The National Interest Foundation Newsletter

Issue 264, December 6, 2024

Welcome to our NIF Newsletter. In this week’s edition, we delve into what’s behind the collapse of the Syrian army in Aleppo, analyze the International Criminal Court (ICC) president’s criticism of the undermining of its investigations, and examine how Former Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon has warned of Israel’s war crimes and ethnic cleansing in Gaza.

Editor: Bassam Tarbush

---

What’s Behind the Collapse of the Syrian Army in Aleppo?

What’s Behind the Collapse of the Syrian Army in Aleppo?

By NIF Staff

During the past week, opposition forces in Syria carried out a military offensive that garnered substantial and rapid territorial gains, including the capture of most of the country’s second-largest city of Aleppo. Analysts have pointed to how the Assad regime had been warned of the plan by Russia and yet still suffered a major collapse which prompted a hasty retreat from Aleppo and other areas. Moscow also reminded Assad that the regional situation had changed and thus urged him to reach a political solution, however he refused this, as well as Turkey’s efforts at reconciliation. As experts have sought to highlight, there are several key factors that have contributed to what has taken place. Firstly, with the Assad regime being politically and militarily backed by the governments of Russia and Iran, the leaders of the opposition forces in Syria clearly viewed Moscow and Tehran’s entanglements in other conflicts as an opening for a successful offensive against the Syrian Army. Putin has been deeply involved in the Ukraine War, and Iran and Hezbollah have been preoccupied with the situations in Gaza and Lebanon. Additionally, the recent election of Trump to another term as U.S. president may have caused pressure on Syrian opposition leaders who became worried about a potential settlement to keep Assad in power. Furthermore, opposition forces likely felt propelled to act given that they were uneasy about the Arab League’s attempt to bring Syria back into the fold and, in doing so, normalize the Assad regime diplomatically.

As previously mentioned, other notable elements have also spurred the recent developments in Syria. Observers have outlined Assad’s continued rejection of Russia’s advice for him to hold reconciliation talks with opposition groups and with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan – whose calls to meet face-to-face had been turned down by Assad as well. In line with this, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan cited Assad’s refusal to engage in political dialogue with the Syrian opposition as the driving force behind what has transpired over the preceding week. Iran and Russia, the Syrian regime’s two most significant allies, are urging Turkey to persuade opposition forces to end the offensive. Turkey could stand to benefit from the Syrian opposition’s advancements, as these groups provide Turkey with substantial influence in any potential future political settlement in Syria. Some have contended that Turkey is likely moving fast to consolidate its power in Syria as a bargaining chip with the incoming Trump administration. Hence, if Trump were to propose a deal to end the renewed fighting, Turkey’s concerns could not be ignored given the influence that they hold.

Regarding Russia, since February of 2022, Moscow has been primarily focused militarily on its offensive in Ukraine. The invasion, which many predicted to be quick and easy, has now dragged out for close to 3 years. Back in June, President Vladimir Putin claimed that 700,000 Russian personnel were involved in the conflict. Throughout the Syrian civil war, Russia has been one of Bashar al-Assad’s main backers, with Russian airpower being key in Assad regaining control of the majority of the country. Besides Ukraine, Georgia, another former Soviet Republic that also borders Russia, has seen the emergence of large-scale anti-Russian protests over a disputed recent election. Thus, Russia is likely keeping a close eye on Georgia out of fear of another color revolution. For Moscow, Syria is essential to its influence in the Mediterranean and the Middle East. Russia hosts a significant naval base in Tartus and an air base in Latakia, both in the northwest of the country, not too far from opposition strongholds. However, Putin will likely focus more of Russia’s limited resources on its war and in its own neighborhood. Putin has carried out massive air strikes against Syrian opposition forces since the fall of Aleppo, but he is unlikely to return to the conflict with the same intensity he provided from 2015 to 2020 as long as the Ukraine War rages on. Therefore, Russia may very well encourage a diplomatic solution where it maintains its influence.

The reignition of the Syrian conflict could also serve as a benefit to Israel, while it spreads Iran too thin. Iran previously supplied the Assad regime with Hezbollah forces that are currently recuperating in Lebanon following intense fighting there in recent months and the initiation of a ceasefire deal with Israel. This created a vital opening in the Assad regime’s defenses, and Israel is expected to use this opportunity to attempt to cut off supply lines from Iran to Hezbollah via Syria. Some suspect that this may also provide Israel with additional incentive to mount another large-scale military operation against Hezbollah as it seeks to weaken Iran and its proxies within the region.

Two important factors likely influencing the decision of Syrian opposition forces to initiate an offensive now are the re-election of Trump in the United States and the recent normalization among Arab states with Assad’s government. Following the Arab Spring and Assad’s brutal crackdown on protests, the Syrian regime was suspended from the Arab League, but its re-admission of Assad’s government this past May was seen as accepting that Assad would stay in power and that it was in the best interest of other Arab states to engage with him. In Washington, Trump’s return to power is predicted to shake up American foreign policy. Trump has, on numerous occasions, promised to halt “endless wars.” During his first term, he negotiated with the Taliban to pull American troops out of Afghanistan, and also sought to reduce the United States’ armed presence overseas when he withdrew some U.S. troops from northern Syria in October of 2019. This paved the way for Turkey to carry out a large military operation to create a partial buffer zone on its border with Syria. Today, there are about 900 U.S. soldiers in Syria with the stated goal of preventing ISIS from resurging.

Turkish-backed rebel groups compose a portion of the Syrian opposition, which Turkey has supported discretely throughout the war. Turkey has generally been interested in combating ISIL and Kurdish forces in Syria, who have posed a threat to Turkey’s national security. Analysts also believe that Turkish President Erdoğan has increased support for opposition groups after Assad refused an offer of reconciliation from him. According to experts, the Aleppo offensive was initially planned for mid-October, and was then delayed after Turkish intervention. It is expected that Erdoğan wishes to put pressure on the Assad regime, but is not looking to overthrow the government, preferring his Turkish-backed forces to avoid pushing any further. This is because Erdoğan wishes to pressure the Assad regime into a normalization of relations to repatriate 4.7 million Syrian refugees residing in Turkey, and to curtail Kurdish groups along the border. The Turkish-sponsored Syrian National Army’s most recent effort led to the seizure of the Kurdish stronghold of Tell Rifaat, along with other towns and villages east of Aleppo.

The incoming Trump administration could cause even more changes to the development of the revived Syrian conflict. President-elect Trump is remembered for having reversed a longstanding bipartisan commitment to Kurdish groups in the region. Erdoğan may use this lack of strong pro-Kurdish sentiment to broker a deal with the Trump administration for reduced U.S. support of Kurdish forces in the region. Should this happen, it would be worth keeping an eye on which groups satisfy the vacuum for the Trump administration. Whether the Trump administration tends towards a more isolationist policy or one that is more hawkish on Iran remains to be seen as well.

The ongoing situation in Syria is highly fluid as Assad is facing the most serious threat to his regime in years, with the city of Hama recently falling to opposition forces as their advance continues. This is an extraordinary blow to the Assad regime, given that Hama is the fourth-largest city in Syria and its capture allows the opposition to push towards the capital of Damascus. They are now seeking to take Homs, a city that is only around 100 miles north of Damascus, and whose fall would cut the Assad regime from the country’s coastline via the M5 Motorway. Opposition groups in the south have also risen to take over territory, leaving Damascus susceptible to advances against it from multiple fronts. If Homs is captured, there would be no significant town or city before Damascus for Assad to use as cover.

ICC President Criticizes the Undermining of Its Investigations

ICC President Criticizes the Undermining of Its Investigations

By Daniel Imbornoni

This Monday, International Criminal Court (ICC) President Tomoko Akane opened the ICC’s annual meeting by denouncing efforts to punish the tribunal’s members, saying that the court has faced “coercive measures, threats, pressure, and acts of sabotage.” While not directly naming either, Akane’s comments were deemed as critical of various U.S. and Russian political figures in particular who have expressed opposition to the ICC’s decision to issue arrest warrants against Israeli and Russian officials for their war crimes and human rights abuses in Gaza and Ukraine, respectively. Formally issued just over two weeks ago, the ICC’s most recent warrants call for the arrests of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and Hamas Military Chief Mohammed Deif.

ICC President Akane’s remarks were partly in reference to recent statements from U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham who expressed that “If you are going to help the ICC as a nation and enforce the arrest warrants against Bibi (Netanyahu) and Gallant…I will put sanctions on you as a nation.” Graham’s response to the ICC arrest warrants is not without precedent, as back in 2020, then-President Trump imposed sanctions on the ICC’s top prosecutor Fatou Bensouda after she launched investigations into alleged war crimes committed by the United States in Afghanistan. Akane appeared to clearly allude to Graham’s comments in her opening statements, saying “The court is being threatened with draconian economic sanctions by another permanent member of the Security Council as if it was a terrorist organization.” These troubling reactions to the serious investigations of an independent and impartial global-level tribunal are not exclusive to Graham, as evidenced by the Biden administration and the incumbent president’s own negative response to the warrant. Throughout the course of the Gaza War, the Biden administration has been legitimately criticized for its mishandling of the conflict, which has included vetoing ceasefire proposals at the United Nations and failing to enact policy changes which hold Israel accountable for its human rights abuses. The Biden administration’s steadfast diplomatic defense of Israel, even in light of overwhelming evidence of war crimes and human rights violations, has been without parallel compared to other governments that have scaled back their military aid and voiced support for the credibility of the ICC’s arrest warrants.

Although many countries have voiced acceptance of the ICC’s decision, certain political entities have expressed skepticism or condemnation of the tribunal. The United Kingdom’s Shadow Foreign Secretary Priti Patel called the ICC warrants “concerning and provocative.” France, who had recently reiterated its “longstanding commitment to supporting international justice,” issued statements implying that it would be unlikely to execute the arrest warrant. The French foreign ministry declared that because Israel is “not a party to the ICC” that “such immunities apply to Prime Minister Netanyahu and other ministers in question and must be taken into consideration should the ICC ask us to arrest them and hand them over.”

Statements like these draw concern regarding the current state of respect and adherence for international law and justice mechanisms. This has been evidenced in recent years, as seen by a lack of compliance to ICC decisions. For instance, back in September, Russian President Vladimir Putin traveled to Mongolia – an ICC member state – and was met with no threat of arrest despite an outstanding warrant against him for war crimes. Organizations like Human Rights Watch (HRW) labeled Mongolia’s lavish red-carpet welcome for Putin as a “betrayal of justice,” and lamented the failure to abide by an international arrest warrant. Although Mongolia is a signatory of the Rome Statute which established the ICC, there was no effort to detain the Russian president. Mongolia, like many other countries, often faces pressures that prevent it from complying with ICC decisions, as the country rests between Russia and Russia-ally China. As such, ICC President Akane hinted at the damaging effect of Russian threats against the institution, like that of the Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of Russia, Dmitry Medvedev, who stated that “It is quite possible to imagine the targeted use of a hypersonic Onyx missile by a Russian ship in the North Sea at the Hague court building.”

ICC President Akane has a valid point in criticizing the blatant efforts of various entities to try to undermine the tribunal’s legitimacy and effectiveness. After all, institutions like the ICC were specifically set up to impartially and independently investigate highly credible suspicions of war crimes and human rights abuses, and thus, threats against it are damaging to the prospect of upholding standards of international law and justice.

Former Defense Minister Warns of Israel’s War Crimes and Ethnic Cleansing in Gaza

Former Defense Minister Warns of Israel’s War Crimes and Ethnic Cleansing in Gaza

By Jake Spiller

Former Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon recently elicited attention when he expressed that Israel is perpetrating war crimes and ethnic cleansing in Gaza, marking the most noteworthy rebuke to date from within the country’s military or political establishment towards its actions in the Palestinian territory. Yaalon’s statements, given that they are coming from a high-ranking former official who also served in the armed forces, highlight the degree to which Israel’s military operations in Gaza have been condemned across the board. They also echo the growing concern with Israeli war crimes and human rights violations, which have now prompted the International Criminal Court (ICC) to formally issue arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and one of Yaalon’s successors, Yoav Gallant. Since nearly the onset of the Gaza War, numerous reputable international aid organizations have attempted to underline the immoral policies initiated by Israel and the dire humanitarian crisis that has been created as a result.

Moshe Yaalon’s remarks should force those that have not been doing so to sit up and take notice. He has an extensive history in the Israeli military and political scene, and thus, his criticism of Israel’s actions speaks volumes as it shows that even those with deep connections to the government apparatus can no longer deny the glaring war crimes and human rights violations that have been committed in Gaza. Yaalon, once an ally of current Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, has become a vocal critic and warned that extremist and dangerous elements have taken hold of Israeli politics. In an interview with an Israeli media network, Yaalon stated, referring to Israel’s ongoing military operation in Gaza, that “The path they’re dragging us down is to occupy, annex, and ethnically cleanse – look at the northern strip.” When asked specifically about ethnic cleansing, he responded that “There’s no Beit Lahia. There’s no Beit Hanoun. They’re now operating in Jabaliya. They’re basically cleaning the territory of Arabs.”

The three locations referenced in northern Gaza continue to be decimated by Israeli military activity. Since early October, the area has been under a total siege, with aid being cut off. Israel has tried to claim that the siege is necessary to fight regrouping Hamas cells, however as noted in a Guardian article from early November, international humanitarian law experts see Israel’s actions as the war crimes of using food as a weapon and forcibly displacing civilians. In fact, later that same month, both the use of starvation as a method of warfare and intentionally directing attacks against civilians were listed against Netanyahu and Gallant in the ICC arrest warrants. With the siege taking place, civilians are being prevented from returning to their homes, which has led to a legitimate concern that Israeli forces are making way for illegal Israeli settlements in the area. Given that these have only increased in the occupied West Bank during the conflict, with Trump’s recent election to a second term in the White House, some observers suspect that Israeli officials might feel emboldened to do so in Gaza as well.

Yaalon’s warnings have also been substantiated by the rhetoric from multiple Israeli officials. This includes key figures in Netanyahu’s cabinet whose support is needed to maintain the fragile current coalition government. Itamar Ben-Gvir, for example, has been fervent in his advocacy for the forcible displacement of Palestinians out of Gaza and subsequent illegal Israeli settlements after the war, saying that “We cannot withdraw from any territory in the Gaza Strip. Not only do I not rule out Jewish settlement there, I believe it is also an important thing.” This has been echoed by Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who has said “We want to encourage willful emigration, and we need to find countries willing to take them in.” The U.S. State Department has called this rhetoric “Inflammatory and irresponsible.” Still, despite this, the United States government continues to fund and give diplomatic cover to Israel.

Ultimately, Moshe Yaalon’s comments are not surprising to those closely watching what has been transpiring in Gaza over the past 14 months. The United States government, its citizens, and the Israeli public – together with the global community – must pressure Israel to end the destructive war and achieve a lasting peace built on fair compromise, not war crimes and ethnic cleansing which will only serve to fuel further animosity.