Six turning points on the Syrian uprising

Six turning points on the Syrian uprising

A chronological examination of developments during the seven years of the Syrian uprising denotes several turning points. Each of them has crucial role in the unfolding Syrian drama, and more importantly each one of them seems to lead to the other and henceforth direct the conflict.

As we all know, the Syrian uprising has its roots in a peaceful movement that demanded social justice, and yet, it rapidly morphed into armed struggle for power between various actors. The uprising is characterized by deep divisions between all anti-Assad factions such as: rural / urban, secular / Islamist, and new generation / old generation. More importantly, there are deep divisions among regional and international powers which seem to overlap all turning points and add complexity to an already complicated picture.

In this context, there are six turning points that can be counted as critical in defining todays’ Syria:

The first one is the militarization of the uprising by late July 2011, which turned a civil movement into an armed struggle for power between various actors. This was mainly due to the regime rhetoric in utilizing hard power (al-hal al-‘amny ; al-hal al ‘askary—security and military solutions) to eliminate its opponents. However, unsurprisingly, state and non-state actors found a golden opportunity in supplying funds and arms to different militias that eventually would serve their interests. Saudi Arabia and Qatar were among the first states which funded militias. Turkey and the United States were to follow.

This indeed has led to the second turning point, which is the sectarianization of the uprising. The Syrian regime played with sectarian fire by pitting Alawite-dominated forces against Sunni-dominated rebels, and thus, portrayed the conflict as sectarian fight, and sectarian actions by the regime forces and the security dilemma certainly played vital roles in this. Moreover, non-state actors, Shi‘a militias on the ground, and the Sunni political entrepreneurs in some Gulf States manipulated sectarian identities for their ends.

Consequently, this polarization of sectarian identities triggered the third turning point which is the radicalization of the conflict with the establishment of Jabhaet al-Nusraal-Nusra Front (NF) in January 2012. Since NF is a paramilitary organization with links to al-Qa‘ida, it forced the West and some Syrians to perceive the uprising as a fight against “terrorism.” In the truth, there are myriads of actors and factors responsible for the creation of NF: violence, sectarian manipulation by state and non-state actors, and the hesitant policies by the West in how to address the uprising–which had now turned into a bloody conflict. In addition, Turkey, while aiming to contain the Kurdish threat, empowered NF by turning a blind eye to jihadists infiltrating through its southern borders.

The strategy of no strategy by Western officials added chaos to an already chaotic conflict leading to the forth turning point, which is the chemical attack on eastern Ghouta. On 21 August 2013 Syrian forces launched sarin gasa deadly chemical weaponinto the Damascus suburb of eastern Ghouta killing more than 1400 including civilians. Since the early days of the uprising, President Barak Obama declared chemical weapons as a “red line” and warned of a military retaliation if they were used by the Syrian regime. Well, the retaliation was limited to condemnation in a press release. No military response took place. The red line was crossed, and the rules of the game were tested.  Several chemical attacks were reported later.

As a result, many rebels were provoked to join radical groups and, furthermore, it created a lethal vacuum which President Vladimir Putin has happily filled, and has been able to draw the rules of the game. This is the fifth turning point. In late September 2015 Russian forces intervened on the ground in Syrian changing the political and military equation as it radically swung the pendulum towards the Assad regime. Throughout the three years of his intervention, President Putin proved himself as de facto most powerful actor in today’s Syria, and moreover, in the future Syria.

The sixth and last turning pointfor the meantimeis the Sochi Deal that prevented a looming deadly assault on Idlibthe last standing haven for rebels. On 17 September 2018 President Erdogan and his new good friend President Putin signed an agreement to create a fifteen-to-twenty-kilometer demilitarized zone in the province of Idlib which would see the removal of heavy weapons and the Jihadists of Tahrir al-Sham (formerly known as NF). The deal prevented a military hegemony by the Assad regime and more importantly guaranteed the deployment of Turkish forces in northern Syria. The Sochi deal demonstrated that Russian interests do not parallel those of Assad, and that alliances shift with the structure of power. The Sochi deal draws the borders of the so-called zones of influence, and empowers the actors who will draw the road to a post-conflict Syria. Whether this deal is going to catalyze a seventh turning point is yet to be seen.

As explained in the above account, these six turning points played critical role in the fate of the uprising. Each one seems to catalyze another. Nevertheless, the most critical turning point in Syria and the life of Syrians was on 15 March 2011, when dozens of brave youth protested in the heart of Damascus chanting for freedom. It might take too many turning points in order to get back to this very first one.

[Other roundtable submissions can be found here]

Syria in a Week (23 July 2018)

Syria in a Week (23 July 2018)

The following is a selection by our editors of significant weekly developments in Syria. Depending on events, each issue will include anywhere from four to eight briefs. This series is produced in both Arabic and English in partnership between Salon Syria and Jadaliyya. Suggestions and blurbs may be sent to info@salonsyria.com.

 

Kurdish Bridges with Damascus

16 July 2018

The Syrian Democratic Council (SDC), the political wing of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), said that it is considering establishing a platform that represents people living in areas under its control in northern Syria in preparation for potential negotiations with the Syrian government.

The SDF is a coalition that is comprised of Kurds and Arabs and receives considerable support from the United States.

On Monday, the SDC held a two-day conference in Tabaqa city in northern Syria. Two hundred and forty people attended the conference, including officials from Kurdish-controlled areas, as well as representatives from the “internal” opposition, the activities of which are overlooked by the Syrian government.

“One of the goals of this conference is the establishment of a platform to negotiate with the Syrian government,” said member of the presidential body Hikmat Habib, adding that this platform “will represent all self-ruled areas and areas controlled by the SDF. It will also include Raqqa, Deir Azzor, and Manbij.”

“We started to open doors for negotiations because Syrians make up most of these forces … If this does not happen, we will resort to liberating these areas by force because we do not have any other options, whether the Americans are present or not,” said al-Assad in a press interview late May regarding the SDF controlled area.

The SDC then announced its willingness and readiness to enter into “unconditional talks” with the government.

 

Reverse Displacement

20 July 2018

The issue of the towns of Kafriya and al-Fu’ah was completely closed at midnight Friday upon the implementation of the agreement between Syrian government forces and armed opposition with Russian and Turkish guarantees.

A security source told a German news agency that government authorities received the last batch of the two towns’ residents and captives from the village of Ishtabraq in Idlib countryside, while the armed opposition received the remaining detainees released by the Syrian government.

The source said that the exchange was thoroughly carried out at the Tallet al-I’ss crossing, twenty kilometers southwest of Aleppo, and the curtains were finally closed after a sixteen-hour-delay caused by the armed opposition.

The exchange process began Thursday morning and took place in several batches, as one hundred and twenty-two buses left the scene carrying around seven thousand people from the two towns’ residents and militants from Hezbollah and Iran.

 

The Humanitarian Issue Precedes the Political Issue

20 July 2018

Russia proposed cooperation with the United States to ensure the return of refugees to Syria, said the Russian Ministry of Defense (MOD) on Friday, days after the summit between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump.

“Specific proposals on how work could be organized to ensure that refugees can return home have been sent to the American side,” said a senior official in the MOD Mikhail Mizintsev in a statement. The proposals “take into account the agreements between the Russian and US presidents during their meeting in Helsinki” on Monday, he said.

Mizintsev said that Russia proposed the establishment of a joint plan regarding the return of Syrian refugees to areas they lived in prior to the conflict, especially those who fled to Lebanon and Jordan.

Moscow proposed the establishment of a working group that includes Russia, the United States, and Jordan based on the Russian-Jordanian coordination center in Amman, and the establishment of a similar group in Lebanon.

In New York, US State of Secretary Mike Pompeo said in a response to a question on this topic that presidents Putin and Trump in the Helsinki summit discussed “the resolution of the conflict in Syria and how we might get the refugees back,” especially those in Lebanon and Jordan. “It is important that at the right time, through voluntary mechanism, the refugees are able to return to their home country,” he said.

Russia, which has intervened in Syria since September 2015 in support of government forces, proposed to the United States the establishment of a joint group to finance the reconstruction of Syrian infrastructure, according to General Mizintsev. He added that “the American side is studying the Russian proposals.”

 

French Relief with Russian Wings

21 July 2018

On Friday, France and Russia provided humanitarian aid to eastern Ghouta, which was recaptured by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s government, for the first time since the onset of the conflict in Syria in 2011.

A Russian Antonov 124 military cargo plane carrying fifty tons of medical and other supplies provided by France landed in Hmeimeim Base in western Syria coming from Chateauroux airport in France, according to a statement from the Russian Ministry of Defense.

This is the first joint humanitarian operation between a Western country and Russia, which has militarily supported the Syrian president since 2015.

On Saturday, French President Emmanuel Macron and Russian President Vladimir Putin stressed the importance of “the humanitarian aspects in resolving the Syrian conflict, including the implementation of the French-Russian initiative,” according to a telephone call mentioned by the Kremlin.

Paris said that it received “guarantees” from Moscow that the Syrian government will not hamper the delivery of the aid, as it does with UN convoys, and that the aid and its distribution will not be used for political objectives.

 

The Last Displacement from the South

21 July 2018

Hundreds of militants and civilians arrived to areas controlled by opposition factions in northwestern Syria, after they were evacuated from al-Qonaiterah governorate in southern Syria.

The evacuation of militants from al-Qonaiterah governorate, which includes the Golan Heights occupied by Israel, came under an agreement brokered by Russia, an ally of the Syrian government, with opposition factions in the area.

The agreement, which followed a large-scale military offensive by government forces, effectively provides for the surrender of the factions, handing over light and medium weapons, the return of official institutions to al-Qonaiterah, and the evacuation of militants who refuse this agreement to northern Syria.

Official media said that the agreement provides for “the return of the Syrian Arab Army to positions it held prior to 2011,” which is when the Syrian conflict erupted in this area that is considered to be sensitive because of proximity to Israel.

The media also said that the militants were carrying individual machine guns and eating food provided to them before everyone, including women and children, boarded buses hired by a local non-governmental organization to take them to temporary camps in the governorates of Idlib (north-east) and Aleppo (north).

Syrian forces launched a large-scale offensive on 19 June to take back areas controlled by factions in southern Syria. They were able to take back more than ninety percent of Daraa governorate before they launched their offensive on al-Qonaiterah governorate.

Syria in a Week (25 June 2018)

Syria in a Week (25 June 2018)

The following is a selection by our editors of significant weekly developments in Syria. Depending on events, each issue will include anywhere from four to eight briefs. This series is produced in both Arabic and English in partnership between Salon Syria and Jadaliyya. Suggestions and blurbs may be sent to info@salonsyria.com.

 

Portents of the Battle in the South

18-24 June 2018

Reuters

After the Syrian army’s military reinforcement in recent weeks, military operations on the southern front started, especially in al-Lajat area, and then expanded to include Dara’a city.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has promised to take back opposition controlled areas in southern Syria. On the other hand, Syrian opposition factions in the south pledged to confront any offensive carried out by government forces and their allies.

This is a rerun of the scenario in Aleppo and Ghouta, as Russia refrained from declaring its direct participation in the military operations and then declared its support for the operations carried out by the Syrian army and its allies, especially through airstrikes.

Last week, the United States warned that it would take “strict and proportional” measures in response to government violations in the “de-escalation” zone in south-west of Syria. The US Secretary of State reaffirmed the US commitment to the ceasefire in the south-west area of Syria during his meeting with the Russian Foreign Minister. However, a new development in the US position emerged as Washington informed Syrian opposition factions not to expect military support to help them confront the massive offensive by the Russian-supported government forces to retake areas in southern Syria. (Reuters)

The UN General Secretary called for an immediate end to military escalation in the south-west of Syria, his spokesman said on Friday, after government forces ramped up their attacks on areas controlled by opposition forces this week. The spokesman referred to the displacement of thousands of civilians and their movement towards the Jordanian border, and stressed that these attacks pose significant risks to regional security. (Reuters) In a statement on Thursday, the UN expressed its grave concern regarding escalations in fighting which led to the death of tens of people and the displacement of thousands. It is estimated that there are seven hundred and fifty thousand civilians in south-west of Syria. (Reuters)

A Jordanian source expressed mounting concern that the violence could spill into the country, and that the kingdom, an ally of the United States, is participating in increasing diplomatic efforts to preserve the de-escalation zone after it helped seal the agreement there.

In a related development, a commander in the pro-Assad regional coalition said that a drone was targeted by an Israeli missile when it was taking part in the Syrian army’s operations in Qunaitera Governorate near the Occupied Golan Heights. The Israeli army said that it fired an anti-aircraft Patriot missile against a drone approaching from Syria, but did not hit the target. It should be mentioned that Israel expressed its fear of Iranian or pro-Iranian forces reaching its border with Syria.

 

Manbij and Solidification of Turkey’s Role

18-24 June 2018

Reuters

Fighters from a Syrian Kurdish faction are leaving Manbij north of Syria, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Monday. (Reuters) Turkish armed forces earlier said that Turkish and US forces had started independent patrols north of Syria along the line separating Turkish-controlled areas and Manbij city, in which Ankara says that the Syrian Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) are deployed. Earlier this month, Ankara and Washington agreed on a road map for the withdrawal of YPG fighters from Manbij and the deployment of Turkish and US forces in the area to secure it. YPG fighters will begin to withdraw from Manbij, north of Syria, starting on 4 July and after months-long preparation, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said on Thursday. (Reuters)

The decline in the US role signals a solidification of the Turkish role in northern Syria, complicating the situation between Turkey, the Syrian government, and Kurdish factions.

On Tuesday, the Syrian government condemned the Turkish and US incursion around Manbij, a day after the two countries started military patrols in the area. The Syrian government pledged to confront any foreign presence on Syrian territory. (Reuters)

The Syrian army will regain control of the northern part of the country by force if militants refuse to surrender, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said in a television interview on Sunday.

“We have chosen two paths: the first and most important one is reconciliation… The second path is to attack terrorists if they don’t surrender and refuse to make peace,” Assad said in the interview. “We will fight with them (opposition fighters) and return control by force. It is certainly not the best option for us, but it’s the only way to get control of the country,” said Assad, responding to a question about the northern part of Syria where armed groups backed by Turkey hold some territory. (Reuters)

The tensions in Manbij coincide with security tensions in Raqqa where the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), who hold control of the city, imposed a curfew for three days starting on Sunday and declared a state of emergency, saying that ISIS fanatics snuck into the city and were planning to carry out attacks. Reuters reported that internal security forces of the SDF set up checkpoints around the city. The SDF announced the curfew late Saturday night to take effect starting early Sunday until Tuesday. (Reuters)

 

Targeting Iraqi “Mobilization Forces”

19 & 22 June 2018

Reuters

On Tuesday, Iraq denounced airstrikes that targeted forces fighting ISIS in Iraq or Syria, after official media said that US-led coalition planes bombed a position belonging to Syrian government forces near the Iraq border, resulting in deaths and injuries. The People’s Mobilization Committee said that US bombing on the Iraqi border with Syria left twenty-two of its members dead and twelve others injured. The United States denied involvement in this attack. A statement from the Iraqi army later said that none of the People’s Mobilization Forces or any Iraqi forces in charge of securing the Iraqi-Syrian border were subject to an airstrike and that the strike took place inside Syrian territories. Although Iraqi forces have launched air strikes against ISIS positions across the border with Syria, its security forces do not have any presence on the ground, however, several factions affiliated with the People’s Mobilization Forces have supported Syrian government forces for years. (Reuters)

 

Ghouta … Medieval War

20 June 2018

Reuters

Syrian government forces and affiliated forces committed war crimes and crimes against humanity during their long siege of eastern Ghouta through heavy bombardment and “deliberate starvation” of two hundred and sixty-five thousand people, UN investigators said on Wednesday. About twenty thousand opposition fighters, some belonging to “terrorist groups”, entrenched in the besieged area and bombed nearby Damascus in attacks “that killed and maimed hundreds of Syrian civilians”, amounting to war crimes, UN invesitgators said. The latest report by the UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria, led by Paulo Pinheiro, is based on one hundred and forty interviews as well as photographs, videos, satellite imagery, and medical records. The report condemned what it described a “medieval form of warfare.” The report went on to say that tactics used from February to April 2018 to recapture the enclave were “largely unlawful in nature, aimed at punishing the inhabitants of eastern Ghouta, and forcing the population, collectively, to surrender or starve.” The report said that planes bombed hospitals depriving the injured of medical care, adding: “This pattern of attack strongly suggests that pro-Government forces systematically targeted medical facilities, repeatedly committing the war crime of deliberately attacking protected objects, and intentionally attacking medical personnel.” UN experts cited evidence of chlorine gas use in Ghouta at least four times this year but said their investigation would continue. (Reuters)

 

The Tragedy of Politicized Asylum

22 June 2018

Reuters

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Friday on a visit to Lebanon that the situation in Syria is not suitable yet for the return of refugees, an issue which has led to a dispute between Lebanon’s Foreign Minister and the UN refugee agency. “We want to help find solutions in Syria so that a return of refugees can take place…we need more secure conditions for a return to be possible,” Merkel said in a news conference in Beirut with Lebanese Prime Minister-designate Saad al-Hariri.

After meeting Merkel on Friday, Lebanese President Michel Aoun said he asked for Germany to support calls “for the gradual return of displaced Syrians” from Lebanon. Aoun said on Twitter that he “stressed the need to separate between this return and a political solution for the Syrian crisis.” (Reuters)

On the Turkish side, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his main rival in Sunday’s presidential elections both pledged to send Syrian refugees to their country in response to growing unease among voters about the number of migrants in Turkey. “Right after the election we aim to make all Syrian lands safe, starting from areas near our border, and to facilitate the return home of all our guests,” Erdogan said in a speech in the southeastern city of Gaziantep. He also said that two hundred thousand Syrians have already gone back to areas north of Syria controlled by Turkey and allied Syrian fighters after military campaigns to oust Kurdish fighters and ISIS fighters. (Reuters)

 

Common Ground in Geneva

19 June 2018

Reuters

Senior officials from Iran, Russia, and Turkey had “substantive” talks on Tuesday regarding the formation and function of the Syrian constitutional committee, and more talks are planned within weeks, said the UN Syria envoy Staffan de Mistura.

On Monday 25 June, de Mistura met with representatives from the United States, Britain, France, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Germany. “During the meeting, constructive exchanges and substantive discussions took place on issues relevant to the establishment and functioning of a constitutional committee, and some common ground is beginning to emerge,” a statement after the talks in Geneva said.

 

 

Syria in a Week (14 May 2018)

Syria in a Week (14 May 2018)

The following is a selection by our editors of significant weekly developments in Syria. Depending on events, each issue will include anywhere from four to eight briefs. This series is produced in both Arabic and English in partnership between Salon Syria and Jadaliyya. Suggestions and blurbs may be sent to info@salonsyria.com.

 

Iranian Nukes … From a Syrian Perspective

8-9 May 2018

Reuters and Al-Jazeera

President Donald Trump declared the US withdrawal from the 2015 Iranian nuclear dear on Tuesday.

The decision came after repeated threats from the US administration to abolish the deal, which it describes as “catastrophic.” Trump signed a presidential memorandum on Wednesday to start imposing strict economic sanctions on Iran, noting the gravity of the deal that allowed Iran to continue enriching uranium, thus increasing the potential of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. (Al-Jazeera)

US pressure failed to convince European partners in the deal to withdraw, as the European Union, Germany, France, and Britain declared that they will remain in the deal. However, the nature of US sanctions imposed on companies that maintain business dealings with Iran will put a lot of pressure on future economic cooperation between Iran and Europe.

Israel, the main beneficiary of sanctions on Iran, welcomed the US withdrawal, as did Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. On its part, Iran said that it would remain in the deal despite the US withdrawal, while Russia and China supported the continuation of the deal (Reuters), reflecting the evident scope of international and regional tensions, which possess great potential for deterioration.

These tensions were manifested on the ground in Syria as the battle between Iran and Israel started to evolve into a direct confrontation. After Israel declared, or leaked, that it attacked Iranian positions or forces in Syria numerous times, including the attack on the T-4 base in central Syria, Iran threatened that Israeli aggressions will not go unpunished.

 

Netanyahu in Moscow and Airstrikes in Syria

7 May 2018

Reuters and Al-Mayadeen

Al-Mayadeen TV channel said on Wednesday that the Resistance Axis carried out a rocket attack on four Israeli military positions in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights, making it the first military offensive in the area since 1974. This offensive came one day after President Trump declared the US withdrawal from the nuclear deal. No one has officially claimed responsibility for the attack. Israel said that Iran launched twenty Grad and Fajr missiles, which were intercepted by the Iron Dome anti-missile system or did not reach their targets in Golan, adding that the Quds Force, a special forces unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard responsible for external operations, is the party that launched the rockets. Israel also said that it carried out rocket attacks on Iranian bases in Syria in retaliation to the “Iranian attacks” on Golan, increasing the fears of deterioration into a large-scale regional conflict.

Syrian official media said that Israel carried out rocket aggressions in the early hours of Thursday, striking air defense positions and an ammunition depot. The Russian news agency reported that Syrian air defenses intercepted half of the Israeli missiles. Official Syrian media sources stated that Israel launched a rocket attack on a target near Damascus on Tuesday, a short time after President Trump’s announcement of the US withdrawal from the Iranian nuclear deal. The Israeli army said that after observing “irregular activities” of the Iranian forces in Syria, it issued orders for civil authorities in the Golan Heights to prepare shelters, in addition to deploying new defenses and calling reserve forces. (Reuters)

Russia, Germany, and France called for self-restraint and wisdom, whereas the US administration condemned the Iranian offensive. Trump’s administration portrayed its opposition to the nuclear deal by saying that the opposition, in one of its aspects, is a response to Tehran’s military intervention in the region.

The irony in the regional scene is that the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was on a visit to Russian President Vladimir Putin on the eve of the large-scale Israeli offensive on Syria. Israel said that it informed Russia of the attack beforehand. This indicates the complexity of alliances and interests regarding the Syrian war.

The intensity of the escalating rhetoric decreased on Thursday, as Netanyahu considered the response adequate and the Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman said that he hoped that the violence with Iran on the Syrian borders was over. It is worth mentioning that the Israeli Ministers for Defense and Energy had previously threatened the Syrian government in case it allowed for the continuation of Iranian presence on Syrian territories.

Regional powers do not seem to be ready to de-escalate as of yet, and there is increasing potential for new forms in the Syrian war with all the investment in arming, aggressions, violations, and incitement, especially when the conflict is linked to issues such as occupation, identity, hegemony, and tyranny.

 

Corrosion of al-Hajar al-Aswad (Black Rock)

13 May 2018

Reuters and Enab Baladi

Fierce battles between government forces and ISIS have continued in the neighborhoods of al-Hajar al-Aswad and Yarmouk Camp south of the capital Damascus. Although the Syrian army is advancing, it is a slow advance accompanied by huge human losses according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, due to the nature of street wars in residential areas and the use of tunnels by ISIS fighters in the battles. As of Sunday, the government holds control of eighty percent of the neighborhood with some parts of Yarmouk Camp still under the control of ISIS

The official SANA news agency said that there were two terrorist explosions, one in Maisat Square and the other in Damascus Tower which left two people dead and fourteen others injured. There were conflicting reports of whether the explosions were a result of a car bomb or rockets launched by ISIS fighters in Yarmouk Camp.

The government expanded their control to the neighborhoods of Yalda, Bibila, and Beit Saham that are adjacent to al-Hajar al-Aswad and Yarmouk Camp after an agreement between Russia and the Syrian government on one hand opposition factions on the other, which provided for the exit of eight thousand six hundred and thirty-two civilians and fighters towards northern Syria, who were distributed between the northern countryside of Aleppo and Idlib. (Enab Baladi)

 

The Last of Enclaves

13 May 2018

Reuters

The last besieged enclave of the opposition is taking the same course of Ghouta. The Syrian government army and opposition factions said that thousands of opposition fighters and civilians left the last main besieged enclave for the opposition in Syria after the factions handed in their heavy weaponry, and opposition fighters not willing to stay started getting ready to leave for areas controlled by opposition forces in northern Syria. This means that future fronts between government forces and opposition factions will be concentrated in the southern front, the north-western countryside of Aleppo, Idlib, and north-east of Syria with the Syrian Democratic Forces.

 

Eastern Ghouta x 20

Eastern Ghouta x 20

“After several days of calm, the battle in Eastern Ghouta enclave seems to have picked up again as President Bashar al-Assad’s government launched a new round of air strikes on Douma, the only city still left in insurgent hands. Leaders of the Islam Army, the opposition militia that rules the city, have insisted that they will stay in Douma come what may, but they do not have the military muscle to pull that off if Damascus and Moscow decide otherwise.

Should regime-rebel talks break down and end in a renewed, full-scale offensive, local civilians will be at risk.

UN sources recently estimated that as many as 78,000–150,000 people may remain in Douma alongside the Islamist fighters, though such figure are unreliable and have historically erred on the high side. Whatever the actual number, it is clear that many civilians in Douma have been forcibly prevented from fleeing by Islam Army rebels, who seem to want to exploit their presence as a card in negotiations, and that all are suffering from callous government siege tactics, with loyalist forces refusing to permit the entry of aid workers, medicine, and humanitarian supplies.

It remains to be seen what form Douma’s capitulation will ultimately take, and how much death, destruction, and displacement will accompany it. But when the city folds, as at some point it will, seven years of opposition rule in Eastern Ghouta are going to come to an end.

Other parts of the enclave have already been retaken since the offensive began in February, with rebels from Failaq al-Rahman, Ahrar al-Sham, and Tahrir al-Sham either killed, forced to surrender, or sent to northwestern Syria along with many civilians—according to the most recent UN numbers, as many as 49,000 people. Meanwhile, some 123,000 inhabitants of Eastern Ghouta are thought to have come under government control, either living inside retaken neighborhoods like Erbeen and Harasta or having fled to Damascus and a series overcrowded IDP shelters near the city.

The retaking of Eastern Ghouta seems almost an afterthought to Assad’s December 2016 victory in Eastern Aleppo, but this is in fact the bigger battle. It is being fought over a larger area, on the doorstep of the Syrian capital, with many more fighters involved and more civilians at risk. Whether more people died in Ghouta than in Aleppo, I don’t know—but many, many people have died.

* * *

Over the past few years, I have spent an unholy amount of time trying to understand the politics of Eastern Ghouta’s rebel movement. I have also written a lot about the area. Sifting through my archives the other day, I found that I had penned no less than twenty English-language articles, reports, and blog posts on the topic, for Syria Comment, the Carnegie Endowment, The Century Foundation, IRIN News, and others. The first one was published in February 2013, as pro-Assad forces prepared to put the region under siege, and the last one is less than a week old.

That’s a lot of text. Although in hindsight I can spot plenty of errors and misunderstandings, and there is still very much that I still don’t understand, there’s also a lot of material in there that seems like it could be useful to people trying to follow the crisis now unfolding near Damascus. Therefore, I have compiled all twenty pieces here, with a short introductory comment about each.

The latest publication is first on the page, so read from bottom to top if you want all five years in chronological order. If not, just pick and choose as you please.

– Aron Lund

• Trapped Between Rebels and Air Strikes, Civilians in Eastern Ghouta Face Chaos(IRIN, Mar. 2018)
With only Douma left in rebel hands by late March, I tried to investigate what became of Eastern Ghouta’s civilian population in more than a month of fighting. UN numbers are all over the map, but it’s clear that many ended up in shelters erected around the area while others stayed put despite the fighting, and that they will now come under Assad’s rule once again. Still others have joined the opposition as it was driven off to Idleb and Aleppo, where some will now be resettled in Afrin. Yet civilians also remain trapped inside insurgent-held Douma, as the clock ticks toward either a rebel surrender or a renewed military offensive.

• Assad’s Divide and Conquer Strategy Is Working (Foreign Policy, Mar. 2018)
Brute military force was certainly the main ingredient in Assad’s victory in Eastern Ghouta, but his government also reached its objectives using more sophisticated means, including by exploiting insurgent divisions to punch where their defenses were weakest, negotiating separate deals through well-connected siege merchants, and rallying supporters inside the enclave to work behind rebel lines. Among other things, this piece looks at the curious case of Sheikh Bassam Difdaa, a pro-government Sufi preacher who helped crack Failaq al-Rahman’s defenses in Kafr Batna.

• Aleppo Again? A Plea to Save Lives in in Eastern Ghouta (TCF, Mar. 2018)
As the final, brutal offensive in Eastern Ghouta got under way, it was obvious that loyalist forces were going to win—they were overwhelmingly superior and faced no risk of outside intervention. In other words, the best time to think about what that meant for civilians was before the battle was over. The pro-Assad side had clearly advertised that defeated rebels and activists would either have to submit to government rule (but some would not; some could not) or head to rebel-held northern Syria. But what about the larger civilian population? Varied in their allegiances and circumstances, some civilians would undoubtedly want to follow the opposition to Idleb, while others would just as undoubtedly want to stay in their homes after government forces returned. To my mind, this was a moment for the international community to push for and facilitate individual choice by, among other things, promoting an orderly handover once rebels surrendered and by dispatching monitors to gauge the voluntariness of civilians staying or leaving, in the hope of minimizing the amount of forced displacement and hostage-type situations. Also, regardless of all political dimensions, humanitarian aid needed to be rushed to relief organizations on the ground quickly, before IDP numbers grew unmanageable. In the end, not a lot of that happened, but many of these suggestions remain just as relevant as when I wrote this—now in Douma.

• Understanding Eastern Ghouta in Syria (IRIN, Feb. 2018)
A short but fairly comprehensive pre-battle backgrounder on Eastern Ghouta as it was in spring 2018, in which I attempt to map out who controlled what while also describing the issues at stake as Assad’s government readied itself to retake the enclave.

• The Man-Made Disaster in Syria’s Eastern Ghouta (IRIN, Dec. 2017)
On how the siege on Eastern Ghouta was tightened in September 2017, in preparation for the offensive that would follow early next year. The humanitarian effects of the siege had always been severe, but with smuggling tunnels now blocked, private food sales banned, and UN convoys prevented from entering, what had been a simmering crisis boiled over into full-scale disaster—hurting civilians much more than rebels, who controlled all levers of the economy. It was a war crime right out in the open, a very effective one.

• East Ghouta Turns on Itself, Again (TCF, May 2017)
In April 2017, the Islam Army and Failaq al-Rahman went back to fighting each other, one year to the day after their mini-civil war in 2016. Drivers this time around included the de-escalation deals being rolled out by Russia, the recent loss of the rebel smuggling tunnels, and a whole lot of pent-up anger.

• The Syrian Rebel Who Tried to Build an Islamic Paradise (Politico Magazine, Mar. 2017)
A long feature on Zahran Alloush and his attempts to unite the enclave under his own iron-fisted rule. Though capable and ruthless enough, the Islam Army leader’s grand project was ultimately frustrated by his failure to control the war economy and the resistance of rival factions. This article covers some of the same ground as the “Into the Tunnels” report, but has more storytelling and a tighter focus on Alloush’s role.

• Going South in East Ghouta (Carnegie, Feb. 2017)
By spring 2017, things were looking pretty hopeless for the rebels. The Syrian government had seized a lot of territory after Alloush’s death and it had just pocketed Eastern Aleppo. It looked as if Eastern Ghouta would be next, with Damascus pulling together troops and seizing the smuggling tunnels in Qaboun and Barzeh. But then fighting petered out, possibly because Russian-brokered de-escalation deals clicked into place during exactly this time, which shifted Assad’s attention to the Islamic State. The Russian military then cleverly played Eastern Ghouta’s factions off against each other, in particular by goading the Islam Army to go after Failaq-friendly jihadis. A new round of infighting would begin in April 2017.

• Into the Tunnels: The Rise and Fall of Syria’s Rebel Enclave in the Eastern Ghouta (TCF, Dec. 2016)
A detailed history of the Eastern Ghouta enclave and its political economy, this report attempts to chart the rise of the main rebel groups and their shifting rivalries, up to the point when they finally split the enclave in May 2016. It includes sections on the 2014 joint institutions, the 2015 wars over frontline crossings and smuggling tunnels, and some discussion of the ideology of the major factions. A shortened and slightly updated version of this report was later printed as a chapter in The Century Foundation’s Arab Politics After the Uprisings, an edited volume that I assume you’ve already bought and read many times over, since it is just that good.

• Showdown in East Ghouta (Carnegie, May 2016)
My quick take Eastern Ghouta’s just-beginning internal breakdown. Ending in a Qatari-brokered truce later in May, the infighting ended up splitting the enclave into two or three parts, depending on how you count them. The Islam Army took sole control over the northern and eastern parts stretching from Douma to Nashabiyeh; Failaq al-Rahman seized the Damascus suburbs; and Harasta remained in the Failaq-friendly hands of Fajr al-Umma. Nusra Front and Ahrar al-Sham Islamists were also part of the mix. Nusra had formally joined forces with Fajr to smash the Islam Army, but they were mostly floating around inside Failaq-land. Ghouta’s small Ahrar branch was fragmenting: some members backed the Islam Army, others fought the Islam Army alongside Nusra, still others tried to remain neutral.

• After Zahran: Rising Tension in the East Ghouta (Carnegie, Apr. 2016)
This was written alongside “An Islamist Experiment,” when Eastern Ghouta was on the verge of major internal conflict. After Zahran Alloush’s death, factions outside Douma had merged into two loosely allied blocks that sought to cut his successor down to size. The Islam Army had lashed out in response with preemptive arrests and assassinations, which didn’t improve the mood much. Right after publication, the Ghouta insurgency blew itself apart with a big, nasty bang.

• An Islamist Experiment: Political Order in the East Ghouta (Carnegie, Apr. 2016)
With infighting on the way, this article looks at the cross-factional institutions set up by Eastern Ghouta’s rebels to contain internal conflicts. Starting in 2014, Alloush had pushed for the creation of a joint military command and a sharia-based governance apparatus. At the peak of his power in early 2015, these institutions had seemed like they could potentially transform into a new political order of a sort. But the joint institutions frayed and hollowed quickly, with factional anarchy resurfacing to a greater extent than is clear in this article. I got a somewhat better understanding of the system later, with more detail presented the “Into the Tunnels” report.

• The Death of Zahran Alloush (Syria Comment, Dec. 2015)
On December 25, 2015, Zahran Alloush died in an air strike. Within weeks of his funeral, rival rebels in Failaq al-Rahman, Ajnad al-Sham, Fajr al-Umma, and the Nusra Front were ganging up on a shell-shocked and sullenly aggressive Islam Army in order to claim his mantle, with violence finally erupting on a large scale in late April 2016.

• Is Zahran Alloush in Amman? (Syria Comment, June 2015)
Yes, he was. Having somehow snuck out of besieged Eastern Ghouta, the Islam Army leader was taking a trip around the region, to Turkey and Jordan, where he met with Syrian rebel and religious allies as well as foreign fundraisers, agents, and diplomats, at a sensitive moment in the opposition’s history. But when I wrote this, it wasn’t yet very clear what was going on.

• Damascus Preachers and the Armed Rebellion (Carnegie, Mar. 2014)
This one takes a brief peak at the capital’s Ashaarite-traditionalist and Sufi networks, which had long dominated Syria’s state-approved Sunni Islamic establishment and would play a huge but under-studied role in the opposition after 2011. Today, their influence remains keenly felt through the Turkey-based Syrian Islamic Council. It is a companion piece to the article about Ajnad al-Sham, which grew out of exactly this clerical milieu and had visible ties to Damascene Sufism and less visible ones to exiled Ikhwani networks.

• The Ajnad al-Sham Islamic Union (Carnegie, Mar. 2014)
I look at the creation of Ajnad al-Sham, a group backed by local Sufi clerics and Muslim Brotherhood members. Later bolstering its ranks by absorbing aggrieved former Umma Army members, Ajnad al-Sham operated as one of Eastern Ghouta’s top three factions for nearly two years. In spring 2016, it merged into the other second-tier faction, Failaq al-Rahman, and launched a devastating attack on the Islam Army.

• The Greater Damascus Operations Room, part 1 (Carnegie, Nov. 2013)
• The Greater Damascus Operations Room, part 2 (Carnegie, Nov. 2013)
This two-parter is for the real nerds. With limited success, I tried to read the tea leaves of a major, foreign-funded rebel unity project in the wider Ghouta region. In particular, I was looking for clues about how it related to Brig. Gen. Salim Idriss’s hapless Free Syrian Army HQ in Turkey, to Ghouta’s Nusra and Islamic State jihadis, and to the unending internecine feuds in Douma, where Zahran Alloush was still struggling to establish himself as capo di tutti capi. I didn’t reach much clarity on any of these issues at the time, but some additional details had seeped out by the time I wrote the “Into the Tunnels” report.

• A Dispute in Douma (Carnegie, Oct. 2013)
In this one, I did my sorry best to make sense of rebel rivalries in Eastern Ghouta, whose internal functioning under a half-year old siege had yet to be hashed out. Though at the time this was only vaguely visible in local coalition politics, Zahran Alloush’s just-created Islam Army was drifting into conflict with a set of pugnacious, Free Syrian Army-flagged commanders and contraband kingpins united by their shared rejection of his dominance and the Islamist rule that came with it. A year later, they made a desperate, last-ditch attempt to kneecap the Islam Army and push it out of the smuggling economy by entering into an alliance known as the Umma Army. Zahran promptly dropped a piano on them. For more about that grim story, check the “Into the Tunnels” report or my piece for Politico.

• The Islamist Mess in Damascus (Syria Comment, Feb. 2013)
This old Syria Comment blog post was written just before Assad’s forces managed to place Eastern Ghouta under siege. It looks at how rebel coalition-building around Damascus had clicked with the major national-level insurgent alliances of the time, and we get an early glimpse of the headstrong ways of a certain Zahran Alloush.”

[This article was originally published by Syria Comment.]