dw.com
HTS Aleppo Takeover: Assad Receives External Support Amidst Regional Instability
Following the capture of Aleppo by the Sunni Islamist group Hayyat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is receiving support from Iraq and Russia, while Turkey's backing of HTS raises concerns about regional stability and the resettlement of Syrian refugees.
- How are the weakened alliances of Bashar al-Assad affecting the current conflict, and what role is Turkey playing?
- The success of HTS is attributed to their strategic timing, exploiting the weakening of Assad's allies—Iran and Hezbollah due to the war with Israel, and Russia due to the war in Ukraine. HTS consolidated its position as a leading force in western Syria, allowing for a powerful offensive, and has reportedly rearmed with drones and missile systems potentially supplied via Turkey.
- What is the immediate impact of Hayyat Tahrir al-Sham's seizure of Aleppo on the Syrian conflict and regional stability?
- Following the recent takeover of Aleppo by Hayyat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a Sunni Islamist group, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is receiving external support. Approximately 200 pro-Iranian fighters from Iraq have crossed the border to aid Syrian government forces against HTS. Russia has also pledged continued support, with joint airstrikes already conducted.
- What are the potential long-term consequences of HTS's territorial gains, considering Turkey's ambitions and the possible resurgence of the conflict?
- The long-term implications include a potential destabilization of the region as HTS seeks to expand its influence and establish a "salvation government". Turkey's support for HTS likely aims to expand its influence in northeastern Syria and create a larger buffer zone to resettle Syrian refugees. The situation remains volatile, with the extent of future Russian and Iranian support uncertain.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The narrative frames the HTS offensive as a significant threat to Assad's regime, emphasizing the potential consequences for Assad and his allies. While acknowledging Assad's external support, the article doesn't fully explore the potential benefits or motivations behind the HTS advance beyond the stated goals of weakening Assad and Iran.
Language Bias
The article uses terms like "jihadists," "radical Islamist group," and "extremists" to describe HTS, which are loaded terms carrying negative connotations. More neutral terms like "rebel group," or specifying the group's stated aims would offer a less biased tone. Additionally, referring to the Syrian opposition as a coalition "linked to Turkey" subtly implies negative foreign influence.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the perspectives of experts and analysts, potentially overlooking the experiences and voices of ordinary Syrian citizens affected by the conflict. The views of those living under HTS control, for example, are largely absent beyond the mention of potential fear of repression.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplified view of the conflict as a struggle between Assad and HTS, overlooking the complexities of involvement from other actors, such as Turkey, Iran, and Russia, and the diverse range of Syrian groups involved.
Gender Bias
The article lacks specific examples of gender bias. While mentioning the restrictions on women's rights under HTS rule, this point is not developed. More information would be needed to assess gender representation fully.