عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

Will Syria Witness a ‘Triple Front’ Military Escalation?

Labourers roast durum wheat to produce freekeh after harvesting a field on May 20, 2022, in the Syrian town of Binnish in the rebel-held province of Idlib in northwestern Syria. (Photo by OMAR HAJ KADOUR / AFP)
Labourers roast durum wheat to produce freekeh after harvesting a field on May 20, 2022, in the Syrian town of Binnish in the rebel-held province of Idlib in northwestern Syria. (Photo by OMAR HAJ KADOUR / AFP)
TT
TT

Will Syria Witness a ‘Triple Front’ Military Escalation?

Labourers roast durum wheat to produce freekeh after harvesting a field on May 20, 2022, in the Syrian town of Binnish in the rebel-held province of Idlib in northwestern Syria. (Photo by OMAR HAJ KADOUR / AFP)
Labourers roast durum wheat to produce freekeh after harvesting a field on May 20, 2022, in the Syrian town of Binnish in the rebel-held province of Idlib in northwestern Syria. (Photo by OMAR HAJ KADOUR / AFP)

Three indicators point to the possibility of a military escalation on more than one front in Syria. Stability along the contact lines in the three Syrian areas of influence - which has been prevailing for more than two years - is threatened by new rounds of fire. This threat does not come from local forces, but rather from abroad, specifically from countries neighboring Syria.

The Russian war in Ukraine has already produced new equations in Syria. The belief that Moscow would be militarily preoccupied with its field and political battles at home and abroad triggered a regional race to “fill the Russian vacuum” in three directions.

The first front is between Israel and Iran, as Tehran intensified its military, political, and economic efforts towards the areas controlled by the Syrian government, signed agreements and provided a financial credit line to Damascus. It has also deployed its militias and organizations in locations from which Russian elements have withdrawn or may withdraw.

Moreover, Tehran set its eyes on the Syrian factions that were supported by the Hmeimim base, after the decline in funding and monthly salaries. It also escalated its campaigns to provide weapons to the Syrian factions and Hezbollah, through traditional and new supply lines, whether by land or air.

This situation has triggered a new round of the “hidden war” between Tel Aviv and Tehran in Syria. Russia tried to assume a balanced role between the belligerents, and brandished the S-300 missile system against Israeli fighters, which had carried out raids in Syria on April 13.

However, the balance that Moscow has so far managed to maintain between Tehran and Tel Aviv is today under threat of getting out of control, especially if the race rages and the impression of “Russian drowning in the Ukrainian swamp” increases.

The second direction is between Turkey and the Kurds. The Iranian-Israeli “hidden war” is not new, as is the case with the repeated Turkish efforts to “dismember” any Kurdish entity south of the border and northern Syria.

At the end of 2016, Ankara abandoned eastern Aleppo in exchange for the establishment of the “Euphrates Shield” area to sever the link between the Kurds east and west of the Euphrates River.

At the beginning of 2018, with a green light from Russia, it launched Operation Olive Branch in Afrin, to prevent the Kurds’ access to the Mediterranean.

At the end of 2019, it cut off the links of the Kurdish entity in east of the Euphrates, by establishing the “Peace Spring” region, with the consent of President Donald Trump.

President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has repeatedly sought to establish a “safe zone”, 30 km deep along Turkey’s borders, as well as to link the three Turkish enclaves in northern Syria. But he did not get US or Russian support. At times, his views were met with threats from Washington or Moscow.

Today, something has changed. The Ukrainian war strengthened the Turkish role. Ankara is a Russian need to break its western isolation from the Turkish gate, and a necessity for NATO to accept the membership of Sweden and Finland. Accordingly, Erdogan put the “safe zone” on the table of negotiations and direct and indirect bargains, and rallied his army and loyal Syrian factions.

In the event that a new Turkish military operation is launched, whether east of the Euphrates or north of Aleppo, the military lines will change in eastern Syria, and may open the discussions on the fate of the Idlib truce. Any military action also poses political challenges between Ankara and Washington before the NATO summit next month.

The third front is between Jordan and Iranian militias. There is no doubt that Amman was among the most excited about normalization with Damascus, on all political, military, security and economic levels.

Jordan is convinced of the new reality that Russia is a neighbor and the regime is here to stay. It was hoping that normalization would ease drug and smuggling campaigns across the border.

Jordan was also betting on Russian expansion at the expense of the Iranian incursion. But recent weeks have seen a change in the equation.

This reality is confirmed by Jordanian officials, who see a Russian military retreat in southern Syria and on the borders of Jordan, and an overt attempt for Iranian advancement.

We have heard in recent days Jordanian officials referring to a “possible escalation” on the northern border, and statements about thwarting drug smuggling attempts and implementing new “rules of engagement” that include the use of immediate fire against smugglers.

The Jordanian army spokesman, Mustafa Al-Hiyari, told an official channel: “We are facing a war on these borders. A drug war. Iranian organizations, these organizations are more dangerous because they conspire with foreign agendas and target Jordanian national security.”

The Jordanian army had previously launched raids against drug networks inside Syrian territory, but had not publicized them to avoid an escalation with Damascus.

However, the recent statements point to a new phase of Jordanian involvement in the conflict, and a possible role that the US base might play in al-Tanf, within the triangle of the Syrian-Jordanian-Iraqi border.

Most Viewed

 
 
Features

Jamal Mustafa: Saddam and Other Iraqi Officials Headed to the Gallows with Heads Held High

Jamal Mustafa al-Sultan. (Asharq Al-Awsat)
Jamal Mustafa al-Sultan. (Asharq Al-Awsat)
TT
TT

Jamal Mustafa: Saddam and Other Iraqi Officials Headed to the Gallows with Heads Held High

Jamal Mustafa al-Sultan. (Asharq Al-Awsat)
Jamal Mustafa al-Sultan. (Asharq Al-Awsat)

Saddam Hussein’s entourage never expected that they would one day find themselves in jail. It never occurred to them that the American military machine would use all of its might to oust Saddam’s regime and overthrow the ruling party and army. They never believed that forces allied to Iran would assume positions of power in the new regime.

Times changed and Saddam, who controlled the fate of the nation and its people, found himself in prison where he counted the days until his execution. The man was unyielding until his last breath and his will remained unbroken.

The men who made up the Revolutionary Command Council or government soon found themselves in prison. They were interrogated by the Americans and Iraqis and a death sentence was always going to be their fate.

In the second installment of his interview to Asharq Al-Awsat, Dr. Jamal Mustafa al-Sultan, late Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s son-in-law and second secretary, recalled the execution of his colleagues and relatives. He also recalled how he married Hala, the youngest of Saddam’s daughters, and how the late president acted around his family, away from state affairs.

Other officials who were held along with Saddam included “Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan, my uncle and member of the Revolutionary Command Council Ali Hussein al-Majid, my other uncle Abed Hassan al-Majid, head of the Revolutionary Command Council Awad al-Bandar, Saddam’s half-brother Barzan Ibrahim al-Hassan, Secretary Abed Hammoud and aide to the intelligence chief Farouk Hijazi,” said Mustafa.

He showed Asharq Al-Awsat a video that recently came to light of Khodair al-Khozaei, the former vice president during the American occupation. “In it, he said that he saw no justification for the death sentence against Abed Hammoud. Most dangerous of all, he confessed that he visited Iran and consulted with a judicial official, who encouraged him to sign the death sentence, which he did,” added Mustafa.

“The truth is that we sensed from the beginning that our trial was a means of revenge acting at Iran’s orders. One day, Abed Hammoud was informed that he was going to be moved to hospital and later that day the guards informed us that he was executed,” he continued.

“Mr. President (Saddam) expected to be executed. The truth is that his very existence, whether in jail or otherwise, was a source of concern for them. I can firmly attest that the members of the leadership bravely faced their death sentence. None of them showed any weakness or faltered,” he revealed.

He recalled the day they informed Barzan and Awad that they were going to be executed. “I was working out with al-Bandar when we received the news. I am not exaggerating when I say that he maintained his optimism even in that moment. They were executed the next day. Days later, I learned that Abed Hassan al-Majid, Farouk Hijazi and Hadi Hassan, an intelligence officer, were executed,” Mustafa said.

“Let me tell you what used to happen. One day, they came up with false charges that before the US occupation, I gave Mr. Khamis al-Khanjar (a Sunni politician) a sum of 250,000 dollars. Of course, the charge is baseless. They told me that I would remain in jail for life if I did not confess to the charge. I refused and told them that I enjoyed normal relations with Khanjar,” he went on to say.

“They later came up with a different scenario. They told me that they would take me to the Iraqi embassy in Jordan if I confessed to the charge and that I would late be released in Amman with a hefty sum of money. I told them that I would reject whatever they have to offer because I would not abandon my values to betray Khanjar, who was a friend,” he stated.

“They later accused me of complicity in the draining of the Mesopotamian Marshes, which I had nothing to do with,” he added.

Saddam Hussein with his daughter Hala in this undated photo. (Getty Images)

First call after Saddam’s execution

Mustafa recalled the first telephone call he had with his wife Hala and her mother, Sajida Khairallah Talfah, right after Saddam’s execution. “Five days after Mr. President’s martyrdom, I contacted my family. I spoke with my wife, and she was in very good spirits. She had very high faith and patience. I asked her about her mother, and she reassured me that she was also doing very well despite the pain,” he said.

“I pray that Gold Almighty will give her health and a long life. We have always derived our strength from her. My mother-in-law lost her two sons, Uday and Qusay, and then her husband. She had played a major role in supporting her husband from the beginning of his struggle. She always used to support him and stood by him throughout his career,” he remarked.

First meetings with Saddam

Mustafa recalled the early days of his meeting with Saddam. “They started when I began working for his special guard. That was when I first met him. Like most Iraqis and Arabs, I believed that he would be a difficult person, but the truth is that I saw him as a paternal figure,” he added. “When you work with him, you begin to develop a different opinion than the public impression. He was a very paternal figure.”

During their first meeting, they learned that they came from the same tribe and were distant cousins.

“I stayed by Mr. President’s side for around 20 years. I started off as part of his personal guard and he then tasked me with people’s affairs, meaning seeing to their needs and addressing their problems. He was very concerned with the people’s affairs and refused any one of them to be wronged. The truth is that many laws were amended or changed at the time following complaints from the people,” he revealed.

“There were two telephones at Mr. President’s office, and both were connected to my office. Whoever had a problem could call the president through the citizens’ line. I used to answer their calls and listen to their problems and set an appointment with the president. Sometimes I used to ask the caller to come in person with their request so that their problem could be tackled. Sometimes Mr. President would interject on the call to ask about the issue and would request to talk to the citizen on the line,” Mustafa said.

“He would listen to the person’s grievance and tell him to head to the dedicated office to tackle the issue. (...) So we used to receive hundreds of citizens every week to solve their problems. Mr. President was very concerned about these issues,” he stressed. “I have never met another person like him. He would listen, care and then come up with a solution.”

President’s son-in-law

Asharq Al-Awsat asked Mustafa about when he asked Hala to marry him. “It was in 1994. As is the tradition in Iraq, I headed with my uncles to Saddam’s family to ask her hand in marriage,” he said. “One of my uncles made the request to Mr. President on my behalf and he agreed and welcomed it.”

“A judge was summoned immediately for the ceremony, and we were married. We had lunch at the president’s house that same day. I first met Hala on September 12, and we were married on September 26. It was a short engagement in line with tradition.”

“Mr. President used to separate state affairs from his relationship with his family. His work was completely separate from family, which had nothing to do with political or state affairs. It never intervened in those issues. Mr. President was a man of state when he was doing his job, and a father when he came home. He treated his family as if he were its father – the perfect father. Every family wishes to have a father that can measure up to him because he looked after all of his children and all of his relatives,” Mustafa said.

“When he sat down to the dinner table, he himself used to serve his own food and ask his children about their day. He would serve them food and generally cared very much for them. The state is one thing and family is another. At the same time, he acted as a father to all Iraqis. He treated them fairly. This is Saddam Hussein,” stressed Mustafa. “He was always keen that Iraqis be treated justly and that none of them be wronged. He was also very firm with his children if they made any mistake.”

Saddam’s hobbies

Saddam was a “very traditional Arab man. He loved traditional Arab and Iraqi dishes. He himself used to cook his own version of the traditional Iraqi dish al-Habeet. (...) He also loved seafood and would cook the Masgouf fish dish himself,” Mustafa told Asharq Al-Awsat.

His hobbies included horseback riding, hunting, swimming and sharpshooting. “Occasionally, before heading to the front to fight against Iran, he would visit the al-Amarah region, where gazelle and geese are abundant, to hunt. As circumstances became more challenging, he limited himself to fishing, which he did regularly,” he added.

He was a skilled shooter from his youth. “Generally, growing up in a tribe, children are taught at a young age how to become a good shooter. This is part of our upbringing. He was also an avid reader. He was always reading something,” Mustafa said of Saddam.