Syrians between the ‘Occupier’, ‘Ally’ and Taliban ‘Victory’

Sweets are handed out in Idlib to celebrate the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan. (Akhbar Idlib)
Sweets are handed out in Idlib to celebrate the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan. (Akhbar Idlib)
TT
20

Syrians between the ‘Occupier’, ‘Ally’ and Taliban ‘Victory’

Sweets are handed out in Idlib to celebrate the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan. (Akhbar Idlib)
Sweets are handed out in Idlib to celebrate the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan. (Akhbar Idlib)

Syria is among the countries most affected by the developments in Afghanistan, whether in regards to the American pullout or the rapid Taliban takeover. Syria and Afghanistan are similar in that several countries are embroiled in their conflict.

Various Syrian parties are quick to comment on defeats and victories in other countries, drawing parallels to what is taking place in their homeland.

Damascus watched with bated breath the rapid developments that unfolded in Kabul. Officials expressed their “relief” at the US withdrawal from Afghanistan and its implication on its Syrian allies – namely the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

Former minister and leading member of the ruling Baath party Mahdi Dakhlallah compared the American withdrawal from Afghanistan to its pullout from Vietnam in 1975. “There is one lesson to be learned: America very simply and mercilessly abandons its agents,” he remarked, saying the US-backed SDF must be diligent.

Dakhlallah suggested that the SDF take up “resistance because it is better than surrender and compromise.” That was the same suggestion made by president Bashar Assad when he was sworn in for a new term in office last month. He spoke of the need for “popular resistance” to force the US to pull out of Syria.

Syrian officials in Damascus have also refused to engage the SDF in political negotiations over the region east of the Euphrates River and the autonomous administration. Damascus has restricted agreements with the SDF to administrative understandings, providing services and economic exchanges.

US President Joe Biden’s remarks that Washington was not concerned with the building of nations, meaning changing regimes, is music to the ears of officials in Damascus. However, his pledge that the US will continue to fight ISIS means that the Americans are not ready to quit Syria. The Syrian demand for the “American occupier to leave” will still stand even as it ignores the presence of Russian and Iranian forces on its soil.

The Russian and Iranian deployment is seen as legitimate by Damascus that had officially requested this support. This is not a view shared by the Syrian opposition that views the Russians and Iranians as occupiers, “who should be resisted.” This was best demonstrated by the Syrian Islamic Council, which is the political wing of the armed factions, when it congratulated the Afghan people for “expelling the occupier”. It also congratulated them on the Taliban “victory against the colonizer and its agents.”

The Istanbul-based council believes that history has shown that colonizers are destined to be defeated no matter how long they are in power. “We hope the Syrians would enjoy security in their country after it is purified of the filthy Iranian and Russian occupiers and their agents,” it declared.

The extremist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham group, which controls the majority of the Idlib province in northwestern Syria, also extended its congratulations to the Taliban and Afghan people on their “victory”. It hoped that the Syrian revolt would also witness such a victory that would see the country liberated from occupiers. It went so far to say that Syria could draw “inspiration” from the Afghan experience and adopt “jihad and resistance to achieve freedom and dignity by toppling the Syrian regime.”

Moreover, members of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham even handed out sweets on the streets to mark the “victory”. Affiliated social media accounts also spoke of deriving lessons from the Afghan experience.

One leading member of the group commented: “The developments in Afghanistan are similar to what the Syrian people are enduring in their demands for freedom from the oppressive regime and its allies, such as the Russian and Iranian occupiers.” Another user said: “Taliban has redrawn global policy.”

Of course, questions now have to be raised about the fate of foreign fighters, who had defected from Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and others who were close to ISIS and al-Qaeda. Many of these fighters are Afghans and had come to Syria years ago. Are they thinking about returning to the “land of jihad” – Afghanistan?

Significantly, those among the opposition who are hailing the Taliban “victory” have failed to mention Turkey and its role in Syria, similar to how Damascus ignored Iran and Russia.

However, the American pullout reminded other opposition figures of how quick the US was to abandon them when it signed the agreement on southern Syria that included the scrapping of an American program to train members of the Free Syrian Army. The pullout also reminded the SDF of former US President Donald Trump’s sudden withdrawal from a region east of the Euphrates, effectively giving the green light for Turkey to fill the void.

Indeed, the SDF may be the party most alarmed by the rapid American withdrawal from Afghanistan and its implications on the Kurds. True, Biden’s declaration that he is committed to fighting ISIS may reassure them, but their memory of fall 2019 is still raw.



Will Israel’s Interceptors Outlast Iran’s Missiles?

The Israeli Iron Dome air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, early Wednesday, June 18, 2025. (AP Photo/Leo Correa)
The Israeli Iron Dome air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, early Wednesday, June 18, 2025. (AP Photo/Leo Correa)
TT
20

Will Israel’s Interceptors Outlast Iran’s Missiles?

The Israeli Iron Dome air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, early Wednesday, June 18, 2025. (AP Photo/Leo Correa)
The Israeli Iron Dome air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, early Wednesday, June 18, 2025. (AP Photo/Leo Correa)

Israel has a world-leading missile interception system but its bank of interceptors is finite. Now, as the war drags on, Israel is firing interceptors faster than it can produce them.

On Thursday, The New York Times reporters spoke to current and former Israeli officials about the strengths and weaknesses of Israeli air defense.

Aside from a potentially game-changing US intervention that shapes the fate of Iran’s nuclear program, two factors will help decide the length of the Israel-Iran war: Israel’s reserve of missile interceptors and Iran’s stock of long-range missiles.

Since Iran started retaliating against Israel’s fire last week, Israel’s world-leading air defense system has intercepted most incoming Iranian ballistic missiles, giving the Israeli Air Force more time to strike Iran without incurring major losses at home.

But now, as the war drags on, Israel is firing interceptors faster than it can produce them. That has raised questions within the Israeli security establishment about whether the country will run low on air defense missiles before Iran uses up its ballistic arsenal, according to eight current and former officials.

Already, Israel’s military has had to conserve its use of interceptors and is giving greater priority to the defense of densely populated areas and strategic infrastructure, according to the officials. Most spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak more freely.

Interceptors are “not grains of rice,” said Brig. Gen. Ran Kochav, who commanded Israel’s air defense system until 2021 and still serves in the military reserve. “The number is finite.”

“If a missile is supposed to hit refineries in Haifa, it’s clear that it’s more important to intercept that missile than one that will hit the Negev desert,” General Kochav said.

Conserving Israel’s interceptors is “a challenge,” he added. “We can make it, but it’s a challenge.”

Asked for comment on the limits of its interceptor arsenal, the Israeli military said in a brief statement that it “is prepared and ready to handle any scenario and is operating defensively and offensively to remove threats to Israeli civilians.”

No Israeli official would divulge the number of interceptors left at Israel’s disposal; the revelation of such a closely guarded secret could give Iran a military advantage.

The answer will affect Israel’s ability to sustain a long-term, attritional war. The nature of the war will partly be decided by whether Trump decides to join Israel in attacking Iran’s nuclear enrichment site at Fordo, in northern Iran, or whether Iran decides to give up its enrichment program to prevent such an intervention.

But the war’s endgame will also be shaped by how long both sides can sustain the damage to their economies, as well as the damage to national morale caused by a growing civilian death toll.

Israel relies on at least seven kinds of air defense. Most of them involve automated systems that use radar to detect incoming missiles and then provide officers with suggestions of how to intercept them.

Military officials have seconds to react to some short-range fire, but minutes to judge the response to long-range attacks. At times, the automated systems do not offer recommendations, leaving officers to make decisions on their own, General Kochav said.

The Arrow system intercepts long-range missiles at higher altitudes; the David’s Sling system intercepts them at lower altitudes; while the Iron Dome takes out shorter-range rockets, usually fired from Gaza, or the fragments of missiles already intercepted by other defense systems.

The United States has supplied at least two more defense systems, some of them fired from ships in the Mediterranean, and Israel is also trying out a new and relatively untested laser beam. Finally, fighter jets are deployed to shoot down slow-moving drones.

Some Israelis feel it is time to wrap up the war before Israel’s defenses are tested too severely.

At least 24 civilians have been killed by Iran’s strikes, and more than 800 have been injured. Some key infrastructure, including oil refineries in northern Israel, has been hit, along with civilian homes. A hospital in southern Israel was struck on Thursday morning.

Already high by Israeli standards, the death toll could rise sharply if the Israeli military is forced to limit its general use of interceptors in order to guarantee the long-term protection of a few strategic sites like the Dimona nuclear reactor in southern Israel or the military headquarters in Tel Aviv.

“Now that Israel has succeeded in striking most of its nuclear targets in Iran, Israel has a window of two or three days to declare the victory and end the war,” said Zohar Palti, a former senior officer in the Mossad, Israel’s spy agency.

“When planning how to defend Israel in future wars, no one envisaged a scenario in which we would be fighting on so many fronts and defending against so many rounds of ballistic missiles,” said Palti, who was for years involved in Israel’s defensive planning.

Others are confident that Israel will be able to solve the problem by destroying most of Iran’s missile launchers, preventing the Iranian military from using the stocks that it still has.

Iran has both fixed and mobile launchers, scattered across its territory, according to two Israeli officials. Some of its missiles are stored underground, where they are harder to destroy, while others are in aboveground caches, the officials said.

The Israeli military says it has destroyed more than a third of the launchers. Officials and experts say that has already limited the number of missiles that Iran can fire in a single attack.

US officials said Israel’s strikes against the launchers have decimated Iran’s ability to fire its missiles and hurt its ability to create large-scale barrages.

“The real issue is the number of launchers, more than the number of missiles,” said Asaf Cohen, a former Israeli commander who led the Iran department in Israel’s military intelligence directorate.

“The more of them that are hit, the harder it will be for them to launch barrages,” Cohen added. “If they realize they have a problem with launch capacity, they’ll shift to harassment: one or two missiles every so often, aimed at two different areas simultaneously.”

The New York Times