&w=3840&q=100)
Amid bloody Sunni-Druze clashes, Israel warns Syria with fresh strike on tanks
Syrian government security forces gather on the outskirts of Sweida province where clashes erupted between Druze militias and Sunni Bedouin clans, southern Syria. AP
Israel's army said Monday it destroyed military tanks in southern Syria, as government forces and Bedouin tribes battled with Druze militias in the latest escalation in the Middle Eastern country battling for peace after a 13-year civil war.
In Syria's Sweida region, fighting between local militias and tribes has claimed the lives of several dozen individuals. Government security troops dispatched to restore order on Monday fought with local armed groups.
According to Syria's Interior Ministry, at than 30 people have been killed and almost 100 injured. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a UK-based war monitor, reported at least 99 deaths, including two children, two women, and 14 security forces personnel.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
The conflicts in Syria began between armed groups from the Druze and Sunni Bedouin clans, according to the observatory, with some members of the government security forces 'actively participating' in favour of the Bedouin.
According to Syrian Interior Ministry spokeswoman Noureddine al-Baba, government soldiers entered Sweida early this morning to restore order.
'Some clashes occurred with outlawed armed groups, but our forces are doing their best to prevent any civilian casualties,' he told state-run Al-Ikhbariya TV.
Clashes fundamentally 'not sectarian' in nature
Al-Baba told The Associated Press that the 'clashes are fundamentally not sectarian in nature.'
'The real conflict is between the state and bandits and criminals, not between the state and any Syrian community,' he said. 'On the contrary, the state views the Druze community in Sweida as a partner in advancing the national unity project.'
Rami Abdurrahman, who heads the observatory, said the conflict started with the kidnapping and robbery of a Druze vegetable seller by members of a Bedouin tribe who set up a checkpoint, leading to tit-for-tat attacks and kidnappings.
The Interior Ministry described the situation as a dangerous escalation that 'comes in the absence of the relevant official institutions, which has led to an exacerbation of the state of chaos, the deterioration of the security situation, and the inability of the local community to contain the situation.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
U.N. Deputy Special Envoy for Syria Najat Rochdi expressed 'deep concern' over the violence and urged the government and local groups to 'take immediate steps to protect civilians, restore calm, and prevent incitement.'
She said in a statement the clashes underscored the 'urgent need for genuine inclusion, trust-building, and meaningful dialogue to advance a credible and inclusive political transition in Syria.'
Israel sees Druze as a loyal minority
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said in a statement that the Israeli military 'attacked targets in Syria as a message and a clear warning to the Syrian regime — we will not allow harm to the Druze in Syria.'
In Israel, the Druze are seen as a loyal minority and often serve in the armed forces.
While many Druze in Syria have said they do not want Israel to intervene on their behalf, factions from the Druze minority have also been suspicious of the new authorities in Damascus after former President Bashar Assad fled the country in December during a rebel offensive led by Sunni Islamist insurgent groups. On several occasions, Druze groups have clashed with security forces from the new government or allied factions.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
In May, Israeli forces struck a site near the presidential palace in Damascus, in what was seen as a warning to Syrian interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa. The strike came after dozens were killed in fighting between pro-government gunmen and Druze fighters in the town of Sahnaya and the Druze-majority Damascus suburb of Jaramana.
Over half of the roughly 1 million Druze worldwide live in Syria. Most other Druze live in Lebanon and Israel, including in the Golan Heights, which Israel captured from Syria in the 1967 Mideast War and annexed in 1981.
A group led by Sheikh Hikmat Al-Hijri, a Druze spiritual leader who has been opposed to the new government in Damascus, on Monday issued a statement calling for 'international protection' and accused government forces and General Security agency of 'supporting takfiri gangs' — using a term for extremist Sunni militants.
Syria's Foreign Ministry called for 'all countries and organizations to respect the authority of the Syrian Arab Republic and refrain from supporting any separatist rebel movements.' In a statement, it called for Syrians to 'cease acts of violence, surrender illegal weapons and thwart those seeking to dismantle the Syrian social fabric and sow discord and division.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
'Like unwrapping an onion'
The Druze religious sect is a minority group that began as a 10th-century offshoot of Ismailism, a branch of Shiite Islam. In Syria, they largely live in the southern Sweida province and some suburbs of Damascus, mainly in Jaramana and Ashrafiyat Sahnaya to the south.
The Druze developed their own militias during the country's nearly 14-year civil war, during which they sometimes faced attacks by the Islamic State group and other militant groups.
Israel has taken an aggressive stance toward Syria's new leaders since Assad's fall, saying it does not want Islamic militants near its borders. Israeli forces earlier seized a U.N.-patrolled buffer zone on Syrian territory along the border with the Golan Heights and have launched hundreds of airstrikes on military sites in Syria.
The Trump administration has been pushing for the new Syrian government to move toward normalization with Israel. Syrian officials have acknowledged holding indirect talks with Israel to attempt to defuse tensions, but have not responded to reports that the two sides have also held direct talks.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
US envoy to Syria Tom Barrack told The Associated Press last week that he believes normalizing ties will happen 'like unwrapping an onion, slowly.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
a few seconds ago
- Hindustan Times
For Pakistan & US, it is back to doing business
There is a discernible sense of satisfaction within Pakistan's strategic fraternity at the undeniable uptick in the US-Pakistan interface over the past few months. Some may dispute the extent, but given how the relationship had eroded in the past decade-and-a-half, any improvement represents a big change. Given the transactional nature that dominates the US, there is the temptation to find direct factors for the upswing in US-Pakistan relations. (AP) The principal milestones of the US-Pakistan downturn are well known. For Pakistan, the US detection and killing of Osama bin Laden in 2011 in Abbottabad was a betrayal and a public humiliation. For many Pakistanis, that the US acted clandestinely deep inside Pakistan superseded the enormity of the fact that Osama had been living there all the time under the very noses of the Pakistan military. The free fall continued with mounting US frustrations over Pakistan's double game in Afghanistan. President Trump's 2018 New Year Day tweet exemplified this view. The tweet underlined US foolishness in giving Pakistan billions of dollars in aid in return for deceit and lies! This was consistent with emergent US narratives about Pakistan, but that it was from the President himself made it doubly significant. Through the Biden tenure matters crystallised at a low plateau of bad blood and mutual recriminations. The US's final withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021 in disorder and disarray added another layer to the deep strategic mistrust and suspicion that now characterised the relationship. President Biden did not have even a telecon with Imran Khan during the time he was PM and Imran Khan in turn blamed the US for his premature ouster from power. In the meantime, most US military and security assistance was suspended. What perhaps hurt Pakistan the most was the impact this had on training programmes for Pakistan military officers in the US. All this happened also when the India-US relationship seemed effortlessly to go from strength to strength. This further highlighted the distance between Washington and Islamabad. The past few months appear quite different. The change was animated quite dramatically by Field Marshal Asim Munir being hosted by President Trump in June 2025 in the immediate aftermath of Operation Sindoor. It is most unusual — perhaps even unprecedented — for a US president to host a chief of a foreign military who is not a head of State or government. This shift also coincides with new ambiguities in the US-India interface — perhaps triggered by President Trump's constant reiteration of having prevented further escalation in the India-Pakistan conflict during Operation Sindoor. To many in Pakistan, this has 'internationalised' Kashmir and highlighted the importance of third-party intervention as equally that even the US was skeptical about India's claims and demands. There had been earlier indicators of change beginning with President Trump's acknowledgement of Pakistan's counter-terrorism assistance in his State of the Union Address in March 2025. The allocation of a significant financial package as assistance to Pakistan for maintaining its F16 aircraft despite an otherwise stringent foreign aid cutback, was another. Alongside, more even-handed references to the India-Pakistan dynamic, meetings and telephone conversations between the US secretary of State and senior Pakistan leaders further underlined this shift. The announcement of a US-Pakistan Trade Agreement, albeit with a 19% tariff on imports from Pakistan, and Trump's enthusiastic references to hydrocarbon exploration and investment, are but the latest in this trend. The trade agreement may not be the best deal Pakistan could have got, but it is not as bad as could have been, and in any case some deal was better than no deal as far as the government of Pakistan was concerned. It may well be argued that there is nothing particularly significant in these transitions, but for most Pakistanis they suggest a return of their country to the US's radar after a long period of being out in the cold. What explains this shift? Given the transactional frame of mind that dominates the US, there is always the temptation to look for a direct and material factor. Numerous reasons are, therefore, assigned for this shift in US policy. Pakistan's counter-terrorism potential and the assistance it can offer is one. That the US is keen to have some relationship with Pakistan given the growing spread of China in the region is another. There is also the view that recommendations of the US Central Command on Pakistan's military potential vis-à-vis Iran in terms of its geographical location and the value of its air bases may have registered on the Presidency amid the current situation in West and South West Asia. Some argue that this shift in policy was also pushed along by crypto currency deals, and by US interest in potential Pakistani reserves of rare earth minerals. Each of these explanations may have some merit but perhaps the weight of any or all of these should not be exaggerated. Instead, it is useful to refocus on some basics. Pakistan is the fifth largest country in the world in terms of population with some 250 million people. It is riven by instability. It has nuclear weapons. It is situated in a sensitive geo-political location, almost in a global fault line. Given these attributes it was always only a matter of time that the long downturn in US Pakistan relations would reverse and US interest in Pakistan would reignite. We are at that stage now. All major powers decide on policies based on an appreciation of their own interests and their own understandings of evolving situations. To think that the long downturn in US Pakistan relations would have simply continued or that the US would see developments from our perspective alone is, and never was, a realistic assessment. We should take this shift in our stride. If some in India feel betrayed or dismayed at this turn of events, they have only themselves to blame. TCA Raghavan is a former Indian high commissioner to Pakistan. The views expressed are personal.
Hindustan Times
a few seconds ago
- Hindustan Times
India-US ties in the crosswires
India's blunt response to US President Donald Trump's repeated outbursts on New Delhi's trade and defence relations with Moscow highlighted the double standards of Western powers that have criticised India for purchasing discounted Russian commodities over the past three years. Trump, who follows a completely transactional and unpredictable approach to global trade and key geo-strategic relationships, has spoken more than once in recent days about levying an unspecified penalty on India for its purchases of energy and military hardware from Russia, over and above the 25% tariff that he has already imposed on exports to the US. India-US ties have evolved from the Cold War days, to achieve a relatively balanced relationship based on mutual respect, democratic values, and strategic interests. (AP) The external affairs ministry's response to Trump's latest fusillade against India has two key takeaways: One, New Delhi reserves the right to choose its trade partners and will exercise strategic autonomy to meet its security needs; and two, the West must end its hypocrisy of offering one set of principles for the rest of the world and following another set to meet its own energy imperatives. A year ago, US officials, albeit under a different administration, had assured the Indian side that Russian crude refined in a third country, such as India, is not a 'product of Russia' from a sanctions perspective. For India, Russian energy is a necessity to ensure predictable and affordable costs for Indian consumers amid volatile market conditions. At the same time, members of the EU and the US have retained their energy and other trade ties with Russia under carve-outs from sanctions packages. The EU's latest sanctions, for example, provide exemptions for Canada, Norway, Switzerland, the UK and the US from an import ban on refined products made from Russian oil. Such double standards do not sit well with Trump's sharp remarks about India. Sure, Trump's posturing may be aimed at pressuring India to conclude a trade deal that is to the advantage of the US, but this is no way to treat an important partner. While Washington has taken the moral high ground on Ukraine (one reason Trump has cited for targeting India), it appears unconcerned about Israel's war in Gaza that has claimed more than 60,000 Palestinian lives. Washington will be mistaken to take India for granted at a time when Trump is dining with the Pakistan army chief in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack. Such moves may even push New Delhi closer to Moscow, a longstanding and reliable ally. India-US ties have evolved from the Cold War days, when New Delhi was allied to Moscow and Washington patronised Islamabad, to achieve a relatively balanced relationship based on mutual respect, democratic values, and strategic interests. Trump's short-sighted and transactional approach to diplomacy threatens to disrupt that journey.
India Today
31 minutes ago
- India Today
Sure India buys its oil from Moscow. But WHO ELSE is trading with Russia?
Donald Trump has turned up the heat on India. Days after slapping a 25 per cent tariff on Indian exports, the US president warned that India's close energy and defence ties with Moscow could put it on the wrong side of America. He said tariffs could rise again within 24 hours, and accused New Delhi of fuelling Russia's war machine by buying cheap has not been a good trading partner... so we settled on 25 per cent, but I think I'm going to raise that very substantially over the next 24 hours, because they're buying Russian oil, they're fuelling the war machine, and if they're going to do that, I'm not going to be happy,' Trump why that charge rings hollow — and why it exposes the West's double standards. What's new: Donald Trump says he will impose a 25 per cent tariff on Indian exports to the US and add penalties for India's Russian oil and arms purchases. The threat comes even as the US and EU keep buying Russian commodities it matters: India gets 35 per cent of its crude oil from Russia, up from just one per cent before the Russia-Ukraine war. It is Moscow's largest weapons customer and a partner in joint defence production. Washington, DC and Brussels (the European Union HQ) accuse New Delhi of undermining sanctions, even as they import Russian liquefied natural gas, uranium, palladium, and fertilisers. Trump's proposed tariffs would raise economic risks and test a sevendecade partnership between India and numbers$68.7 billion: India-Russia trade in 2024–25; $63.8 billion in imports, $4.9 billion in exports67.5 billion: The EU's goods trade with Russia in 202435%: Share of India's crude oil from Russia in 2024, up from less than 1% prewar16.5 million tonnes: Record Russian LNG imported by the EU in 2024700M: EU's 2024 imports of Russian uranium products25%: Tariff that Trump vows to impose on Indian exports to the USIn-depth1. India's energy pivot: Before February 2022, Russia supplied less than one per cent of India's crude oil. The war and subsequent sanctions diverted Russian barrels from Europe to Asia. India stepped in, buying at steep discounts to secure affordable fuel for an economy that imports 85 per cent of its oil. Avoiding Russian crude would push New Delhi back toward more expensive Middle Eastern suppliers.2. Trump's threat: In a Truth Social post after unveiling the 25 per cent tariff plan, Trump wrote: 'I don't care what India does with Russia. They can take their dead economies down together, for all I care.' The proposed penalties would target both oil and arms purchases from Moscow, raising the stakes in US-India trade relations.3. Seven decades of strategic ties: India and Russia have been close partners since the Cold War. In 1971, during Bangladesh's war of independence, Moscow backed India while Washington, DC sided with Pakistan. Over the decades, the two have cooperated in space, energy, and defence.4. Defence dimension: Russia remains India's largest arms supplier, providing fighter jets, battle tanks, and missiles. Joint projects include Kalashnikov rifle production. But India has been diversifying. US defence sales to India exceed $24 billion, including attack helicopters, transport aircraft, and artillery. The Pentagon calls defence cooperation 'a major pillar' of the Western trade persists: While rebuking India, the US and EU continue to buy from LNG paradox: Record 16.5 million tonnes of Russian LNG in 2024Uranium dependence: Nearly a quarter of the uranium used in EU nuclear plants comes from RussiaUS reliance: Imports include uranium, palladium, fertilisers, and chemicals6. Double standards: India's Russian oil is about keeping fuel affordable for 1.4 billion people. Western imports often serve industrial or strategic needs. But they persist despite sanctions picture: The Ukraine war redrew the world's energy map. India's pivot to Russian crude was driven by necessity, not defiance. Western nations made their own pragmatic choices, keeping open trade in Russian commodities vital to their economies. Trump's tariff threat adds a new layer: The US could punish India for a policy it once tolerated, even as the West maintains its economic ties with they said: 'The targeting of India is unjustified and unreasonable. Like any major economy, India will take all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security,' said an Indian Foreign Ministry spokesperson on August 4.- EndsTune InMust Watch
