The Israeli news site Walla has some unexpected good news about Syria.
From The Algemeiner:
“Under the pressure of continuing IAF air strikes, Iran is beginning to draw down its military presence in Syria, unnamed Israeli security officials were quoted as saying on May 4.
Iran’s economy is in free fall. It cannot spend nearly as much on its foreign adventures, helping proxies and allies in Yemen, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, as it could just two years ago, before the re-imposition of American sanctions. For not only have those sanctions been crushing, but Iran has also been hard hit by the coronavirus, which has forced the shutting down of much of its economy. And at the same time as the coronavirus pandemic hit, there was a collapse in the market for, and price of, oil, so that even if the American sanctions were to be lifted, Iran will be making much less from the sale of its oil than anyone could have predicted just a few months ago.
Walla cited Israeli officials saying, “For the first time since Iran entered Syria, it is reducing its forces there and evacuating bases.”
Israel won’t give the Iranians in Syria time to catch their breath; it’s war from the air without let-up. No sooner do the Iranians reinforce an existing, or build a new, base in Syria, than the Israeli Air Force appears, ready to destroy whatever the Iranians have managed to create on the ground. The Israeli planes bomb apparently at will; not a single IAF plane has been downed or even damaged by the Iranians during this campaign that has gone on, relentlessly, over the last few years.
IRGC officers had always assumed that once they had helped Bashar al-Assad to regain control of almost all of Syria, the grateful Syrians would share Syrian bases with IRGC forces, and also permit them to build their own, Iranian bases on Syrian soil. Both were done, but neither Syria nor Iran understood in time the efficacy and potency of the Israeli Air Force. After all, the Israelis had allowed Hezbollah to accumulate 140,000 rockets in their Lebanese armories, without destroying them – why would Israel behave any differently now? But Israeli strategists bitterly regretted having allowed that huge accumulation of rockets by Hezbollah, which has hidden them in urban areas in southern Lebanon, where any attack by Israel now would cause major collateral damage. Israel was determined not to repeat that error.
Consequently, bases either being shared by the Syrians with their Iranian allies, or built by Iran for its exclusive use, have been systematically destroyed, along with weapons stockpiled there, some for use by the Iranians in a future conflict with Israel, while others may have been intended for delivery to Hezbollah.
The blood-curdling warnings issued by Iran, threatening Israel with a terrible vengeance, have had no effect on the IAF. The Israelis, undeterred, keep on with their crippling air campaign. Iran, it turns out, takes a while to learn its lesson, but eventually it does so, and at the beginning of May the IDF noticed that not only are the Iranians no longer building new bases in Syria, but are also pulling out of those places where they had still managed to maintain a presence.
“Syria is paying an increasing price due to the Iranian presence on its territory for a war that is not [Syria’s],” they [Israeli officials] added.
The IAF hits Iranian targets even when they are in the midst of, or next to, or very near, Syrian bases. The IAF bombs destroy both Iranian and Syrian structures, blow up Iranian and Syrian weapons depots, and kill Syrian as well as Iranian soldiers. Just as non-Hezbollah buildings were unavoidably destroyed by the IAF during the Israel-Hezbollah War of 2006, the IAF has caused significant damage to Syrian bases, buildings, and fighters. That is the “increasing price” that Syria is paying “due to the Iranian presence on its territory.” Another Israeli target inside Syria has been the advanced weapons — precision-guided missiles — that Iran, with Syrian help, tries to deliver to Hezbollah. Since 2012, the IAF has carried out hundreds of sorties inside Syria, aimed at stopping the delivery of those weapons to Hezbollah. This effort seems to have worked; no increase in Hezbollah’s supply of such missiles has been discerned.
“Iran has turned from an asset for Syria into a burden,” the [Israeli] officials asserted.
They added that Israel would maintain pressure on Iran “until it leaves Syria.”
Recently, Israel has stepped up its attacks on Iranian targets in Syria, including an air strike on May 3 near Aleppo. Strikes last week hit Homs, Quneitra and the outskirts of Damascus.
Now that Assad has essentially won the civil war, with only a small area in Idlib Province still unconquered, he no longer needs the Iranians as he once did. There are signs of a possible rapprochement between Syria and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), even though the Emirates remain one of Iran’s staunchest enemies. On March 27, Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi and Deputy Supreme Commander of the UAE Armed Forces, spoke on the phone with Bashar al-Assad about the spread of coronavirus throughout the region.
According to the state-run Emirates News Agency, Zayed spoke about “rising above political issues during this common challenge that we are all facing.” The Syrian state news agency SANA also noted that Zayed had stressed that Syria would not be alone in these critical circumstances. In response, Assad “praised the humanitarian position of the UAE and welcomed his [Zayed’s] cooperation.”
After the massive destruction of the Syrian Civil War, Syria will need hundreds of billions of dollars in reconstruction money. Such sums can only come from the Gulf Arabs, and the price they may demand is that Syria remove all Iranian fighters and weapons from its territory, and to end its no-longer-necessary alliance with Iran. For Syria, this pivot in foreign policy makes eminent good sense. Iran is no longer in a position to help Syria financially or militarily, and the continued presence of its forces in Syria endangers Assad’s fighters, who may become collateral damage, along with their weaponry, from deadly Israeli air strikes.
Defense Minister Naftali Bennett vowed Israel would not permit Iran to entrench itself in Syria, saying, “For Iran, Syria is an adventure a thousand miles from home, for us it’s our lives.”
“We are much more determined” than Iran, he declared.
Israel has achieved what it wanted in Syria, through its bold, relentless, and brilliant air campaign. There will be no Iranian bases in Syria. The Syrians themselves don’t want them. Iranian forces are pulling out. And they have done so without having been able to deliver precision-guided missiles to Hezbollah in Lebanon, or to upgrade the missiles already in Hezbollah’s armory.
Defense Minister Naftali Bennett has made a geopolitical point that the less fanatical, wiser heads in Tehran will do well to heed. It bears repeating: “For Iran, Syria is an adventure a thousand miles from home, for us, it’s our lives.”
Buraq says
And oddly enough, May the 4th has another historical resonance that fits the Iran situation perfectly. It was on May the 4th that Nazi Germany signed its surrender on Luneberg Heath. Like the Nazis of the past, the announcement on May 4th that the Islamic fascists are pulling up stakes in Syria has a resonance that is uncanny!
Charles Ford says
You kind of wonder why the Arabians haven’t duplicated what was done in Lebanon by putting their bases and sources and heavily populated areas did the government of Syria and Russia refused to permit this
Boromir's Horn says
Allah let the door hit ’em in the ass
Roland says
It is remarkable that the Russians (under Putin) have allowed the Israelis to bomb out the Iranians and associated Syrians without retribution. Israel, under Netanyahu, fortunately took advantage of this diplomatic window of opportunity.
Now, the Israelis face a difficult challenge in Hezbollah-controlled Lebanon.
Will the Americans, post- January 20, 2021, continue to allow the Israelis to defend themselves?
Hugh Fitzgerald says
Putin’s personali may help to explain Russian forbearance for Israeli bombing of Iranian and Syrian sites. He is that most unusual thing, a Russian ruler who is not an antisemite.
The reason has to do, I think, with his personal history. He lived in a communal apartment, and among those who shared the apartment wA a family of observant Jews — Orthodox, I believe, — who were poor, and for whom he developed a great affection. He also learned German from a Jewish lady, Mina Berliner, who lived in the same apartment block, whose lessons helped keep Putin from becoming a “hooligan” (that knowledge of German was what led to his later becoming a KGB agent in Germany).
Mina Berliner moved to Israel. When Putin visited Israel, he sought out his old teacher, and he also moved her from her modest rental to an apartment he bought for her in the center of Tel Aviv.
Putin also did sports — I think it was judo — with two Jewish brothers who became his friends. And there are other details about Putin’s warm relations throughout his life with Russian Jews worth telling, but perhaps I’ll put them in a separate article and post it at Jihad Watch.
Frank Anderson says
Roland, purely as a matter of my opinion, anyone who tries to prevent Israel from defending itself is in for a miserable lesson. Whatever discord exists in Israel with more or less as many parliamentary parties as existed in Weimar Germany, that discord ends on the subject of self-defense.
Daniel Triplett says
Putin wears a crucifix his mother gave him around his neck at all times Is Putin an Islam apologist, or is he just trying to plug a hole in the dike with his finger for the time being?
Putin can’t win the Islamic War by his self. He has 15+% Muslims within his borders, and his southern border is lined with Muslim states. He’d be overrun and destroyed if he tried to fight the global war by his self while the rest of the World stood by silently or in opposition and watched. He knows that. If we intend to defeat the Ummah in war (they obviously intend to extinguish us), then we must have a Worldwide allied front, not to exterminate the Ummah, but to break their will to fight and force their surrender. Every state on the globe must choose one of two sides. How can we win this war unless we do? The Ummah is well organized and has a multi-generational plan for victory, with a 1400 year record of accomplishment. We do not. We haven’t even identified our enemy yet, much less developed a global plan to defeat it. Kafirs are losing the war badly.
Regardless of any local allegiance either Russia or the West feels necessary with Muslims, (the US trains the militaries of Sunni gulf states and Egypt, and sells them all kinds of sophisticated weapons [to which I personally disagree]), perhaps Putin is focusing on the big picture and honoring the ultimate end objective: Ummah loses, Kafirs win. The West must figure this out too.
Perhaps from a global perspective, Putin respects that there are only two sides in this 1400 year zero-sum war: Ummah and Kafirs.
gravenimage says
Putin, sadly, is a regular apologist for Islam.
jimjfox says
Is that why he blasted Chechnya/ Grozny into submission? And has he forgotten Beslan? NO- he uses islam, “lying to their faces whilst in his heart he hates them”
gravenimage says
jim, Putin has allowed full Shari’ah law to be imposed in Chechnya, including the persecution of Christians–he has also been involved in building Muslims mega-Mosques.
jimjfox says
According to a documentary, Lebanon is on the point of collapse, unable to make interest payment on its massive loans. As in Iran there is a protest movement gathering pace as people cannot feed themselves.
Jake says
Too bad the West doesn’t have more Naftali Bennetts. We have Ivy League Literature majors and Iranian born communists just fine with the surrender to Iran and the collapse of Western values.
Zimriel says
Syria’s government, as “Alawite”, serves guarantor of what’s left of Christianity in southwest Syria and Lebanon. They’ve been resisting the jihad too. Well… half the jihad
Assad calling in Hezb and the Islamic Republic was a deal with the devil (as was releasing all that ISIS, to give the Qaeda a hard time). Without the Shi’a jihad on his side, Assad is weaker; but he does improve his ability to protect local seculars and Christians, for their own sake rather than for Shi’ism’s.
Overall this COULD be good news but I’d not pop the champagne yet.
gravenimage says
The Islamic Republic of Iran is Pulling Out of Syria
……………..
Hard to know how to feel about this. Israel is safer with Iran out of the picture, and for that I am very glad. But Syria under Assad–bad as that is–may be under even more threat from Sunni Jihadists in the region, and this puts surviving Christians and Yezidis in the region under even more threat.
Frank Anderson says
GI, under any muslim government, is any non-muslim safe?
gravenimage says
No, Frank, they aren’t. Syria still oppresses Infidels, but because they need Christians as allies, has been somewhat less horrific than most of Dar-al-Islam.