Saturday, March 24, 2018

A Syrian Army Defector Explains Why The Assad Regime Keeps On Winning Territory

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad meets with Syrian army soldiers in eastern Ghouta, Syria, March 18, 2018. SANA/Handout via REUTERS

Ruth Sherlock, NPR: How The Syrian Regime Keeps Winning Territory, From An Army Defector's Perspective

Dressed in a sharp black suit, Syrian President Bashar Assad smiles for selfies with his soldiers against a backdrop of blown-out buildings and a battered tank. Weary-looking men crowd around him and chant the slogan frequently heard on this side of the country's war: "With our spirit and our blood, we will free you Bashar!"

This week, pro-regime media posted photos and videos of Assad visiting what they claimed was a town regime forces had recently captured in eastern Ghouta, an area east of the capital Damascus.

The message was clear: Assad is projecting confidence that the region will soon surrender to his control.

Even as the regime makes gains elsewhere in the country, tens of thousands of heavily armed rebels in eastern Ghouta — just miles from the presidential palace in the capital — continue to pose a serious threat.

Read more
....


WNU Editor: A must read for those who want to know what is happening on the ground in Syria.

3 comments:

efFlh43 said...

// Posting in two part because of lenght

It's more of the bitterness that talk from this defector, who while were under the siege did not really paid attention of how the war going. SAA gaining ground on the back of military thinking and strategy, while rebels during the entirety of the war made cell based, local decisions and did not commit to a bigger picture. Back in the beginning when FSA tried to create some form of a command hierarchy, and created the 5 "fronts" to coordinate the rebel force, that at the start actually worked, since SAA was caught off-guard and got overwhelmed quickly, but with FSA falling apart and local, more and more radical alliances emerged the big picture just was not there anymore.


The rebel offensive against Damascus started very well, the original idea was great, and the only reason that they could not advance further into the city was because of the 4th Armored Division and the Republican Guard were originally trained to defend Damascus. There was a point back in 2012-13 that not only the M1 route was cut ( that connected Damascus with the North ), but also the valley toward Zamadani / Lebanon was under rebel hand, East Ghouta was captured, the Airport was under siege, roads to the south were cut, and Damascus was surrounded in like 270 degree, and yet rebels were able to throw away the victory by instead of keeping up the pressure just started to wait for Assad to step down. When the tide turned in the urban fighting and SAA started to encircle the multiple advance axis of the rebels, and deal with them separately, that was the beginning of the end, where we are now, but it could have been differently.


This defector well represent the military thinking of the rebels, of how can you lie to yourself the winning, while being encircled, cut off from supply, food, electricity, water and clearly no possibility that anyone ever will come to your help to break the siege on you. Does a fish in the net think he is winning against the fisherman? When the Damascus front started to fall apart, the encirclement of East Ghouta has started, and some rebel forces known that it would not worth being under siege, so they tried to break out, and fight back against the encirclement, but they lacked the will to commit more to this battle. The area of Otayba seen heavy outbreak attempts but all failed, including the escaping ones, like the famous Hezbollah ambushed that targeted a large group of rebels ( youtu.be/BVDPX4m4jts ). But it should not have been this way, retreating is no defeat, taking a fight that you cannot win is. Every such pocket, not only Damascus, but Zabadani, Homs, Aleppo ended the same way, it's only a matter of time, that is how war works.

efFlh43 said...

// Continuation of the previous post



Encirclement is not the end, we seen many successful hold where the siege was broke. Rebels from East Ghouta broke out multiple times but only in small amounts. The most successful breakout was maybe the one where Rebels from the inside advanced toward North, crossed the M1 route, captured the military/industrial complex on the other side of the route then crossed the Qalamun mountain's ridge and headed toward Rankos/Lebanon border ( at the time this area north from that ridge was already mostly been recaptured by SAA, but since it's largely underpopulated desert it was only secured by NDF forces, and small rebel groups could move on the area undetected). The Aleppo siege-break attempt of the rebels was maybe the most well known, but the general idea of it was wrong so it did not achieved much. SAA had dozens of their forces encircled, many were lifted ( like Aleppo Central Prison, Kweres Air Base, Nubl/Zarah ) and some were not ( many air/military bases under rebel areas like Menagh, the 17th Division's base in Raqqa ). Encirclement itself is not a decider right away but it have to be handled well for good result.


Those who see the evacuation of the rebels as victory are mistaken, mislead. This is war, where decisions are made, or supposed to be made based on logic, and in case of SAA by military thinking ( with the assistance of their allies ). Taha from the article is right, they are being sent from fire to fire, it's only their defeat/death is that postponed, and only because it's easier to fight the rebels in less populated rural areas, than in a dense city. This move reduce the collateral damage, the civilian casualties and also the losses of SAA while under the "ceasfire agreement of Idlib area" SAA also gain time to focus on other fronts. Don't count on emotion, international outrages, diplomatic counter-steps, UN speeches, photoes, articles shared tens of thousands of times in the west, those don't matter in a war that rages for 7 years already. Those that are sent to Idlib are there to be contained, and will be dealt with when other parts of the Syria, like the still remaining Homs rural pocket, Daraa, Quneitra, and the East Qalamun pocket are liberated. When the gig is up SAA will attach Idlib, and meanwhile they just let the rebels to fight themselves, Al-Qaede, the Kurds, and let their morals and dreams drop so low the emigrate, and gives up the fighting.

Unknown said...

"only because it's easier to fight the rebels in less populated rural areas, than in a dense city. "

BINGO!

Also it is a big help to Assad, Hezbollah and Iran to kill 200,000 people in dribs and drabs over a few years than to kill say 200,000 surrounded people in a few weeks in a cauldron battle.

If you kill too many people too quickly then certain ilk are put on notice that they have to take notice and actually do something.

They would rather do nothing.

Well actually they are not doing nothing. They are doing something. Palfrey no doubt has been replaced and peole of both parties are busy enriching friends and family.