To outside observers, the turmoil in Syria is puzzling. With lightening speed, rebel groups, as the Western media now calls them, seized control of Syria. Though I can fathom the reasons behind the armed factions choosing this month to launch an attack against the regime of former Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad, I am also deeply worried about where Syria is heading.

Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS), previously known as the Jabhat Al-Nusra, Al-Qaeda’s official wing in the Syrian war until the breaking of ties in 2016, has been designated as a terrorist group. Today, it has seized control of Syria. It moved swiftly from Idlib to Aleppo, Homs, and Hama, and then into Damascus. Al-Assad abdicated power and left for Russia. 

In 2022, HTS had an estimated 6,000 to 15,000 members. For this faction to morph into a power capable of defeating the Syrian Army, even if it had consolidated with other factions, is bewildering. The exact figure of Syrian armed forces personnel is unknown, but in 2022, it was estimated to be 269,000. It does not seem as if Syrian troops were even deployed in the events earlier this month, leaving HTS to move in briskly and effortlessly.

Why didn’t the Syrian Army resist? What was Al-Assad told that had him choose to flee when he had resisted for 13 years? How can the West forgive and forget the true nature of HTS leader Mohamed Al-Golani? It appears that agreements behind closed doors took place. 

The Western media have chosen to depict HTS and Al-Golani in a constructive but striking fashion. First, it has insisted on calling the HTS factions rebels and not terrorists, extremists, or jihadists even though they are still considered to be terrorists by the UN and the US. 

One media source said that “Syria topples Al-Assad,” claiming that all of Syria had unified itself behind Al-Golani to rid itself of Al-Assad. Even more bizarre, according to the UK newspaper the Guardian, the US and the UK are considering removing HTS from the terror list “to deepen contact” with the Al-Qaeda offshoot. 

Once allied with Al-Qaeda, Al-Golani is now being portrayed in the Western media as a redeemed, legitimate, and moderate rebel. While the Western media brand him as having evolved into a positive and less brutal person, we must wait to see if the shift is genuine or merely strategic. 

The US network CNN, not Aljazeera or any other Arab media outlet, was given the privilege of speaking to Al-Golani during the conflict. It also had him use his real name for the first time, Ahmed Al-Sharaa, instead of the nom de guerre he has been known by. There was nothing dismissive about the portrayal; quite the contrary, his salient characteristics were highlighted and his previous history erased. In fact, in the interview he came across as a progressive leader and not a barbaric emir.

Minutes after Damascus had fallen into the grip of HTS on 8 December, CNN reporters roamed the city, confident in their own safety and projecting a jubilant and glorious story. According to CNN, the streets were calm, and the flags of the Al-Assad regime lay torn on the ground. According to CNN, peace had finally arrived in Damascus. 

This may be true, but the fact that Western media outlets ignored the dangers ahead, the link with Al-Qaeda, and the Islamist links, together with the Israeli air strikes on Syria, and cheered the incoming faction as though it was made up of heroes was mystifying and suspicious. 

Timing is of the essence. The US wants to come across as though it was not involved and will not get involved, but it does have over 900 armed personnel in Syria, which raises the question of how informed the US was of the developments?  

As the HTS gained ground and entered Damascus, the US utilised the moment to carry out a major round of airstrikes on Islamic State group targets. In a sense, it was supporting Al-Golani in his effort to take over Syria. No comment came from him or the HTS. 

Again, timing is of the essence. Only days after the ceasefire in Lebanon was implemented, Israel carried out hundreds of air strikes across Syria, striking military targets such as weapons facilities and missile arsenals. It also wiped out the Syrian Navy. Israel said that its aim was to stop weapons falling into the hands of extremists, a flimsy excuse to wipe out the Syrian Army. 

Israel also went further. An incursion into southern Syria advanced to about 25 km southwest of Damascus, destroying strategic targets as it went. However, according to the US network ABC News, “there was no immediate comment from the insurgent groups, led by Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham, or HTS, that have taken control of Damascus.” 

While the US and the UN special envoy for Syria called on Israel to halt its bombardments and movements inside the country, the Syrian media said that Syria’s new leader “is focused on the political transition for now.” It seems obvious that Al-Golani’s gutsy move was known to many others and was prepared for and timed perfectly. So, who are the winners and the losers behind the overthrow of the Al-Assad regime? 

Despite what the Western media have claimed, and despite what some Syrians themselves presume, Syria has not gained much. Quite the contrary: the future is gloomy and sombre. Too many opposing groups already exist on its soil, some jihadists and others ethnic such as the Kurds. Many states such as Russia, Turkey, Iran, Israel, and the US have splintered Syria into fragments. I doubt that all these groups will leave Syria in peace.

Then there is Israel. Israel is already on the move to gain more Syrian territory and utilise the present circumstances to its benefit. It may take over areas beyond the buffer zone in the south of the country, and it may continue its strikes on Syria, leaving it powerless. 

Besides, the HTS and Al-Golani have deep jihadist roots. Will their current “new look” persist, or is it a mere façade, and will the HTS impose stringent Islamic laws over all the minority groups in Syria, such as the Alawites, who supported Al-Assad, and the Armenians and Druze, amongst others? Given its Islamist roots, will it saddle the Syrians with an Islamic government like the one in Afghanistan? 

Iran and Russia have lost this round, a rather anticipated loss if Israel and its allies win. Both backed the ousted Syrian regime. I doubt that the new regime in Syria will seek to bolster its relationship with either of these countries. Iran used Syria to replenish Hizbullah and Hamas with weapons. Its role in Syria will definitely diminish.

Israel is the most important winner. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Al-Assad before the HTS push started that he was “playing with fire” by allowing the transfer of weapons to Hizbullah through Syria, and soon afterwards he gloated about the regime change in Syria, calling it a “historic day.” 

Once the dust had cleared, Israel pounded Syria immediately, succeeding in eliminating another thorn in its side by squashing the supply route to Hizbullah from Syria. If you think that the Israeli hostages in Gaza are of any consequence in what Israel is reaping today, you must be from another planet. 

Should Israel worry about Al-Golani and his Islamist group that has taken over Syria? I doubt it, since Al-Golani has said that his concern now is the Iranian and Hizbullah militias. At the same time, Israel has not been after Al-Golani’s troops, and Al-Golani and his group have turned a blind eye to Israel’s strikes on Syria. HTS has never got involved in the Gaza or Lebanon war, or even the Occupied Golan Heights, and it is now watching as Israel does what it wants. 

Craig Murray, a Scottish author, human rights campaigner, and former diplomat, has said on X that “Israel has just taken land in Syria up to twice the size of the Gaza Strip, and Israeli tanks are within 30 miles of Damascus and possibly closer. Yet, HTS has not fired one single shot at an Israeli soldier. If that doesn’t make you understand what happened, nothing will.”

As the Western media feed its followers this new reality, the world may well think that it is being told the true story. It may take years for observers to get to the honest truth. 

* The writer is a former professor of communication who is based in Vancouver, Canada.

* A version of this article appears in print in the 19 December, 2024 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly