Syrian army and Iranian-backed militias push towards Idlib province

[webfact]

Syrian army and Iranian-backed militias push towards Idlib province

By Suleiman Al-Khalidi

 

 

A general view of the Syrian town of Atimah, Idlib province, seen in this picture taken from Reyhanli, Hatay province, Turkey October 10, 2017. REUTERS/Osman Orsal

 

AMMAN (Reuters) - The Syrian army and Iranian-backed militias backed by Russian air power stepped up a military campaign against rebels in eastern Hama province in a push towards the rebel stronghold of Idlib province in northwestern Syria, rebels and witnesses said.

 

They said dozens of aerial strikes believed to be conducted mainly by Russian jets in the last 48 hours hit opposition held villages and towns in the northeastern Hama countryside and the southern part of Idlib province.

 

The Islamist Hayat Tahrir al Sham and some Free Syrian Army (FSA) rebel faction in control of these areas said they were sending reinforcements to seize back a string of villages in the northeastern Hama countryside, near the town of Rihjan, that the army had earlier announced were captured in heavy fighting.

 

The army said the villages of Um Turayka, Bilil, and Rujum al Ahmar were seized, forcing the rebels to flee to areas close to the administrative boundaries of Idlib province.

 

The Syrian army had lost the strategically located Idlib province to insurgents when the provincial capital fell to rebels in 2015. It has since become the only province that is fully under opposition control.

 

The Syrian army's first goal was to retake strategic Abu al Dhour military airport, one of the largest airports in the north of the country that fell to rebels in 2015. It was heavily bombed on Sunday, a rebel source said.

 

"The regime movements seek to besiege Idlib province with the help of Shi'ite militias fighting with them," said Colonel Mustafa Bakour, a commander in the Jaish al Izza rebel faction.

 

Tahrir al Sham, which is spearheaded by the former al Qaeda branch in Syria, is the main rebel force in the province, raising fears among civilians and rebels alike that Moscow and the Syrian army and its allies would soon turn it into a major battlefield.

 

The strategically located province that borders Turkey is part of the Russian-led de-escalation zones that seek to shore up ceasefires in western Syria.

Idlib has been a haven for tens of thousands of rebels and civilians who were forced to abandon their homes in other parts of western Syria that the government and its foreign military allies have recaptured from rebels.

 

It has already been the target of intensive strikes by the Russia and Syrian air forces in the past year that have killed thousands of civilians and destroyed hospitals and civil defence centres.

 

Tahrir al Sham also repelled simultaneously an offensive by Islamic State militants who have been for the last few weeks pushing into the opposition-controlled territory to extend a small enclave they have in that area, among the few they retain across Syria.

 

The ultra hardline militants also seized a string of villages that brought them within kilometres of Idlib province.

 

The Russian and Syrian army advance towards Idlib is also piling pressure on Turkey which had since October begun a major military deployment in the province it considers within its sphere of influence.

 

Ankara's intervention seeks to rein in Russian strikes and prevent Idlib from facing a similar fate to Mosul or Aleppo, according to a senior rebel commander briefed on Turkish policy.

 

(Reporting by Suleiman Al-Khalidi; Editing by Mary Milliken)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-12-11

[Srikcir]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

intensive strikes by the Russia and Syrian air forces in the past year that have killed thousands of civilians and destroyed hospitals and civil defence centres.

Whatever it takes to protect the Asaad regime ... and Russia's interests.

[Morch]

 

Wonder if it's Putin's "'Mission Accomplished" moment:

 

Russia's Putin visits Syria airbase and orders start of pullout

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-42307365

 

As I recall, there was a past occasion in which Russia said troops will be withdrawn, which didn't actually happen (or not in the scale alluded to). Seeing as Putin wishes to focus efforts on a diplomatic solution, withdrawing may not be a bad move.

 

If Russian forces, in Syria by invitation, withdraw, it would put extra pressure on other players (Turkey, USA, Hezbollah, Iran, and Iraqi Shia militias) to withdraw their forces as well, or at least to scale back operations. Provided the overall security situation can be kept under control, such a move may serve to reduce potential clashes between parties (potentially including Israel as well). 

 

It may also broadcast that Putin does not intend to back Assad militarily against the Kurds (which considering USA presence would be a no go anyway).

[craigt3365]

I can't find the article now, but just read there are major issues with Syrian and Russian warplanes crossing over into coalition territory and striking targets.  The coalition issued a warning it will shoot down any plane that crosses the line.  They said it's a disaster waiting to happen.

 

Syria is still a mess.  Hard to say anybody has won.  And the future doesn't look that good.  Russia leaves and the opposition will feel emboldened to go after Assad.

[Morch]

8 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

I can't find the article now, but just read there are major issues with Syrian and Russian warplanes crossing over into coalition territory and striking targets.  The coalition issued a warning it will shoot down any plane that crosses the line.  They said it's a disaster waiting to happen.

 

Syria is still a mess.  Hard to say anybody has won.  And the future doesn't look that good.  Russia leaves and the opposition will feel emboldened to go after Assad.

 

What opposition?

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

What opposition?

I'd guess the 50% of former Syria the government doesn't control. LOL

[Morch]

51 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

I'd guess the 50% of former Syria the government doesn't control. LOL

 

I'd guess you are guessing wrong. Not fully controlling all of Syrian territory does not mean that there is an effective opposition in place or that such would emerge. A large tract of such land would be the one controlled by the Kurds - which are not intent on fighting Assad's regime.

 

The country is depopulated, most of the direct military opposition is either crushed or far from being the threat it used to be. The OP refers to the area in question as "only province that is fully under opposition control. " That Assad's regime is hated does not imply automatic support of the remaining population to opposition organizations or to further military operations. If things abroad are an indication, the ability of the various opposition groups to cooperate or even agree on key issues is questionable.

[craigt3365]

11 hours ago, Morch said:

 

I'd guess you are guessing wrong. Not fully controlling all of Syrian territory does not mean that there is an effective opposition in place or that such would emerge. A large tract of such land would be the one controlled by the Kurds - which are not intent on fighting Assad's regime.

 

The country is depopulated, most of the direct military opposition is either crushed or far from being the threat it used to be. The OP refers to the area in question as "only province that is fully under opposition control. " That Assad's regime is hated does not imply automatic support of the remaining population to opposition organizations or to further military operations. If things abroad are an indication, the ability of the various opposition groups to cooperate or even agree on key issues is questionable.

Come on.  If there wasn't any opposition, Assad wouldn't require help from outsiders and he'd be in control of the entire country!  He's not.  So there's opposition.  This map lays it out pretty well.

 

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2015/05/syria-country-divided-150529144229467.html

Syria: Who controls what?

A map of the Syrian civil war that shows who controls what after years of fighting.

[Morch]

4 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Come on.  If there wasn't any opposition, Assad wouldn't require help from outsiders and he'd be in control of the entire country!  He's not.  So there's opposition.  This map lays it out pretty well.

 

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2015/05/syria-country-divided-150529144229467.html

Syria: Who controls what?

A map of the Syrian civil war that shows who controls what after years of fighting.

 

I didn't say that there is no opposition or resistance, but commented on its effectiveness and prospects. That Assad doesn't control all of Syria does not imply that all areas not under his control are massively up in arms or support an organized and effective opposition, never mind successful military resistance.

 

If you wish to doubt Assad's level of control, then apply the same to the level of control the opposition exercises over areas it holds (and add to that opposition being fragmented). 

 

It's not a zero-sum game.

 

Most of the Syrian territory not held by Assad, and which does support a potential force able to to oppose or resist is under Kurdish control. The areas held by others (whether Islamic, FSA or local outfits) are smaller, less organized and shrinking. It may take yet a while for Assad to take control of them, but that's where it's heading. Dealing with the Kurds will be much more complicated, and a whole different story. Looking up maps portraying how zones of control changed over time since the civil war erupted, makes the direction of where things are going easier to discern.

[craigt3365]

I said Assad doesn't control 50% of Syria.  You said I was wrong.  I'm not.  I didn't mention whether the opposition was effective or not.  You did.

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

I said Assad doesn't control 50% of Syria.  You said I was wrong.  I'm not.  I didn't mention whether the opposition was effective or not.  You did.

 

The way I read it, you associated nominal areas of control with the existence of an opposition:

 

https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1015349-syrian-army-and-iranian-backed-militias-push-towards-idlib-province/?tab=comments#comment-12530415

[JemJem]

Those 'rebel-held areas' are possibly breeding grounds for jihadis. I am hoping that Assad forces will be able to take control of those places in the near future. It won't be easy of course. 

 

I am personally rooting for a new Syria, with Assad+Kurds in control. Those 'rebel areas' are a major cause for worry, I think. 

[simple1]

14 minutes ago, JemJem said:

Those 'rebel-held areas' are possibly breeding grounds for jihadis. I am hoping that Assad forces will be able to take control of those places in the near future. It won't be easy of course. 

 

I am personally rooting for a new Syria, with Assad+Kurds in control. Those 'rebel areas' are a major cause for worry, I think. 

Think you will find the OP provence has for quite a while being set up as a killing ground for the majority of remaining Islamist forces in Syria. Assad has made it very clear he wishes to regain total control of Syrian territory, so it will be interesting to see if the Trump Administration will dump  the 'rebels' made up of Kurds & others or leave them to the mercy of Assad & his allies.

[JemJem]

5 hours ago, simple1 said:

Think you will find the OP provence has for quite a while being set up as a killing ground for the majority of remaining Islamist forces in Syria. Assad has made it very clear he wishes to regain total control of Syrian territory, so it will be interesting to see if the Trump Administration will dump  the 'rebels' made up of Kurds & others or leave them to the mercy of Assad & his allies.

The Kurds will be just fine (unless the YPG-hater Erdogan decides to attack their territory). I don't think Assad will attack YPG. Of course, one can never know, but I doubt this will happen.

 

The Kurds there deserve to be protected by the West (and Russia), if attacked by Erdogan or Assad. They have done tremendously in fighting the jihadis. 

 

The menace to the region is Erdogan and his AKP party. Now, he is stirring up anti-Jewish hatred (we all know that in the Muslim world, anti-Israel sadly means anti-Jewish, for most people anyway) among the Muslims on the Jerusalem issue. He is also sadly very efficient in manipulating and polarising people. And, look at what he has done to Turkey,  my country, which used to be secular (now, only half-secular and definitely not democratic anymore) and which used to have good (or at least decent) relations with most countries. Now,  also, my country's reputation in the world, especially in the West, is HORRIBLE too. Anyway, 'his rebels' in Syria will definitely be trouble-makers in the future.