Hezbollah declares Syria victory, Russia says much of country won back

[webfact]

Hezbollah declares Syria victory, Russia says much of country won back

By Tom Perry and Katya Golubkova

 

FILE PHOTO:People watch Lebanon's Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah as he appears on a screen during a live broadcast to speak to his supporters at an event marking Resistance and Liberation Day in Bekaa Valley, Lebanon, May 25, 2017. REUTERS/Hassan Abdallah/File Photo

 

BEIRUT/MOSCOW (Reuters) - The Lebanese Shi'ite group Hezbollah has declared victory in the Syrian war while Russia said government forces had driven militants from much of the country where President Bashar al-Assad's rule seemed in danger two years ago.

 

The comments from two Syrian government allies mark the most confident assessments yet of Assad's position in the war, though significant parts of the country remain outside the government's control. Russia's assertion that the army had won back 85 percent of Syria was dismissed by the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. It said the government held 48 percent of Syria.

 

On Tuesday, Russia's defence minister met with Assad in Damascus to discuss joint military efforts and the fight against Islamic State.

 

The government's most recent advances have recovered swathes of territory in eastern Syria from Islamic State, which is being targeted in the same region by U.S.-backed Kurdish and Arab militias.

 

Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, whose group has sent thousands of fighters to Syria, dismissed the fighting left to be done in Syria as "scattered battles".

 

"We have won in the war (in Syria)," he said in comments reported by the Lebanese newspaper al-Akhbar.

 

Referring to Assad's opponents, Nasrallah said "the path of the other project has failed and wants to negotiate for some gains". The comments, made at a religious gathering, were confirmed to Reuters by a source familiar with the speech.

 

Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed in the conflict, which has fractured Syria into a patchwork of areas and generated a refugee crisis of historic proportions, forcing millions of people into neighbouring states and Europe.

 

Military backing from Iran and Russia has proven critical to Assad in the war with insurgents including rebels who have been backed by Gulf Arab states, Turkey and the United States, which has decided to end a programme of covert support to rebels.

 

Rebel groups were making steady advances against Assad as recently as 2015, when the deployment of the Russian air force to Syria turned the tide in his favour.

 

Over the past year, Assad has crushed numerous pockets of rebel-held territory in the cities of Aleppo, Homs and Damascus, brokering local deals by which thousands of his opponents have been moved to remaining rebel-held enclaves of the country.

 

Ceasefire deals brokered by Russia, Turkey, Iran and the United States in remaining rebel-held areas of western Syria have freed up manpower on the government side, helping its advance east into the oil-rich province of Deir al-Zor.

 

AIR STRIKES

 

Russian defence minister Sergei Shoigu visited Assad on Tuesday on the orders of President Vladimir Putin, the ministry said.

 

The meeting focused on plans to recapture Deir al-Zor city and to "strengthen efforts to combat terrorism in all Syrian territory until its utter annihilation," Assad's office said.

 

Shoigu and Assad discussed the de-escalation deals in parts of Syria that have "sped up the victories of the Syrian army and its allies in fighting terrorism in other areas", it said.

 

Government forces last week reached Deir al-Zor city, the provincial capital on the Euphrates River, breaking an Islamic State siege of a government-held pocket and a nearby air base.

 

"To date, 85 percent of Syria's territory has been cleared of the militants of illegal armed groups," the RIA news agency cited Alexander Lapin, chief of staff of the Russian military contingent in Syria, as saying.

 

Lapin made no reference to a swathe of territory held in northern Syria by an alliance of U.S.-backed militias - the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) which is led by the Kurdish YPG and is not at war with Assad. The Observatory said SDF-held territory amounts to 23 percent of Syria.

 

Lapin said Islamic State fighters are still in control of around 27,000 square km of Syria's territory.

 

"The liberation of (Deir al-Zor) city is proceeding," Lapin said. "Syrian troops are finalising the defeat of the ISIL group blocking the northern and southern districts of Deir al-Zor," he said. He said the assault was being led by General Suheil al-Hassan, a Syrian officer who has risen to prominence in the war.

 

Referring to the Russian figure of 85 percent, a Western diplomat said: "Other numbers tell a darker story: over 400,000 killed; half the population displaced; millions of refugees."

 

"The harder question for Russia to answer is whether any of its vaunted 85 percent is stable. The Assad state is a thin veneer stretched over a patchwork of fiefdoms."

 

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said air strikes likely to have been carried out by Russian warplanes killed 69 people since Sunday near the Euphrates River in Deir al-Zor.

 

The Russian Defence Ministry did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment on Tuesday's report by the Britain-based monitoring group.

 

The Observatory, which identified the victims as civilians, said the air strikes had hit encampments on the western bank of the river and vessels crossing to the eastern side.

 

Syrian state television separately reported the army was conducting artillery and machine gun attacks on rafts carrying Islamic State militants to the eastern side of the river from their last positions in Deir al-Zor city.

 

"ONLY ESCAPE ROUTE"

 

"Their only escape route out of the city is through rafts on the river, and god willing, we will target them in the water before they get away," a commander said in a televised interview.

 

Aside from the territory held by the SDF and Islamic State, rebels still control a corner of the northwest, a corner of the southwest, an area near Damascus, and an area north of the city of Homs.

 

Syrian government attacks in the rebel-held Eastern Ghouta region near Damascus suggest Assad may yet try to recapture the remaining rebel-held areas of the west, including enclaves at the borders with Turkey, Jordan and Israel.

 

A major general in the Syrian Republican Guard interviewed by a state-run TV station from Deir al-Zor on Monday warned Syrians who had "run away or escaped from Syria to any other country" not to return.

 

Major General Issam Zahreddine, head of the 104 Brigade which was under IS-siege for three years in Deir al-Zor, later issued a clarification on his Facebook page, saying his warning had been directed only at people who had taken up arms.

 

(Additional reporting by Sarah Dadouch and Laila Bassam in Beirut, Dmitry Solovyov and Jack Stubbs in Moscow; Writing by Tom Perry; Editing by Alison Williams)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-09-13

[ilostmypassword]

And if the USA, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the UAE, Qatar, and possibly a few more countries, hadn't intervened in the affairs of a sovereign nation, this war would have been over a long time ago and at much less cost to human lives.

[Srikcir]

8 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

possibly a few more countries

Notably the Kingdom of Jordon that took in more than 345,000 Syrian refugees

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaatari_refugee_camp

Meanwhile the country and the King himself took the fight to ISIS, boxing well above its weight class in the war against radical Islamic terror

https://www.defensenews.com/home/2016/05/09/jordan-proves-heavyweight-in-fight-against-isis/

[tonbridgebrit]

This is good news, and let'shope that Assad, Russia and Hezbollah will carry on this progress.

Hopefully, this is a massive step towards peace in Syria.


Notice that the report says "Military backing from Iran and Russia has proven critical to Assad in the war with insurgents including rebels who have been backed by Gulf Arab states, Turkey and the United States, which has decided to end a programme of covert support to rebels."
Yes, Russia and Iran(Hezbollah) have been vital to Assad in this war. And indeed, the United States deciding to end covert support to the rebels has also been significant.

Edited September 13, 2017 by tonbridgebrit

[Morch]

13 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

And if the USA, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the UAE, Qatar, and possibly a few more countries, hadn't intervened in the affairs of a sovereign nation, this war would have been over a long time ago and at much less cost to human lives.

 

Obviously not a word regarding Assad's dealings with his supposed opponents, or treatment of demonstrations contributed to the mess. And, of course, one might entertain the thought that countries supporting Assad could have avoided jumping in, thereby facilitating a new regime, or doing more to promote negotiation months and years ago.

[sanemax]

14 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

And if the USA, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the UAE, Qatar, and possibly a few more countries, hadn't intervened in the affairs of a sovereign nation, this war would have been over a long time ago and at much less cost to human lives.

And we would now then have an Islamic State Country covering Syria and Iraq and looking to expand.

[tonbridgebrit]

5 hours ago, sanemax said:

And we would now then have an Islamic State Country covering Syria and Iraq and looking to expand.

You have to bear in mind, yes, Washington backed a load of rebels, and yes, some were Islamic fundamentalists. But Washington's intent was, was to "support a load of rebels, watch them remove Assad, and then look at the rebels after Assad has gone, and then bomb the rebels who are Islamic fundamentalists".

Yes, a very dangerous strategy. But still, I don't think Washington ever intended to see a new Syria controlled by Islamic fundamentalists.

[tonbridgebrit]

5 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Obviously not a word regarding Assad's dealings with his supposed opponents, or treatment of demonstrations contributed to the mess. And, of course, one might entertain the thought that countries supporting Assad could have avoided jumping in, thereby facilitating a new regime, or doing more to promote negotiation months and years ago.

Look, if Iran/Hezbollah and Russia had not of jumped in, well yes, there would be a new regime. A new regime, Islamic fundamentalists. This would have meant Washington having to bomb some of the guys in the new regime.

[craigt3365]

20 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

And if the USA, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the UAE, Qatar, and possibly a few more countries, hadn't intervened in the affairs of a sovereign nation, this war would have been over a long time ago and at much less cost to human lives.

And if Iran and Russia hadn't intervened in a civil war, this war would have been over a long time ago and at much less cost to human lives.

[craigt3365]

42 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Look, if Iran/Hezbollah and Russia had not of jumped in, well yes, there would be a new regime. A new regime, Islamic fundamentalists. This would have meant Washington having to bomb some of the guys in the new regime.

Seems the Washington backed rebels are doing OK against ISIS.  At least they are going after ISIS and not claiming to, like Russia and Assad.  Bombing innocent civilians instead.

 

http://www.inss.org.il/publication/syrias-civil-war-kurdish-success-turkish-dilemma/

Quote

The success of the Syrian Democratic Forces with its Kurdish majority (especially the YPG, i.e., the People’s Protection Units, the armed wing of the Democratic Union Party) and other Sunnis in liberating parts of al-Raqqa’s suburbs from the Islamic State and in the battles to liberate the Manbij area are a necessary link in the effort to drive the Islamic State physically out of Syria.

http://www.iraqinews.com/arab-world-news/sdf-captures-thakana-district-advances-toward-central-raqqa/

Quote

SDF captures Thakana District, advances toward central Raqqa

 

Raqqa (Syrian News) The Syrian Democracy Forces (SDF), backed by U.S. troops, captured al-Thakana District, in the center of the city of Raqqa, after fierce battles with the Islamic State militants, Qasioun News reported on Wednesday.

 

Violent battles took place between the Syrian Democratic Forces militias and the Islamic State militants in the vicinity of al-Rasheed Park and the General Hospital of Raqqa, amid artillery and rockets shelling.

 

[ilostmypassword]

37 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Seems the Washington backed rebels are doing OK against ISIS.  At least they are going after ISIS and not claiming to, like Russia and Assad.  Bombing innocent civilians instead.

 

http://www.inss.org.il/publication/syrias-civil-war-kurdish-success-turkish-dilemma/

http://www.iraqinews.com/arab-world-news/sdf-captures-thakana-district-advances-toward-central-raqqa/

 

Are you seriously claiming that Syria and its allies are not fighting Isis? That bombing civilians and attacking Isis are somehow mutually exclusive?

[craigt3365]

Just now, ilostmypassword said:

Are you seriously claiming that Syria and its allies are not fighting Isis? That bombing civilians and attacking Isis are somehow mutually exclusive?

No. Just saying ISIS isn't 100% their target. Otherwise, why use barrel bombs in primarily civilian areas?  This has been well documented.

[ilostmypassword]

3 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

No. Just saying ISIS isn't 100% their target. Otherwise, why use barrel bombs in primarily civilian areas?  This has been well documented.

Really? How do you reconcile that with what you just wrote? "At least they are going after ISIS and not claiming to, like Russia and Assad.  Bombing innocent civilians instead."

[craigt3365]

Just now, ilostmypassword said:

Really? How do you reconcile that with what you just wrote? "At least they are going after ISIS and not claiming to, like Russia and Assad.  Bombing innocent civilians instead."

Russia and Syria claimed they were only bombing ISIS, when in fact, they were bombing everything in sight.  Sometimes with indiscriminate chemical weapons, as has been proven.  You know this.

[ilostmypassword]

Just now, craigt3365 said:

Russia and Syria claimed they were only bombing ISIS, when in fact, they were bombing everything in sight.  Sometimes with indiscriminate chemical weapons, as has been proven.  You know this.

I agree with this statement. But that's not what you said.  Do I really have to take apart piece by piece what you wrote to show that it says Syria was not fighting Isis but instead was bombing civilians? Once again here's your sentence:  "At least they are going after ISIS and not claiming to, like Russia and Assad.  Bombing innocent civilians instead."

[craigt3365]

7 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

I agree with this statement. But that's not what you said.  Do I really have to take apart piece by piece what you wrote to show that it says Syria was not fighting Isis but instead was bombing civilians? Once again here's your sentence:  "At least they are going after ISIS and not claiming to, like Russia and Assad.  Bombing innocent civilians instead."

Quit nitpicking.  Jeez...you never give up. LOL

[ilostmypassword]

Just now, craigt3365 said:

Quit nitpicking.  Jeez...you never give up. LOL

And what you are doing isn't "not giving up?" Odd how you accuse someone of the very thing you are doing. The fact is, you can never admit when you are wrong. So in this case, when it's clear you are, you instead resort to bringing up an irrelevancy.

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, ilostmypassword said:

And what you are doing isn't "not giving up?" Odd how you accuse someone of the very thing you are doing. The fact is, you can never admit when you are wrong. So in this case, when it's clear you are, you instead resort to bringing up an irrelevancy.

I've admitted several times when I'm wrong.  Have you?  Ever?  LOL  This is all irrelevant to the OP.  Can we get back to that?  Please.

[ilostmypassword]

Just now, craigt3365 said:

I've admitted several times when I'm wrong.  Have you?  Ever?  LOL  This is all irrelevant to the OP.  Can we get back to that?  Please.

Maybe. But not this time.  And you're still not giving up. Can't you just let this go?

[Rancid]

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

And if Iran and Russia hadn't intervened in a civil war, this war would have been over a long time ago and at much less cost to human lives.

I like your posts as they give insight into what the majority actually do believe, in fact I used to think exactly the same way.

[Morch]

4 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

You have to bear in mind, yes, Washington backed a load of rebels, and yes, some were Islamic fundamentalists. But Washington's intent was, was to "support a load of rebels, watch them remove Assad, and then look at the rebels after Assad has gone, and then bomb the rebels who are Islamic fundamentalists".

Yes, a very dangerous strategy. But still, I don't think Washington ever intended to see a new Syria controlled by Islamic fundamentalists.

 

4 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Look, if Iran/Hezbollah and Russia had not of jumped in, well yes, there would be a new regime. A new regime, Islamic fundamentalists. This would have meant Washington having to bomb some of the guys in the new regime.

 

Pushing these faux talking points again?

 

To begin with, Islamic elements weren't as dominant with regard to the resistance/uprising/rebels against Assad's regime. Had Assad not been supported by Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, perhaps the situation could have been decided before things changed.

 

As pointed out on numerous topics, you provide no support for the alleged "Washington's intent". That US foreign policy in the ME is a mess, doesn't quite make it what you repeatedly claim it is.

[The Deerhunter]

The day the biggest Russia oil company bought Syria's biggest oil company was the day that fortold the inevitable outcome of this horrific waste of human life.   And probably set the stage to destroy Europe as well with "refugees".  A double win for Putin!    Oh Dear!

Edited September 14, 2017 by The Deerhunter

[ilostmypassword]

2 hours ago, Morch said:

 

 

Pushing these faux talking points again?

 

To begin with, Islamic elements weren't as dominant with regard to the resistance/uprising/rebels against Assad's regime. Had Assad not been supported by Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, perhaps the situation could have been decided before things changed.

 

As pointed out on numerous topics, you provide no support for the alleged "Washington's intent". That US foreign policy in the ME is a mess, doesn't quite make it what you repeatedly claim it is.

"To begin with, Islamic elements weren't as dominant with regard to the resistance/uprising/rebels against Assad's regime." So they were dominant but not as dominant? Or are you saying that they weren't dominant?

[craigt3365]

5 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

"To begin with, Islamic elements weren't as dominant with regard to the resistance/uprising/rebels against Assad's regime." So they were dominant but not as dominant? Or are you saying that they weren't dominant?

My gosh.  He lays it out very clearly.  Nitpicking.

[simple1]

1 hour ago, The Deerhunter said:

The day the biggest Russia oil company bought Syria's biggest oil company was the day that fortold the inevitable outcome of this horrific waste of human life.   And probably set the stage to destroy Europe as well with "refugees".  A double win for Putin!    Oh Dear!

If you look into a bit of detail, one of the primary push factors for genuine asylum seekers entering the EU was insufficient funding by the international community in places such as Turkey and Lebanon where they were not permitted to work, insufficient shelter, minimum orderly legal processing for applying for refugee status and so on. At the time the foregoing factors drained asylum seeker's saving, leaving them no immediate solution, but to seek alternatives.

[ilostmypassword]

6 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

My gosh.  He lays it out very clearly.  Nitpicking.

You're not doing Morch any favors by chiming in here. No, it's not clear at all. Because if he's saying that Islamist elements were dominant, just not as dominant, the fact is that they were still dominant. So that would tend to discount the contribution made my other groups. 

[craigt3365]

19 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

You're not doing Morch any favors by chiming in here. No, it's not clear at all. Because if he's saying that Islamist elements were dominant, just not as dominant, the fact is that they were still dominant. So that would tend to discount the contribution made my other groups. 

Jeez.  Read his post again.  He never said what you are saying.  Maybe this will help.  The civil war started in 2011.  IS wasn't a factor until late 2012:

 

http://faculty.fordham.edu/davenport/Syria/Syria-History.html

Quote

But by late 2012, many fighters from other Sunni nations had come to Syria to help the rebellion, including some from more extremist (jihadist or fundamentalist) groups such as the Al Nusra front and the Islamic Front and later ISIS (the "Islamic State in Syria" or ISIL = "the Islamic State in the Levant"). The Free Syrian Army units found themselves working alongside, and increasing in tension with, more religiously-driven militias not under their command.

 

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

Jeez.  Read his post again.  He never said what you are saying.  Maybe this will help.  The civil war started in 2011.  IS wasn't a factor until late 2012:

 

http://faculty.fordham.edu/davenport/Syria/Syria-History.html

 

Well, I have to admit you do have a point about what Morch said. But that the Syrian non fundamentalist oppostion was ever a serious threat to the regime is a dubious proposition.  It was only with the advent of money and materiel from the Sunni states, such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar with their aid to fundamentalist forces, that the Syrian regime became seriously endangered.

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Well, I have to admit you do have a point about what Morch said. But that the Syrian non fundamentalist oppostion was ever a serious threat to the regime is a dubious proposition.  It was only with the advent of money and materiel from the Sunni states, such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar with their aid to fundamentalist forces, that the Syrian regime became seriously endangered.

 

Assad's regime was enjoying Russia's and Iran's support from the very start. Not necessarily, to counter expected nitpicking arguments, in the form of troop and weapon deployment - but through maintaining financial and military supply lines, or providing diplomatic protection in the UN. Whether or not Assad's regime would have been able to overcome his secular and sectarian opponents without such support is debatable.

 

 

[ilostmypassword]

Just now, Morch said:

 

Assad's regime was enjoying Russia's and Iran's support from the very start. Not necessarily, to counter expected nitpicking arguments, in the form of troop and weapon deployment - but through maintaining financial and military supply lines, or providing diplomatic protection in the UN. Whether or not Assad's regime would have been able to overcome his secular and sectarian opponents without such support is debatable.

 

 

His secular or at least relatively secular opponents as recent history shows would have been easily overcome without help from any outsiders. Militarily speaking, they weren't up to much. And let's not forget Turkish invasion of Syria or the American aided Kurdish incursion.

What we do know is that Syria is a sovereign nation, and its government does have a right to get military aid from other nations. Whether outside nations have a right to support rebels is a dicier question. And it stops being dicey when the aid is massive.,