Middle East
Organisations waging war against the Syrian army: Which organization, backed by whom, is attacking where?
The attacks of the terrorist organizations led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which captured the rest of Idlib, all of Aleppo and the northern countryside of Hama in Syria, were followed by the attacks of the Turkish-backed FSA in Tal Rifaat, the U.S.-backed FSA in al-Bukamal and the YPG in Deir ez-Zor. The Syrian army looks disorganized in the attacks, which ‘coincided’ with a period when Russia and Iran, which support the Syrian government, were busy with their own agendas. The Syrian army’s unopposed retreat from Aleppo could have profound implications for Syria’s political future.
So which organizations are fighting in Syria, where and against whom? Which powers are supporting them and why?
1- Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS): Idlib-Aleppo-Hama
Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) is the leading terrorist organization targeting the Syrian army in the battlefields of Aleppo, Idlib and Hama.
The Fateh al-Mubin Operations Room, formed with the participation of HTS and other organizations, launched an attack against the Syrian army on 27 November under the name of “Operation Deterring Aggression”. The groups took control of Aleppo, 310 kilometers from the Syrian capital Damascus, and captured some small settlements towards Hama province. According to AA, the groups also took control of the settlements of Jalime, Alzeka, Beridej, Jubbeyin, Tal Meleh, Kirkat, Mughayyir and Mabtan in Hama, and the villages of Tuwayne, Huwayz, Sheria and Bab Taka in the Gab Plain.
A ‘commander’ from Fateh al-Mubin’s operations room, who requested anonymity, told Majalla that in addition to HTS, Jaysh al-Izzah and Jaysh al-Nasr, as well as some of the groups under the umbrella of the Turkish-backed FSA, such as the Nour al-Din Zengi Movement, the National Liberation Front and the Joint Force, are involved in attacks in the area.
Around 40,000 opposition fighters are involved in attacks against the Syrian army in Aleppo, Idlib and Hama. The commander said that the groups have about 80,000 fighters in reserve, all of whom have received military training in various forms of warfare and conflict, how to deal with circumstances, how to use weapons and how to confront regime forces and their allies.
HTS, formerly al-Nusra, was formed under the leadership of Abu Mohammed Golani, who was sent to Syria in 2011 by the Islamic State of Iraq (ISIS), the Iraqi branch of al-Qaeda led by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
When Golani, the leader of al-Nusra, which had grown rapidly by exploiting the chaos in Syria, and Baghdadi fell out, Baghdadi announced the dissolution of al-Nusra in 2013. In the same statement, Baghdadi announced the creation of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and declared that ISIL was expanding into Syria.
Meanwhile, al-Nusra declared its allegiance to al-Qaeda, but this did not prevent ISIS from seizing the vast majority of al-Nusra’s human, ammunition, and financial resources in Syria. The crisis between the two organizations also went to al-Qaeda’s central arbitration center, but the crisis could not be resolved.
Because of its links to al-Qaeda, al-Nusra was quickly placed on terrorist lists by various countries. Turkey added it to its list of terrorist organizations in 2014. From 2014, as ISIS spread rapidly across Syria, al-Nusra and other groups were trapped in the Idlib region.
Russia’s intervention in Syria and the Syrian army’s rapid operations to ensure territorial integrity led al-Nusra to unite with other groups. To this end, it announced that it had severed its ties with al-Qaeda and adopted the name Jabhat Fateh al-Sham Front (JFC).
Of course, the ‘break’ with al-Qaeda was only superficial. For al-Nusra’s move came immediately after al-Qaeda’s leadership advised it to ‘do whatever is necessary for the benefit of the jihad in Damascus and to unite with other organizations’. However, even the name changes only resulted in the unification of the SFC with a few small groups.
In 2017, HTS was formed under the military leadership of Golani, along with a few other groups such as the Nureddin Zengi Movement, Liwa al-Haq and others. HTS declared its goal to be “the rule of Sharia and the rejection of secularism”.
In January 2017, a ceasefire was declared in Idlib as part of Astana, excluding ISIS and al-Nusra. However, HTS took advantage of the ceasefire to engage in a confrontation with Ahrar al-Sham, the other main group in Idlib, in the summer of 2017, and suffered a major defeat. Since then, HTS has rapidly expanded and recruited other organizations, either by force or voluntarily, and by the end of 2019 it controlled 95% of Idlib. With around 30,000 fighters, it is the most effective armed force in the region.
2- Turkey-backed FSA (SNA): Northern and Northern countryside of Aleppo
The Turkish-controlled FSA (Syrian National Army – SNA), the most ideologically mixed front organization, is the military organization of the Coalition of Syrian Opposition and Revolutionary Forces (SMDK). They also have a government called the ‘Syrian Interim Government’.
There are dozens of organizations within the SNA, such as Faylaq al-Sham, Jaish al-Ahrar, Jaish al-Nasr, Ahrar al-Sham, Nour al-Din Zengi. Many of these organization are known to have received military and financial support from the CIA-controlled Military Operations Coordination Room and Gulf states in the past.
While some of the SNA-affiliated organizations took part in the HTS-led Aleppo offensive, some of them captured the Tal Rifaat district center as part of Operation Dawn of Freedom launched against the PKK/YPG.
According to Majalla, the day after the HTS launched its offensive, Turkey summoned the SNA factions in its area of influence in northern Aleppo for a secret emergency meeting. One of the SNA commanders said that during the meeting an agreement was reached with the Turkish side to expel the YPG from the areas it controls in the neighborhoods of Ashrafiya and Sheikh Maqsoud in northern Aleppo, Tal Rifaat and Manbij in the northern countryside of Aleppo, in parallel with the HTS operation.
3- PKK/YPG: East of the Euphrates in Deir ez-Zor
The US-backed terrorist organization PKK/YPG, which was forced to withdraw from Tel Rifaat after the Turkish-backed FSA attack, has launched an attack to drive the Syrian army out of 7 villages in Deir ez-Zor province, east of the Euphrates.
According to AA, the PKK/YPG launched an offensive against the Syrian army in the villages of Murrat, Hashsham, Mazlum, Tabiya, Husseiniye, Salihiyyah and Hatlah, and clashes are ongoing.
The Syrian army is known to be present in the area from Deir ez-Zor city center to al-Bukamal district near the Syrian-Iraqi border.
The PKK/YPG occupy almost all of Deir ez-Zor east of the Euphrates River, while the center of the province and other rural areas are under the control of the Syrian army.
4- US-backed FSA: Iraqi border in Deir ez-Zor
The U.S.-backed FSA launched an attack on the towns of al-Bukamal and Meyadin in Tanf, where US forces are stationed in the Syrian provinces of Homs and Deir ez-Zor.
The aim of these attacks is to sever Syria’s link with Iraq. Iranian groups supporting the Syrian army are concentrated in al-Bukamal, close to the Syrian-Iraqi border. This area is critical for the land link with Iranian-aligned forces in Iraq.
The US State Department stated that it has waived human rights conditions on more than $300 million in military aid to Egypt.
The statement emphasised that this decision was taken in consideration of Cairo’s “helpful role” since the outbreak of the war against Iran.
Egypt began receiving substantial support from the US after signing a peace treaty with Israel in 1979.
Since the late 1980s, the country has received approximately $1.3 billion annually in US military assistance.
A portion of this aid is subject to conditions related to human rights and democracy, which can be waived on national security grounds.
Withholding funds, including during the administration of former US President Joe Biden, has caused tension between Cairo and Washington in the past.
A letter dated 21 September and addressed to various congressional committees, obtained by Reuters, stated that Secretary of State Marco Rubio “decided to waive the certification requirement under the fiscal year 2025 Foreign Military Financing programme for Egypt of $320 million.”
This waiver was subsequently confirmed by the State Department.
An accompanying memorandum justifying the decision stated that this portion of military aid was “essential for counterterrorism, border security, or non-proliferation programmes, or otherwise important to the national security interests of the United States.”
The memorandum, dated 4 September and bearing Rubio’s signature, stated: “Exercising this waiver authority is critical to the US-Egypt relationship and to US national security priorities, particularly given the helpful role Egypt has played in the aftermath of Operation Epic Fury.”
“Operation Epic Fury” is the designation used by the US military for the campaign launched jointly with Israel against Iran in late February.
The State Department memorandum, whose authenticity was confirmed by two sources in Washington familiar with the letter, did not provide detailed information regarding what was termed Egypt’s “helpful role”.
The State Department’s annual decision on military aid to Egypt typically covers funds allocated for the preceding fiscal year, which ends on 30 September.
A State Department spokesperson stated that Rubio waived the certification in the interest of US national security and that the US continues to cooperate with the Egyptian government across a range of issues.
In an emailed statement, the spokesperson said: “This waiver recognizes the importance of maintaining security cooperation with Egypt at a time of significant security challenges in the region.”
The Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not immediately comment on the matter.
The spillover effects of the Iran war have imposed a heavy toll on US security partners, including Egypt.
Owing to rising fuel prices and other disruptions, the Egyptian economy is passing through a difficult period.
Under the Biden administration, the US withheld portions of the annual military allocation on multiple occasions over Egypt’s human rights record.
In 2024, following the Hamas-led 7 October attack on Israel and the subsequent war in Gaza, the Biden administration set aside human rights conditions, disbursing the entire $1.3 billion allocation to Egypt for the first time in its tenure.
Human rights organisations have long accused Egypt, under the administration of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, of widespread human rights abuses, including torture and enforced disappearances.
This week, Egyptian police detained six journalists from a fact-checking and investigative media outlet, accusing them of spreading false information on behalf of the banned Muslim Brotherhood.
Egyptian authorities state that they have taken steps to address human rights issues. Sisi said stability is paramount and that the government supports human rights by working to provide for basic needs.
Britain has significantly broadened its military export restrictions targeting Israel, suspending or rejecting more than 80 licences for items the IDF could use in Gaza.
This figure is nearly triple the number affected when the policy was first introduced in September 2024.
United Kingdom Minister of State for the Middle East Stephen Doughty said that as part of what he described as a “tighter system” for assessing exports to Israel, more than 50 further export applications have been refused since approximately 30 licences were initially suspended.
Under the initial decision taken in September 2024, 30 of roughly 350 licences were suspended after the British government concluded there was a “clear risk” that certain military exports could be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian law in Gaza.
The affected equipment included components for military aircraft, drones, naval systems, and targeting gear.
Doughty said additional measures adopted this month established what he termed a “double safeguard” mechanism within the approvals process.
Export applications must now be assessed both against existing international humanitarian law criteria and in light of Britain’s position on the legality of Israel’s presence in the Palestinian territories.
“We have so far suspended or refused more than 80 licences,” Doughty said, adding that he had personally examined each licence.
Despite the wider restrictions, British-origin parts entering the international F-35 fighter jet supply chain continue to be largely exempt.
The UK government argues that preventing British-made components from entering the global F-35 pool could undermine the programme as a whole and have serious consequences for the security of the UK and its allies.
Direct exports of F-35 parts intended specifically for Israel remain suspended.
Doughty defended maintaining the supply of components via the international programme, arguing that halting it could have severe ramifications for the broader European and allied security architecture.
Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Emily Thornberry challenged this position, arguing that the issue was political rather than purely legal.
Thornberry suggested adopting an approach similar to the Dutch model, under which components entering the international supply chain could be flagged as “not intended for aircraft bound for Israel”.
The initial suspension was implemented in September 2024 by then Foreign Secretary David Lammy.
Lammy stressed at the time that the measure did not constitute an arms embargo and applied solely to items assessed as usable in military operations in Gaza.
Since then, the policy has been tightened further under Prime Minister Andy Burnham.
The expanded export restrictions follow the Burnham government’s adoption of a more confrontational policy toward the Israeli government.
Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband drew sustained applause at the Labour Party’s annual conference in Liverpool after delivering a sharp critique of the Netanyahu government’s policies and defending the decision to ban trade with Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
Accusing Israel of committing war crimes in Gaza, Miliband stated that the British government heard public outrage over the conflict, telling delegates: “We hear you. You were right.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with representatives of Gulf and Arab nations that lack diplomatic ties with Israel, including Saudi Arabia, during his weekend visit to the United Arab Emirates.
Sources close to the gathering told the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth on Monday that representatives from Morocco, Libya, Jordan, and Qatar also took part in the meeting.
Netanyahu made a unannounced visit to Abu Dhabi on Sunday, where he met with the country’s leader, Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan.
According to Israeli media, this marked the first time the United Arab Emirates officially confirmed a visit by Netanyahu.
The meeting was arranged by Mossad Director Roman Goffman “at the request of Saudi Arabia, which asked for Israel’s assistance against Houthi attacks in the Red Sea region,” according to Yedioth Ahronoth.
The discussions addressed Iran and the Houthi militia. The newspaper added that the Arab states heard from Israel that “Israel is prepared to assist countries in the region with air defence systems, just as it aided the UAE during the conflict with Iran.”
Conflict in Yemen intensified in September when Ansarullah militiamen launched a rapid offensive that seized Yemen’s entire Red Sea coastline, including the vital maritime corridor of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.
The Yemeni resistance also imposed a blockade on Saudi Arabia’s energy exports and staged multiple attacks against the kingdom.
Saudi Arabia reportedly sought military assistance from the US to counter Ansarullah.
Washington declined to attack the Houthis directly, but announced that it would provide intelligence and targeting support.
Reporting on the same visit, The Jerusalem Post said Netanyahu spent six hours in the UAE and that the principal subject of his discussions with MBZ was Iran.
Citing sources familiar with the matter, the newspaper added that the trip came “after Netanyahu exerted heavy pressure on the United Arab Emirates to arrange a meeting ahead of the Israeli elections on 27 October.”
Separately, the Associated Press, citing a person with direct knowledge of the meeting, reported that Netanyahu’s visit to the UAE was arranged in part to ask MBZ to deny reports that he had warned the Israeli prime minister of an impending Hamas threat prior to 7 October 2023.
According to Israeli media, Netanyahu’s office denied the AP report, issuing the following statement:
“Fake news. The visit focused solely on strengthening ties between the two countries and on regional issues.”
Germany expands North Sea military ports and plans new naval base
Musk appointed co-director of Pentagon future warfare initiative
US waives human rights terms on $320m military aid to Egypt
Putin says Russia did not start war and warns of nuclear risks
European nations unite against US pressure over strategic oil stocks
-
Europe4 days agoEuropean unions urge governments to scrap all Palantir deals
-
Diplomacy4 days agoEast-West Forum in Istanbul highlights irreversible shift to multipolarity
-
Europe1 week agoEmmanuel Todd says West faces collapse amid Ukraine and Iran crises
-
Europe1 week agoEuropean intelligence chiefs divide over risk of Russian attack
-
Diplomacy1 week agoEast-West Forum in Istanbul to debate multipolarity and global order
-
Middle East1 week agoSharaa says 7 October must not shape Israel policy on Syria
-
America1 week agoRepublican support for Trump’s war with Iran drops sharply in polls
-
Middle East1 week agoPalestinian factions confront legitimacy crisis at Istanbul talks
