lexpress.fr
HTS Captures Most of Aleppo in Major Syrian Offensive
Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a jihadist group, and allied rebels captured most of Aleppo, Syria's second-largest city, in a three-day offensive, exploiting the Syrian regime's weakness due to Hezbollah's withdrawal to Lebanon and facing regular Israeli airstrikes; this is the largest attack in years.
- What are the immediate consequences of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham's swift seizure of Aleppo?
- Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a jihadist group, and allied rebels seized control of most of Aleppo, Syria's second-largest city, in a three-day offensive. This is the most significant violence in years, resulting from the Syrian regime's weakened state and the absence of effective countermeasures. The swift takeover surprised observers due to the regime's inability to mount a significant defense.
- How did the regional context, specifically involving Hezbollah and Israel, contribute to the success of the HTS offensive?
- The attack exploited the vulnerability of the Syrian regime, weakened by the withdrawal of Hezbollah forces to Lebanon and facing regular Israeli airstrikes. HTS's strategic move aimed to alleviate pressure on Idlib, where it governs 3 million displaced people with limited resources, and to improve its negotiating position. The absence of a substantial response from the Syrian army highlights its inability to conduct urban warfare.
- What are the potential long-term implications of this offensive for the Syrian conflict and the regional balance of power?
- The capture of Aleppo marks a major setback for the Assad regime, potentially destabilizing his power. HTS now controls vast military equipment and territory, enhancing its military capacity and negotiating leverage. The conflict's volatility has increased, resembling the fluidity of 2013, with uncertain implications for regional stability and future power dynamics.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing emphasizes the military successes of HTS and the failures of the Assad regime. The rapid collapse of the Assad regime's defenses is highlighted throughout, presenting the HTS victory as decisive and unexpected, potentially shaping the readers interpretation of the event as a more significant blow to Assad than it might be.
Language Bias
While the article uses factual language, the repeated emphasis on terms like "effondrement" (collapse), "débandade" (rout), and "défaite massive" (massive defeat) when describing the Assad regime's actions may subtly influence the reader's perception. While accurate descriptions, these words are emotionally charged. More neutral language could improve objectivity.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the military and strategic aspects of the conflict, giving less attention to the humanitarian consequences for civilians caught in the crossfire. While the suffering of displaced persons in Idlib is mentioned, the impact of the recent offensive on the civilian population of Aleppo is not explicitly addressed. This omission could leave the reader with an incomplete understanding of the full consequences of the conflict.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplified view of the conflict as a struggle between the Assad regime and Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), overlooking the involvement of other actors such as Turkey, Russia, Iran, and other rebel groups. The narrative does not fully explore the complexities of alliances and shifting power dynamics that shape the conflict. The portrayal of HTS as either a purely revolutionary force or a terrorist organization, depending on the perspective presented, is a potential false dichotomy.
Gender Bias
The article primarily focuses on political and military figures and analysis, with little attention paid to the gender dynamics of the conflict or the experiences of women. There is no explicit gender bias but a more inclusive analysis would benefit the report.