Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine and Washington have contributed to bringing Yabrud down

Two events have contributed to diverting attention away from the fall of Yabrud: a referendum in Crimea in favor of Russia, and a terrorist bombing in the Bekaa Valley. 

In fact, the fall of Yabrud hitting record speed raises a set of observations, most notably the following: 
-    The Syrian army and its most prominent ally Hezbollah are now capable simply and at the lowest possible cost of controlling a strategic area as Yabrud when they both decide to do so. 
This means that their strategy of combat has evolved significantly in the past year. This also means that this development portends the possibility of controlling other areas in Syria soon, and this will happen. 

-    The other military groups and battalions are facing a difficult moral status. What contributed to this is the fighting that took place between those groups for months before the Yabrud battle, as they were unable to unify the military command. Also, the growth of the Syrian army’s strength, and the decline of the size of the embracing environment, which no prefer the return of the state, as well as the disappearance of corruption among some officers of the Syrian army, all this was a reason for what they are going through. The corruption contributed in the beginning of the Syrian war to surrendering full zones and warehouses. 

-    The U.S. started to abandon these armed groups and this will increase in the next phase for three reasons, the first being unable to overthrow the regime by force, the second is the great concern over terrorism that has gripped the insurgencies, and the third is distrusting the state that is funding in terms of differentiating between the terrorist and the non-terrorist groups. Of course, Washington does not want to cut the two important strings of negotiation and rapprochement with Iran. 

-    The Saudi initiative to put the “Nusra”, “Daesh”, and “Al-Qaeda” on terrorism lists contributed to scattering the gunmen, to planting confusion between them, and to increasing the level of fighting. Riyadh was willing to pull the paper of fighting against terrorism from the hand of the Syrian government, Iran, and Hezbollah, but it instead weakened the combat capabilities of the insurgents and undermined their morale. 

-    The Saudi-Qatari clash which led to withdrawing the ambassadors of Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Bahrain from Qatar, and to adding the “Muslim Brotherhood” to the list of terrorist organizations by Riyadh, caused confusion in the ranks of the abroad opposition, through which the financing and armament process were taking place. What is being leaked from the opposition meetings demonstrates the size of hatred and recrimination about the party that is responsible for the failure. 

-    When Qatar sent signals about the possibility of changing the path of the winds regarding Syria and the substantial convergence with Iran, the “Nusra Front” and some of the armed groups that are said to be close to Doha believed that they will no longer be funded or supported. Thus, some of the jihadists began to return to their home country or to flee from the battlefield the time they see the soldiers of the Syrian army or the Hezbollah fighters. 

-    Iran’s success in attracting Turkey, in addition to the successive crises of the Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan internally, have had an impact on Turkey’s failed role in Syria. As a result, the Turkish army began to tightly control the Syrian fighters who are known of committing terrorism. According to information, the Turkish security began to hit some transients across its borders, even if there were no confirmed charges of terrorism against them. 

-    The media, international, and political transformation towards Ukraine made the Syrian army and its allies feel that the opportunity is suitable for accelerating the pace of decisiveness on the one hand, as well as the information leaked from people close to President Vladimir Putin suggests that he believes that the paper of military decisiveness in Syria is efficient for him in his battle in the Crimea. 

-    Supposedly, according to the Syrian military strategy, the pace of toppling major zones would continue as is the case nowadays. This will be achieved through qualitative military operations such as those launched by the Syrian army and Hezbollah, or through reconciliations and surrender processes. The central decision is to control the major and strategic areas before the presidential election next summer. If some people see that the fall of Yabrud and the Qalamoun areas is sort of a project of division through linking Damascus to the Syrian coast, the map of the upcoming battles will definitely contradict this. Aleppo would be targeted through the future plans, as well as Deir ez-Zor, and others. There would be no desire to conduct the presidential election without taking control of Aleppo. 

-    Based on the above mentioned, the military system of the armed groups seems to be in a difficult situation, and the international and regional cover seems to be in a more difficult one. Yet, the more serious question that is to be raised now: What would Israel do after noticing that the alliance of Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and their allies gave the armies of this state and its fighters high capacities to fight in difficult areas and on other unusual lands? 

There is no doubt that Israel and its allies are more anxious, because the military takeover in Syria means, first, a victory for the axis of resistance from Iran to the southern suburbs, and second Israel will be in the face of unparalleled armies and opponents. 

Israel bothered before a while Syria and Hezbollah to know the possibilities of their response.

However, the response came from the heart of Palestine through the Islamic Jihad rockets that were backed by Iranian, and then from the borders of Lebanon. The message was clear: taking the battle back to inside Israel is possible if it sought to reverse the military balance on the ground in Syria. 

Precisely, the Yabrud battle was a strategic par excellence battle, even though the response to it would be through some terrorist operations in Lebanon and Syria. According to the Syrian leadership, the case before the Yabrud battle will be different than that after it.