The US bombing attacks also
targeted Jabhat al-Nusra(JaN), an Al-Qaeda-linked radical group but one
that has mostly fought in cooperation with the FSA and other rebel
groups such as the Islamic Front. There are reports that the bombing
attacks were directed also at Ahrar al-Sham in the Aleppo area. The
group is not linked to Al-Qaeda at all and operates in tandem with the
Free Syrian Army that is supported by the west.
One US official explained:
"We're characterizing our targets as Khorasan and ISIS but its possible others were there. It is a toxic soup of terrorists".
Khorasan is
a jihadist group that has migrated to Syria. It is associated with Al
Qaeda and apparently includes a bomb-maker from Yemen. It hopes to hit
targets in the west. James Clapper, Director of US National Intelligence
claims that "in terms of threat to the homeland Khorasan may pose as
much of a danger as the Islamic State (IS)".
While attacking the Nusra
Front and Khorasan mayl seem quite reasonable from the point of view of
the US war against terror, it makes no sense to Syrian rebels. Just when
the rebels need all the help they can get against the Assad regime, the
US actions appear to help him out in key areas such as Aleppo where the
rebels are already having difficulties holding their ground and radical
groups are an important fighting force.
The US has claimed that it was bombing the Islamic State in Syria but
instead it is attacking any radical rebel group that it does not like
even though those groups are helping the Free Syrian army and other
rebels against Assad.
The bombings are cheered on by the Asssad regime
which originally opposed them as violations of its sovereignty and
against international law. Syrian minister for national reconciliation
, Ali Haidar, praised the attacks although Syria was still watching developments with caution:
"As
for the raids in Syria, I say that what has happened so far is
proceeding in the right direction in terms of informing the Syrian
government and by not targeting Syrian military installations and not
targeting civilians.Notification of the Syrian government happened.
Confirmation that they would not target Syrian military installations,
and confirmation they would not target civilians happened."
Civilians are not typically targeted in any event but are just collateral damage.
Rebel groups of all stripes condemned the bombings. The Syrian
Revolutionaries Front, a major secular coalition in the north-west of
Syria that drove ISIS out of Idlib in January along with other rebel
groups
condemned the bombings
claiming:"You help Bashar" Although bombing strikes targeted Idlib
there are no IS forces there any more. One of the first condemnations of
the strikes was by
Harak Hazm an FSA militia operating mostly in Hama and numbering about 7,000:
“The
Hazem Movement rejects the external intervention of the US Coalition,
which launched its first airstrikes on Tuesday in the governorates of
Deir el Zour, Raqqa, al Hasaka, Aleppo, Idlib and Homs, with 11
civilians killed in rural Idlib province and five others in rural Homs
province, as well as fighters from Jabhat al Nusra and the ISIS.These
air attacks amount to *an attack on national sovereignty* and work to
*undermine the Syrian revolution...We of the Hazem Movement hereby
reaffirm our full commitment to the principles of the revolution, and
emphasize that *our actions are guided solely by revolutionary
principles and national interest, not by the demands of the
international coalition...The only beneficiaries from the US coalition’s
military intervention will be the Assad regime,.."
There have been
demonstrations against the bombings in many rebel areas. While many are
in support of the Nusra Front there are others which even express
sympathy with the Islamic State: The enclosed You Tube video shows
damage in bombings of Al Nusra Front positions:
The only
clear support for
the bombings among rebel groups was the group supported by the west and
Gulf state the Syrian Opposition Coalition(SOC) and the Supreme
Military Command(SMC). The latter group supported "all earnest national
forces and free international forces who are fighting terrorism but said
that this should begin with attacking "the Assad Gang" whom the group
claimed created the Islamic State.
The aim of the US may to be to weaken or eliminate rebel groups it
does not favor even though they are fighting cooperatively along with
other rebel groups against Assad. The type of force that they will train
will play the role of the
Sons of Iraq
in Iraq who were paid by the US government to fight against Al Qaeda in
Iraq. This worked as long as the US continued to foot the bill. It may
not work in Syria. The main rebel groups see radicals as allies as long
as they work together against Assad. Destroying rebel's allies will not
win any friends among the majority of the rebels even moderates.
The ultimate aim of US policy may not be to defeat the Assad regime but
to create a situation where there are more pro-western moderate rebels
but who will be willing to negotiate with a war-weary and weakened Assad
regime. Assad will be convinced to step aside and there will be a
political settlement with the new government committed to fighting
radical jihadists throughout Syria. Much of the material in this article
derives from a long and very interesting article plus many links by
Michael Karadjis from the University of Western Sydney to be found
here.