By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following the rebel recapture of Aleppo, a newly formed coalition achieved another significant victory by seizing control of Hama, a strategically crucial city in central Syria. The Syrian army’s withdrawal followed intense fighting and heavy casualties. This offensive marks a major resurgence of the civil war, reversing years of relative dormancy and posing a considerable threat to the Assad regime. Rebels declared their intention to push further south, targeting Homs.
Read the original article here
Syrian rebels’ swift capture of Hama is astonishing, a remarkably rapid military operation completed in a matter of days. This victory, achieved by a coalition of rebel groups including Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and the Syrian National Army, represents a significant strategic gain. Hama’s location at a major intersection connecting Syria’s central, northern, eastern, and western regions makes its control pivotal, dramatically shifting the balance of power in the ongoing conflict.
The speed of the rebel advance has left many observers stunned. The seemingly effortless takeover raises questions about the effectiveness, or perhaps the corruption, within Assad’s forces. Their failure to adequately fortify or defend such a crucial city suggests serious vulnerabilities within the regime. This stands in stark contrast to the protracted battles seen in Ukraine, where Russia has struggled to gain ground even in smaller villages. The stark difference highlights the differing levels of competency and perhaps motivation among various warring factions.
This success isn’t just a military achievement; it represents a considerable blow to Russia and its allies, including Iran. The rebels’ quick victory undermines Russia’s influence in Syria and casts doubt on its ability to effectively support its allies. The implications extend further, potentially destabilizing the region and altering the dynamics of power struggles between regional and global players. Putin’s ongoing war in Ukraine may have inadvertently weakened his influence in the Middle East, allowing this rebel offensive to gain momentum.
The composition of the rebel forces raises serious concerns. While some view the rebels as freedom fighters challenging the Assad regime, others rightfully point out their association with extremist groups, including those with links to al-Qaeda and even historical ties to the events of 9/11. This raises the troubling prospect of a future where these “rebels” pose a significant terrorist threat to the West, echoing past patterns of support for proxy forces that later turn against their backers. The situation showcases the complex and often contradictory nature of alliances and proxy wars.
The international implications are profound. The US’s past involvement, including support for groups that later became enemies, is a relevant historical parallel. The potential consequences of the rebels’ victory are far-reaching, raising questions about the future stability of Syria and the broader Middle East. The possibility of the rebels targeting ISIS territory or even Russian military bases adds a dangerous element of unpredictability to the situation.
The future trajectory of the Syrian Civil War remains uncertain, though Assad’s prospects appear bleak. With the fall of Hama, Damascus might be the next target. However, the possibility of further Russian intervention remains. The involvement of Turkey, and its ambition to eliminate Kurdish forces, adds another layer of complexity to the conflict. The long-term ramifications are difficult to predict, but the current state of affairs suggests a significantly altered geopolitical landscape.
The quick victory also invites speculation about rebel funding and the acquisition of advanced weaponry, like tanks. The apparent resurgence of these groups after several years of relative inactivity adds to the mystery. Where this advanced armament came from, and the individuals or states providing financial support, remain significant unanswered questions.
Beyond the immediate military implications, the fall of Hama highlights a wider moral and ethical dilemma. Supporting rebels, even against a brutal dictator like Assad, risks empowering groups with potentially violent ideologies that might become future threats. The West’s complex relationship with proxy forces in the Middle East has a long, often problematic, history, and the Syrian civil war serves as a troubling reminder. This isn’t a simple narrative of good versus evil; it’s a complex conflict with numerous actors pursuing their own interests, some of which are far from benevolent. The potential long-term consequences of the rebels’ victory, and the involvement of Western powers, necessitate careful consideration. The focus needs to be shifted to long-term stability rather than simply celebrating a short-term victory against Assad. The reality is that this “victory” might merely represent the beginning of an even more perilous chapter in the Syrian conflict.