Syria and Covert Strategies Quietly Implemented by the Axis Powers
Assad's departure from power led to a mix of jubilation and despair: people rejoiced at the end of a brutal dictatorship and felt sorrow for the glimpses of his brutal prisons. After over 50 years of the Assad dynasty, with both father and son in power, there was an end, along with all the suffering that came with it. Why all the pain? Why the torture, disappearances, executions, chemical weapons, and dead infants? It all came to an end in a single day. This day was undeniably significant, deserving of recognition and commemoration. But is the suffering truly over? Many observers couldn't help but wonder - what now? Can all the factions live harmoniously? What about extremist groups? And the inevitable reckoning that the population will demand against Assad supporters? And the geopolitical power struggles among neighboring states and beyond. So, this text is about Syria's future, with no apologies for not fully appreciating the moment - due to past experiences in Iraq and Libya, which have left discouraging precedents.
Regarding my background, for decades, I have covered the ground in all the relevant countries: Turkey, Iran, Syria, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, and the Russosphere. The following analyses, therefore, are not entirely uninformed, biased opinions. In our November 12 edition, I suggested a potential deal during the Trump era. Russia would get what it wanted in Ukraine, while Israel would get leeway to tackle the Iran threat through attacks on the Mullah regime within and outside the country. Israel would withdraw its support for Ukraine, and Russia would halt its support for Iran.
This deal requires a close partnership between Putin and Netanyahu. Israelis are well aware of this. You can find a discussion on it in this thread. Since the 2016 U.S. election, Zelensky has openly expressed the possibility of a ceasefire, a contentious stance. It became more acceptable due to the promise of potential NATO membership for Ukraine. The overall concept? It seems shaky, with Putin unlikely to accept NATO and equally unwilling to honor the deal's terms. Nevertheless, the notion of such a deal is present in various circles.
Take, for example, the events in Syria. It's strange how the Russians displayed little resistance as rebels gained momentum in Aleppo and beyond. Iran's attempts to aid Assad with Iraqi militias were curtailed by American air power. Similarly, Iran's efforts to supply Assad with weapons were halted by the Israeli air force. It seems that Moscow and Tehran made minimal efforts to support Assad. One could attribute this to the quid pro quo mentioned earlier. However, why isn't Iran fighting back harder, considering that the next step is Netanyahu bombing their nuclear installations and ports? The answer may be that Tehran believed Moscow would cave, unable to support Syria without Russian aid, no matter how much Iran's Shiite proxies tried. Assad was essentially undefendable. Israel's attacks on Hezbollah in Lebanon prevented any armed aid from reaching Assad. So, it appears that Iran conceded Syria to Israeli power as a concession to a rival.
These are the positive aspects of the scenario. However, the future of Syria holds negative consequences. Trump has declared that the U.S. should not intervene in "that situation." For him, this means allowing Israel to bomb Iran, unlike previous U.S. Presidents who prevented Israel from doing so. As for Erdogan, his overt offer of a summit meeting to Assad was ignored, and the rebel attack commenced. This had happened before in 2011. Syria had been invited to repudiate Iran and rejoin the Arab bloc by the Saudis. For a year, Assad was indecisive, before declining and sparking the Arab Spring. This time, Russia and Iran abandoned him. However, this choice will have negative implications for Syria's future stability, as Erdogan prepares for potential backlash.
The Russians and Assad are likely to have spoiler plans to destabilize Syria and create a negative image of the new coalition government. None of the axis powers want Syria to suddenly prosper because they have left the country. They justify the past suffering as necessary for "stability." If Syria becomes stable, the various factions may clash, and the Sunnis may oppress others. They need this situation to continue, so we should expect provocations, false flag outrages, high-profile kidnappings of Westerners, and more. Just like Putin used such tactics to justify flattening Grozny, Assad employed similar methods to destabilize Iraq and sow discord between factions. After the Syrian uprising began, Assad planted his own provocateurs in rebel areas, leading to kidnappings and creating headlines.
In the digital era, this commences with females sharing experiences of being compelled to wear headscarfs and being subjected to mistreatment. The authenticity of such social media grievances can't be verified. It seems like one group will target another. Places of worship like mosques and churches will experience anonymous arsons. The predictable response from the emerging administration will be to strengthen security measures, track down remnants of Assad supporters who are instigating disorder and such. Alliances are susceptible to such strategies. As a consequence, the government will have to implement strict central command. Before long, the internet will resonate with voices lamenting Assad's departure and advocating for the return of Russian/Iranian safeguards.
After the shift in Syria's power dynamics, Russia and Assad might employ spoiler tactics to destabilize the new coalition government, as they don't want Syria to prosper due to potential internal conflict. In a similar vein, Iran, despite being curtailed in supporting Assad, has not heavily opposed Israel's attacks on its nuclear installations and ports, perhaps believing Russia would succumb under the pressure of maintaining Syrian stability. Additionally, Turkey's overture to Assad for a summit meeting was rejected, leading Erdogan to prepare for potential backlash from Syria's destabilized state, a situation reminiscent of the Arab Spring in 2011. Lastly, there have been reports of social media grievances in the digital era, with females claiming they've been forced to wear headscarfs and mistreated, but the authenticity of these claims remains unverified, potentially foreshadowing future tension between factions in Syria.
