran.

The big mistakes that lead to this were playing footsie with Turkey/Erdogan and tolerating a frozen conflict. Syria, with Russia and Hezbollah’s support could have conquered Idlib, but Russia decided not to, leaving enemies with a foothold in Syria. Those enemies waited till the best time, then re0-openned the war.

If you’re winning a war and can win the war, then frozen conflicts are a bad idea. They remain a knife near your throat. Russia made this mistake in 2014 as well, when it could easily have fully defeated Ukraine and imposed a peace.

Hopefully they’ve learned the lesson. They do have enough reserves left to send sufficient troops to Syria. This time, win the war.

SUBSCRIBE OR DONATE TO OUR 2024 FUNDRAISER

 

Guardian Pushes for Western Countries Involvement in Invasion of Syria

By

On February 15, 2016

Comments

So, Michael Clarke in the Guardian writes that the Saudi Arabian threat to invade Syria isn’t credible (it isn’t, if acting alone, but Saudi Arabia claims Turkey is onside, and Turkey is a credible threat.)

He then goes on as follows:

Militarily, the Saudi threat issued at Munich has to be made credible. If a ceasefire does not materialise soon, the Russians, Iranians and Assad himself have no incentives to quit while they are ahead. Only the possibility of Arab ground forces, from Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the UAE, heavily backed by western logistics and intelligence, air power and technical specialists, could force Assad and his backers to make a strategic choice in favour of cessation. Only the US could make that work for the Saudis and others – and only Britain could bring along other significant European allies.

So, he wants America involved in this invasion in a big, visible way, along with Europe.

The sheer crazy here is awe-inspiring. Clarke believes that a “vengeful Assad” would be a huge problem for the West if he reconstitutes Syria.

Big enough to risk nuclear war?

Why?

It’s a small country, destroyed by war, run by a pragmatist. I suppose it is possible Assad could sponsor terrorism, but he’s unlikely to risk anything truly large that would entail risking his own life in retaliation, nor could he expect Russia to defend him if he was truly sponsoring terrorism.

There is nothing in Syria, and never was, that was worth a war there, at least not for the West. Destabilizing Syria has caused nothing but headaches for the West, including the current refugee crisis, which is likely to seen, historically, as one of the causes of the EU either breaking up or becoming a largely toothless and ceremonial organization.  (The main cause will be that the EU cripples its own members economically.)

(I am fundraising to determine how much I’ll write this year.  If you value my writing, and want more of it, please consider donating.)

I am shocked at the level of political thinking which the Guardian considers worth publishing. Truly shocked, not just rhetorically. Insane NeoCon warmongering is one thing when you’re dealing with countries like Iraq and Libya, it is another when you are dealing with a country where one of the world’s great nuclear powers is currently fighting.

Stupidity like this could get a lot of people very dead, and not just Middle Eastern people the West doesn’t care about.

Nothing in Syria is worth risking a war with Russia over. Nothing.

 

 

Saudi Arabia & Turkey to Invade Syria?

By

On February 15, 2016

Comments

It’s hard for me to credit anyone for being so careless, but the Independent reports that:

Saudi Arabia is sending troops and fighter jets to Turkey’s Incirlik military base ahead of a possible ground invasion of Syria.

…

“At every coalition meeting we have always emphasised the need for an extensive result-oriented strategy in the fight against the Daesh terrorist group.

“If we have such a strategy, then Turkey and Saudi Arabia may launch an operation from the land.”

So… they will claim that they are fighting ISIS, which is, by this point, I suppose, traditional. Turkey is already shelling Kurdish positions in northern Syria.

Of course, Saudi Arabia is not credible on this (at least with regards to a large commitment), with their involvement in Yemen, especially as they are also considering invading that country.  But Turkey is. I hope this is just bluster, intended to sway negotiations.

If it isn’t, this is a fiasco, a catastrophe, waiting to happen. Unlike the other foreign forces with boots on the ground (Iraq, Iran, Hezbollah, Russia), these forces would obviously not be invited by the Syrian government.

Syrian forces, backed by Russian airpower, are now fighting quite close to the Turkish border. Their aim has been to close that border so that various rebels (including ISIS) can’t receive supplies from Turkey.

It should be pointed out that if Daesh/ISIS has a government ally in the world, it is Turkey. As for Saudi Arabia, well, Daesh’s theology is a very close descendant of their branch of Islam.

Perhaps more to the point, all those armies tromping around in a rather small country risks war between Russia/Syria/Hezbollah and Saudi Arabia/Turkey.

Russian supply lines to Syria are not the best, to put it mildly. Turkey can close the direct sea route from Sevastopol, and alternative routes require going through some dangerous territory.

I wonder what Russia would do in such a situation. The Turkish military is very large and right on the border. A Turkish attack on Syria can’t be considered an existential threat to Russia, so Russian nuclear doctrine doesn’t call for use of battlefield nukes, but… I get twitchy when a NATO member goes up against Russia, and Turkey is a member of NATO.

Russia created “facts on the ground,” which have led to a realization that Assad will probably survive and that the rebels are doomed.

It seems those who wanted Assad gone the most now want to create their own “counter-facts” on the ground. Either they get rid of Assad in peace deals (assuming they avoid outright conflict), or they divide up Syria, with Turkey getting a good chunk of it.

That’s the plan. If they do invade, I find myself almost hoping the plan “works,” because if it doesn’t “work” that will most likely be because of general war between the powers.

(I am fundraising to determine how much I’ll write this year.  If you value my writing, and want more of it, please consider donating.)

This is an absolute catastrophe waiting to happen. I find it unlikely this could be done without the US’s approval, and, given Obama’s recent statement about how Russia should stop hitting “moderate” opposition targets in Syria, I can only assume he’s greenlighted this.

Were I in the White House, I’d be telling Saudi Arabia and Turkey not to. If they insisted on doing it anyway, I’d go public with a warning not to, and a UN Security Council motion with the US voting against Turkey and Saudi Arabia.

And let’s be perfectly, brutally frank here: If they want to do this, I’d tell Turkey that NATO’s “an attack on one is an attack on all” principle will not apply here. You do this, we’re not getting into a nuclear war for you. This is not self-defense.

As for Saudi Arabia, I’d have a pointed conversation about the price of oil and their budget. However, as much as they think the price of oil will increase if there is a war in Syria, their economy is still in bad shape, and the US could total it tomorrow if they chose to–simply through Treasury sanctions. Likewise, an end to parts and ammunition for their military would curtail them.

These are stern, even radical steps. Avoiding a war with Russia justifies them. There is nothing in Syria worth the risk of having all these armies stomping around, especially after Turkey has already shot down one Russian plane.

Hizbollah’s Leader Says They Are Battling All Across Syria

By

On May 26, 2015

Comments

Nasrallah:

The leader of Lebanon’s Hezbollah has said his fighters would expand their presence in Syria, saying the group was engaged in an existential battle against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

Hassan Nasrallah acknowledged for the first time that his Shia group was fighting across all of Syria in support of President Bashar al-Assad’s government.

Picture of Hassan Nasrallah

Picture of Hassan Nasrallah

Years ago, I noted that Hizbollah needed to keep supply lines open to Iran, and thus had reason to support the Syrian government. That was a near-existential reason in itself.

And he called specifically on his fiercest critics in Lebanon to back his intervention across the border, warning that their support for Assad’s opponents would not save them from ISIL.

I think this is accurate. There is a weird idea that if ISIL conquers Syria it won’t move into Lebanon. Of course it will. ISIS is the Caliphate. As a matter of belief and ideology, their legitimacy is tied to expansion, and Lebanon is definitely part of the lands they consider as rightfully belonging to the Caliphate.

To not fight them will not save Lebanon if ISIL wins, and Lebanon is a heck of a lot easier of a target than Iran or Turkey. Thus, former prime minister, and leader of Lebanon’s anti-Hezbolla bloc, Saad Hariri’s criticism of Nasrallah’s speech and his movement’s intervention in Syria is nonsense:

“We in the Future Movement declare publicly that the Lebanese state and its institutions are legitimate and our choice and guarantee,” Hariri said in a statement. “Defending the land and the sovereignty and dignity (of Lebanon) is not Hezbollah’s responsibility.”

Well, I suppose the last part might be true. But it is laughable to suppose that the Lebanese army can guarantee Lebanon’s safety from an ISIL invasion. Lebanese who are old enough will remember how well the Lebanese army performed against the Israeli invasion. I am unaware of any particular reason to suppose they would do better enough this time to matter. (It is also true that Hezbollah is currently mostly fighting the Nusra front.)

These wars are also sharpening fighters throughout the Muslim world. They are becoming tougher and smarter. Hezbollah has already defeated the Israeli army twice, ISIL is fighting very well, and the same can be said of many other forces in the Muslim world. I will be frank: I believe that Western force’s edge now comes down mostly to military equipment, which means air power–open-field battle systems (i.e., shoot them before they are even in range of you) and surveillance systems.

I believe the Israeli military, especially, given its corruption due to being an occupying force whose primary job is to beat up, torture, and kill the effectively defenseless, is not even close to as good as quite a number of Muslim (non-state and ISIL) forces.

One really shouldn’t create the perfect Darwinian learning system for those one considers one’s enemies.

If you enjoyed this article, and want me to write more, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén