1. Jabhat al-Nusra is important on the battlefield, but it is far from the leading group in the rebellion and the opposition. The Islamic Front --- including factions such as Ahrar al-Sham and Jaish al-Islam which are much larger than Jabhat al-Nusra --- the Southern Front, and the Levant Front (now "renamed" Fateh Haleb) blocs are the notable forces. They do not include Jabhat al-Nusra, although they cooperate with it in operations such as the Jaish al-Fateh operations room.
Slapping the label "Salafi Jihadis" on all those groups is simplistic and wrong --- for example, Free Syrian Army units are involved in all the blocs --- and does not begin to appreciate the religious and political debates as these blocs develop.
2. One of the senior members of Ahrar al-Sham, Abu Khalid al-Suri, was Ayman al-Zawahiiri's representative in Syria. He was killed in 2014 by the Islamic State as he tried to broker a truce between the Islamic State and rebel factions.
However, he is the exception rather than the rule. Few in the Ahrar al-Sham leadership have any ties with Al Qa'eda, and the group has made clear --- under Hassan Abboud, killed in September 2014 in a bombing, and under present leadership --- that it does not subscribe to Al Qa'eda's ideology.
The simple and false equation of Ahrar al-Sham=Al Qa'eda has been pushed by some of the same folks who pushed for US entry into the 2003 Iraq War, so it is interesting to see it replayed here.
3. Countering the false presentation of the complex nature of the Syrian rebels and opposition should not be dismissed with the equally false charge of "downplaying" the issues --- to the contrary, it highlights them. As Assad is going to lose this war, it is probably important to have an understanding of that complexity rather than to put it into a convenient if inaccurate box of "Al Qa'eda".
With respect, this is a dangerously misleading piece, far below the standards of this site.
"Al Qa'eda-linked groups" did not take Jisr al-Shughour --- or indeed make the wider gains of an offensive across Idlib and Hama Provinces that could turn the course of the war.
None of the groups involved have links to Al Qa'eda except Jabhat al-Nusra. Some may be called "Islamist", such as Ahrar al-Sham, but this general category does not capture the debates over religious and political approaches going on right now. Other groups are "Islamic" or "secular".
Thank you for the reply.
1. Jabhat al-Nusra is important on the battlefield, but it is far from the leading group in the rebellion and the opposition. The Islamic Front --- including factions such as Ahrar al-Sham and Jaish al-Islam which are much larger than Jabhat al-Nusra --- the Southern Front, and the Levant Front (now "renamed" Fateh Haleb) blocs are the notable forces. They do not include Jabhat al-Nusra, although they cooperate with it in operations such as the Jaish al-Fateh operations room.
Slapping the label "Salafi Jihadis" on all those groups is simplistic and wrong --- for example, Free Syrian Army units are involved in all the blocs --- and does not begin to appreciate the religious and political debates as these blocs develop.
2. One of the senior members of Ahrar al-Sham, Abu Khalid al-Suri, was Ayman al-Zawahiiri's representative in Syria. He was killed in 2014 by the Islamic State as he tried to broker a truce between the Islamic State and rebel factions.
However, he is the exception rather than the rule. Few in the Ahrar al-Sham leadership have any ties with Al Qa'eda, and the group has made clear --- under Hassan Abboud, killed in September 2014 in a bombing, and under present leadership --- that it does not subscribe to Al Qa'eda's ideology.
The simple and false equation of Ahrar al-Sham=Al Qa'eda has been pushed by some of the same folks who pushed for US entry into the 2003 Iraq War, so it is interesting to see it replayed here.
3. Countering the false presentation of the complex nature of the Syrian rebels and opposition should not be dismissed with the equally false charge of "downplaying" the issues --- to the contrary, it highlights them. As Assad is going to lose this war, it is probably important to have an understanding of that complexity rather than to put it into a convenient if inaccurate box of "Al Qa'eda".
With respect, this is a dangerously misleading piece, far below the standards of this site.
"Al Qa'eda-linked groups" did not take Jisr al-Shughour --- or indeed make the wider gains of an offensive across Idlib and Hama Provinces that could turn the course of the war.
None of the groups involved have links to Al Qa'eda except Jabhat al-Nusra. Some may be called "Islamist", such as Ahrar al-Sham, but this general category does not capture the debates over religious and political approaches going on right now. Other groups are "Islamic" or "secular".
Full coverage at http://eaworldview.com/topics/syria/