Syrian Rebels Are Rejecting U.S. Strategy

Edlib News Network/AP

AA Font size + Print

The new rebel alliance formed under al-Nusra is a no-confidence vote in U.S. leadership. By James Kitfield

President Obama capped an unusually dramatic week of diplomacy at the United Nations with the first conversation between American and Iranian presidents since the 1979 Iranian revolution, and, following a meeting between the U.S. and Russian top diplomats, with a unanimous vote on the U.N. Security Council for the surrender and destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles. The one major player in Syria’s civil war who was not represented in last week’s high-level talks in New York, however, decided to throw a monkey-wrench at the United States’ carefully choreographed diplomacy.

The announcement that 11 of the largest armed factions among the Syrian rebels have united under an Islamist umbrella held aloft by Jabhat al-Nusra, an al-Qaeda affiliated terrorist group, represents a potential game-changer. The unlikely alliance amounts to a warning shot at the United States, the Syrian Opposition Council, which had sought to represent the fractious opposition in negotiations, and an international community that is seeking a negotiated end to a bloody civil war that has already claimed more than 100,000 lives. If the odd-couple alliance holds it will greatly complicate U.S. efforts to arm “moderate” elements of the Syrian rebellion. Already it has put territory on the border of NATO ally Turkey under the black banner of al-Qaeda.

“To the extent this is not just a trial balloon and this murky alliance holds, then it is very troubling that some of the rebel factions we considered arming are now allied with an al-Qaeda affiliate,” said David Pollack, an analyst with The Washington Institute for Near East Policy in Washington. “On the other hand, a number of these secular and nationalist rebel factions have been openly battling with the jihadi groups in recent weeks, and if this ultimately splits the two it will make it even more important for the United States to finally arm and back the groups we want to see win.”

The surprise announcement of an Islamist rebel alliance was aimed most directly at the U.S. and its diplomatic gambit to end the war. The Obama administration has made no secret of its strategy for using the deal reached this week to secure Syria’s chemical weapons as the jumping off point for negotiations in Geneva that the U.S. and Russia have pushed for ending the war.

“Agreement on chemical weapons should energize a larger diplomatic effort to reach a political settlement within Syria. I do not believe that military action — by those within Syria, or by external powers — can achieve lasting peace,” Obama said in his speech to the U.N. General Assembly. Such a negotiated settlement should include a transfer of power from the regime of Bashar al-Assad, he said, and preserve the unity of a functioning Syrian state. “Those of us who continue to support the moderate opposition must persuade them that the Syrian people cannot afford a collapse of state institutions, and that a political settlement cannot be reached without addressing the legitimate fears of Alawites and other minorities.”   

On one level, the new rebel alliance was a vote of no-confidence in the U.S.-promoted peace talks, and in the Western-backed political opposition of the Syrian Opposition Coalition as the rebels’ interlocutor. The SOC chairman Ahmad al-Jarba had recently announced his willingness to attend the as-yet-unscheduled Geneva talks, but the new Islamist alliance declared in its statement that the SOC “does not represent us.”

Upon hearing of the new alliance, Gen. Salim Idriss, head of the Free Syrian Army’s Supreme Military Council, cut short a trip to Paris to return to Syria and try and persuade the more moderate factions to reconsider the new alliance. However, Idriss and the rest of the rebel leaders have been bitterly disappointed that the Obama administration has been slow to arm “moderate” opposition factions as promised. They were further infuriated by the U.S. decision not to launch threatened military strikes at the Assad regime for its use of chemical weapons in August.

“A lot of the Syrian rebels are very upset that instead of striking at the Syrian regime militarily as promised, the Obama administration is now negotiating with Assad. That crushed the last hope the Syrian opposition had for Western intervention on their behalf,” said Valerie Szybala, a Syrian analyst at the Institute for the Study of War in Washington. “So the announcement of this new alliance was a proclamation in the strongest possible terms that we not only reject the U.S. strategy, we reject U.S. leadership that, by continually promising and not delivering, has actively undermined some of the rebel groups we claim to want to help.”

On another level, however, the new Islamist rebel alliance may be a defensive move against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), a rogue offshoot of al Qaeda in Iraq that has recently battled not only with secular rebel factions in northern Syria, but also with the al-Nusra Front. Recently, a local ISIL leader killed Kamal Hamami, a Free Syrian Army military commander who was a member of the U.S.-backed Supreme Military Council. The killing set off weeks of fighting between the rebel groups that forced Turkey to close a key border crossing into Syria. The supposedly secular Tawheed Brigade of Aleppo stepped in to try and mediate the disputes, and it was among the most prominent rebel faction to join with al-Nusra in the new Islamist alliance. Importantly, al-Qaeda in Iraq and the Levant is not part of the new grouping.

For the time being, the new alliance leaves the Obama administration pushing peace talks in Geneva, but with no interlocutor representing the majority of the rebels actually fighting on the ground. Meanwhile, the Syrian opposition seems intent on justifying Assad’s narrative of a war between his regime and Islamic extremists allied with al-Qaeda.

“The Syrian revolution didn’t start out as a drive for an Islamic state, but over time it has been steered in that direction by rebel groups who are desperate, and who know that an Islamist agenda attracts the most financial support in the region,” Szybala said. “So the situation in Syria today is about as complicated and dangerous as you could imagine in your wildest nightmares.” 

Close [ x ] More from DefenseOne

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Software-Defined Networking

    So many demands are being placed on federal information technology networks, which must handle vast amounts of data, accommodate voice and video, and cope with a multitude of highly connected devices while keeping government information secure from cyber threats. This issue brief discusses the state of SDN in the federal government and the path forward.

  • Military Readiness: Ensuring Readiness with Analytic Insight

    To determine military readiness, decision makers in defense organizations must develop an understanding of complex inter-relationships among readiness variables. For example, how will an anticipated change in a readiness input really impact readiness at the unit level and, equally important, how will it impact readiness outside of the unit? Learn how to form a more sophisticated and accurate understanding of readiness and make decisions in a timely and cost-effective manner.

  • Cyber Risk Report: Cybercrime Trends from 2016

    In our first half 2016 cyber trends report, SurfWatch Labs threat intelligence analysts noted one key theme – the interconnected nature of cybercrime – and the second half of the year saw organizations continuing to struggle with that reality. The number of potential cyber threats, the pool of already compromised information, and the ease of finding increasingly sophisticated cybercriminal tools continued to snowball throughout the year.

  • A New Security Architecture for Federal Networks

    Federal government networks are under constant attack, and the number of those attacks is increasing. This issue brief discusses today's threats and a new model for the future.

  • Information Operations: Retaking the High Ground

    Today's threats are fluent in rapidly evolving areas of the Internet, especially social media. Learn how military organizations can secure an advantage in this developing arena.


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.