Vanlok
deus ex machina
- Член од
- 30 мај 2009
- Мислења
- 27.403
- Поени од реакции
- 36.609
Some thoughts on Syria:
Throughout my ~8 years of research and OSINT on the Middle East region, I've generally stuck with a good 'rule of thumb'. This rule of thumb is the following: If Israel and the United States are against a certain group or nation, then this group or nation is usually on the right path, in terms of basic moral values.
When we look at Syria, we see the situation is somewhat complicated. On the one hand, Ahmad Al-Sharaa (Jolani) and his HTS-led government are supported openly by the United States and most Western nations. This is evident from the reopening of embassies, the lifting of U.S. sanctions, and so on.
On the other hand, you have Israel bombing Syrian government forces in As-Suwayda. Why would Israel bomb the Syrian government if it's so pro-Western and pro-Israeli? You might think that this implies HTS is on the right side, and that they're a valid resistance movement. However, this could not be farther from the truth.
Since President Ahmad Al-Sharaa took power after the departure of Assad, all of his messaging has been de-escalatory and pointed towards peace or some form of normalization with Israel. Just two weeks ago, Witkoff said that he believes Syria will soon join the Abraham Accords, and Syrian and Israeli officials both confirmed that talks were ongoing. So what happened? Why did Israel jeopardize this opportunity of a lifetime?
There is only one thing that benefits Israel more than Syria joining the Abraham Accords: A perpetually unstable and fragmented Syrian state that doesn't have the time to build its capabilities or become truly sovereign. A Syria that's fragmented and constantly involved in internal turmoil can never turn into a real threat towards Israel. And even better, Israel may be able to entice seperatist movements to join its cause. Israel's greed for territorial control knows no limits.
Ahmad Al-Sharaa is almost fully to blame for this situation. While his previous crimes as the infamous Al-Nusra / ISIS warlord can never be whitewashed, he had a historic opportunity to unify the Syrians and end the civil war, once and for all. He could have reached out to the Druze, given them an alternative. He could've amended ties and given amnesty to the Alawites and former SAA soldiers, fostering a new national unity.
But he didn't. Instead, Jolani turned a blind eye while murderous ISIS-like gangs massacred thousands of Alawite civilians on the Syrian coast. He also turned a blind eye while these same gangs violated the rights and properties of the Druze and intimidated Christians in Damascus. And I'm being generous here, because I'm assuming that HTS didn't play a direct role in these events, which is doubtful in itself.
As for the Druze, they are a tight-knit group of people. They only want safety and the right to be themselves, with their own distinct identity. Due to the prevailing situation, they made the unfortunate decision of becoming Israel-backed, rather than organizing an independent and honorable resistance. This is something that will be a stain on the history of Syria, and cannot easily be turned around.
Jolani's sectarian actions and rhetoric have pushed Syria to the brink of disaster. He has given Israel the perfect opportunity to divide and conquer Syria, to balkanize it even more than it already is.
If Jolani has any spine or any honor left in his body, he would put aside all his differences with the Druze, the Alawites, the Christians, and the Kurds, and he would put an end to the Israeli aggression, and subsequently begin building a new Syrian state, including members from all sects and backgrounds, that has the ability to decide its own fate, and NOT be a slave of the Jews or the Americans.
t.me
Целосно разбирливо е што сакаат да направат Израел (и тие повисоко од нив), балканизација и фрагментирање на Сирија во куп помали завојувани ентитети и непрекината војна и напади меѓу нив.
Throughout my ~8 years of research and OSINT on the Middle East region, I've generally stuck with a good 'rule of thumb'. This rule of thumb is the following: If Israel and the United States are against a certain group or nation, then this group or nation is usually on the right path, in terms of basic moral values.
When we look at Syria, we see the situation is somewhat complicated. On the one hand, Ahmad Al-Sharaa (Jolani) and his HTS-led government are supported openly by the United States and most Western nations. This is evident from the reopening of embassies, the lifting of U.S. sanctions, and so on.
On the other hand, you have Israel bombing Syrian government forces in As-Suwayda. Why would Israel bomb the Syrian government if it's so pro-Western and pro-Israeli? You might think that this implies HTS is on the right side, and that they're a valid resistance movement. However, this could not be farther from the truth.
Since President Ahmad Al-Sharaa took power after the departure of Assad, all of his messaging has been de-escalatory and pointed towards peace or some form of normalization with Israel. Just two weeks ago, Witkoff said that he believes Syria will soon join the Abraham Accords, and Syrian and Israeli officials both confirmed that talks were ongoing. So what happened? Why did Israel jeopardize this opportunity of a lifetime?
There is only one thing that benefits Israel more than Syria joining the Abraham Accords: A perpetually unstable and fragmented Syrian state that doesn't have the time to build its capabilities or become truly sovereign. A Syria that's fragmented and constantly involved in internal turmoil can never turn into a real threat towards Israel. And even better, Israel may be able to entice seperatist movements to join its cause. Israel's greed for territorial control knows no limits.
Ahmad Al-Sharaa is almost fully to blame for this situation. While his previous crimes as the infamous Al-Nusra / ISIS warlord can never be whitewashed, he had a historic opportunity to unify the Syrians and end the civil war, once and for all. He could have reached out to the Druze, given them an alternative. He could've amended ties and given amnesty to the Alawites and former SAA soldiers, fostering a new national unity.
But he didn't. Instead, Jolani turned a blind eye while murderous ISIS-like gangs massacred thousands of Alawite civilians on the Syrian coast. He also turned a blind eye while these same gangs violated the rights and properties of the Druze and intimidated Christians in Damascus. And I'm being generous here, because I'm assuming that HTS didn't play a direct role in these events, which is doubtful in itself.
As for the Druze, they are a tight-knit group of people. They only want safety and the right to be themselves, with their own distinct identity. Due to the prevailing situation, they made the unfortunate decision of becoming Israel-backed, rather than organizing an independent and honorable resistance. This is something that will be a stain on the history of Syria, and cannot easily be turned around.
Jolani's sectarian actions and rhetoric have pushed Syria to the brink of disaster. He has given Israel the perfect opportunity to divide and conquer Syria, to balkanize it even more than it already is.
If Jolani has any spine or any honor left in his body, he would put aside all his differences with the Druze, the Alawites, the Christians, and the Kurds, and he would put an end to the Israeli aggression, and subsequently begin building a new Syrian state, including members from all sects and backgrounds, that has the ability to decide its own fate, and NOT be a slave of the Jews or the Americans.
Middle East Spectator – MES
— Some thoughts on Syria: Throughout my ~8 years of research and OSINT on the Middle East region, I've generally stuck with a good 'rule of thumb'. This rule of thumb is the following: If Israel and the United States are against a certain group or nation, then this group or nation is usually...
t.me
Автоматски споено мислење:
Целосно разбирливо е што сакаат да направат Израел (и тие повисоко од нив), балканизација и фрагментирање на Сирија во куп помали завојувани ентитети и непрекината војна и напади меѓу нив.
Автоматски споено мислење:
Последно уредено:
