Russia has declared war on any groups opposed to the regime of Bashar al-Assad; who are they?

Link: Russian missiles crash in Iran.

Russia is demonstrating its military capabilities in the Syrian theater, by launching multiple bombing raids and missile launches, targeting ISIS positions.  After initially focusing on internal Syrian opposition targets, Russia has expanded its hit list to include ISIS-held positions.  The missile barrage, launched from Russian warships in the Caspian Sea, was apparently intended to reinforce the message that not only does Russia have the determination to conduct all-out war, it also has the capacity and reach to do so.  Although the Russians have started conducting bombing sorties against ISIS forces, the Free Syrian Army, an anti-Assad organization with very close ties to the United States, was also among today's targets.  As the Russians become more familiar with the Syrian political environment, they will realize that the participants in this conflict are not limited to the Islamic State, Jabhat al-Nusra, the Free Syrian Army, Syrian Kurds, and forces loyal to de facto President Bashar al-Assad.  Since Russia has declared war on all the organizations opposing the Syrian Ba'ath Party and Assad, lets review some of the groups who are determined to implement regime change in Damascus:


Aleppo Province:
Aleppo Conquest is an anti-regime, anti-ISIS group that is singularly focused on    
the liberation of Aleppo City.
 Ansar al-Sharia is also active in Aleppo and is opposed to the Assad regime.  But Ansar al-Sharia is a fundamentalist group with possible ties to ISIS.  Their goal is to introduce Sharia Law to Aleppo City.
The group Euphrates Volcano is an interesting group, who do not necessarily oppose the Assad government, but fights against ISIS and other Islamist and Kurdish extremist factions.

Idlib Province:
Jaysh al-Fatah Idlib is exclusively focused on eliminating all regime forces in Idlib Province.
The group Battle of Victory is opposed to the Assad regime, and is determined to occupy the city of Jisr al-Shughour.

Hama Province:
Jaysh al-Fatah Idlib is also active in Hama Province, and is determined to keep the Sahel al-Ghab plain from remaining in government hands.
Jaysh L-Nasr is opposed to the Assad regime, and can be found in small units, operating throughout Syria.

Homs Province:
Victory of the Oppressed is opposed to both the Assad regime and ISIS, and works to provide support to the local population.

Damascus Province:
The Eastern Ghouta Unified Command is a group focused on liberating the Eastern Ghouta suburb of Damascus from regime occupation.  Ghouta envisions a community without the Assad puppets, that provides representation and works to improve the lives of the local population.
One Flag Alliance is dedicated to the total overthrow of the Assad regime.
Jaysh al-Fatah Qalamoun fights to liberate the Qalamoun region from regime and Hezbollah forces. The Gathering of Western Qalamoun is also opposed to the Assad regime and the presence of Hezbollah in Syria.
The Eastern Qalamoun Operations Room is opposed to both the regime and ISIS.

Dera'a and Quneitra Province:
Jaysh al-Harmoun is focused on eliminating the Assad regime elements southwest of Damascus. Jaysh al-Fatah al-Janoub fights to liberate the suburbs of Western Ghouta in Damascus from the Assad Regime.
The Southern Front is opposed to tyranny and extremism, and fights to bring representative government to the Syrian people.

What can we expect if Bashir al-Assad is forced to abandon Damascus?

Links: A. Assad forces losing more ground in Syria.
           B. Assad's weaknesses being exploited.


Everyday the headlines bring news of more territory lost to pro-government forces, as the hodge-podge of various anti-Assad groups push closer and closer to Damascus. In recent weeks, Jabhat al-Nusra (JN), a well-organized group that many identify as Al-Qaeda's proxy in the Syrian conflict, has taken the lead, and delivered a string of defeats to the regular Syrian Army near the northwest town of Idlib.  Syria's second-largest city of Aleppo, which is just north of Idlib, presently is not controlled by either side.  Within the last year, regime forces have suffered losses in every corner of the country.  The Iraqi border area is controlled by the Islamic State, while the northeast border with Turkey appears to be under mostly Kurdish control.  The Jordanian border area in the southwest has seen a successful push by Jabhat al-Nusrah as of late, with the regime no longer able to claim control of any of the towns.

Although I have argued on numerous occasions that the IS, JN, and the Khorosan group were basically separate digits connected to the same hand, the hand of Ayman al-Zawahiri and Al-Qaeda.  I have always based my opinion on the strong historic links between all the groups and Al-Qaeda, and the usefulness of having the enemy imagine ten separate opponents on the battlefield as opposed to one.  In truth, I'm sure these groups do have certain issues of ideology or ceremony that aren't the same, but at the end of the day, they share they same basic goal: creating an Islamic Extremist state in Syria (and the entire Levant, for that matter).  Interestingly enough, now that the Kurds have solidified their defensive positions in the north eastern border region, all of these groups can focus exclusively on regime military targets.  I would imagine that if they truly were opposed to each other, then we would eventually see some sign of conflict; it's human nature.  Even the nebulous "Free Syrian Army", equipped and trained by the United States, appears to be focused on Syrian military units.  In a nutshell, Its all against one.

If the regime is unable to respond effectively, what can be expected?  Right now, Assad's control basically is limited to everything west of the Anti-Lebanon Mountain Range, which includes the entire Mediterranean coast, and the area around Damascus, although the Yarmouk refugee camp just outside Damascus has apparently been co-opted by the IS.  As difficult as it is to imagine, Assad controls roughly one-eighth of Syria, the enemy is collecting at the gates.  No doubt, when it becomes necessary, Assad and his family will be able to find asylum in Iran, Oman, or some friendly country, and plenty of money has been squirrelled away in various banks to keep him and his henchmen living comfortably for the remainder of their days.  The question is, will Assad recognize the moment, when the time has come to abandon ship?  He has shown a great deal of determination in the past, and he has stayed in Damascus when many others would have left. 

Who picks up the pieces?  Will it be Jabhat al-Nusrah?  Or possibly Al-Qaeda, or the Islamic State?  Don't put your hopes on the Free Syrian Army.  As soon as the U.S. money goes away, these guys will disappear into the hills.  I believe that the Islamic State will take charge, and the experts will begin to consider that maybe these groups weren't so far apart after all.  While the IS solidifies its position, maybe Angela Merkel and President Obama and convene a summit to enact sanctions. One thing is certain; whatever military resources that will be made available because of the end of hostilities in Syria, will quickly make their way to the battlefields of Iraq.  

Extremists On The Offensive In Syria

Links: A. Al-Nusra Front, Ahrar al Sham Advance In Syria
           B. Islamic State Advances On Deir al Zour

Lately I've had to come to grips with the fact that I was wrong regarding certain events in Syria.  Last month I repeatedly raised expectations that forces loyal to de facto Syrian President Bashir al-Assad would have had the opportunity to refit and reorganize.  I opined that Russian military aid would have allowed the Syrian Armed Forces to reconstitute its armor brigades and possibly rebuild the Syrian Air Force.  The Allied air campaign should have occupied the Islamic State (ISIL) and the various other armed groups enough to allow the regular Syrian Army an opportunity to regain the strategic initiative, I hypothesized.  It appears that I was mistaken.  Even though in late November the international media printed a number of stories indicating a slow down in ISIL military advances, the reality is that the extremist groups were on the move just about everywhere. 

For some reason, the press and media continue to separate the groups who make up the Islamic extremist element in Syria.  Wasn't there a recognition in October that Al-Nusra, ISIL, Ahrar al Sham (and whoever else wants to throw their hat into the ring) are loyal to Al-Qaeda?  And yet we continue to see Al-Nusra being given the mantle of "Al-Qaeda's representative in Syria", as if we are referring to a Lodge meeting in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.  Unless I see some usefulness in doing so, I will not refer to separate Islamic extremist factions in Syria.  I have a good idea why the U.S. media (eager to do the bidding of this administration) continues to perpetrate the falsehood that their is some significant difference between these groups. Qatar (and possibly the UAE as well), who has a couple jets involved in the "anti-ISIS" air campaign, has been suspected of supporting some of these other groups in the past.  Qatar wants to be seen as only bombing ISIL targets, because ISIL's message of an enlarged Caliphate is dangerous to the existing Gulf royal families.  Qatar wants to continue its "clandestine" support for these other groups, though, so they will only participate in ther bombing of ISIL targets.  If someone has evidence that Qatar and the UAE contingents in the air campaign have indeed participated in action against non-ISIL targets, please let me know.  Actually, I'm not even sure of the United States is bombing non-ISIL targets (although you would think that "Al-Qaeda's representative in Syria" would be in line for some sort of attention).

What a mess.  We can be certain of one thing: the regular Syrian forces have been taking a beating in the northwestern province of Idlib and eastern province of Deir al Zour.  Interestingly enough, the extremists have been making effective use of American-made TOW anti-tank missiles in action against Syrian armor.  Will I be the first to consider just how the TOW anti-tank missiles ended up the hands of the extremists?  Were they originally the property of the Free Syrian Army that is being supported and armed by the United States?  Assad can only be ringing his hands in despair as the U.S.-led air campaign seems to be having no impact on the Islamic extremists offensives against the few remaining government positions outside of Damascus.  I'm one of those folks who likes to look at a big map and envision the various military elements and positions accordingly.  I have spent a decent amount of time focusing on the regular Syrian Army, and I think I'm beginning to get a grasp on the three main groups that constitute the Islamic extremist forces.  But I'm totally in the dark regarding the army that the United States government was planning on training in place of U.S. ground forces.  Last summer we were told that the United States military would be training and equipping the "Free Syrian Army" (sometimes called the "New Syrian Army").  If my memory serves me correctly, this military force was led by a group of former regime officers who were both secular and opposed to Assad.  Money was allotted for the training and equipping of this army, and I recall the Pentagon supposing that it would take somewhere around four months to stand-up the Free Syrian Army.  In October, my understanding of the situation was shaken like an Etch-a-Sketch.  The Pentagon released a statement declaring that the Free Syrian Army would be a force utilized for defensive operations only.  Then a few days later, I recall news reports indicating that elements of the free Syrian Army had been involved in a battle with ISIS, and came away the worse for it.  Was this a "defensive only" engagement? 

If I could get the answers to a few simple questions, my understanding of the conflict would be increased measurably.  What is the state of the Free Syrian Army?  Does it exist, is it active, and will the Pentagon confirm its previous statement that the Free Syrian Army has definite rules of engagement that limit is capabilities to defensive action only?  Is it true that the Qatari government requested rules of engagement for its contribution to the air campaign, which would exempt Qatari jets from bombing any targets other than ISIL?  If so, does the UAE, Kuwait or Bahrain have the same prohibition sewn into their agreement to be part of the Allied air coalition?  I can't help but feel a bit lost on the Syrian front.  The last time I spent much time on this part of the map, the Kurds were besieged by ISIL in Kobane; has this situation in Kobane changed?  Its true I have been keeping a closer eye on developments in Iraq, as the growing Iranian involvement has me reconsidering my prediction that Baghdad would eventually fall to ISIL.  The Iranians have the capacity to defeat ISIL hands-down.  At the same time, the Iranian government might decide to climb back into its hole and pull back its resources.  When it comes to efforts to obtain weapons-grade Uranium, the Iranians are easy to predict.  But when it comes to the deployment of its military, Iran can vacillate with the best of them.   

Its Time To Get To Know Jabhat al-Nusrah

Links: A. Al-Nusrah Claims That U.S. Has Bombed Its Territory
           B. Al-Nusrah Front, Jun al-Aqsa Terrorist Groups In Idlib
           C. Al-Nusrah Forces U.S.-Backed Group From Idlib

We've managed to dissect just about every player in Syria except Jabhat al-Nusrah (Al-Nusrah Front), the regular Syrian Army, and the Free Syrian Army. 

The Regular Syrian Army

The regular Syrian Army consists of whatever Syrian President Bashir al-Assad has been able to patch together from the pre-war Syrian Army.  The Syrian Air Force has been decimated and will have to be rebuilt from scratch (which isn't necessarily that difficult if you have the cash to buy new jets from Russia), but the Army, which has basically been inactive over the past few months, really only needs reorganizing and a strong leader who can inspire men to fight.  Syria continues to have an absurd advantage in armor over all the players in this drama, and I imagine a great deal has been done to repair vehicles/tanks and train new soldiers.  For Assad, the allied air intervention was like water to the man in the desert dying of thirst.  He has been given a reprieve, and I have no doubt that he has been making the most of this down-time.  We can't forget that Russia continues to support the Syrian government in Damascus.  Vlad Putin is also grateful of the allied air campaign because the situation in Syria was becoming dire for Assad and his Ba'athist buddies.  The IS was making preparations for an assault on Aleppo, which would have only been the precursor to an attack on Damascus itself.  The Syrian Air Force, with most of its Air Bases overrun by the IS and other Islamic terrorist groups, had basically collapsed (with the exception of a few helicopter gunships, which Assad loves to call into action).  Without air

support, the army had lost its eyes and was finding itself caught in one ambush after another.  But the regular Syrian Army has been given the opportunity to retreat behind the front lines and lick its wounds, while the Kurds struggle against the IS in Kobani and forces supported by the U.S.(?) are driven out of Idlib (were the elements that were routed in Idlib connected to the Free Syrian Army?).  Make no mistake, when the time is most advantageous to Assad, his military will return to the battlefield, and don't be surprised if Putin has assisted in rebuilding the Syrian Air Force.

The Free Syrian Army

What about the Free Syrian Army (forgive me; for some time I was referring to this group as the "New Syrian Army")?  We digested news reports last week from Idlib (see link C) that detailed the rout of U.S.-backed fighters.  Were these fighters part of the Free Syrian Army that we are supposed to be training and wasn't supposed to be operational for at least another month?  And what about the statement from the Pentagon that the Free Syrian Army would be deployed in a defensive capacity only.  Were "our" fighters in Idlib in a defensive posture before they were run out of town?  Maybe this is a different group, and this is an indication that we are training other military elements that will have a more "offensive" plan of action.  I find this hypothesis to be the most hard to believe, because until now the Obama Administration has been very generous sharing every last detail of its intentions.  I see no reason to believe that the leopard has changed his spots; why train others as offensive pieces on the board, but leave the main body of your forces, the Free Syrian Army, in a purely defensive posture?  I am surprised that we don't have more information regarding the Free Syrian Army, especially regarding its timetable.  I can't help but wonder if this Free Syrian Army, in its effort to be "defensive", is going to get caught between the various Islamic groups in the east, and a reconstituted regular Syrian military in the west.

Jabhat al-Nusrah (Al-Nusrah Front)

The first two links I chose to share provide important details regarding Jabhat al-Nusrah, or the Nusrah Front.  The press, in its daily effort to retweet all the propaganda fed to it by the terrorist groups via social media, continues to remind us that al-Nusrah is the Al-Qaeda representative in Syria and that they are not friends with the IS whatsoever.  Common sense, and a career of working against Islamic terror groups, leads me to suspect that someone is falling hook, line  and sinker for the most obvious of disinformation campaigns.  Khorasan hates al-Nusrah and al-Nusrah hates the Islamic State and since al-Nusrah is the representative of Al-Qaeda in Syria (?), then Al-Qaeda must also hate the Islamic State.  Please, folks....listen carefully and try to see the truth in all its simplicity.  All of these groups are Sunni affiliated and all have historic Al-Qaeda connections of one type or another.  The Islamic State of the Levant was called Al-Qaeda in Iraq not to long ago, for goodness sake.  I think the decision by the Qatari Air Force to only bomb targets selectively (no Al-Nusrah targets, please) was part of the effort to convince us that there is freedom of thought and movement in its each individual group.  I don't accept this; as far as I'm concerned they are all Sunni terrorist groups who prey upon the weak and helpless.  In fact, our military would be best served by keeping all these groups under one header: "THE ENEMY", and let the CTC analysts at Langley worry about the personalities within.

Back to Jabhat al-Nusrah.  This group announced its formation in Syria in January 2012, and states that its end goal is the creation of a Pan-Islamic State under Sharia Law and ruled by a Caliph.  If we switched out "Jabhat al-Nusrah" with "Islamic State of the Levant", who would know the difference?  And yet, according to Twitter, the international media, and the Pentagon, the two groups are at each other's throats.  It is believed that many of the original members of Al-Nusrah are Syrians who were fighting with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's "Al-Qaeda in Iraq" (AQI) group during Operation Enduring Freedom.  The members of Al-Nusrah are believed to be the best trained and the best equipped of all the Sunni Extremist groups in the Syria/Iraq theater.  Al-Nusrah is known for conducting suicide attacks.  The leader of the Islamic State, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and the head of Al-Nusrah, Abu Mohammad al-Julani, appear to have had numerous discussions about the merging of the two groups.  According to Al-Jazeera, Ayman al-Zawahiri, the only remaining leader of Al-Qaeda without two bullet holes in his forehead (so far), instructed the two groups not to merge.  Al-Baghdadi ignored this instruction and continued to publicly declare a merger between the two.  Since they appear to be separate today, I'm assuming al-Julani won that argument.  But lets be honest; who really gives a shit about any of the back-and-forth that I just repeated (direct from Wikipedia)?  Al-Nusrah is on the battlefield in Syria, its fighters are well-trained, disciplined, and like to blow themselves up for Allah.  Much of the same can be said for the Islamic State, so as far as I see it, we are looking at two peas in a pod.  When the bullets start to fly, I guarantee that these two groups (and any other Sunni-affiliated armed extremist groups) will join ranks.  To be honest, the war in Syria means very little to me.  The Russians will find a way to protect their interests in the end, so I am forced to accept that Assad isn't going anywhere.  My interest is in Iraq, where we have easily identified allies in the Iraqi military and the Peshmerga/Kurdish regular forces.  Actually, it becomes more apparent everyday that Iranian military units have been participating in the war against IS.  From Assad in Syria to the Iranians in Iraq, we keep ending up with the strangest of bedfellows!  I recognize that the Iraqi Army has been strengthened by groups of both Shia militia and Sunni tribal fighters.  I see a real opportunity in Iraq to defeat Al-Qaeda/IS, solidify the Kurdish homeland, and greatly improve Sunni/Shia relations.  Insha'Allah!