Connect with us

Middle East

Organisations waging war against the Syrian army: Which organization, backed by whom, is attacking where?

Published

on

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.

Middle East

Iran resumes ballistic missile assembly using stockpiled parts

Published

on

Iran has resumed ballistic missile production in underground facilities, despite statements by Israeli and US authorities asserting that this capacity had been completely eliminated.

According to a report by The Wall Street Journal citing US and Middle Eastern officials, the Tehran administration is utilizing pre-stockpiled components in the manufacturing process.

Officials report that despite strikes on missile sites and industrial installations at the beginning of the war, Iran continues the assembly of both solid- and liquid-fuelled missiles.

Intelligence data indicates activity at numerous underground centres, including the Khojir complex in the southeast of the country, along with efforts to establish additional underground assembly points to protect against new air strikes.

Current assembly operations are being maintained at lower volumes compared with pre-war levels, as US and Israeli operations destroyed several facilities and a naval blockade has impeded the import of components and solid-fuel ingredients.

Assessing the process, Tal Inbar, a senior analyst at the US-based Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, stressed that damaged infrastructure can be repaired during periods when facilities are not targeted, and parts procured from other countries can be stored there.

Inbar noted that it would be naive to believe Iran is not rebuilding its missile production capacity.

Arguing that the facilities were destroyed and Tehran has suffered severe losses, the official stated that Iran remains weaker than ever before, and US President Donald Trump will never permit the country to acquire nuclear weapons.

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell stated that the US has destroyed up to 90% of Iran’s drone, ballistic missile, and naval industrial infrastructure, severely degrading Tehran’s ability to launch missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles.

Another US government official pointed out that the Tehran administration may have revived production, albeit on a low scale, following preliminary talks conducted in mid-June with the Trump administration regarding the opening of the Strait of Hormuz and ending the war. The official noted that existing stockpiles are sufficient to assemble at least two hundred missiles.

A CNN report in late May indicated that the Tehran administration was attempting to reopen underground missile shelters, struck by the US and Israel with costly munitions, using bulldozers and dump trucks.

Excavation activities accelerated after the April ceasefire decision; out of 69 tunnel entrances struck across 18 distinct locations, 50 have been made accessible again.

Experts stressed that it is impossible to destroy missile power solely by bombing tunnel entrances, underlining the limitations of such bombardments.

US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth claimed in April that they had effectively ended Iran’s missile programme. However, an NBC News report noted that Tehran utilized the ceasefire period to reconstitute its military strength.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Mohammed bin Salman urges Trump to strike Houthis after Mokha falls

Published

on

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has requested that US President Donald Trump launch air strikes against the Houthis in Yemen.

According to two US officials who spoke to Axios, Trump rejected the request, and US officials emphasised that the administration has no plans for direct intervention against the Houthis for now.

Oil prices surged on Thursday after the resistance led by Houthi militias (Ansarallah) seized the strategic coastal city of Mokha in Yemen.

This development brought the Yemeni resistance one step closer to the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, which is vital for global trade and Saudi oil exports.

With Iran already disrupting traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, Houthi control over Bab el-Mandeb could provide Tehran with powerful new leverage over the US and its Gulf allies.

On Thursday, as Houthi forces advanced towards the coastal city of Mokha and Saudi-backed Yemeni forces retreated, bin Salman telephoned Trump to brief him on the deteriorating situation.

A few hours later, the prince called again to request that Trump carry out US air strikes against the Houthis.

Trump declined, but a US official stated that the administration would provide Saudi Arabia with intelligence and targeting data on the Houthis.

The official noted that approximately 200 US military personnel are currently stationed in Saudi Arabia, providing non-military support.

A senior Trump administration official indicated that Washington’s priority is keeping the Red Sea open, while leaving the broader fight to regional partners.

“We are in continuous dialogue with Saudi Arabia and the Government of the Republic of Yemen regarding regional stability,” the official said.

The official continued:

“The US remains focused on protecting our core national security interests, such as ensuring freedom of navigation in the Red Sea, while empowering our regional partners to take the lead in managing and resolving regional security challenges.”

The US is concerned by the rapidly escalating conflict in Yemen and is seeking to avoid direct military intervention while increasing its support for Saudi Arabia.

According to two sources familiar with the matter, Admiral Brad Cooper, Commander of US Central Command (CENTCOM), travelled to Saudi Arabia on Thursday for urgent coordination meetings.

The conflict between Saudi Arabia and Yemeni resistance forces reignited in July after Riyadh blocked an Iranian aircraft carrying senior Houthi officials from landing in Sanaa following their return from Ali Khamenei’s funeral.

Bin Salman requested Trump’s political support to strike Sanaa airport, but made clear that Saudi Arabia did not require US military assistance. Trump granted his support.

The Houthis subsequently retaliated by attacking Saudi tankers in the Red Sea. These strikes threatened a route crucial to the kingdom’s oil exports, and the group later expanded its attacks to Saudi energy facilities.

Saudi Arabia and its Yemeni allies responded with air strikes and ground operations against Houthi positions.

Saudi Arabia’s request for direct US military intervention marks a sharp reversal from July, when Riyadh informed Washington that it could manage the Houthis on its own.

As clashes intensified, the Saudis began seeking progressively greater support from the US.

Sources close to the discussions noted that in recent weeks, US military and civilian officials informed their Saudi counterparts that Trump’s directive is to keep American forces focused on Iran and the Strait of Hormuz, and to avoid opening a new front.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Netanyahu ignored MBZ warning on Hamas 7 October plan, report says

Published

on

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly ignored a direct warning from UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan in the run-up to 7 October 2023, according to an investigation by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

The report states that the UAE leader, widely known as MBZ, was convinced in September 2023 that an explosion was imminent in the region, particularly given the escalating tensions in the West Bank.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog, who maintains close ties with bin Zayed, recounted: “In the months leading up to the war, he spoke with me about this issue frequently. He consistently conveyed the message that the situation needed to be de-escalated. He even dispatched a special envoy to Israel who met with the prime minister. The emir appeared to sense that the region was on the verge of erupting.”

MBZ also engaged in direct discussions with Netanyahu. These exchanges followed a standard operational protocol: a representative from the United Arab Emirates embassy would arrive at the prime minister’s office equipped with a specialised, secure telephone device to ensure confidentiality.

However, according to the newspaper, the call initiated by bin Zayed on this occasion was extraordinary in nature.

A week and a half before 7 October 2023, the UAE ruler placed a call to Netanyahu from the Presidential Palace in Abu Dhabi, and the two leaders spoke for 45 minutes.

During this conversation, bin Zayed warned that Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas leader in Gaza, was planning a major operation against Israel.

Bin Zayed voiced deep concern that such an event would not only lead to significant bloodshed, but would also destabilise the entire region and undermine the Abraham Accords.

Haaretz reported that three senior foreign sources possess direct knowledge of the call’s contents, marking the first public disclosure of the conversation’s existence.

A close Palestinian adviser to bin Zayed, who had emigrated from Gaza to Abu Dhabi years earlier and maintained extensive connections across the Gaza Strip, was also present during the exchange.

According to the adviser, the UAE ruler stressed to Netanyahu that Israel needed to prepare for this specific threat.

The adviser stated:

“The emir explained that, according to his assessment, Sinwar was preparing for a major event. He told Netanyahu that Israel had to be prepared. At the same time, he proposed working towards an economic solution for the Gaza Strip to prevent escalation, alongside calming the situation in the West Bank.”

Bin Zayed urged Netanyahu to take the matter seriously. Yet, to the emir’s surprise, the prime minister reacted with relative calm.

Netanyahu told bin Zayed that, in his own assessment, Hamas was planning to operate in the West Bank area. Reassuring the Emirati leader, Netanyahu insisted that Israel was prepared for any scenario.

The UAE leader later recounted his conversation with Netanyahu and his subsequent warning to CIA Director William J. Burns.

Bin Zayed shared with Burns the intuitive alarm he had sought to convey to Netanyahu—that “something over there is about to blow”—and noted the Israeli prime minister’s conviction that the unstable theatre was in fact the West Bank.

“The emir hoped that, despite Netanyahu’s reserved reaction, he would take the message seriously and take action,” the adviser said.

However, neither anticipated that the prime minister would hear the warning without briefing the heads of his defence and security establishments: neither the director of the Shin Bet, nor the director of the Mossad, nor the chief of staff of the Israel Defence Forces was informed of MBZ’s warning.

Haaretz noted that Gaza-related negotiations between Israel and Hamas had been proceeding smoothly in early 2023, providing the context in which the Emirati ruler’s concerns emerged.

The report received swift corroboration from the Israeli political opposition. Former prime minister and leader of the B’Yachad party, Naftali Bennett, stated that he knew the warning issued by UAE leader Mohamed bin Zayed to Netanyahu concerning Hamas’s plans prior to 7 October was genuine.

Speaking to 103FM, Bennett said: “I am telling you: I know this to be true.”

Bennett continued:

“Mohamed bin Zayed of the UAE warned Netanyahu that Sinwar was planning an operation. The head of the Egyptian General Intelligence Directorate, Abbas Kamel, also notified Netanyahu a few days before the massacre that a major operation was being planned. I do not wish to discuss my sources with anyone. I am telling you: I know this fact to be true.”

Contending that Netanyahu had led Israel “blindly into this horrific disaster,” the opposition figure asserted: “He was so deeply captive to the conception that Hamas was an asset that, despite receiving explicit warnings, he did nothing.”

Bennett maintained that Netanyahu bears direct responsibility for 7 October, not merely by virtue of being prime minister, but because “he spent 15 years strengthening Hamas and doing nothing.”

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey