How is an Extremist Marketed in Syria?

As the Syrian regime collapsed, Israel shifted its efforts towards redrawing the security geography and penetrating deeper into Syrian territory in an attempt to establish a future reality where some strategic Syrian land would remain under Israeli control and surveillance. These efforts included targeting Syria’s military infrastructure and dismantling its army’s arsenal, with the aim of creating a demilitarised Syria and rendering its geography unusable in any future equation that might target Israel.

While the world has been preoccupied with tracking the movements of the leader of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), Abu Mohammad al-Jolani (Ahmad al-Sharaa), his transformation in presence and rhetoric has drawn attention. This appears to be part of a strategy to market him as a suitable political option for the next stage. Despite his repeated assertions about respecting diversity within Syrian society, maintaining the country’s unity, and ensuring a democratic transition, doubts remain about HTS’s ability to translate these statements into practical action.

Al-Jolani, who currently leads the Syrian scene as a figure representing an ideological stance, may face serious challenges in accepting others, managing differences, or embracing the principle of power-sharing. His initial steps, forming a homogeneous government and attempting to dominate power, indicate a lack of a genuine strategy to address Syria’s social complexities and political legacy. The regime’s collapse may lead to significant difficulties in dealing with this legacy, both in its security and bureaucratic aspects. Such an approach could provoke expected reactions from various internal factions, such as the Druze and Kurds, or even within Idlib itself, who see this monopolisation of political decisions as a threat to their interests and future.

While simplifying al-Jolani and HTS’s rise to power by emphasising the oppressive image of the previous regime may make the Syrian scene appear clearer, the complexity of the current reality cannot be ignored. International support from the US and regional backing from Turkey may not fully guarantee a political transition, as the real challenge lies in how HTS handles extending its influence over the entirety of Syrian territory, a goal yet to be achieved. Additionally, integrating all segments of Syrian society into a national project remains nearly impossible for an ideologically driven organisation that struggles to embrace political diversity or power-sharing principles.

In recent years, the Biden administration took a notable step in Afghanistan by withdrawing and leaving the country to the Taliban, later marketed desperately as a reformed, moderate movement. Today, this phenomenon is being repeated with HTS, as promises to remove it from the terrorist list, distinguish it from other extremist groups, and present al-Jolani as a progressive, politically competent figure gain traction. However, removing HTS from the terrorist list warrants careful consideration of the potential repercussions. Most extremist groups may adopt escalation and rebellion as a primary strategy in the coming phase, particularly in their competition with each other and in their efforts to gain recognition as viable governing entities. This trend could extend beyond Syria’s borders.

Additionally, this development may reignite aspirations among Islamic parties, which retreated after the Arab Spring, to resume their pursuit of power. The symbolism of certain actions since the Syrian regime’s collapse, such as al-Jolani’s speech at the Umayyad Mosque, framing the event as a victory for the Islamic nation rather than a triumph for Syria’s opposition, and the newly appointed Prime Minister Mohammad al-Bashir delivering his first address from a Friday sermon pulpit at the same mosque, reflects an ideological agenda being marketed as the product of a political rather than religious revolution.

Political transition in Syria remains a challenging and complex process due to historical, social, economic and institutional factors. The risk of internal conflict remains significant, as many Syrian factions have yet to express their stance or acceptance of current developments. Furthermore, ceding control of their areas of influence will not be easy. The position of Daesh also remains ambiguous, with its movements since the regime’s fall unclear.

The region may be on the brink of significant repercussions resulting from what has happened and how things will develop in Syria, both politically and in terms of security. The next phase may also see Israel advancing practical measures on the ground before the Trump administration returns to the White House, including annexing areas of the West Bank, securing its borders with Lebanon and Syria, and striking farther targets which Israel considers to be fronts of Iranian influence extending from Iraq to Yemen and even inside Iran.

Dr Amer Al Sabaileh, a professor in the University of Jordan, is a columnist in The Jordan Times

CrossFireArabia

CrossFireArabia

Dr. Marwan Asmar holds a PhD from Leeds University and is a freelance writer specializing on the Middle East. He has worked as a journalist since the early 1990s in Jordan and the Gulf countries, and been widely published, including at Albawaba, Gulf News, Al Ghad, World Press Review and others.

Related Posts

Can Arab States Stop The Israeli Genocide?

Neither the Israeli war nor the ethnic cleansing of Gaza will ever stop if there is no forceful, determined intervention from the outside. 

And primarily this intervention has to come from the Arab countries and the pan-Arab nation as a whole: If these states – so-called Arab brethren and Islamic affiliates bound by common language and culture – don’t stand up and say ‘no’ to Netanyahu’s bloody war on Gaza, now in its 15th month, the ethnic cleansing, devastation, destruction and possibly the near and future displacement of the Palestinian people will continue to be hummed.

No bland utterances

Arab countries, from the far-west to the center and all the way to the east must move beyond bland utterances and condemnations of the mindless bloody Israeli military actions on Gaza that has so far resulted in the killing of more than 50,000 people, internally displaced more than 2 million of the population with 14,000 dead yet to be recovered from under the millions-of-tons of rubble that needs years to clear out.

As well, and further stated by Palestinian activist Dr Mustafa Al Barghouti, Arab states have to now develop at least a two-pronged strategy to drive the message across that they will not stand ideally by and watch the Palestinian people of Gaza being massacred and driven to smithereens.

Arab countries, and incidentally this should have been done a long time ago, which have normalized with Israel must freeze their diplomatic relations with the Zionist entity. Their leaders must say to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that relations will remain cut and frozen and that no further relations will take place, until he ends the Israeli war on Gaza and from now on, its back to the “bad old days” of a black Cold War between the Arab countries and Israel. 

The message needs to be loud and made crystal clear by Arab leaders for Netanyahu and his extremist government and military men to stop the carnage, killing and mayhem that is being created in Gaza and its people.

Determined Arabs

It is only through such a determined approach that will force the Israeli government, its leaders and ministers to sit, think and possibly review their slaughter of the Gaza enclave. At the very least, they would be forced to put the “brakes on” to their “happy attitude” of committing their atrocious massacres carried out almost daily since 7 October, 2023.

What is needed is a credible deterrence with those in power moving beyond their pedestals and high chairs and plush stages and put words and action together for the Arab world is nowhere as helpless on this issue as it is being projected.

All of the 22 Arab countries have now a real opportunity to stop the Gaza massacres through the new American president at the White House Donald Trump. He forced Netanyahu’s hand for a temporary ceasefire starting 19th January, 2025 which continued for almost two months and he can do it again if he wanted to and/or forced to. At the moment there is no political will.

Effective tool

Despite the present-relaunching of the war on 19 March, basically through an American green-light, Arab countries can have an effective and meaningful role if they choose to. After all, Trump soon backed down when he first suggested that the USA take over Gaza and turn it a Middle East Riviera whilst displacing its people to neighboring countries such as Jordan and Egypt.

He soon retreated from pursuing such an idea especially when Arab capitals such as Cairo, Amman, Riyadh, Algiers, Beirut, Kuwait, Doha, Muscat and Abu Dhabi condemned such a move with Netanyahu even having the audacity to say  Palestinians can have their state in Saudi Arabia. Trump’s Riviera idea soon became bogged down but Israel shortly after, restarted its war on Gaza, again with the blessing of the US administration.

But here again, and today the Arab countries, can make their move. The USA has vital, strategic, economic and political interests in the world and these can be used in different ways to persuade Washington to pressure Tel Aviv to back down on Gaza, other than promising to continue its bloody onslaught on ordinary Palestinians in Gaza with the hope of getting rid of Hamas and which according to their calculations they can’t beat until 2027 and/or whenever.

Netanyahu must be made to stop! He is not doing so because of the ongoing military supplies and backing from the United States and from the muted Arab response which have to go beyond condemnation and denunciations. Arab states have the tools at their disposal, it is time for these to be uses effectively otherwise the Israeli genocide will continue and expand.

This comment is written by Dr Marwan Asmar, chief editor of the crossfirearabia.com website.

Continue reading
Trump, Iran And The ‘Nuclear Fight’

Experts say the Middle East region is poised on an impending war with the top protagonists being the USA, Israel and Iran.  They stand on a military pedestal of violent conflict where Armageddon has become the new catchphrase.

The man at the center of it all is US president Donald Trump who has been elected on a so-called global “peace” ticket but is fueling the worldwide escalation with his rhetoric.

He is telling Iran, nay warning it, to either hitch out and agree to a new accord on the country’s nuclear file or face the American wrath where its Persian cities and nuclear facilities would be wildly attacked in a first-time development that is turning international relations upside down.

And so a war of words began between Tehran and Washington since Trump sent a stern letter to Iran’s spiritual leader, Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei, telling him to submit to a new nuclear agreement to stall his country’s nuclear facilities or face extensive US bombing. 

This was a callous, stark warning. The international system has never, till now, faced such discursive diplomatic parlance, even at the height of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union.

The Iranian leadership saw Trump’s verbiage as an outright threat and refused to submit, even telling US president that Iran will not be bullied and he can to “go to hell”, a comment made by Iranian president Massoud Pezeshkian. He was speaking for the Ayatollah and the top leadership in the country.

Since then however, and in spite of the occasional utterings, recently made by Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Iraghchi that Tehran would respond quickly and heavily to any outside attack, both sides have been involved in a “jostling affair” issuing different and irk statements short of the war-mongering tirade Trump started.

Military brink

Today, and on the face of it, both sides appear to want to pull back from the military brink. The Iranians are now saying they would be prepared to negotiate but only indirectly through Oman, the country that has traditionally served as a consummate link between Washington and Tehran.

Whilst the Trump administration may be contemplating such a fact, although it’s on record for stating it would prefer direct face-to-face negotiations involving fully-fledged American and Iranian expert teams in the field of nuclear weapons and proliferation, Washington has not closed the doors to such an offer from Tehran and it is still considering it which means it might be softening its position.

But there is another snag to this. Iranian officials have stated they want confidence-building measures from the Trump administration and don’t believe in negotiations under threat but this appears to be what is happening today.

As the diplomatic chit chat continues, Washington is sending military reinforcements with jet fighters, mass bombs and missiles to the Indian Ocean, Arabian Sea and the Red Sea as part of their stepped-up fight against the Houthis and potentially against Iran, both of whom are against the Israeli military onslaught on the Gaza Strip which is being financed by the USA.

Thus, what is happening now is that both sides are involved in sending out mixed signals despite the military escalation and war of words with Trump in what is becoming his customary U-turns. He is now saying that he doesn’t want a fight with Iran and is prepared for negotiations. 

But the ball is turning so to speak. For one thing Israel has long sought deadly strikes on Iranian cities and nuclear facilities and for it, today this is a “golden opportunity” being flanked and supported by US warships in the area.

Israel sees such a series of strikes as more urgent than before because after 2018 when Trump got the USA out of the nuclear deal, Iran started once again to boost its uranium enrichment program and many argue it’s very near to achieving a nuclear bomb and capability.

But that may be over-stating the fact, because Iran has always stated its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes and its officials have maintained an official dialogue with the countries it originally made a deal with in 2015 officially named as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

So the current escalation may be tinged with diplomatic talk for although Trump maybe rash in what he says, there is usually a back up plan up his sleeve of not reaching beyond the military brink with brinkmanship being played at the highest levels.

This comment is written by Dr Marwan Asmar, chief editor of the crossfirearabia.com website.

Continue reading

You Missed

Gaza Under The Rubble

Gaza Under The Rubble

Controlling America

Controlling America

Israel Bombs ‘Journalists Tent’ in Khan Younis

Israel Bombs ‘Journalists Tent’ in Khan Younis

10 British Citizens Face Gaza War Crimes – Guardian Newspaper

10 British Citizens Face Gaza War Crimes – Guardian Newspaper