Six killed in attack by pro-government militias on tribal area in Syria's north-east
The violence in the town of Suluk, to the east of the Euphrates River in Raqqa governorate, came after members of the Unai, the main tribe in the area, expelled on Monday a militia called the Sunni Lions, which is part of a constellation of armed groups in the region supported by Ankara and allied with Syria's ruling Hayat Tahrir Al Sham (HTS).
The main conflict in the north-east is between US-backed Kurdish forces and the Turkish-backed government in Damascus and its auxiliaries. The violence in Suluk indicates disagreements between the central authorities and Arab tribes. The tribes have been trying to regain influence on their home turf, after their areas repeatedly changed hands in the 14 years of Syria's civil war between anti-Assad rebel Kurdish militias, pro-Iranian forces and finally Turkish-backed forces.
Local resident Hamlan Al Ein said the expulsion of the Sunni Lions was sparked by the beating by militiamen of an elderly man in the street while he was with his grandchild.
"It was the tipping point. People are fed up with their racketeering and thuggishness," Mr Al Ein told The National. He said militiamen then returned to Suluk on Tuesday, accompanied by units of the Syrian National Army, another militia supported by Turkey.
"They fired mortar rounds and Dushkas randomly," Mr Al Ein said, referring to a Soviet-era heavy machine-gun. "They broke into shops and rampaged in the town."
The dead comprised two tribal fighters and four civilians, he said. There was no information about casualties among the attacking forces.
Abdallah Najm, commander of the Sunni Lions, appeared in a video statement from the main square in Suluk. He accused the Unai of "provocation against the government" and marring joy over the removal of Syria's former Bashar Al Assad regime.
Mr Najm brandished a tribal robe at the end of his statement, a symbol of victory.
The Syrian National Army captured Suluk in 2018 from the mostly Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a militia supported by the US that still controls large areas of north-east Syria. Since the fall of former president Mr Al Assad, the Syrian National Army, the Sunni Lions and other Arab militias have allied with HTS.
HTS, which was formerly linked with Al Qaeda, is led by Ahmad Al Shara, the current Syrian president. Mr Al Shara has been seeking to enlist tribal support in the east to undermine the SDF. He has used a similar strategy against other foes in his quest to consolidate control over the country.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
3 hours ago
- The National
Dropping aid into Gaza and the fate of a ceasefire
Israel has begun allowing aid to be dropped into Gaza by parachute. In Israel, far-right figures are objecting to permitting aid into Gaza. Syria, France and the US have agreed to meet on Kurdish integration. On today's episode of Trending Middle East: UAE and Jordan planes drop food and humanitarian aid into Gaza Israel claims aid trickling in after widespread condemnation of blockade Paris to host Syria talks on integrating Kurds This episode features Hamza Hendawi, Cairo correspondent, and Thomas Helm, Jerusalem correspondent. Editor's note: We want to hear from you! Help us improve our podcasts by taking our 2-minute listener survey. Click here.
The National
12 hours ago
- The National
Syria expected to hold parliamentary election in September, official says
Syria is expected to hold its first parliamentary election under the new government in September, the head of the electoral process said. Voting for the People's Assembly should take place from September 15-20, the head of Syria's High Elections Committee Mohamed Taha Al Ahmad said. President Ahmad Al Shara"emphasised the necessity of proceeding with the electoral process in all Syrian governorates, rejecting division, which is denounced by all Syrians," he said. All those who "sided with the criminals and supported them" and individuals "who advocate for division, sectarianism and factionalism" will be excluded from running in the vote. He added that the number of parliamentary seats will increase from 150 to 210, with the president appointing 70 members. This decision is likely to come under intense scrutiny following President Al Shara's decision to appoint two brothers, Maher and Hazem, to top government positions. Mr Ahmad said the international community and independent election monitors will be invited to oversee the poll. The vote will be the first after the fall of Bashar Al Assad's regime. Mr Al Shara, leader of a former Al Qaeda offshoot, came to power in Syria after guerrilla fighters he led brought down Assad in December, after more than 13 years of civil war. The announcement came as the country was gripped by a series of violent incidents in recent weeks. A Syrian committee investigating sectarian violence in the Alawite heartland said on Tuesday it had identified 298 suspects implicated in serious violations during bloodshed that left at least 1,426 members of the religious minority dead in March. The findings come after fresh violence involving the country's Druze community, raising further questions over the new government's ability to manage sectarian tensions.
The National
15 hours ago
- The National
Why the world is treating the new Syria differently from the new Lebanon, and what Beirut can learn from that
The US, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries are pressing ahead to encourage Syria to become a model for much of the Middle East. That involves co-existence with Israel, the containment of extremist movements and engagement with minorities, all within the framework of the state. The issue of the state's monopoly on the possession of arms remains a major hurdle. Some of Syria's minority groups insist on retaining their weapons until it becomes clear how the new government will handle their rights and to what extent it will rein in extremist militants. There is also the issue of federalism and decentralisation, which the state opposes. But despite the massacres and atrocities committed in Sweida and on the coast, those investing in President Ahmed Al Shara's project and the new Syrian model are forging ahead. When it comes to the future of Lebanon, however, western countries – namely the 'European three' (E3, which comprises the UK, France and Germany) and the US – are wavering on several fronts. In dealing with Lebanon itself, the E3 has chosen to take a backseat to US diplomacy, led by Ambassador to Turkey and special envoy for Lebanon and Syria Thomas Barrack. But Iran is a hugely important part of what happens in Lebanon, and the E3 limited recent discussions with representatives from Tehran solely to nuclear issues. Iran's nuclear programme must be addressed, but that should not prevent Europe from raising other concerns, like Tehran's proxy network. Succumbing to Iran's traditional insistence that neither the US nor Europe discuss its regional proxies, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, is a strategic error. It fails to prevent Iran's ongoing erosion of Lebanese sovereignty its use of Lebanon as a bargaining chip in negotiations with the West. Europe is not challenging Tehran's directive to Hezbollah to keep its arms instead of handing them over to the Lebanese state. This is dangerous, especially given how confused and contradictory US positions have become towards both Iran and Lebanon. Europe is not challenging Tehran's directive to Hezbollah to keep its arms Mr Barrack's three visits to Lebanon have drawn criticism because at times he wielded the stick and at others, he expressed understanding of the 'complexity' of disarming Hezbollah. One moment, he described Hezbollah as a political party and the next a terrorist organisation. He appears to have emerged from meetings with Lebanese officials more influenced by their appeasement tactics than persuasive in moving them towards sovereign decision-making. The contradictions in the American position in Lebanon may be intentional, as part of a strategy to alarm Lebanese officials and the public, or unintentional, the result of Mr Barrack's frequent gaffes, only to be followed by retractions. Mr Barrack says he understands the 'difficulties', and that 'everyone is doing their part and trying to settle things in Lebanon, but the situation is complex, both for Lebanese leaders and for all of us'. Such statements devalue American prestige and seriousness. They are not so much the words of a serious emissary carrying US President Donald Trump's demand that Lebanon's leaders enforce a monopoly on arms as they are those of a local-style politician who 'understands' the difficulties but cannot guarantee how Israel might react to Hezbollah's outright refusal to disarm. Nor has Steve Witkoff, Mr Trump's envoy to the Iran negotiations, insisted that Iran cease using its grip over Lebanon through Hezbollah as a negotiation card with Washington. All of this will cost Lebanon dearly when Israel inevitably destroys its infrastructure in response to Hezbollah's rebuilding of its military capabilities, including Iranian missiles on Lebanese soil. The Trump administration does not want Israel to open multiple fronts. But it also cannot restrain Israel in Lebanon if Israel deems Hezbollah's refusal to disarm a security threat. Yet in Syria, Mr Trump wants Israel to act with restraint. Iran has lost its staging ground there, a devastating blow to its regional axis. And while Washington recognises the persistence of extremism and the survival of ISIS, it believes that containment of these factions is possible through co-optation, offering them a slice of the cake instead of a bloody conflict. In return, Israel gains a buffer zone and security guarantees along its border with Syria. The message to Israel is that even if ISIS remains dominant in some areas, security arrangements can contain its threat as long as it remains within isolated pockets that pose no danger to the Syrian state structure. In other words, Syria will not be a threat to Israel. Gulf states have quickly moved to encourage Syria's re-integration into the Arab fold. Despite all the challenges, the Gulf is a key partner in backing Mr Al Shara and rebuilding Syria. This was reflected last week in the Saudi-Syrian Investment Forum, a watershed moment that signalled a long-term strategic partnership between Riyadh and Damascus. Forty-seven agreements and memoranda of understanding were signed, worth about $6.4 billion. They included the construction of a medical city as well as deals in agriculture, industry, transport, gas, water, electricity, infrastructure and real estate development. Syria is being placed on a new track, and should indeed be congratulated for this strategic leap towards realism that embraces investment as the basis of policy. One hopes Lebanon's leaders take a lesson from their new counterparts in Damascus and abandon their arrogance towards eager assistance from fellow Arab states, hiding behind the excuse of being unable to rein in Hezbollah. They ought to demand the US, Europe and the Arab world also pressure Iran and not just offer security guarantees via Israel, because the two issues are inseparable. One hopes they also cease dodging political accountability under the guise of protecting Lebanon's safety. Perhaps Arab states will consider taking a calculated risk in supporting Lebanon, as they did in Syria. Both countries suffer from instability. Just as Hezbollah and Israel are playing havoc with Lebanon, extremist fundamentalism continues to trouble Syria. May the international partnership playing a constructive role in Syria inspire those involved to think outside the box in order to rescue Lebanon from regional war and ruin. Lebanon, too, deserves to be rebuilt and invested in to defy those who want it destroyed.
