dw.com
IS Claims First Attacks on New Syrian Security Forces
The Islamic State (IS) claimed responsibility for two attacks targeting new Syrian security forces in Al-Suweida's desert on May 22nd and 28th, 2025, using explosives; this is the first time IS claimed such attacks since the December 2024 fall of Bashar al-Assad, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR).
- What factors contribute to the continued presence and activity of IS in Syria's desert regions despite its territorial defeat?
- The attacks highlight IS's persistent presence in Syria's vast desert regions despite their territorial defeat in 2019. The SOHR reported one fatality and three injuries from a remotely detonated mine on May 28th. This follows recent arrests of IS cells near Damascus and Aleppo, indicating ongoing efforts by both the Syrian government and IS.
- What is the significance of the Islamic State's (IS) claimed attacks in Syria's Al-Suweida desert, and what are the immediate implications?
- On May 28th and 22nd, 2025, the Islamic State (IS) claimed responsibility for attacks in Syria's Al-Suweida desert, targeting new security forces with explosives. This marks the first time IS has directly claimed attacks against these forces since the fall of Bashar al-Assad in December 2024, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR).
- What are the potential long-term implications of the renewed IS activity in Syria for regional stability and international counter-terrorism efforts?
- The resurgence of IS activity poses a significant challenge to the new Syrian government. The US, having lifted sanctions on Damascus, is now urging cooperation to counter this threat. The continued presence of IS in the Syrian desert and their demonstrated capability to conduct attacks suggest the need for sustained counter-terrorism efforts and regional collaboration.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing emphasizes the ISIS attacks and the Syrian government's response, potentially portraying ISIS as a more significant threat than it may currently be. The headline and early paragraphs prioritize the ISIS claims, while later sections mention the government's actions and other developments. This sequencing could shape the reader's perception of the situation.
Language Bias
The article uses terms like "terrorist group" and "apóstata régimen" which are loaded terms. While "terrorist group" is common journalistic shorthand, it lacks nuance. Using more neutral language such as "militant group" or providing further context could mitigate this. Similarly, describing the Syrian government as an "apóstata régimen" adds an evaluative judgment. A more neutral term like "Syrian government" would be preferable.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the ISIS attacks and the Syrian government's response, but lacks perspectives from other involved parties, such as local communities affected by the violence or international organizations involved in counter-terrorism efforts in the region. The omission of these voices might limit the reader's understanding of the broader context and consequences of the attacks.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplistic dichotomy between the Syrian government and ISIS, without exploring the complexities of the ongoing conflict or the involvement of other actors. The narrative focuses primarily on these two sides, potentially overlooking the influence of other groups or underlying factors contributing to the instability in the region.
Sustainable Development Goals
The resurgence of ISIS and its attacks on Syrian security forces undermine peace, justice, and the establishment of strong institutions in Syria. The attacks cause instability, violence, and a breakdown of law and order, hindering the country's ability to build a peaceful and just society.