Syrian Civil War Developments

[Oracle]

Some mutual interests. Leaked proposal: US offering Russia military pact in Syria

[troung]

Credit Sergey Ponomarev for The New York Times


Some of the Afghan fighters head to Syria for religious reasons, seeing the battle as a war against Sunni extremists or choosing to defend Shiite holy sites in Syria alongside other Shiite militiamen from Lebanon or Iraq. Others were coerced or duped into fighting, say human rights groups. But most were enticed by financial benefits, including the promise of legal residence for the fighters and their families in Iran, said Abdul Rahim Ghulami. He is a local official in Herat who said his brother-in-law was a commander of an Afghan unit fighting in Aleppo.


Iran’s government provides a few weeks of training and flies the men to Syria, where they join one of the Afghan brigades. Those units are sometimes viewed with suspicion by their own allies: In interviews in Syria, some of the other fighters from pro-government militias disparaged the Afghans as too young and poorly trained.


A shop owner in Damascus named Ahmed who works near the Sayyida Zainab mosque, a revered site for Shiites, said the numbers of Afghan fighters guarding the mosque had increased in the last six months. They were a sorrowful lot who complained about their lives in Iran or Afghanistan when he talked with them, he said, but said they faced little choice if they wanted to support their families. At least if the men die, they die as martyrs in a holy war, he added, giving only his first name because he did not want to be punished.


Casualties among the Afghan fighters were high, said Mr. Ghulami, who lived in Iran for 24 years. He said he visited the Iranian town of Mashhad two months ago and saw that its Afghan quarter was blanketed with black banners that signaled a house in mourning.





The size of the outflow from Afghanistan itself has been harder to tally, because the government’s disapproval has led families to stay quiet. Mr. Ghulami, who serves as a local mayor in Jebrail, a Hazara district of Herat with roughly 100,000 residents, estimated that 20 percent of the families there had someone serving in Syria. There was no way to confirm that number: no funerals of Afghan fighters, and no black banners to honor the dead.


But in Jebrail, along with another Hazara neighborhood of Herat, called Khatim al-Anbiya, it is easy to find the relatives or friends the Afghan fighters had left behind.






Today’s Headlines: Asia Edition

Get news and analysis from Asia and around the world delivered to your inbox every day in the Asian morning.




At the cigarette kiosk where he worked in Jebrail, a boy named Sayed Ali remembered his neighbor and classmate, Habibullah, 20, who ran off to Syria a few years ago, when he was still a teenager. This year, word came back that Habibullah had been killed in the war. His family packed up the house and moved to Iran, granted legal residence there because of the boy’s death, Sayed Ali said.


Another high school student, named Jawad, disappeared from his home in Khatim al-Anbiya two winters ago, leaving his family to assume he had gone to Iran to find work, according to his uncle, Mohamed Ibrahim.


When his parents last heard from Jawad, he said he was in Syria, and told his father he was preparing to come home. Then, eight or nine months ago, a man brought the news that Jawad had been shot in the head and killed.


Mr. Ibrahim said he was not sure what took Jawad to Syria — “No one can read anyone’s heart,” he said — but said he thought the boy was just looking for work. “They go there because of poverty,” he said. Jawad’s family left for Iran after he was killed, leaving behind their one-story house and their cow, their most valuable possession, Mr. Ibrahim said.

Yazdanbeg Yazdani, a 50-year-old resident of Jebrail with family in Iran, said that a year ago, he received a call from Iran telling him his younger brother, named Yunus, had joined the war as an officer and was killed in a suicide bombing attack.


Mr. Yazdani was unsure why his brother, who was 48, felt compelled to fight — whether he supported the Syrian government, or had been forced into battle, or simply needed the money. The brothers had been separated decades ago, when Yunus moved to Syria — their family fractured by migration, like so many in Afghanistan. Mr. Yazdani could not attend his brother’s funeral, which was held in Iran. But his family there sent him pictures of the service.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/wo...-war.html?_r=0

[troung]

Stalemates, defections and shifting alliances: Syria’s restive south at crossroads


 Jul. 27, 2016


AMMAN: Jabhat a-Nusra has withdrawn the bulk of its fighters from battles to drive Islamic State-linked forces from southern Syria in recent days, rebel and civilian sources tell Syria Direct, ending four months of coordination with US-backed rebels.

The reported withdrawal over the past two weeks follows more than four months of battles in southwest Daraa in which Jabhat a-Nusra, Ahrar a-Sham and the US-backed Southern Front fought a mutual enemy: IS-linked forces based near Syria’s southern borders with Israel and Jordan.

Jabhat a-Nusra has made no official statements announcing or confirming that it has scaled back participation in the battles, but two FSA commanders and one civilian source in the area independently told Syria Direct that Nusra withdrew forces.

In March of this year, alleged IS affiliate Liwa Shuhadaa al-Yarmouk launched a surprise offensive from its base in southwest Daraa’s Yarmouk Basin region. Attacking positions and towns held by the Southern Front and Islamist militias including Nusra and Ahrar a-Sham, LSY pushed roughly 7km to the east in a matter of weeks and linked its territory with that of ideologically similar brigade Harakat al-Muthanna.

In response, Jabhat a-Nusra, Ahrar a-Sham and the Southern Front launched a successful counteroffensive to initially halt and then roll back LSY gains.

In May, a weakened LSY merged with its idealogically similar allies in southwest Daraa and neighboring Quneitra to form Jaish Khaled bin al-Waleed (JKW), named for the 7th-century Rashidun commander who led greatly outnumbered Muslim forces to victory over the Byzantine army in present-day southern Syria.

A rebel fighter in Daraa city this past June. Photo courtesy of Nabaa Media Foundation.

After months of fighting, hundreds of fighters and dozens of civilians killed and thousands more displaced, the fight against JKW in southwest Daraa has petered out to a stalemate: daily shelling, with no major advances on the ground.

Now, Nusra appears to have lost interest in the fight, reportedly withdrawing the bulk of its fighters from fronts with JKW. Ahrar a-Sham’s fighters reportedly remain in place.

“Nusra withdrew large numbers of its forces,” citizen journalist Omar al-Jolani, who is currently near the frontlines with JKW, told Syria Direct. “It hasn’t completely withdrawn from the fighting, but no longer has any real numbers to speak of at the flashpoints with JKW.”

“Nusra has withdrawn from the ongoing battles against Jaish Khaled bin al-Waleed,” a Southern Front commander currently in Daraa province told Syria Direct late last week, requesting anonymity. “The FSA factions are displeased,” he added.

Why might Nusra be withdrawing its forces from the fight with LSY now?

With no official statements from Nusra, it is not possible to know for sure. However, Southern Front commanders and a civilian journalist who spoke to Syria Direct in recent days said they view the move as preparation by Nusra to open new fronts with the regime in Daraa in a bid to increase the group’s influence on the ground.

“If Nusra and Ahrar are able to open fronts against the regime and advance, this would increase their support base,” said al-Jolani. Both Nusra and Ahrar operate within the Southern Victory Army, modeled after the northern Syrian coalition of hardline Islamist groups.

While Nusra was once a considerable force on the ground in Daraa, months of fighting with LSY, a series of assassinations and the reported relocation of Nusra’s Daraa leadership to northern Syria earlier this year have reduced the faction’s manpower in southern Syria’s Daraa to mostly fighters from the province itself.

Despite its reportedly reduced numbers, Nusra “aims to have the final word in Daraa,” alleges the same Southern Front Commander. “It’s a serious attempt by Nusra to consolidate its position.”

‘A state of discontent’

Southern Front and Islamist factions alike in south Syria are facing calls by residents and—most recently—prominent clerics to refocus their efforts on regime forces after months of grinding battles with alleged IS affiliates.

Two weeks ago, a newly formed group of hardline Islamist scholars, including Nusra’s Abu Maria al-Qahtani and prominent Saudi cleric Dr. Abdallah al-Muhaysini issued a statement online calling on Daraa rebels to launch battles with the regime in order to draw attention away from battles in Aleppo and Outer Damascus.

“Take initiative in the few coming days to ignite the fronts and battles,” urged the mid-July statement, adding that “it is impermissible for any faction to respond to pressure from any internal or external party not to open the fronts,” alluding to a belief that foreign backers have instructed Southern Front rebels to primarily focus on fighting IS affiliates in Daraa rather than the regime.

Salaries and weapons deliveries to the rebel Southern Front are coordinated by the secretive, Jordan-based Military Operations Command (MOC), led by regional and international backers, including the United States.

“For long months, we have been awaiting the battle of Daraa,” said Muhaysini in a separate message sent to Daraa rebels via WhatsApp and posted online last week. “History will bear witness: Either victory for the people of Daraa, or their betrayal of Darayya and Aleppo.”

It is not immediately clear how much sway external calls by religious scholars hold over Jabhat a-Nusra or other rebels in southern Syria. However, those calls coincide with a reported sense of frustration amongst civilians in the area after months without any major battles with regime forces.

“There’s a state of discontent among some residents,” citizen journalist al-Jolani told Syria Direct. “They’ve lost trust in the FSA after the failure of a number of their battles, in addition to the lawlessness in the area.”

“Civilians in the area are calling for a battle to be opened against the regime,” the anonymous Southern Front commander told Syria Direct. “Their main goal is to be rid of the regime forces.”

“If Nusra works against the regime, many fighters will join them.”

‘They’ll join those who pay the most’

Frustration over perceived Southern Front inaction against the regime coupled with financial hardship have reportedly driven hundreds of Southern Front fighters to defect and join Islamist brigades over the past two weeks.

“More than 200 personnel from the Southern Front joined Jabhat a-Nusra and Ahrar a-Sham in southern Syria” last week, one Southern Front commander told Syria Direct. A second SF commander as well as citizen journalist al-Jolani cited the same number of defections.

“The tepid fronts with the regime drove most of them to join Nusra and Ahrar,” said al-Jolani. He believes the number of defections could go up in coming days, “especially since there are reports circulating about Nusra and Ahrar reopening fronts with the regime in the area.”

“Some people who recently joined Ahrar and Nusra had abandoned their weapons, but have now joined up again,” said al-Jolani.

For many of those joining Islamist brigades, getting paid is as important as ideology or the desire to fight the regime.

Some Southern Front fighters “haven’t been paid in three months,” according to the second commander who Syria Direct spoke with this week, and who also requested anonymity.

The commander alleged that financial support from unnamed “operation rooms” has been delayed and salaries cut during that period, a claim that Syria Direct could not independently confirm.

“Fighters have children and families,” said the SF commander. “Their only ideology is to provide for them. They’ll join those who pay the most.”

“The Islamist brigades give attractive salaries,” he added, above the $50 a month paid to Southern Front fighters. “The pay doesn’t get cut off. That’s the incentive to join.”

http://syriadirect.org/news/stalemat...8FQhpI.twitter

[tantalus]

Early news reports indicate a large rebel offensive (spearheaded mainly by extremists) have broken the siege of Aleppo. Interesting to see if this is true and if they can hold and secure the gains. If so, it probably represents the biggest defeat for Assad since the Russians stepped in. An intensified effort from Russia seems likely.

Also a lot of reports about chemical weapons being utilised recently, likely origin the regime, not seeing much coverage in the media this way on the matter. Obama admin are very quite.

A case for limited American involvement.

If Russia does want to limit its involvement in Syria, the threat of limited strikes should persuade it to make the Syrian leader behave.

The Obama administration wants to reduce the violence and suffering in Syria and, at the same time, quash jihadist groups there. This is why the White House is now pushing a plan for the United States to cooperate with the Russian military in Syria, sharing intelligence and coordinating airstrikes against the Islamic State and the Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front. In return, Russia would force the government of Syria's president, Bashar al-Assad, to stop using barrel bombs and air attacks in areas in which neither extremist group is present.

Wiping out terrorist groups in Syria is an important goal and, after years of death and destruction, any agreement among the country's warring parties or their patrons may seem welcome. But the Obama administration's plan, opposed by many within the CIA, the State Department and the Pentagon, is flawed. Not only would it cement the Assad government's siege of the opposition-held city of Aleppo, it would push terrorist groups and refugees into neighboring Turkey. Instead, the United States must use this opportunity to take a harder line against Mr. Assad and his allies.

Secretary of State John Kerry hopes that this understanding with Russia will help lead to progress on other issues, including restoring the "cessation of hostilities," a partial truce that began in February and broke down in May, and returning to negotiations on a political transition. These are reasonable goals, which are also embodied in a United Nations Security Council resolution adopted last December.

But a leaked text of the proposed agreement with Russia shows that it is riddled with dangerous loopholes. American and Russian representatives are now delineating areas where the Nusra Front is "concentrated" or "significant" and areas where other opposition groups dominate but "some possible Nusra presence" exists. This will still allow Mr. Assad and his Iranian and Russian backers to attack the non-Nusra opposition in those areas, as well as solidify the Syrian government's hold on power.

More worrying is that the Assad government lacks the manpower to hold rural Sunni areas and so will rely on Hezbollah and other Shiite militias to do so. These brutal sectarian groups will most likely force the Nusra Front and other Sunni rebels to decamp to Turkey, bringing them, and the threat of militant violence, closer to the West. The fighting will similarly displace Sunni civilians, leading more of them to try to make their way to Europe.

The administration's initiative with Russia is driven by either hope or desperation, but surely not by experience. During the partial truce, Russia took advantage of similar loopholes that permitted it and the Assad government to keep fighting the non-Nusra and non-Islamic State opposition. Such violations have allowed Mr. Assad and his allies to gain territory and besiege Aleppo.

The Obama administration appears to believe that President Vladimir V. Putin is looking for a way to limit Russia's involvement in the Syrian civil war. We doubt it. Mr. Putin is more interested in demonstrating that Russia and its friends are winning in Syria and the United States is losing. He will not alter his approach unless he becomes convinced that it has grown too expensive. Instead, because Mr. Putin knows the United States will not take action to punish Russia for its support for the Assad government, he and Mr. Assad will probably treat the emerging agreement no differently from the previous ones.

There is an alternative: Punish the Syrian government for violating the truce by using drones and cruise missiles to hit the Syrian military's airfields, bases and artillery positions where no Russian troops are present.

Opponents of these kinds of limited strikes say they would prompt Russia to escalate the conflict and suck the United States deeper into Syria. But these strikes would be conducted only if the Assad government was found to be violating the very truce that Russia says it is committed to. Notifying Russia that this will be the response could deter such violations of the truce and the proposed military agreement with Moscow. In any case, it would signal to Mr. Putin that his Syrian ally would pay a price if it did not maintain its side of the deal.

If Russia does want to limit its involvement in Syria, the threat of limited strikes should persuade it to make Mr. Assad behave. Conversely, if the skeptics are right that Mr. Putin will get serious about a political solution only if he sees the costs of backing Syria's government increasing, the threat of such strikes is probably the only way to start a political process to end the war.

Mr. Obama and Mr. Kerry have long said there is no military solution to the Syrian conflict. Unfortunately, Russia and Iran seem to think there is -- or at least that no acceptable political outcome is possible without diminishing the rebels and strengthening the Syrian government. It is time for the United States to speak the language that Mr. Assad and Mr. Putin understand.

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/p...-bombing-assad

The Syrian civil war is as confusing and opaque as it is sadistic and bloody. On one side stands Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, a barbarous tyrant backed by Iran and Russia, Hizbullah, and Shi'ite militias from Iraq, the remnants of the Syrian army, and the odd Kurdish splinter group.

Against him are arrayed multiple rebel groups including the Islamic State extremist group, Al-Qaeda, and a host of more moderate rebel factions. It is often hard for the observer to make sense of events, let alone understand their true importance. But one thing is clear: the insurgent offensive under way right now in Aleppo aimed at breaking the government siege of rebel-held areas in the east of the city may reshape the direction of the entire war.

On the weekend of July 30-31, the surrounded rebels who held the center of Aleppo city and a larger body of rebel groups to the west of the city tried to reconnect their battle lines, striking at a position in the strategic Ramouseh district. But, as ever, outgunned, the regime fought back: using Russian airstrikes to try to halt the advance.

Syria's revolution is now unequivocally in the balance. As Kyle Orton, a research fellow at the Henry Jackson Society, points out in an e-mail interview with RFE/RL, Aleppo is the last major urban holding of the mainstream armed opposition in Syria. If the political process is to amount to anything other than a regime victory in all but name, the rebels have to hold Aleppo City. For its part, the regime, with Russian and Iranian help, has severely lessened the strategic threat from the insurgency already -- for them to retake Aleppo City would kill it. Orton is blunt: "In short, the course of the entire war is in the balance with the fate of Aleppo."

If the rebels succeed in breaking the siege then the pro-regime coalition will suffer a serious strategic setback. As Orton further notes, "the pro-Assad forces [are holding] out in northwestern Syria by some relatively tenuous supply lines through Hama and southern Aleppo." If the rebel positions in Idlib Province and southwestern Aleppo are expanded to include areas of Aleppo City, Assad's bases in the north come under serious threat, and with it Assad's chance of crushing the rebellion entirely.

Detoxifying The Islamist Brand

But there is another more complex and disturbing possibility that encapsulates the problems of Syria in a microcosm. The main rebel players in the offensive are Jabhat Fatah al-Sham (formerly the Al-Qaeda-linked Al-Nusra Front), Ahrar al-Sham, and Free Syrian Army brigades. Al-Qaeda in Syria's renaming of itself as Fatah al-Sham -- officially for the sake of "rebel unity" -- is, in reality, little more than a move to publicly detoxify its brand.

And this is where a major question about the timing of the offensive comes in. Endless rounds of failed peace talks have yielded nothing for the rebels. Discussions of talks scheduled for late August are likely to yield nothing once again. With Iran and now Russia behind it, the regime is now so strong it has little incentive to compromise. Meanwhile, Russian support is not merely confined to the battlefield. Its diplomatic efforts have deftly changed the conversation from one centering on Assad's removal to the conditions under which he will stay in power.

As each cease-fire inevitably failed (almost invariably broken by pro-Assad forces), Al-Qaeda was eventually able to claim, back in December 2015, that the entire peace process was a "conspiracy" against the revolution. And its absurd claims gained traction among an increasingly desperate population who saw little reaction from the onlooking global community. More than this, after each cease-fire ended, Al-Qaeda was the mainstay of much of the rebel fight back -- it was even able to make significant gains in southern Aleppo. In essence, the rebels allowed Al-Qaeda back into the mainstream opposition by their own adherence to previous cease-fire agreements.

Under its new Jabhat Fatah al-Sham banner, the group can now use the Aleppo offensive as a means by which to further integrate into the mainstream rebel alliance. As Orton states, it presents the group with its best chance yet of using "the rebellion as a shield against external attack, annexing what is an objectively good cause -- breaking the nascent terror-siege of Aleppo City…[to] show its utility as the military tip of the spear to act as a kind of special forces for the insurgency -- and…make connections and alliances that can facilitate its vanguardist program."

Short Supplies

Meanwhile, the possibility of (yet another) humanitarian catastrophe becomes increasingly distinct. The UN estimates that some 300,000 people are trapped inside the city with rapidly shrinking medical supplies and, critically, declining stocks of food. The regime is clearly going all-out to capture Aleppo and crush the rebellion once and for all.Thus far, however, it has been slow to respond to the rebel counterattack. This state of affairs will not last. It will rain down destruction from the air and the ground.

So far reports are sketchy due to an insurgency media blackout in the area, but it does appear that the rebels are making significant steps toward breaking the siege. According to some reports, on August 1, they captured the strategic Al-Mishrefah area, south of the Ramousah air force artillery base. But they still needed to advance another 2.5 kilometers to take the city's artillery base, one of the biggest in all of Syria and a base that has been the linchpin of Assad's defenses in the city.

Achieving this would allow them to reach their fellow rebels on the Aleppo side. Now, according to Orton, "fragmentary reports [say] there has been intense fighting and very rapid and significant gains for the insurgency…coming within several hundred yards of breaking the siege on eastern Aleppo City."

If these reports are true -- or if the rebels are able to make minor gains or at least maintain the status quo in the city -- then once again it will be Jabhat Fatah al-Sham that benefits the most. In leading the charge to rescue the besieged population while the world looks on, it will have irretrievably bound itself to the armed opposition in Northern Syria.

And that is a scenario that benefits no one -- not the mainstream rebels and most of all, not Syria's long-suffering people.

http://www.rferl.org/content/islamic.../27900375.html

[troung]

Things aren't all that well for the terrorists when lobbyists are calling for the US to show up and declare war.

But a leaked text of the proposed agreement with Russia shows that it is riddled with dangerous loopholes. American and Russian representatives are now delineating areas where the Nusra Front is "concentrated" or "significant" and areas where other opposition groups dominate but "some possible Nusra presence" exists.

AQ fights closely with other groups...

his will still allow Mr. Assad and his Iranian and Russian backers to attack the non-Nusra opposition in those areas, as well as solidify the Syrian government's hold on power.

Tears shed for Islamists.

Under its new Jabhat Fatah al-Sham banner, the group can now use the Aleppo offensive as a means by which to further integrate into the mainstream rebel alliance.

Interesting how it is to the point where he can't write moderate with a straight face and instead calls Islamists "mainstream."

There is an alternative: Punish the Syrian government for violating the truce by using drones and cruise missiles to hit the Syrian military's airfields, bases and artillery positions where no Russian troops are present.

A Russian soldier in a BTR looks a lot like a member of the Tiger Forces or Desert Hawks in a BTR from 20k feet.

e rebellion as a shield against external attack, annexing what is an objectively good cause -- breaking the nascent terror-siege of Aleppo City…[to] show its utility as the military tip of the spear to act as a kind of special forces for the insurgency -- and…make connections and alliances that can facilitate its vanguardist program."

Calling 2014.

Against him are arrayed multiple rebel groups including the Islamic State extremist group, Al-Qaeda, and a host of more moderate rebel factions.

I wouldn't call the Muslim Brotherhood and it's ilk moderate. Ahrar was founded by a former AQ member who fought the US in Iraq after all...

Under its new Jabhat Fatah al-Sham banner, the group can now use the Aleppo offensive as a means by which to further integrate into the mainstream rebel alliance.

They were already brigaded together, long before the fake name change. Maybe we should just bomb AQ.

These brutal sectarian groups will most likely force the Nusra Front and other Sunni rebels to decamp to Turkey, bringing them, and the threat of militant violence, closer to the West. The fighting will similarly displace Sunni civilians, leading more of them to try to make their way to Europe.

Brutal sectarian groups forcing out poor AQ and the Muslim Brotherhood. Turkey supports them already, hardly bringing them closer to the west.

he UN estimates that some 300,000 people are trapped inside the city with rapidly shrinking medical supplies and, critically, declining stocks of food.

Mostly under Assad's control.

Conversely, if the skeptics are right that Mr. Putin will get serious about a political solution only if he sees the costs of backing Syria's government increasing, the threat of such strikes is probably the only way to start a political process to end the war.

Or start a larger war. Thankfully Obama is a bad leader, but not insane.

=============
More reasons on why think tanks and other paid lobbyists should be taken with treated with suspicion.

[Dazed]

In a First, Russia Uses an Iran Base for Its Syria Campaign

MOSCOW — Russia launched a fleet of bombers bound for Syria on Tuesday from an Iranian air base, becoming the first foreign military to operate from Iran’s soil since at least World War II.
Besides enabling Moscow to bring more firepower to the Syrian conflict, analysts said the new arrangement would expand Moscow’s political influence in the Middle East and speed the growing convergence between Moscow and Tehran. In a First, Russia Uses an Iran Base for Its Syria Campaign

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/17/wo...yria.html?_r=0

[Big K]

since the birth of my daughter, i didnt sleep one night without smelling&kissing her hair. if i am away from home, her daily pictures & videos are constantly sent by her mother. she became the meaning, center & true purpose of my life...

then i saw this.

a little boy with fear in his eyes. looking around trying to understand what is happening. a little boy who is embarassed when he couldnt know where to wipe the blood on his hand which came from the open wound on his head...

it should be us, the rest of the world who should be embarassed.

the world is getting worse everyday and the ones who suffer the most are always the innocents and/or the children.

some months earlier toddlers found on the shores....yesterday in Diyarbakir, a mother was crying like this: "please bury my son (5yrs old) right next to his father. because he is afraid of dark"...today another child sits in an ambulance looking with eyes full of fear...

on the other side of the world another child is starting to a ballet class, another celebrates his/her birthday, another taking his first steps to the school...

everybody with a heart is sad somebody kills children for nothing and nobody can do anything about it...

[anil]

^

I don't know if you've already seen it but Liveleak is hosting videos of syrian children decapitating captured opposition residents under the guidance of elders.

Its a disturbing culture across this region.

[Big K]

^

I don't know if you've already seen it but Liveleak is hosting videos of syrian children decapitating captured opposition residents under the guidance of elders.

Its a disturbing culture across this region.

careful now. blaming a whole culture is not wise.

even a spoiled child is still a victim.

[gf0012-aust]

careful now. blaming a whole culture is not wise.

even a spoiled child is still a victim.

exactly. too much fog on all sides of the terrain for anyone to speak with confidence

as usual the innocent pay an unpalatable price.....

[chakos]

The video of that kid knocked me around. I'm usually Mr objective, rational and emotionless but I'm not too proud to say i drove home as fast as sensible and hugged my 2 year old till he started beating me on the head with his bottle to stop.

The world's fucked up...

[troung]

. Who Are The Turkey-backed Syrian Rebels?

August 25, 2016 8:40 PM
Sirwan Kajjo
FILE - A Free Syrian Army soldier stands on a Syrian military tank in front of a mosque, which were damaged during fighting with government forces, in the Syrian town of Azaz, on the outskirts of Aleppo, Sept. 23, 2012.
FILE - A Free Syrian Army soldier stands on a Syrian military tank in front of a mosque, which were damaged during fighting with government forces, in the Syrian town of Azaz, on the outskirts of Aleppo, Sept. 23, 2012.
Share
See comments
In its assault against the Islamic State group this week, Turkey empowered an Arab rebel force that originally was formed to fight the Syrian regime, mainly in the city of Aleppo.

The offensive against the IS-controlled town of Jarablus included at least 10 rebel factions that have been involved in different battles against President Bashar al-Assad’s forces since the war in Syria broke out in 2012.

The factions are loosely known as the Free Syrian Army (FSA), which began as a secular force mainly composed of soldiers who had defected from the Syrian military.

“These are a combination of Sunni Arab and Turkmen groups that have been entirely supported by Turkey,” said Mustafa Abdi, a Syrian media activist who closely followed the Jarablus offensive.

The 1,500 rebels in the assaults included those from the al-Sham Legion, Levant Front, Nureddine al-Zanki Battalions, Jaish al-Tahrir and Ahrar al-Sham — Islamist groups that have fought under the umbrella FSA.

Competing forces

The battle against IS in northern Syria involves a complex array of competing forces, some of which have U.S. support.

The operation to liberate Jarablus from IS fighters came less than two weeks after the U.S.-backed and Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces liberated the town of Manbij, another IS stronghold in the vicinity.

The Kurdish rebels have been a source of tension between the U.S., which views them as a key ally in the war in Syria, and Turkey, which sees them as terrorists allied with separatist Turkish Kurdish factions inside Turkey.

Fearing a Syrian Kurdish-led offensive on Jarablus, Turkey mobilized the rebels.

Jarablus, Syria
Jarablus, Syria

Sources told VOA that the operation was put together in less than 12 days and that rebels were taking instructions from the Turkish military. Turkish tanks led the way and were backed by U.S. bombers.

Kurdish forces retreated from the area, reportedly at the urging of U.S. officials. By Thursday, Kurdish forces had moved to their bases east of the Euphrates River, leaving Turkish forces and rebels to control the area around Jarablus.

“These Turkey-backed groups were deployed to the battle to push out IS and stop Kurdish advances at the same time,” said Rami Abdulrahman, head of the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, an anti-Assad group.

IS fighters gone

Most IS fighters had fled south to IS strongholds even before the Turkish operation reached the town.

There were small-scale confrontations between Syrian rebels and IS fighters, “with IS knowing that Turkey was there to win,” Abdulrahman said.

Turkish news reports said 46 IS fighters and two FSA fighters were killed.

The Turkish-backed FSA fighters are expected to move farther south into IS territory. They have announced plans to take control of the IS-held town of al-Bab.

“They have the capability to go after IS in the area,” Abdulrahman said, adding that they were fully trained by the Turks.

Rebel fighters reportedly were engaged in low-key clashes with Kurdish forces in southeastern Jarablus on Thursday. At some point, analysts say, Syrian rebel forces could confront Kurdish fighters.

“The Kurds lost hundreds of fighters in the Manbij [battle]. It would be difficult for them to withdraw after gaining all these vast territories from IS,” Abdulrahman said.

Kurdish forces said they were intent on protecting their territories.

“Regardless of what happens in Jarablus and elsewhere, Kurdish forces would continue defending our territories whether from IS, opposition groups or Assad military,” said Alan Shammo, a Kurdish official in northern Syria.

VOA's Kasim Cindemir contributed to this story from Washington

...

[troung]

Syria’s warlords were nobodies. Now they are rich men with sex slaves
As Isis lose ground the other Islamist militias have a vested interest in keeping the civil war going
Paul Wood
(Photo: Getty)
(Photo: Getty)

Paul Wood

6 August 2016

9:00 AM

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/syri ... ex-slaves/
The other day I was speaking to a Kurdish journalist who was held in Isis captivity for ten months. He and a colleague had had the bad luck to run into an Isis checkpoint in Syria. ‘How do you perform the midday prayer?’ they were asked after their car was waved to a halt. Unable to answer — they were not believers — they were immediately beaten around the head. Then one of the jihadis from the checkpoint was put into the back of their car and they were told to drive to the Isis base. The fighter had a pistol pointed at them the whole time, which was superfluous because he was also wearing a suicide belt. ‘Make a move and I’ll detonate myself,’ he said. ‘We’ll all die together.’

Paul Wood and Lara Prendergast discuss the Syrian crisis:

At the base, the emir, or commander, was so delighted to have two infidel prisoners that he got on to his radio to spread the good news. ‘All units, all units,’ he gleefully proclaimed: ‘We have two journalists. Thanks be to God.’ He ordered them to be handcuffed, blindfolded and taken to jail. It was the start of an ordeal of constant beatings and death threats that came to an end ten months later when the Kurds arranged a prisoner swap. Some time after they arrived in the cell, a new inmate joined them. It was the emir who had ordered their detention. It seems he had been declaring rich local Muslims to be infidels in order to steal their money — but had overplayed his hand and was now in his own jail.

The emir was a Syrian in his late twenties. When the revolution started he had volunteered for the Free Syrian Army. Next, he joined the al-Qaeda group in Syria, the Nusra Front. Finally, he defected to Isis, because they were closer to God, and because they gave him a car and a house. He spent his time in the cells abusing the other prisoners as infidels but mostly ‘all he wanted to talk about was girls’, said the Kurdish journalist. The emir’s story has many familiar elements: the journey from the FSA, through Nusra, to Isis; the greed and corruption of many in the revolution, including those who profess religious motives; and the risible hypocrisy — hilariously exposed by the emir’s sex-obsessed prison talk — of those wrapping themselves in a black flag to dictate the morals of others.

Many Islamic State fighters joined up because Isis were the strongest, richest and most successful group. But now that they look like losers, the defections are gathering pace, hastening the collapse of the ‘Caliphate’ predicted in this magazine in January and which may be starting to happen now. The latest loss is the important town of Manbij. The battle is still going on, but commanders of the advancing Kurdish forces say Isis fighters are shaving off their beards and trying to slip away among groups of refugees. Some have even been captured dressed as women. Only a month ago, according to local activists, Isis had publicly executed a whole family, including two children, for trying to flee.

Of course, even after the caliphate is gone, the so-called Islamic State’s jihad against the West will continue. In fact, as I wrote here in January, its death throes will be marked by more killing in the West, though it seems that the recent horrific attacks in France and Germany were the work of (possibly deranged) individuals, and only later claimed by the Isis leadership. Syria’s war without end will go on, too, because Isis occupies only one corner of a crowded battlefield. Earlier this year, a think-tank produced a handy graphic designed to explain the Syrian conflict. Different coloured lines showed who’s killing whom, who’s arming which side, and whose money keeps the war ticking along. It looked like the world’s most complicated cat’s cradle; it was also reminiscent of a circular firing squad.

The conflict grows steadily more complicated. Take the American offer to Russia of an alliance to carry out joint bombing raids against Nusra, that is to bomb al-Qaeda in Syria. Nusra then cunningly changed their name and announced they were severing the link to al-Qaeda. Many US officials think that is a con. But if the Americans do go ahead and bomb, it will be another example of the United States literally fighting on both sides of the war. Russian military sources recently said one of their helicopters in Syria had been shot down by an American TOW missile. It was supposedly fired by Isis — if so, it’s not clear how they got hold of it — but any of the rebel groups might have launched it. Russia is killing them in large numbers, along with even larger numbers of civilians, as part of its effort to keep President Assad in power.

American policy is still, officially, to depose President Assad. But if they join Russia in targeting the most effective anti-regime rebels, the group formerly known as Nusra, then the Russians will have more bombs left over to drop on the other rebels, the ones the Americans support. The madness extends further. The US airstrikes support the Kurdish militia in Syria, the YPG, because it is the most effective force against Isis. Yet the YPG is in a tacit alliance with the regime, and has found itself in skirmishes with the Arab rebels backed by the Americans. Both are now in a race to occupy territory vacated by Isis fighters as they retreat in northern Syria. And as the US-backed YPG moves through the north, it has come under artillery fire from Turkey, America’s Nato ally. Meanwhile, in the fight against Isis in Iraq, the US finds itself acting as the air force for Shia militias funded and directed by Iran.

It is not just the US that suffers from strategic incoherence. For years, Turkey let Isis keep safehouses and operate rat-lines for volunteers and supplies across its Syrian border. Isis were fighting the Kurds and Turkey’s logic, presumably, was that the jihadis would keep Kurdish nationalism in check. But now Isis suicide bombers are blowing themselves up in Turkey and there may be thousands of jihadi ‘sleepers’ in the country, according to one intelligence source. The Kurds in Syria have anyway managed to establish something that looks very much like their own state, encouraging a resurgence of the bitter conflict between Turkey and its Kurds across the border. (After last month’s failed coup, the Turkish military and security services are now occupied with internal matters rather than their fight with Isis or the Kurds.)

Starting, or escalating, a war with Turkey made no sense at all from the Islamic State’s point of view. Isis is believed to have carried out five to seven attacks in Turkey. The lesson of Afghanistan, and many other conflicts, is that it is almost impossible to defeat an insurgent group that has a rear safe area — yet this is exactly what Isis has denied itself in bringing the war to Turkish soil. It made no sense, either, for Isis to sacrifice so many of its fighters to the battle with Nusra. They have almost identical ideologies — indeed they were one organisation before they split — yet their side-war has often been bloody enough to overshadow the struggle with the regime.

Nusra, as it used to call itself, is coming out on top. According to some reports it has gained 3,000 to 4,000 recruits in northern Syria since spring. This is part of the reason the US proposed an attack, though it’s less than a year since the ex-CIA director and Afghanistan commander General David Petraeus was arguing that elements of Nusra could be peeled off to fight Isis alongside the Americans. If the US bombs now, that is likely to drive Nusra back to al-Qaeda.

The other big beneficiary of the current mess is President Assad. Increasingly, there are moves to rehabilitate him as the alternative to rule by the jihadis. For a long time it has been an article of faith among the dwindling numbers of the ‘moderate’ opposition that Assad incubated the jihadi movement, creating the enemy he needed to unite his own people and win international support. This was in fact exactly what had happened, the commander of one of the biggest Salafi rebel groups in Syria, told me once. He had been in prison before the uprising. He and his cellmates all went on to important leadership positions in Isis, Nusra, and other jihadi groups. They were all freed within weeks of street protests against the regime getting under way.

Some say all this is America’s fault. Firstly, at the start of the conflict, President Obama declared that Assad should go, encouraging many in the uprising to think they had a superpower ally and so victory was inevitable. Secondly, the US then failed to intervene decisively — letting Saudi and Kuwaiti donors put their imprint on the emerging armed groups. People in rebel-held areas did turn to the jihadis in 2013 when the Americans failed to bomb the regime, as President Obama had threatened after the chemical attacks outside Damascus. But the character of the armed uprising was always Islamist, or at least Islamic. The battle cry of every single armed group I met in about a dozen trips inside Syria was not ‘Democracy’ but ‘God is great’. This is one reason why a US training scheme produced ‘only four or five’ rebel fighters despite spending half a billion dollars, as an embarrassed general admitted to Congress last year. (Yes, those figures are correct.)

The US could not have changed the nature of the uprising, though it could perhaps have nudged it in a more moderate direction. This is clearly not going to happen while Obama sees out the last months of his presidency —but even a more engaged US president would struggle with the forces driving the conflict. All sides in the war have been corrupted and degraded by fighting it. Last month there was a report that the US-backed Noureddine Zinki Brigade in Aleppo had beheaded a 12-year-old boy in front of cheering bystanders. The child was said to have been captured while fighting for a pro-regime militia.

Syria’s agony will go on, not just because of big power politics but, more importantly, because so many rebel leaders had nothing — were nothing — before the war and now have everything. One brigade commander made bricks in the sun for a living and now drives a BMW. Two Yazidi sisters told me that the ‘emir’ who bought them as sex slaves had been the village odd job man, who used to beg their father for work. The emir who captured the Kurdish journalist may have ended up in jail, but there are many more like him, for whom war is a business. And business is good.

...

[kato]

Turkish forces have not just entered IS-held territory, but also crossed the border near Kobane into entirely Kurdish-held territory. As for ground forces, it so far seems like all Turkish forces do not expand their envelope beyond operating from Turkey itself.

Kurdish forces have destroyed three Turkish tanks near the border town of Jarablus in formerly IS-held territory according to CNN Türk and BBC. The death of one soldier in this engagement has been confirmed by Turkey.

[troung]

Brave moderates dealing with evil Kurds.
https://mobile.twitter.com/sergermed...63663129858049


Turkey crosses into Syria to keep open supply lines to their Islamist allies (and I guess ours), moves accepts the pratically bloodless handover of ISIS held positions, and begins to bomb the Kurds who fight ISIS.

Is Turkey a U.S. Ally Against ISIS?

By GONUL TOLAUG. 26, 2016
Continue reading the main story
Share This Page

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/26/op...inst-isis.html
Photo
A convoy of Turkish Army tanks heading toward the Syrian-Turkish border town of Jarabulus on Thursday. Credit Bulent Kilic/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

WASHINGTON — One might wonder how a country that recently survived a bloody coup attempt and multiple terrorist attacks could embark on a military incursion into a neighboring country. Yet this is exactly what Turkey has done.

In the early hours of Wednesday, Turkey sent tanks and warplanes across the border into Syria in a coordinated campaign with Western-backed Syrian opposition fighters to capture the town of Jarabulus, one of the Islamic State’s last strongholds on the Turkish border, which the Foreign Ministry had recently vowed to “cleanse” of the militant group.

But the operation seems to be aimed more at containing the territorial ambitions of the Syrian Kurds, which Turkey sees as its primary enemy in Syria.

Turkey views the Syrian Kurdish militia, the People’s Protection Units, or Y.P.G., as an extension of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party, a militant group that has been at war with the Turkish state for decades. It’s true that there are close ties between the groups. But it’s also true that in recent years, the Y.P.G. has become Washington’s most effective ally fighting against the Islamic State on the ground in Syria.

Turkey is worried that as the Kurds, supported by American air cover, expand westward in their war against the Islamic State, they could establish a corridor along the Turkish border stretching from Iraq to the Mediterranean. Control over that territory could fuel separatist ambitions among Kurds in Turkey. That’s why the Turkish government has been pressing the United States to end its cooperation with the Y.P.G. Ankara decided that a Turkish-led operation to take the border town would preclude an attack by the Kurdish forces.

The United States has not only supported Turkey’s bid to rein in Washington’s Kurdish allies, but has also delivered an unusual public denunciation of its ally the Y.P.G. on the day of the operation. Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who was visiting Turkey on Wednesday, warned that the United States would cut its support for the Kurds if they did not accede to Turkish demands to withdraw to the area east of the Euphrates River.

The joint offensive, as well as American reassurance that the Kurds should stay on their side of the river, might help ease tension over Turkish demands to extradite Fethullah Gulen, the Pennsylvania-based cleric whom Turkey accuses of orchestrating last month’s failed coup. But this could prove shortsighted. Abandoning the Kurds and encouraging Turkey’s incursions into Syria will only complicate America’s war against the Islamic State.

Turkey’s move into Syria carries a serious risk of “mission creep.” Turkey is not likely to withdraw if the Y.P.G. fails to retreat to the east of the Euphrates. If the Kurds do not back off, there is the real possibility of a serious clash between two of Washington’s critical allies.

The Kurdish militia remains Washington’s best bet on the ground. Given their track record, Western-backed Syrian opposition fighters are unlikely to hold the territory they captured along the Turkish border. With its diminished capacity after the failed coup, Turkey’s military may not be able to get the job done either. In the wake of the mutiny, the Turkish government has purged thousands of military personnel, leaving the military weaker and more divided.

The United States now faces a dilemma: On one hand, it needs continued access to Turkey’s Incirlik air base, a key nexus in the campaign against the Islamic State. It also needs Turkey to keep jihadist fighters from traveling through the country on their way into and out of Syria. On the other hand, the United States needs the Syrian Kurds to continue battling Islamic State forces in Syria.

To get out of this quandary, Washington must push the Turkish government for a return to peace talks with its own Kurds, which collapsed last summer. The recent coup attempt has not caused either side of the conflict to rethink its escalation strategy. The government has excluded the pro-Kurdish party from post-coup national unity efforts, and the Turkish military and Kurdish militants have continued battling in the country’s southeast. If Turkey fails to find a peaceful resolution to its Kurdish problem, it will keep seeing the Kurds in Syria as an existential threat and continue attacking the Y.P.G., undermining the United States’ efforts against the Islamic State.

To force Turkey to the negotiating table with its Kurds, the United States has to offer it something. Turkey’s No. 1 demand is Mr. Gulen’s immediate extradition. This will be hard to deliver. Extradition involves a lengthy legal and technical process.

But the United States could instead offer Turkey a closer military partnership. Ankara has long wanted to purchase armed Predator drones from the United States, something that has faced opposition in Congress. The Turkish government has also sought cooperation with Washington on defense technology. By working closely with Turkey on these issues, the United States could ease some of Turkey’s security concerns and show the Turkish government it is committed to its security.

This might provide Washington the leverage to persuade Ankara to take a step to resolve its Kurdish issue. That would remove a major irritant in Turkey-United States relations and allow both parties to focus on the biggest concern: fighting the Islamic State.

If the US gives Turkey predator drones those would end up providing CAS support for Turkey's AQ proxies and other Islamist allies.