Informal Institute for National Security Thinkers and Practitioners

Quotes of the Day:

"It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues."

– Abraham Lincoln

“There is no national science, just as there is no national multiplication table; what is national is no science.”

– Anton Chekhov

"Every man takes the limits of his own field of vision for the limits of the world."

- Arthur Schopenhauer

1. H.R. McMaster: My Travels with Trump

2. Bashar al-Assad, an Ophthalmologist Who Became a Dictator, Is the Last of a Despotic Dynasty

3. Assad’s Rule Collapses in Syria, Raising Concerns of a Vacuum

4. Caught Off Guard: Strategic Surprise in History and Lessons for National Security Strategy.

5. What to Know About the Civil War in Syria

6. Leader of Syria's biggest rebel faction calls Assad's fall a 'victory to the Islamic nation'

7. How an Assassin Escaped One of the Most Surveilled Cities in the World

8. He Investigates the Internet’s Most Vicious Hackers—From a Secret Location

9. Losing Syria Is A 'Huge Slap In The Face' For Russia

10. Roughly 900 US Troops Still in Syria as Rebels Close in on Damascus

11. Frontline report: Ukraine destroys Russian S-400 shield to target North Korean training camps in Kursk

12. Blending AI with Human Judgment: Man, Machine, and the Battlefield in Modern Warfare

13. State Department aims to get more career ambassadors in place before 2nd Trump term

14. In the Syrian Regime’s Hour of Need, Its Patron Iran Makes an Exit

15. The Pentagon knows it's got a drone problem. Here's what it's doing about it.

16. Why the Syrian army collapsed so quickly in northern Syria

17. Syria's Assad resigns and leaves the country after stunning rebel blitz, Russia says

18. Guam: The U.S. Military's Achilles Heel in War with China?

19. Austin: U.S. Leadership, Alliances Make for a More Secure World

20. This Chinese Drone Company Found a Workaround to Congress's Ban on Doing Business in the US—Before the Ban Is Even Passed

1. H.R. McMaster: My Travels with Trump

H.R. McMaster is one of the only people who are trying to provide a balanced view of the President-elect.

H.R. McMaster: My Travels with Trump

‘I wished more Americans could understand the good, as well as the bad and the ugly, of the Trump presidency.’ The former U.S. National Security Adviser is the star of our next Book Club.

https://www.thefp.com/p/hr-mcmaster-travels-with-trump?utm

By H.R. McMaster

December 7, 2024

America needs sober, fair assessments of Donald Trump. There’s enough people demonizing the once and future president, and enough people idolizing him, too. But as we prepare for his return to the White House, we need people who see all sides of the president. People like H.R. McMaster.

McMaster served as National Security Adviser for roughly the first year of Trump’s presidency. He was, and remains, a military legend. McMaster served as a captain in the Gulf War, a colonel in the Iraq War, and a brigadier general in Iraq. While working for Trump, he remained on active duty as a lieutenant general. He’s earned a Silver Star, among a dozen other awards. He’s also a scholar and best-selling author, most recently of At War with Ourselves, an account of what he calls his “tour of duty” in the White House.

It’s no secret that we admire H.R. here at The Free Press. He’s appeared on Honestly twice—to speak about America’s failure in Afghanistan, and the possibility of nuclear escalation between Russia and Ukraine. But with the Middle East on the brink and his old boss coming back, his voice is more important than ever. So we’re incredibly excited to announce he will be the star of our next Free Press Book Club, hosted by Michael Moynihan in the retired general’s hometown of Philadelphia.

To understand why At War with Ourselves is an essential read, we’re running an excerpt, in which H.R. reveals the inside story of Trump’s first foreign tour as president—to Saudi Arabia, Israel, the Vatican, the NATO headquarters in Brussels, and a G7 summit in Taormina, Italy. It is a rare insight into how Trump thinks about the world, how he makes decisions, and how he’s influenced by the people around him.

H.R. will be talking to Michael about all this, and more, on January 7 at Philly’s National Constitution Center. You can get tickets by clicking here—and we recommend booking early. (Our last Book Club, with Peggy Noonan, sold out in a couple of hours.) In the meantime, you can order At War with Ourselves today—and scroll down for our exclusive excerpt. —The Editors

Saudi Arabia’s King Salman welcomes Trump at the King Khalid International Airport in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on May 20, 2017. (Bandar Algaloud via Getty Images)

Saudi Arabia

As Air Force One took off, I felt a sense of relief. I was happy to leave behind Washington for a while. Maybe the overseas trip would allow us to focus on the substance of foreign policy.

I shared the four-person office between the galley and the conference room with the president’s chief economic adviser, Gary Cohn; his chief of staff, Reince Priebus; and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. They complained about the uncomfortable chairs that did not recline. I assured them that Air Force One was much more comfortable than the cargo aircraft I was used to taking to the Middle East. I learned on those flights that the key to getting rest was to stake out a comfortable spot on the floor.

President Trump was in a good mood when he popped into the office. He noted, as he often would on trips abroad, “General, you are always working.” And I gave what was becoming my standard answer: “Mr. President, that is what you hired me to do.”

Before dinner was served, I briefed the president and First Lady Melania Trump on the first three stops of what would be a nine-day odyssey.

The first stop, Saudi Arabia, had been a strategic partner since 1945. But it had also been the principal funder of mosques and schools that systematically taught an ideology that was a gateway to jihadist terrorism. ISIS was using Saudi textbooks to teach children to hate Jews as well as “infidels” and “rejectionists” who did not adhere to their extreme interpretation of Sunni Islam.

I advised Trump against getting involved in internal Saudi politics, especially the power struggle between the then-crown prince, Mohammed bin Nayef (MBN), and his cousin, Mohammed bin Salman (MBS). One month later, MBN would be unseated and replaced by MBS, who remains crown prince to this day.

Kushner had a close relationship with MBS. I had my doubts, but I believed that Saudi Arabia was at a turning point. MBS had told the president when he visited Washington weeks earlier that his father, King Salman, now understood the danger of proselytizing hatred and intolerance. And the kingdom was deeply concerned about Iran’s intensification of its proxy wars in Iraq, Yemen, and Syria and its pursuit of nuclear weapons.

King Salman welcomed Trump and the First Lady at the foot of Air Force One. They walked together on a red carpet lined by a military honor guard. As our motorcade departed King Khalid International Airport, it was already clear that our hosts had pulled out all the stops. Billboards welcoming Trump with his smiling image lined the highway on the way to the Royal Court palace.

I thought to myself that they knew exactly how to win Trump’s favor.

As we turned onto the road leading to the palace gate, over a dozen horses flanked the presidential limousine, their riders carrying alternating American and Saudi flags. After a ceremony during which Saudi officials and U.S. heads of defense and other large companies signed letters of intent for over $110 billion in deals, we traveled to The Ritz-Carlton hotel to prepare for dinner.

That’s when we learned the billboards and the horses had been only a warm-up. As we turned down the hotel’s long driveway, laser lights lit up the building with alternating images of the American and Saudi flags and the faces of President Trump and King Salman. Although press reports dismissed the fanfare as the Saudis playing to Trump’s penchant for adulation, Saudi leaders were also signaling their desire to welcome the United States back after the estrangement of the Obama years.

After the dinner at the palace, I went to the president’s suite to hear his assessment and to summarize the next day’s activities. Trump seemed at home in the ornate, gilded hotel room packed with extravagant floral arrangements, fruit bowls, date trays, and plates of Middle Eastern sweets. The pageantry and the successful meetings seemed to have invigorated him.

Steve Bannon was engaged in his typical combination of sycophancy and agitation, alternating praise for the president with lamentations of how Trump was under assault from the press, the FBI, the deep state, and “globalists.” As Cohn and I tried to help Trump focus on the next day’s events, Bannon pulled Trump back into his preferred territory: the morass of partisan domestic politics. He must have recognized that his influence depended on Trump’s anxiety and sense of beleaguerment. I had begun to see Bannon as a brash yet fawning court jester who “entertained” the president with stories, mainly about those who were out to get him and what he could do to “counterpunch.”

I interrupted: “Mr. President, I thought I might give you and the team a quick reminder of the agenda for tomorrow.” Then I launched into the first of many quick briefings I would give him on the road.

“You will begin with something like speed dating as you meet with the leaders of Bahrain, Qatar, Egypt, and Kuwait for just under 30 minutes each,” I began, before rattling off a few other commitments.

“You and the First Lady will attend the opening ceremony for the inaugural global summit on combating extremism,” I continued, referring to what came to be known as the Riyadh Summit. “Many of the 50 world leaders in attendance will want photos with you. I will escort Ashraf Ghani”—then president of Afghanistan—“and a few others over to you and then help you break contact and get to the greenroom to relax before your speech, which will be the first after King Salman’s. The speech will be historic. Yours, the king’s, and other key messages are mutually reinforcing.”

All went accordingly, but the majority of the media was so stuck on covering the administration as if it were a soap opera that the significance of the Saudi Arabia trip was apparent only in retrospect. The president’s messages promoting solidarity, peace, and humaneness among “people of the book”—Jews, Christians, and Muslims—were sowing seeds for what would become, years later, the Abraham Accords, an agreement that most experts thought impossible, especially under the Trump administration.

I wished that more Americans could see beyond their silos of cable news and vitriolic partisanship to understand more fully the good, as well as the bad and the ugly, of the Trump presidency.

Trump and Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu on May 23, 2017 in Jerusalem, Israel. (Kobi Gideon via Getty Images)

Israel

Air Force One touched down in Israel at 12:15 on Monday, May 22, 2017, the date commemorating the reunification of Jerusalem after the 1967 Six-Day War, in which Israel defeated a coalition of Arab nations and seized, among other territory, the eastern half of the city.

The welcoming ceremony was ornate. After walking the line of troops, the president and First Lady mounted a red carpeted stage equipped with a podium, alongside Israel’s president, Reuven Rivlin, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and their wives. Rivlin noted that Israel needed a strong United States and that the United States needed a strong Israel. Netanyahu referred to Trump’s speech in Saudi Arabia and stated that Israel’s hand was extended to all its neighbors in peace. He noted that Trump had traveled from Riyadh to Tel Aviv and hoped that “one day an Israeli prime minister will be able to fly from Tel Aviv to Riyadh.”

After the ceremony, we moved to President Trump’s helicopters, which had been transported from the United States for the short 41-mile flight to Jerusalem. As we flew north, I pointed out what I had seen several times before, from Israel Defense Forces helicopters—Israel’s “narrow waist,” the mere 8.7 miles separating the Mediterranean Sea and the West Bank. Israelis view the West Bank, also occupied after the Six-Day War, as critical to their security, because it added 30 miles to their country’s “waist.” And after leaving the Gaza Strip in 2005, only to see Hamas turn that territory into a haven for a terrorist organization committed to destroying Israel and killing Jews, it was understandable that Israeli leaders were unwilling to end their security presence in the West Bank.

Trump was the first president to visit East Jerusalem, and he was doing so on the fiftieth anniversary of its annexation. I had been to Jerusalem several times before, but one cannot help but feel a strong sense of spirituality transcending day-to-day stresses. Those stresses seem small when the visitor realizes they are following in the footsteps of Jesus or King David. I had enjoyed the company of Cohn as we followed the president to each site. We knelt down to touch the Rock of Golgotha, where Jesus was crucified, and we walked to the Western Wall together to tuck our prayer notes into its crevices. There, I asked God to give me the ability to do my duty and the fortitude to ignore or overcome the obstacles that might keep me from doing so.

Reporters and former officials with experience in the Middle East described Trump’s desire to broker the “deal of the century” between Israel and the Palestinians as naïve. But I thought that a touch of naïveté might be necessary to make progress on one of the longest-running and most complex conflicts in the world. When, nearly three weeks earlier, on May 3, Trump hosted the president of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, at the White House, he had caused consternation with the statement “I’m looking at two-state and one-state, and I like the one that both parties like . . . I can live with either one.” He had used language consistent with a two-state solution, but he was very direct about the need for the Palestinian Authority to reform, and to contest the grip that the terrorist groups Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad had on Gaza and the inroads they were making into the West Bank. Trump had also begun to put pressure on Netanyahu by saying to many audiences that he did “not think Bibi wants to make a deal.” He was not wrong. Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders had legitimate concerns that a two-state solution would be unviable.

Over six years later, the horrific Hamas terrorist attacks on Israel would reveal that the viability of a two-state solution depended on ensuring that terrorists cannot control territory on Israel’s borders.

The morning after the visit to the Western Wall, I met Trump’s chief speechwriter Stephen Miller on my way to see the president.

Miller told me that the president had modified the language of a forthcoming speech—at the Palestinian Authority in Bethlehem—to describe the perpetrators of a horrible terrorist attack at England’s Manchester Arena as “losers.” The president had also, Miller said, made additions to a speech he would give later in the day, at Israel’s Holocaust memorial museum, to announce that he had decided to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Finally, Miller informed me the president had seen a film last night at dinner that portrayed Palestinian leaders encouraging terrorist acts against Israelis. I thanked Miller for filling me in and went to see the president.

As I walked into his room, Trump asked me, “Do you like calling the terrorists ‘losers’?”

I responded, “I like it. It is an accurate description for people who murder innocents.”

Trump then told me about the film Netanyahu had shown him. I surmised from his description that it had spliced together footage of Abbas to make it appear that he had called for the murder of Israeli children.

I told Trump that Miller had mentioned that he might now announce the move of the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem. I asked him to reconsider that decision so he could hear from his cabinet first and to give us time to develop a plan to maximize the advantages of such a move and mitigate any negative consequences.

“Okay, General, you can take it out of the speeches.”

The motorcade moved quickly along the cleared roads for the short drive into the West Bank and on to Bethlehem. I rode with Trump. Policemen lined the entire route at intervals of between 20 and 50 yards. Trump stewed about the film from the night before. I assumed that Netanyahu had shown the film not just to undermine Trump’s relationship with Abbas, but also to prevent the president from pushing harder for a moratorium on new Israeli West Bank settlements or for a two-state solution unacceptable to the Netanyahu government.

In Bethlehem, Abbas waited for Trump at the Mukataa, the seat of Palestinian government, at the end of a red carpet with two children in biblical-era dress bearing flowers. A band and honor guard stood at attention as Abbas and Trump walked up the red carpet together. Anthems played. They walked into the Mukataa, to a receiving line of Muslim, Orthodox, and Catholic clerics.

The rest of us went in through a side door, entered a square room, and sat in chairs across from the Palestinian delegation. I leaned over to Kushner and said, “I hope this meeting doesn’t blow up. It sounds like Netanyahu ran an operation on the president of the United States last night.”

From the outset of the meeting, it was clear the film screening had the desired effect. Trump had a compassionate side, and any abuse or harm to children incensed him. I had seen that side of him when he learned of the murder of children in Syria. His anger boiled over.

Now he accused Abbas and others in the room of murder. His tone and his words were threatening. Members of Abbas’s party, most of whom had attended the congenial meeting in the White House just two and a half weeks earlier, wore expressions of befuddlement and panic.

The bilateral meeting broke up, and a stunned Abbas walked with Trump across the courtyard to where both would make short statements. Trump, returning to the terrorist attack at the Manchester Arena, offered his condolences to the families of the fallen, calling the terrorists “evil losers” who must be “driven out from our society forever.” On the prospects for enduring peace between Israel and the Palestinians, he stated his desire to do “everything I can . . . to achieve a peace agreement between the Israelis and Palestinians.” Abbas also described the Manchester Arena murders as a “horrible terrorist attack.”

We departed Bethlehem and drove to Yad Vashem, the Holocaust memorial museum in Jerusalem. It was my fourth visit, but I experienced again the same waves of emotion that had washed over me during my previous experiences there.

One enters the memorial and is immediately gripped by a sense of foreboding. It is Europe in the early 1930s. The floor slopes downward. Gray granite walls narrow toward the ceiling, squeezing out the light. One descends as humanity did when good men did nothing to stop the mass murder of Jews, prisoners of war, homosexuals, and people with disabilities. Moving forward, we see the Nazis begin to use gas vans. The visitor to Yad Vashem hits the bottom of a ramp as large shipments of German Jews begin on October 15, 1941.

My knees were weak from feelings of profound sorrow for those who suffered and for everything each condemned person might have experienced, and what they might have contributed to the world had they lived—weak, too, from the profound disappointment that man has the capacity for evil on a scale that is almost impossible to comprehend.

The deep sorrow and foreboding one experiences in the first half of the museum allow no room for hope. It is when the U.S. Army, alongside British, Canadian, Free French, and Free Polish forces, crossed the English Channel in June 1944 that the floor at the Yad Vashem memorial begins to slope upward, toward sunlight streaming through the window at the far end of the memorial.

Everyone responds differently to a visit to Yad Vashem, and I wondered what Trump was feeling. The press roundly criticized his hasty inscription in the memorial guestbook, “It is a great honor to be here with all of my friends—so amazing and will never forget!” as remarkable for its “lack of gravity or deep reflection.”

His self-absorption and insecurities encumbered his ability to demonstrate his feelings, yet I hoped he felt not only the heavy weight of sadness as he descended the central walkway, but also that weight lifting as he ascended toward the light. I wanted him to see Yad Vashem as the most profound argument against those who would have the United States disengage from consequential competitions abroad, such as “the long war” against jihadist terrorists. Evil, if not confronted, only grows, inflicting unspeakable harm on humanity.

Trump’s speech after a moving ceremony in the Hall of Remembrance was heartfelt. He noted that the mass murderers of the Holocaust had to be stopped physically. He extolled the strength and resilience of the Jewish people and noted that “As long as we refuse to be silent in the face of evil, as long as we refuse to dim the light of truth in the midst of darkness, as long as we refuse to become bystanders to barbarity, then we know that goodness, peace, and justice will ultimately prevail.”

Pope Francis meets Trump on May 24, 2017 in Vatican City. (Vatican Pool via Getty Images)

Rome

Hours after the final event in Israel, a speech at The Israel Museum in Jerusalem, we arrived at Villa Taverna, the U.S. ambassador to Italy’s residence in Rome.

The next morning, I warned the president that it would be another long day for him and the First Lady, but a consequential one. For me, the first event of the day would be the experience of a lifetime. We would meet the pope.

I am Catholic. My sister, Letitia, and I attended an excellent Catholic elementary school, Norwood-Fontbonne Academy, in the Chestnut Hill neighborhood of Philadelphia, and our family had gone to Mass at Immaculate Heart of Mary every Sunday. But what had solidified my faith over the years were experiences in combat that were very difficult to explain except for divine Providence. I had borne witness to moral and physical evils that might have shaken anyone’s faith. But I had also seen good triumph over those evils in ways that only affirmed my belief in God.

We entered the pope’s study and, as instructed, lined up in front of high-backed armchairs facing one another. Pope Francis moved clockwise, silently taking each person’s hand in his hands. When he reached mine, he looked me in the eye, and said, “Please pray for me.” I smiled and responded, “Holy Father, I hope that you will pray for me.”

I felt a peculiar sense of calm and serenity. I saw in the pope’s countenance his understanding of the challenges I would face. In the coming months, I would reflect on this brief but powerful encounter and recall the first few lines of “The Serenity Prayer”: “God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”

Although Pope Francis and Trump had jousted in the media over the border wall, there was no discernible tension between them. The president’s gift to him, a box of signed first-edition books by Martin Luther King Jr., was appropriate and thoughtful. Pope Francis’s gift to Trump, signed copies of three documents, was pointed: the copy of Francis’s encyclical on climate change, Laudato sí, was clearly meant to challenge Trump’s skepticism on global warming. Trump promised to read it. I caught myself smiling, thinking, It’s a good thing Trump isn’t Catholic, or he’d have to go to confession for that lie.

We departed the Vatican for the short drive to the Quirinal Palace, where Trump was to meet with Italian president Sergio Mattarella. If Trump had experienced inner peace while visiting the Vatican, it was wearing off. He found it difficult to understand why he was meeting with President Mattarella rather than with Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni, whom he had met in Washington on April 20. The pace of events and what he regarded as a superfluous meeting had made him cranky. After the meeting with Mattarella, I rode with him and Jared on the way back to Villa Taverna, where Trump was scheduled to meet with Gentiloni. He was getting tired and angry. He turned toward Jared and me in the far back and said, “How long is this fucking trip? Whose idea was this?”

I smiled and said, “It was Jared’s idea, Mr. President,” which prompted a smile from Jared and a scowl from Trump.

Trump speaks with Belgium’s King Philippe in Brussels, on May 24, 2017. (Benoit Doppagne via AFP)

Brussels

The next leg of the trip concerned me the most. Candidate Trump had called Brussels a “hellhole”; had celebrated Brexit, predicting that more countries would follow the United Kingdom’s lead and depart the European Union; and had said the NATO alliance was “obsolete,” not only pointing out (as other American leaders had done) that many member nations were free riding on U.S. defense, but also suggesting that the United States might not come to the aid of NATO allies if they were attacked.

Trump was right that many countries were not fulfilling their pledge to invest at least 2 percent in defense. But, I told him, Russia wanted nothing more than to divide NATO and the EU countries and fragment the most successful military alliance in history. On the short flight to Brussels, I suggested to Trump that he press hard to get NATO nations to increase defense spending while not giving Russian president Vladimir Putin what he wanted. Cohn gave the president similar advice on trade: to demand changes to unfair economic practices that disadvantaged American companies and workers, but not to advocate for the disintegration of the European Union. We told Trump that divisions in the transatlantic relationship were good not only for Putin, but also for the country that posed the largest economic challenge to the United States—China.

I grew more concerned as we drew closer to Brussels. Watching the news on the flight had put Trump in a bad mood. Being away from home for a long stretch of time, combined with the constant drumbeat of Russiagate coverage, had made him anxious. Ex-CIA director John Brennan had just testified before the House Intelligence Committee on Russian interference in the 2016 election. Priebus and Bannon, who advanced their influence through cultivating a bunker mentality and portraying themselves as his most loyal defenders, only stoked Trump’s anxiety. I told Cohn that I was concerned. Trump needed to lash out—and he might do so against NATO and the European Union in a way that would be a boon to our adversaries.

The next morning’s meetings with the presidents of the European Commission and the European Council—Jean-Claude Juncker and Donald Tusk, respectively—were benign mainly because Trump and the EU leaders talked past one another. Trump and European Council president Tusk agreed that Russian gas pipelines to Europe were problematic because they fed the Kremlin’s ATM and gave Putin coercive power.

The meetings were cordial, but most of the press viewed Trump exclusively through the lens of his brash persona, misinterpreting body language and minor comments as indicators of major tensions. Reports on his meetings had become formulaic: Trump was rude and destructive to relationships.

Next up: the NATO summit itself.

In a room on the second floor of the U.S. ambassador’s residence, I sat next to the president at a round table for a final preparation session. Trump, who would give a speech to dedicate the 9/11 memorial at the new NATO Headquarters, wanted to threaten to pull out of NATO if member nations did not “pay their dues” and “pay arrears” for past underpayments to the organization.

I tried to explain—as I had many times before—that the commitment was for NATO nations to spend at least the equivalent of 2 percent of GDP on their own defense capabilities. Talk of “dues” and “arrears” to NATO would only confuse leaders, rather than put pressure on them to own up to their commitments. I tried not to sound exasperated. “Mr. President, the best way to make your point is not for the United States to threaten to renege on its obligation, which would weaken the alliance’s ability to deter Russia or other hostile actors, but to get others to live up to theirs.”

Businessman Trump thought it logical to condition fulfillment of the treaty obligation under Article 5, to treat “an attack on one as an attack on all,” on whether the attacked country had met its pledge to invest at least the equivalent of 2 percent of its gross domestic product in defense.

I pointed out: “Vacillating on Article 5 while standing in front of a remnant of the North Tower of the World Trade Center at a ceremony commemorating the only time the alliance evoked Article 5 after that mass murder attack on your hometown would not be a good look.”

Trump relented and went to his quarters to rest before we departed. Later, as I was packing up for the drive to NATO headquarters, Miller came to me. He had just been with the president, and I could tell by the look on his face that he was bearing bad news. He started with “I swear I had nothing to do with this. The president called me in and dictated some changes to the speech.”

Trump had excised a sentence affirming the United States’ commitment to Article 5 of the treaty. I was not worried about that—NATO leaders should not be expected to affirm their intention to uphold a treaty to which they are signatories every time they speak. More concerning, though, was new language in the speech: Trump had followed through on demanding that NATO countries pay “arrears” in their “dues” to NATO. Much worse, he had added that the United States would not be obligated to come to the defense of countries that were “delinquent” in their “payments.”

Miller gave me the news as he departed for NATO Headquarters to load the speech into the teleprompter. I met Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis at the top of the residence’s marble staircase. I needed their help. “Let’s all ride with the president, so we can explain why that language is offensive and counterproductive.”

Mattis replied as we stepped outside: “H.R., I think you can convince him. I’m going to ride with Rex.”

I responded, “Would both of you please get in the fucking car?”

They acceded.

On the short drive from the ambassador’s residence to NATO Headquarters, I told Trump that the reaction to his comments would focus exclusively on his threat of withdrawal from NATO and not on members’ failure to meet their obligations. Tillerson and Mattis reinforced this point. Finally, about halfway into our 20-minute drive, Trump said, “Okay, okay, you can take it out, General.”

With the issue resolved, I called Stephen Miller, to tell him to delete the new language from the teleprompter. He made the change just prior to the president’s arrival at NATO Headquarters.

NATO secretary general Jens Stoltenberg met us out in front, and walked us through the brand-new building complex to the greenroom. He thought that Trump would be impressed, and he was—just not in the way Stoltenberg had hoped. Trump said something about the stupidity and cost of the new building, observing that “one bomb would take out the whole thing.” He was right. The new headquarters symbolized the overconfidence of the post–Cold War period.

I exited the building and walked past the 9/11 memorial and the podiums to the U.S. seating area, where I joined Cohn to listen to the president’s statement.

Later, members of the media criticized Trump for omitting the explicit pledge to adhere to Article 5 of the NATO Treaty. The Washington Post decried his comments on burden-sharing as “confrontational, nationalist rhetoric.” But Trump had made the points he wanted to make on burden-sharing without emboldening adversaries or creating cracks in the alliance that the Kremlin could easily exploit.

Trump greets Italy’s former prime minister Paolo Gentiloni in Sicily on May 26, 2017. (Christian Minelli via Getty Images)

Sicily

The travel team was pared down. With Bannon and Priebus gone, Cohn and I would staff the president for the G7 in Sicily, with a much smaller group.

We landed at Naval Air Station Sigonella and jumped into the convoy for the scenic 48-mile drive to the coastal town of Taormina. When I got to my hotel room, I found it had a beautiful view of the bay, the setting sun illuminated colorful buildings that rose from the harbor in tiers anchored into the steep slope of Mount Etna. I couldn’t help but think that living at the base of an active volcano was an apt metaphor for serving in the Trump White House.

Early the next morning, Cohn and I met the president in his quarters. Trump was in a good mood. We summarized the key points Trump might consider making during the roundtable discussions with Angela Merkel, Emmanuel Macron, Shinzo Abe, Gentiloni, Justin Trudeau, and Theresa May. The president noted that this leg of the trip “seemed a lot easier.”

On the way out, I said to Cohn, “It does seem a lot easier, and he is in a much better mood.”

Cohn replied, “Consider who is not here.”

We were experiencing the absence of Priebus and Bannon agitating Trump.

We made the short drive to the beautiful San Domenico Palace hotel. The seven leaders sat at a circular table with a single adviser seated at tables behind them; Cohn was in the room for the economic discussion, and I joined Trump for the foreign policy and security discussions.

That night, during a stop for gelato on our walk back to the hotel after dinner, my phone rang. It was National Security Council legal adviser John Eisenberg. Priebus and Bannon, having returned early to Washington, had apparently decided that with Cohn and me in Sicily, it was time to try again to effect a purge of NSC staff. I returned to my hotel room to make the first of several phone calls. I was angry because of the blatant violation of trust and frustrated that Bannon and Priebus were more concerned about sabotaging the organization that was actually delivering for the president than in advancing his agenda and the interests of the people who had elected him.

I succeeded in blocking another attempt at a baseless mass firing, but I wondered how much longer it would be before the next attempt. The wolves were always circling, and my absence from Washington had given them another opportunity.

The next morning, the president would address American servicemen and -women and their families before leaving on Air Force One. I worked with Miller to ensure that the speech summarized the purpose and accomplishments of the trip. I also hoped it would help Trump understand better how he could advance his agenda through effective presidential diplomacy and that Cohn’s and my teams were helping him do so.

Melania introduced the president to those gathered. She described the nine-day trip as a “home run.” I agreed with her assessment.

On Air Force One, Cohn and I met with our teams to discuss how to keep the momentum from the trip going. Someone suggested that the two of us author a joint op-ed, so we went to work on an outline and asked our teams for suggestions. The May 30 op-ed in The Wall Street Journal stated that the “world is not a ‘global community’ but an arena where nations, nongovernmental actors, and businesses engage and compete for advantage.” We wrote that “America First” did not mean “America Alone” and that the Trump administration was committed to “protecting and advancing [U.S.] interests while also fostering cooperation and strengthening relationships with allies and partners.”

The reaction to the op-ed demonstrated that Cohn and I occupied the space between Trump’s virulent base of neo-isolationists and those who hated Trump and saw him as the greatest threat to their idealized international order. Some in the latter category wrote rebuttals that were hysterical in tone and full of ad hominem attacks. Others clung to Russiagate and claimed that all the administration’s efforts, even the op-ed, “have no standing.” Cohn and I were not surprised that serving in the Trump administration subjected us to the vitriol associated with America’s severe polarization.

The trip overseas was a success, but everything was much harder than it should have been. I thought of what the Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz had said about the friction of war: “Everything is very simple in war, but the simplest thing is difficult.” Fighting a war, he noted, was “like movement in a resistant element.” In battle, the enemy is the principal cause of friction. But in the Trump White House, as in American society, we were at war with ourselves. The “circular firing squad” in the White House both reflected and reinforced the us-versus-them mentality in U.S. politics and society.

H. R. McMaster, a retired lieutenant general, served as the United States national security adviser from 2017 to 2018. Read his last piece, “America’s Weakness Is a Provocation.”

This is an edited excerpt from At War With Ourselves: My Tour of Duty in the Trump White House by H.R. McMaster. Copyright ©2024 by H.R. McMaster. Published with permission from Harper Books and HarperCollins Publishers.

2. Assad’s Rule Collapses in Syria, Raising Concerns of a Vacuum

The question being asked in the surrounding capitals, in the UK, NATO, and US is "what do you do now Lieutenant?" Or "what plans do we have ready to execute as we anticipated this situation." (We did anticipate this, right? We did make plans for this, right?)

Assad’s Rule Collapses in Syria, Raising Concerns of a Vacuum

Outside powers maneuver for influence as a regime that controlled the divided country for half a century melts away

https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/assads-rule-collapses-in-syria-raising-concerns-of-a-vacuum-95568f13?mod=WSJ_home_mediumtopper_pos_2

Caught Off Guard: Strategic Surprise in History and Lessons for National Security Strategy

Ken Robinson

National Security, Counter Terrorism, Cyber Security, and Multi-Media Entertainment Professionalhttps://www.linkedin.com/pulse/caught-off-guard-strategic-surprise-history-lessons-ken-robinson-fvasc/?trackingId=MVJ1%2FjbMuiywcnMkSutWuA%3D%3D

December 8, 2024

By: Ken Robinson

Today, the Fall of Damascus to rebel militias marks a pivotal moment in Middle Eastern geopolitics, reminiscent of historical upheavals that have shocked the world and revealed glaring gaps in the ability of states and their intelligence services to anticipate transformative events.

The stunning speed of the rebel advance exemplifies the enduring challenge of strategic surprise: that unleash chaos and reshape the geopolitical landscape.

History is rife with examples of strategic surprises—moments when events defied expert predictions, exposed flawed assumptions, and thrust nations into unanticipated crises.

The difference between "prediction" and "anticipation" lies at the heart of these failures.

While Prediction seeks singular outcomes and often narrows focus to the most obvious scenarios, Anticipation properly ranks outcomes based on their potential impact. By failing to prepare for low-probability, high-impact scenarios, policymakers have repeatedly been caught off guard, with dire consequences.

Historic Strategic Surprises and Their Consequences

1. The Attack on Pearl Harbor (1941): Japan's surprise attack crippled the U.S. Pacific Fleet and propelled the United States into World War II. Despite warnings and mounting tensions, American military and intelligence services underestimated Japan's willingness to strike preemptively.

2. The Iranian Revolution (1979): The Shah’s regime, long considered stable and a key U.S. ally, fell to Ayatollah Khomeini's Islamic Revolution with shocking speed. The collapse marked the rise of an anti-American theocracy, fundamentally altering regional dynamics, shifting from wars of national liberation, to the age of sacred terror, Jihad and Holy wars.

3. The Fall of the Berlin Wall (1989): The sudden collapse of East Germany and the broader Soviet Empire stunned Western policymakers. Despite decades of Cold War intelligence, the rapid disintegration of the Eastern Bloc was largely unforeseen, leading to a scramble to manage the post-Cold War order.

4. The September 11 Attacks (2001): Despite repeated intelligence warnings, the U.S. was unprepared for Al-Qaeda's coordinated assault. A failure of imagination! The attack reshaped global security priorities, leading to prolonged wars in Afghanistan and Iraq with lasting implications, costing trillions of dollars, and thousands of US soldiers killed, and wounded. Millions of peoples, displaced, thrust into a global diaspora, destabilizing the capitals of Europe, the middle east, and asia.

5. The U.S. Withdrawal from Afghanistan (2021): The Taliban’s rapid takeover following the withdrawal of U.S. forces mirrored earlier collapses, with intelligence agencies failing to anticipate the Afghan government’s swift disintegration. This debacle left a vacuum that has emboldened adversaries and diminished U.S. credibility, with the ripple effects, and true consequences, still unknown.

Lessons from Strategic Surprises

1. The Primacy of Anticipation over Prediction: Strategic surprises often result from over-reliance on linear predictions. Effective anticipation, supported by Advanced Intelligence Collection, and Analysis demands scenario planning that includes improbable but impactful outcomes. Decision-makers must foster a culture of questioning assumptions and preparing for unlikely contingencies.

2. The Need for Adaptive Intelligence: Intelligence failures often stem from bureaucratic inertia and groupthink. Agencies must adopt dynamic analytical methods, integrating diverse perspectives and real-time reassessments of emerging threats.

3. Balancing Resources and Objectives: Prolonged investments in projects like Afghan nation-building highlight the risks of overextending national resources on ill-defined goals. Clear prioritization of vital interests is essential to avoid becoming mired in unsustainable commitments.

4. Understanding 4th and 5th Generation Warfare: The proliferation of asymmetric and hybrid warfare tactics, such as cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, and proxy conflicts, requires a reevaluation of traditional military strategies.

Adversaries like Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea exploit these methods to erode U.S. influence and sow discord.

Implications for U.S. Regional and National Security Strategy

1. Prioritizing Regional Stability: The fall of Damascus underscores the fragility of states in conflict zones and the regional domino effect of instability. The U.S. must recalibrate its engagement strategies to prioritize conflict prevention, local partnerships, and stabilization efforts. This is happening right now, in Europe, the Middle East, Africa, Central and South America, and the Indopacific.

2. Strengthening Alliances: Strategic surprises often expose weaknesses in international cooperation. Reinforcing alliances through shared intelligence, joint contingency planning, and interoperable military capabilities can mitigate risks and enhance preparedness.

3. Investing in Resilience: National security strategies must emphasize resilience against non traditional threats, including cyberattacks, pandemics, and economic coercion. Proactive measures, such as securing supply chains and critical infrastructure, are vital.

4. Reassessing Grand Strategy: The U.S. must shift from a reactive to a proactive stance in global affairs. This includes aligning military capabilities with broader strategic objectives, ensuring flexibility to address both state and non-state actors, and preserving a credible deterrence posture.

Conclusion

To navigate the complexities of an era defined by proxy conflict, the U.S. must embrace a forward-looking, adaptive approach to national security.

By prioritizing anticipation, fostering resilient alliances, and investing in versatile capabilities, America can better safeguard its vital interests in a world fraught with uncertainty.

3. Assad’s Rule Collapses in Syria, Raising Concerns of a Vacuum

Assad’s Rule Collapses in Syria, Raising Concerns of a Vacuum

Outside powers maneuver for influence as a regime that controlled the divided country for half a century melts away

https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/assads-rule-collapses-in-syria-raising-concerns-of-a-vacuum-95568f13?mod=WSJ_home_mediumtopper_pos_2

Bashar al-Assad, an Ophthalmologist Who Became a Dictator, Is the Last of a Despotic Dynasty

Once a self-styled modernizer, Syria’s president bought time with a harsh crackdown, but his government eventually succumbed to its many enemies

https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/bashar-al-assad-syria-regime-ends-672af9a8?mod=latest_headlines

By Isabel ColesFollow

and Jared MalsinFollow

Dec. 8, 2024 9:46 am ET

Bashar al-Assad was never expected to rule Syria. That job was meant for his older brother, Basil, who trained as a military commander while Bashar studied to be an ophthalmologist.

He wasn’t expected to be the last of the line for his family’s despotic dynasty, either—at least, not this soon.

A lightning advance by Syrian rebel groups took just over a week to roll through the country’s major cities and into the capital Sunday, driving Assad to flee and bringing an end to a regime that had ruled for 54 years.

Rebel fighters celebrated as military court in Damascus burned on Sunday. Photo: Hussein Malla/Associated Press

People search the ransacked private residence of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus on Sunday. Photo: Hussein Malla/Associated Press

Russia and Iran, which had saved his government after a civil war erupted more than a decade ago, did little to help this time as his enemies closed in. Arab governments turned away his entreaties for support. In the end the army and security services that terrorized, tortured and used chemical weapons against Syrians just melted away, leaving Assad exposed and alone.

He fled the country as the rebels advanced, Syrian security officials said, and his whereabouts Sunday were unknown. His wife and children left for Russia in late November, while his brothers-in-law left for the United Arab Emirates, Syrian security officials and Arab officials said.

The Assads’ fall is in part due to the wars in Lebanon and Ukraine, which damaged Iran-backed Hezbollah and Russia, distracting them from the threat in Syria. But it is also due to years of economic mismanagement and brutality by Assad’s government.

After initially positioning himself as a modernizer of Syria’s economy, Assad launched a brutal crackdown once protesters took to the streets. The violence unleashed a civil war that destroyed entire cities, displaced more than half the population, redrew the balance of power in the region and unleashed waves of refugees whose arrival in Europe helped fuel anti-immigrant sentiment.

The crackdown delayed the end by more than a decade, but eventually the resulting anger and deprivation doomed his rule.

“If I were to describe him, I’d say he’s affable and unyielding,” said Robert Ford, former U.S. ambassador to Syria. “He will go down in history as a brutal dictator that thrust his country into a horribly destructive and bloody civil war. This will always be his legacy.”

Second son

Syrian President Hafez al-Assad with his wife and children in 1974. Bashar is in a white shirt standing by his mother. Photo: Alexandra DE BORCHGRAVE/Gamma-Rapho/Getty Images

Bashar al-Assad is the second son of Hafez al-Assad, a military officer who led a coup in 1970 and ruled Syria for nearly 30 years. Born in Damascus, the younger Assad was just 5 years old when his father took power. Sandwiched between more charismatic siblings who showed an early interest in the military and politics, Assad was a meek child interested in science and medicine.

He was a teenager when his father quelled an uprising by the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood by razing the town of Hama and killing an estimated tens of thousands of people in army shelling. It was a chilling blueprint for how the Assad regime would deal with opposition.

A young man who often looked at the floor when greeting strangers, Assad attended the Lycée Francais in Damascus and studied medicine at Damascus University. He moved to London in the 1980s to become an ophthalmologist, inspired by the ability of science to give people sight. While studying medicine in the U.K., he met and married Asma Akhras, a London-born Syrian banker. Meanwhile, back in Syria, Basil drove sports cars and rose to the rank of colonel in an elite army unit.

When Basil was killed in a car crash in 1994, Bashar flew to Damascus, where at the age of 29 he was thrust into the role of unlikely heir. Speaking at Basil’s funeral, he stared down at a fistful of printed pages that flapped in the wind. “My beloved brother Basil, I cannot comprehend your death or find the words to describe it,” he said, as his father looked on.

“I think he always saw himself as not measuring up in his father’s eyes,” said Dennis Ross, a senior American diplomat in the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations. “So some of that, no doubt, has contributed to his need to prove that he’s strong.”

Syrian soldiers in Beirut put up portraits of Syria’s Hafez al-Assad and his son Bashar in June 2000, after the president died. Photo: SOUHAILA SAHMARANI/AFP/Getty Images

To prepare him to take power, Assad was fast-tracked through the military. After his father’s death in 2000, Syria’s rubber-stamp parliament amended the constitution to allow someone younger than 40 to become president. Assad was 34 at the time. He assumed the presidency via an election in which his name was the only one on the ballot, receiving 99.74% of the vote.

He initially played the role of a modernizing leader—the region’s youngest at the time. Computer-savvy, fit and fluent in English, he promised institutional accountability, changes to the socialist economy and political liberalization. His first year in office became known as the Damascus Spring, as the government allowed a modicum of political expression and the stirrings of a civil society. Damascus opened its first stock exchange. Vogue magazine profiled his wife in 2011, portraying her as glamorous and chic, “a rose in the desert.”

That same year, a revolt swept the Arab world. Tunisia’s leader fled the country. Egypt was gripped by a revolution that would eject President Hosni Mubarak from power. Assad, who had yet to face protests against him, received a new American ambassador in Damascus.

The ambassador, Ford, rode to the presidential palace in an armored car. After presenting his credentials, he was ushered into a grand room with marble floors and was seated next to the president. Delicately raising the topic of the regional unrest, Ford said, “A hot wind is blowing from North Africa. Are you worried about it coming here?”

Assad cast the comment aside. “My people love me,” he said, according to Ford. “We’re leading the resistance against Israel.”

Burn the country

Smoke rose over Aleppo, Syria, following fighting between rebel groups and Syrian government forces in October. Photo: Manu Brabo/AP

In March 2011, protesters filled the streets of Damascus, Aleppo and other Syrian cities. Assad’s security forces opened fire on the crowds. As the protests grew into an armed insurrection, he upped the ante, turning to tactics that included chlorine and sarin gas attacks, abduction of opposition activists and the use of barrel bombs—makeshift explosives that regime soldiers dropped from planes and helicopters on rebel enclaves. Assad’s forces laid siege to rebel towns, forcing civilians to eat grass to survive, according to the World Food Program.

His supporters spray-painted a slogan on walls: “Assad, or we burn the country.” Assad is subject to an arrest warrant in France on war-crimes charges that he denies.

Children received treatment after a suspected chemical attack at a makeshift clinic in a rebel-held village on the outskirts of Damascus in 2018. Photo: HAMZA AL-AJWEH/AFP/Getty Images

Within two years, armed opposition groups controlled a swath of northern Syria, the south near the border with Jordan and parts of the Damascus suburbs. Assad ceded control of Syria’s northeast to Kurdish militants, who would later ally with the U.S. in the fight against Islamic State extremists.

Assad clawed back some two-thirds of the country after a lethal military campaign backed by Russian air power and Iranian-allied militias such as Lebanon’s Hezbollah.

Many of the rebels were confined to a small enclave pinned against the Turkish border hosting 2 million displaced people, many of them in camps. The last major Russian and regime offensive ended in 2020. The years of fighting had killed hundreds of thousands of Syrians and uprooted some 12 million others from their homes.

The civil war continued, but the front-lines remained static. His country was shattered, but Assad had survived.

“If he could have sat with the people since day one and talked to them and gave them a bit of their rights and gave them a bread and electricity since that time, a lot of Syrians would have not been killed,” said Majd al-Jadaan, the exiled sister in-law of Maher al-Assad, Assad’s younger brother and commander of the Syrian army’s elite 4th Armored Division.

With the conflict on a low simmer, some regional leaders began to reach out to Assad, ending years in which some Middle Eastern powers had shunned him over his crackdown on his people. Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed, the influential leader of the U.A.E., flew to Damascus in 2021 to open a new era of relations with the Syrian leader. Saudi Arabia rekindled relations. Jordan reopened its border and resumed flights to Damascus.

Assad appeared to have won. But the country was shattered, and the government hollowed out. When a rebel group that had been building up its capabilities in the northwest launched a lightning offensive, his rule quickly unraveled.

“The regime just broke,” said Aron Lund, a security analyst with the Swedish Defense Research Agency, a government think tank. “It’s not the size of the battering, it was the door that was the problem.”

Write to Isabel Coles at isabel.coles@wsj.com and Jared Malsin at jared.malsin@wsj.com

5. What to Know About the Civil War in Syria

What to Know About the Civil War in Syria

Rapid advances by rebel fighters against government forces are taking a more than decade-old conflict into a new phase

https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/syria-civil-war-explained-731644f6?mod=latest_headlines

By Jared Malsin

Updated Dec. 8, 2024 12:25 am ET

A tank captured by antiregime groups in Hama, Syria. Photo: Emin Sansar/Anadolu/Getty Images

In little over a week, Syrian rebel groups have rolled across Syria, routing government forces and pushing the Assad family’s half-a-century rule to collapse.

Early Sunday, the rebels said they had liberated the capital, Damascus, from the rule of President Bashar al-Assad, who fled as they closed in, Syrian security officials said.

Islamist rebels launched a large-scale attack on government forces at the end of November, causing the largest shift in the balance of power since 2020 in the country, where more than a decade of war has taken place. Battling Iran- and Russian-backed regime forces, within days the rebels in a lightning offensive had captured Aleppo, which was Syria’s largest city before the war, before advancing south to take the strategic cities of Hama and Homs. Here’s what to know.

What has happened so far in Syria’s civil war?

The war broke out in 2011, when Assad’s regime violently suppressed protests that had spread across the country during the Arab Spring. That triggered an armed insurrection against the government, parts of which morphed into an Islamist uprising.

The northern city of Aleppo was a center of that armed rebellion, and the opposition forces claimed parts of the city in 2012. It took the Syrian regime four years, with military support from Iran and its allies and later Russian air power, to oust rebels from their strongholds in Aleppo. While Assad’s forces eventually clawed back control over much of the territory, several rebel groups maintained control of parts of the divided country.

Who is fighting whom?

The rebels fighting the Assad regime are backed by Turkey and are largely made up of Sunnis. The main rebel group, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, is a Sunni Islamist group that the Trump administration designated as a terrorist organization in 2018. Some rebel groups are backed by Turkey.

Meanwhile, Russia and Shiite Iran have backed Assad. But in the wake of the rebel offensive, both Russia and Iran signaled to the Syrian leader that they couldn’t or wouldn’t intervene to save his regime, according to people familiar with U.S. intelligence analysis. In the wider Middle East, Iran and its allies are competing for power and influence against Sunni states, including the Saudi monarchy. Within Syria, Assad has drawn his support from the minority Alawite sect. In the northeast, Western countries have supported Kurdish fighters, which Turkey opposes.

Why has the war intensified?

The surprise rebel offensive is, in part, a consequence of new wars that have erupted outside Syria’s borders, leaving Assad’s allies—Iran, Russia and the Lebanese Hezbollah militia—weakened and distracted. The rebels also took advantage of disaffection in the Syrian military, which is filled with badly paid soldiers.

Syrian opposition fighters with a captured Syrian regime tank in Kafr Naya, in northern Syria, last month. Photo: Anas Alkharboutli/Zuma Press

Who are the rebels and their backers?

Hayat Tahrir al-Sham is an offshoot of the Nusra Front, a onetime affiliate of al Qaeda, and is funded by Turkey. The group has run a statelet of its own in Syria’s northern Idlib province in recent years. Abu Mohammed al-Jawlani, the leader of the group, has turned it into a disciplined fighting force, with an ideology that blends Islamism and nationalism.

Turkey has historically backed the opposition against Assad since the start of the 2011 uprising against him, and now it supports some Syrian rebel groups in its own fight against Kurdish militants on its southern border.

Are the rebels linked to Islamic State?

Jawlani, the HTS leader, broke with Islamic State in 2012. He cut ties with al Qaeda in 2016, and since then has fought both organizations in bloody campaigns. Instead of the banner of Islam, HTS troops choose to fight under the Syrian flag that dates back to the republic that existed before the 1963 Baath Party revolution that eventually brought the Assad family to power.

What role does the U.S. play?

The U.S. has sanctioned the Assad regime for using chemical weapons against civilians during the conflict, among other things. The first Trump administration launched airstrikes against Syrian military assets in 2018.

The U.S., which maintains a force of around 900 troops in southeast Syria to defend against Islamic State fighters, has supported the Kurds in northern Syria but has said it has nothing to do with the rebel offensive and has called for a de-escalation. U.S. officials fear getting dragged deeper into the conflict if its troops stationed there are attacked, or if the U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces is targeted by Turkey.

On Saturday, President-elect Donald Trump posted on social media that the U.S. should stay out of the war in Syria.

Who supports the Syrian government?

Russia and Iran, longtime supporters of Assad in the civil war, have come to his aid since the most recent rebel assault began but didn’t come to his rescue this past week as they did in 2015, when they helped him crush an uprising with air power and proxy forces. Russia is occupied with its war effort in Ukraine, while Iran and the militias it backs have been hammered by an Israeli air and ground campaign in Lebanon and strikes in Syria in recent months.

Tehran told Assad earlier this week that help for his regime would be limited, blaming his forces for retreating, Arab officials briefed on the conversations said. People familiar with the matter said Iran had pulled senior commanders stationed in eastern Syria out of the country.

Will Assad’s regime fall?

The Assad family has clung to power for half a century, surviving by brutally suppressing uprisings and working with allies to fight rebellions. The rebels’ advance on Damascus, following their seizure of Aleppo, Hama and Homs puts Assad in the most precarious position of his 24-year rule. Assad, who was in Damascus on Saturday, fled to an unknown destination early on Sunday, local time, Syrian security officials said.

Assad had announced he would address the nation at 8 p.m. local time on Saturday, but the speech never occurred.

As Assad’s forces scrambled to defend core strategic areas, its hold on other parts of the country also appeared to be weakening. Rebels claimed to have seized another city in the south, Daraa, where the Syrian revolution started in 2011.

This explanatory article may be periodically updated.

Summer Said contributed to this article.

Write to Jared Malsin at jared.malsin@wsj.com

6. Leader of Syria's biggest rebel faction calls Assad's fall a 'victory to the Islamic nation'

Numerous photos at the link: https://apnews.com/article/syria-assad-sweida-daraa-homs-hts-qatar-816e538565d1ae47e016b5765b044d31?u

Leader of Syria's biggest rebel faction calls Assad's fall a 'victory to the Islamic nation'

https://apnews.com/article/syria-assad-sweida-daraa-homs-hts-qatar-816e538565d1ae47e016b5765b044d31?

AP · by ABBY SEWELL · December 8, 2024

By ABDULRAHMAN SHAHEEN and

ABBY SEWELL

Sewell is the Associated Press news director for Lebanon, Syria and Iraq. She joined the AP in 2022 but has been based in the region since 2016, reporting and guiding coverage on some of its most significant news stories.

twitter mailto

AP · by ABBY SEWELL · December 8, 2024

7. How an Assassin Escaped One of the Most Surveilled Cities in the World

Please go to the interactive link to read the entire article: https://www.wsj.com/us-news/how-an-assassin-escaped-one-of-the-most-surveilled-cities-in-the-world-0e3918b5?st=dtq975&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

How an Assassin Escaped One of the Most Surveilled Cities in the World

Police say that after the fatal shooting, the suspect likely fled New York City by bus

An NYPD flier hangs outside the New York Hilton Midtown in New York. Photo: Yuki Iwamura/Bloomberg News

By Alyssa LukpatFollow

, Brian McGillFollow

, Tania Colon-Bosch and Taylor UmlaufFollow

Dec. 6, 2024 9:00 pm ET

The UnitedHealth assassin has evaded police in one of the most surveilled cities in the world but has left a trail of clues to his whereabouts.

Investigators are using a web of public and private cameras to hunt the suspect who fatally shot Brian Thompson, the chief executive of UnitedHealth’s insurance arm. The killing outside a New York City Hilton hotel was captured on video Wednesday, along with several other stops the suspect has made.

Amnesty International has estimated New York City has more than 25,000 cameras at traffic intersections alone. The city introduced a new drone surveillance initiative over Central Park last month to help solve crimes there and in other areas.

The images offer hints about the killer’s journey as he went to Starbucks and slipped away in Manhattan. But there are holes in the timeline the investigators made public, underscoring how difficult it can be to track a single man in a city of more than eight million.

The New York City Police Department said Friday afternoon they think the suspect left the state on a bus. Police said investigators used surveillance footage to track the suspect’s path out of Central Park and up the west side of Manhattan, from which they think he made his getaway out of New York.

Here are some of the places the suspect was spotted in New York City:

Surveillance videos show the suspect exiting the park, still with the bike, near 77th Street and Central Park West, police said Friday. Later videos described by police show him walking near 86th Street and Columbus Avenue.

The suspect took a taxi to the George Washington Bridge Bus Station, where police said they think he caught a bus leaving the state. Police said they have footage of him entering the bus terminal but no video of him leaving.

Police investigators arrive Thursday at a hostel where the suspect stayed. Photo: Yuki Iwamura/Associated Press

The suspect stayed at an Upper West Side hostel before the shooting. Investigators are searching for clues at the hostel, a Victorian-style building near Central Park.

Authorities haven’t publicly identified the suspect, who appears masked in much of the surveillance footage. On Thursday, police released its clearest image to date, showing a person of interest smiling as he leans over a counter.

Write to Alyssa Lukpat at alyssa.lukpat@wsj.com, Brian McGill at brian.mcgill@wsj.com and Taylor Umlauf at taylor.umlauf@wsj.com

8. He Investigates the Internet’s Most Vicious Hackers—From a Secret Location

He Investigates the Internet’s Most Vicious Hackers—From a Secret Location

In the increasingly dangerous world of cybercrime, Brian Krebs faces threats, manipulation and the odd chess challenge

‘I’m fascinated with the human side of cybercrime,’ says Brian Krebs. WSJ

By Robert McMillan

and Vipal Monga

Dec. 7, 2024 9:00 pm ET

https://www.wsj.com/us-news/how-an-assassin-escaped-one-of-the-most-surveilled-cities-in-the-world-0e3918b5?mod=hp_lead_pos9

One morning in September, a hacker known as Waifu sent a message to Brian Krebs, a cybersecurity researcher investigating him. Waifu wanted to play a game.

“Here is the deal,” Waifu wrote. “Beat me 2 out of 3 in chess, and if your demand is reasonable, I would answer questions without trolling u.”

Krebs didn’t reply, but the messages kept coming in. “I would rate you FBI range in terms of HUMINT skill and capability,” Waifu wrote, using a military term for gathering intelligence from human sources. “But I really want to play you in chess.”

The two had been communicating on messaging apps for months. Investigators had linked Waifu to a hacking rampage that started in April and exposed private information on hundreds of millions of Americans, including phone records. Some investigators, including Krebs, had tied Waifu to a real-world identity over the summer, although they hadn’t gone public with that information—yet.

Over their correspondence, Waifu felt out Krebs to see what he knew. Waifu used multiple accounts, including the aliases Nyakuza and Judische, the German word for Jewish. “He’s talking to people in the industry, under different names, offering information, trying to suss people out,” Krebs said in an interview.

One hint some of the accounts belonged to Waifu: He liked to use animated cats as avatars. Other aliases included Meowist, Catist and Scarlet the Meow Cat, according to court filings. “He would say meow all the time. I don’t really know what that’s about,” Krebs said.

Some of Waifu’s messages were threatening. Krebs’s work investigating and writing about cybercriminals has become so dangerous that he goes to extraordinary lengths to keep his location hidden.

That September morning, Krebs didn’t take up Waifu’s chess challenge. “What am I going to do, play him at chess?” he said. “He would have just screenshot what I said and send it to his friends.”

But their back-and-forth continued for several more weeks, like a real-life chess game, until Waifu ran out of moves.

Signal conversations between Waifu and Krebs. Waifu liked to use intelligence and military jargon, and in the second screen suggests he might be conducting surveillance on Krebs and others supposedly working with him.

It’s all part of the daily routine for Krebs, 52 years old, who over the past 20 years has investigated and outed some of the worst actors on the internet: Russian money launderers, Romanian ATM thieves, Nigerian scammers and American hackers.

While many researchers sell cybersecurity services to companies, Krebs, a former Washington Post reporter, makes most of his money from banner ads on the website where he shares his findings. His site, Krebs on Security, routinely pulls in more than 1 million visits a month. He hears from law enforcement and other officials who read his posts—and from hackers, too.

Waifu is well known among investigators, who say he is part of an anarchic online community known as the Com, made up mostly of young men in English-speaking countries. They say Waifu has a history of harassing his online foes and of SIM swapping, in which someone seizes control of a victim’s phone number and uses it to reset online passwords, such as for cryptocurrency accounts.

“He’s been an influential figure in the culture of the Com for at least five years,” said Allison Nixon, chief research officer at online investigations firm Unit 221B, who was also drawn into the hunt for Waifu.

Com hackers have grown more dangerous, ratcheting up their activities from taking over social-media accounts to stealing cryptocurrency to digital extortion. They have been linked to major hacks at Nvidia, Twitter and MGM Resorts.

The online mayhem is spilling into the real world. Com hackers have been linked to home invasions designed to steal cryptocurrency at gunpoint and have hired strangers to fire guns or throw bricks at a victim’s house. FBI agents routinely redact their own names from legal filings related to the Com to protect their identities, and analysts zealously guard their privacy.

Krebs tracks it all from his workstation, sitting in a black leather professional racing seat that his wife calls the “space chair.” In it, he’s surrounded by a 250-watt Bose sound system, a microphone and 6 feet of touch screen monitors that slowly lower up and down, like something out of a sci-fi movie.

With a glance to his left, Krebs can see a half-dozen live feeds from security cameras placed around his home. He gives fake names to plumbers and landscapers who work on his home to keep his address secret. He asked a visiting reporter not to reveal certain information, like the name of his dog. He isn’t registered to vote, because that requires an address.

Krebs got interested in cybersecurity in 2001 after his computer got hacked and he wanted to figure out how it happened. “I’m fascinated with the human side of cybercrime,” he said. He spends a lot of time lurking in forums where cybercriminals hang out. He spent years learning Russian, listening to lessons while running on a treadmill in his home gym.

He roams a domain where information mixes with misdirection and psychological manipulation. At one point Waifu ran through the identities of several other hackers and accused Krebs of implying he was one of them, in an apparent attempt to get more information.

“Go fish,” Krebs replied.

The investigator

Brian Krebs in front of the home where he was swatted in 2013. Photo: WSJ

Krebs cut his teeth investigating Russian hackers and pharmaceutical spammers. Fighting Russian adversaries is something of a family preoccupation. He grew up in Springfield, Va., one of seven children of an Air Force engineer who in the 1980s briefed then-President Ronald Reagan on a missile interception system that he believed would help the U.S. win its nuclear arms race with Russia.

Paying Krebs a visit these days isn’t easy. A recent trip to his home meant leaving behind all smartphones and internet-connected devices, to prevent any kind of digital trail that hackers could pick up. Visitors must navigate through winding Virginia farm country roads using a paper road map. No cameras are allowed.

He moved there after an incident in 2013, when he was getting ready to have his mom and aunt over for dinner.

Krebs had opened the door to remove some old tape on the window. On the other side were more than a half-dozen officers with their guns drawn, he said.

“Put up your hands,” an officer told him. Krebs was handcuffed in front of his house. He had been swatted—a form of online harassment where someone reports a fake emergency to 911, seeking to convince authorities to dispatch a SWAT team to a victim’s house. Someone had called 911 claiming to be Krebs and said that Russian criminals were in his home and had shot his wife.

A few months later, Krebs was looking at a Russian language online forum dedicated to fraud that he had gained access to. There he found a plot under way targeting him: Someone had mailed him a gram of heroin and was planning to call the police to report suspected drug activity.

Krebs called the police when he found the plot—and then again after the heroin arrived. An officer came to his house, and they talked around his kitchen table. Krebs recalled saying as the officer stood up to leave, “Thanks for coming and taking me seriously. Be safe.”

“Be safe?” the officer replied, according to Krebs. “I’m not the one who is having Russian cybercriminals send heroin to my house.”

The Ukrainian hacker behind the plot was later extradited to the U.S. and found guilty of cybercrimes—but not before he sent a 4-foot cross of carnations to Krebs’s house with a note addressed to his wife: “Rest in peace…. You’ve chosen to live with a wrong man, but we will always take care of you.”

A security camera photo from the swatting at Krebs’s former home; the floral arrangement that was later delivered to his door.

Krebs has had lines of credit taken out in his name. He’s even had an online forum for buying and selling stolen credit cards named after him: Brian’s Club.

When he heard about the April hack, on companies that were customers of cloud-data company Snowflake, he said he suspected “this was one for the books.”

The hack

The attack started in April, ultimately exposing data from 165 companies.

The hackers began advertising some of the stolen data for sale online. They posted 170,000 bar codes that they said were Taylor Swift Eras tour tickets, stolen from Ticketmaster, part of an attempt to sell what they said were customer records. They offered to sell the shopping records of 50 million Neiman Marcus customers for $150,000.

Perhaps their biggest score was more than 50 billion call records belonging to AT&T’s wireless customers. They posted a message on X, threatening to post FBI agents’ call records taken from AT&T, tagging AT&T, the FBI, Google’s Mandiant cybersecurity group and Krebs in the post. They included a screenshot with names and numbers.

Behind the scenes, they were also extorting companies for millions of dollars.

Mandiant, which was hired by Snowflake and other companies to investigate, found that the hackers were breaking into each company one by one, using login credentials they had gotten in Telegram and criminal forums. Those companies hadn’t turned on multifactor authentication for their Snowflake accounts—a process that requires users to verify their identity through another method, like a phone number. A username and password was all it took for the hackers to break in.

“You had so many Fortune 500 companies that thought it was totally fine to store all kinds of sensitive data just with a username and password,” Krebs said. “I was blown away by that.”

Snowflake now turns on authentication for its customers by default.

Meanwhile, a user named Judische was posting about some of the hacks on a Telegram channel dedicated to fraud.

Krebs asked around online about Judische, who then began messaging Krebs in private chats. It isn’t uncommon for hackers to talk to investigators. Sometimes they’re looking for publicity, to pressure extortion targets. Sometimes they’re trying to figure out what investigators might know.

A screenshot of the forum where users discussed buying heroin on the dark web to send to Krebs. Photo: KrebsOnSecurity.com

During the heart of his investigation, Krebs compiled a 97-page document with clues like email addresses, online usernames, forum posts and chat records. Looking at Judische’s account history and posts, he was able to connect Judische to Waifu.

The hackers mentioned Krebs, Nixon and other researchers in online posts, sometimes threatening them with violence. The hackers posted on a Telegram channel a musical “diss track” talking about Com members getting “failed doxxed by the legendary Krebs.”

Krebs was eventually getting messages from Waifu daily. Although they sometimes came from different accounts, they would repeat details from previous conversations. Much of it was misdirection. Sometimes he told the truth.

“Are you Judische?” Krebs asked in one of his messages to Nyakuza, who replied, “Yes.”

At one point Krebs identified someone he thought was Waifu—but then discovered that person was already in jail.

Nixon was driven to investigate because of the online threats against her. In collaboration with an anonymous researcher, her firm uncovered Waifu’s real-world identity by early July and turned the information over to authorities, she said. Researchers don’t like to reveal exactly how they trace anyone’s real-world identity. “We’re never going to disclose how, because the threat actors want to know,” said Nixon, who noted only that at one point Waifu made a move that inadvertently left a digital trail. Krebs and the cybersecurity firm Mandiant were just a few steps behind.

On Sept. 13, two days after Waifu’s chess challenge, Krebs published a post on his site making public the most personal details yet available about Waifu: He was a software engineer in Ontario, Canada, in his 20s. Krebs held off on giving a name. “I thought it prudent to wait for his arrest,” he said.

The arrest

The morning of Oct. 30, the Canadian equivalent of a SWAT team assembled near the Kitchener, Ontario, home of Anthony Przeklasa. The 75-year-old grandfather headed out for some errands and was quickly swarmed by police vehicles.

The police were there to arrest his grandson, 25-year-old Connor Moucka, who lived with Przeklasa. The police told him they were prepared to gas the house and break the door down, and in response, Przeklasa said, ”I asked them if they wanted my keys.”

Video footage shows Connor Moucka’s arrest.

Authorities in the U.S. wanted Moucka extradited to the U.S. on hacking, extortion, identity theft and wire fraud charges, according to a warrant that authorized police to seize Moucka’s electronic devices and a range of records.

According to a Justice Department indictment, unsealed in November, Moucka is Waifu.

Nine days earlier, just after 2 p.m., plainclothes officers had knocked on the door of the home and surreptitiously photographed Moucka to establish his identity. “You woke me up, sir,” Moucka told them, according to a court filing.

Moucka, who is 6-foot-2 and about 200 pounds, according to his grandfather, lived in a small bedroom on the top floor. He never had friends over and opened the door only to get takeout food or alcohol he ordered from the nearby liquor store. His dad died when he was very young and he moved in with his grandparents when he was in 12th grade.

He displayed signs of being on the autism spectrum, said Przeklasa, and at school, students harassed him by doing things like throwing pine cones at him. He never completed high school, his grandfather said.

When Przeklasa would pop in to see his grandson, he would either be asleep or in front of his two screens with headphones on. He told his grandfather he was a software developer. In the room, he had two photos of his grandmother, whom he was close to. She died of cancer last year, Przeklasa said.

Przeklasa said he had no idea of the extent of the allegations against his grandson until told by a reporter shortly after the arrest.

Moucka’s lawyer declined to comment.

This surveillance photo of Moucka, taken nine days before his arrest, appeared as evidence in a court filing.

Moucka is awaiting an extradition hearing, according to court records. The indictment named a co-conspirator in Turkey, John Binns, who has also been arrested and didn’t respond to messages seeking comment. In 2021, Binns told The Wall Street Journal that he had hacked telecom company T-Mobile.

The indictment alleged that Moucka, Binns and co-conspirators extorted at least 36 bitcoin—worth about $2.5 million at the time of payment—from at least three victims in the hack.

In court filings, prosecutors say that in online posts, “Moucka repeatedly references mass killings and obtaining firearms.” Moucka has also been charged in the Canadian province of Quebec with making death threats against a Montreal woman last year.

Waifu had been messaging Krebs up until the night before his arrest. “Knowing that there is one fewer person like that in the Com, that’s a win,” Krebs said.

His work continues. On Nov. 27, Krebs posted about a third suspect in the Snowflake incident who remains at large. And the Com is a much bigger problem than many in the security industry want to admit, he said. “They’re sitting on huge piles of crypto, and they feel emboldened.”

Caitlyn Ostroff contributed to this article.

Write to Robert McMillan at robert.mcmillan@wsj.com and Vipal Monga at vipal.monga@wsj.com

9. Losing Syria Is A 'Huge Slap In The Face' For Russia

Losing Syria Is A 'Huge Slap In The Face' For Russia

December 08, 2024 07:46 GMT

By Michael Scollon and

Frud Bezhan

rferl.org · by Michael Scollon · December 8, 2024

When Vladimir Putin took the reins of power in a post-Soviet Russia in shambles a quarter-century ago, he immediately set about restoring Moscow's status as a global power.

It took 15 years, but Russia heralded its military intervention in the Syrian civil war as proof of its return as a force to be reckoned with on the international stage.

Moscow leveraged that image to expand its influence throughout the Middle East and beyond as a counterweight to the West.

Now, the fall of the government of President Bashar al-Assad, a key ally of Moscow, has dealt a serious blow to Russia's great-power ambitions.

"Putin's military adventure in Syria was designed to demonstrate that Russia is a great power and can project its influence abroad," said Phillip Smyth, a Middle East expert. "Losing Syria is a huge slap in the face for Putin."

Roughly 900 US Troops Still in Syria as Rebels Close in on Damascus | Common Dreams

commondreams.org · by Jake Johnson · December 7, 2024

Rebel groups are pictured advancing through central Hama, Syria on December 7, 2024.

(Photo: Emin Sansar/Anadolu via Getty Images)

"Whether the Pentagon wants to admit it or not," U.S. troops "are likely involved in the broader conflict unfolding there right now," warned one analyst.

Dec 07, 2024

Syrian rebel groups' rapid advance on the nation's capital city of Damascus and the possible collapse of President Bashar al-Assad's government after more than a decade of civil war has brought renewed attention to the continued presence of U.S. forces in the country, despite the absence of a clear legal authorization.

The U.S. is believed to have around 900 troops deployed to Syria, mostly in the northeast, as well as an unknown number of private contractors. Nick Turse, a contributing writer for The Intercept, observed Thursday that American forces in Syria "have, on average, come under fire multiple times each week since last October," according to internal Pentagon statistics.

"Keeping military personnel in harm's way for the sake of foreign policy credibility has become increasingly risky with the Gaza war and the flare-up of the Syrian civil war," Turse wrote.

Kelley Vlahos, senior adviser to the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, wrote Saturday morning that "whether the Pentagon wants to admit it or not," U.S. troops "are likely involved in the broader conflict unfolding there right now."

Reutersreported Tuesday that as rebels advanced toward the city of Hama, "fighters from a U.S.-backed, Kurdish-led coalition battled government forces in the northeast, both sides said, opening a new front along a vital supply route" and "compounding Assad's problems."

As the coalition of groups led by the Islamist organization Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and factions of the Turkey-backed Syrian National Army has quickly seized control of large swaths of territory, the White House National Security Council (NSC) said in a statement last weekend that the U.S.—which has previously armed and trained Syrian rebels—"has nothing to do with this offensive."

"The United States, together with its partners and allies, urge de-escalation, protection of civilians and minority groups, and a serious and credible political process that can end this civil war once and for all with a political settlement consistent with UNSCR 2254," said NSC spokesperson Sean Savett. "We will also continue to fully defend and protect U.S. personnel and U.S. military positions, which remain essential to ensuring that ISIS can never again resurge in Syria."

On Friday, the White House said in a letter to Congress that "a small presence of United States Armed Forces remains in strategically significant locations in Syria to conduct operations, in partnership with local, vetted ground forces, to address continuing terrorist threats emanating from Syria."

President-elect Donald Trump, who during his first term opted to keep U.S. troops in Syria for the openly stated purpose of exploiting the country's oil fields, wrote in a social media post on Saturday that "the United States should have nothing to do with" the current conflict.

"This is not our fight," he wrote in all caps. "Let it play out. Do not get involved!"

Trump's post, as The Associated Pressreported, came as rebels' "stunning march across Syria gained speed... with news that they had reached the suburbs of the capital and with the government forced to deny rumors that President Bashar al-Assad had fled the country."

Hassan Abdul-Ghani, an insurgent commander, said in a Telegram post that rebels are entering the "final stage" of their offensive as they began to encircle Syria's capital. Citing unnamed local sources, Al Jazeerareported that "a state of panic has spread as army troops withdraw from their positions around Damascus."

"They also confirmed that opposition forces had advanced in the western Damascus countryside and the withdrawal of army forces from cities and towns in Eastern Ghouta," the outlet added. "There was a rush for food items in markets in the capital."

Government forces have been backed by Russian airstrikes, Hezbollah, and Iraqi militia fighters.

Reutersreported that "Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said in an Arabic-language interview that Tehran would consider sending troops to Syria if Damascus asked, and Russian President Vladimir Putin urged an end to 'terrorist aggression' in Syria."

In a video statement on Saturday, a Syrian military commander said that "our valiant army continues to carry out its operations against terrorist gatherings at high rates in the directions of the Hama and Homs countrysides and the northern Daraa countryside, inflicting hundreds of deaths and injuries on the terrorists."

— (@)

Anti-war lawmakers in the U.S. have repeatedly questioned the role of American troops in Syria in recent years and launched efforts to force their withdrawal.

In March 2023, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the U.S. House put forth a resolution that would have required full withdrawal of American forces from Syria within 180 days of passage in the absence of congressional action authorizing their continued presence.

The resolution was voted down by 170 Republicans and 150 Democrats.

Months later, the U.S. Senate tanked a similar effort.

Erik Sperling, executive director of the advocacy group Just Foreign Policy, told The Intercept on Thursday that the Biden administration hasn't "put the war in Syria up for debate because they know the American people don't want another war in the Middle East."

"They know there is no popular support for putting U.S. troops at risk for this," said Sperling, who warned that "many of Trump's advisers will try to drag him deeper into this regional conflict in the Middle East."

The explosion of Syria's civil war in recent days has been disastrous for civilians in the crossfire.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) said Wednesday that "the outbreak of major hostilities... raises concerns that civilians face a real risk of serious abuses at the hands of opposition armed groups and the Syrian government."

"The bloody record of atrocities by all parties to the conflict in Syria is bound to persist until leaders go beyond words and support accountability efforts," said Adam Coogle, HRW's deputy Middle East director. "Without credible justice, there will be no end in sight to the suffering Syrians have endured, no matter who controls the land."

Join Us: News for people demanding a better world

Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place.

We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference.

Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will.

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

Jake Johnson

Jake Johnson is a senior editor and staff writer for Common Dreams.

bashar al-assad donald trump joe biden pentagon us military us troops syria

"Keeping military personnel in harm's way for the sake of foreign policy credibility has become increasingly risky with the Gaza war and the flare-up of the Syrian civil war," Turse wrote.

"This is not our fight," he wrote in all caps. "Let it play out. Do not get involved!"

Government forces have been backed by Russian airstrikes, Hezbollah, and Iraqi militia fighters.

— (@)

Anti-war lawmakers in the U.S. have repeatedly questioned the role of American troops in Syria in recent years and launched efforts to force their withdrawal.

The resolution was voted down by 170 Republicans and 150 Democrats.

Months later, the U.S. Senate tanked a similar effort.

The explosion of Syria's civil war in recent days has been disastrous for civilians in the crossfire.

Jake Johnson

Jake Johnson is a senior editor and staff writer for Common Dreams.

"Keeping military personnel in harm's way for the sake of foreign policy credibility has become increasingly risky with the Gaza war and the flare-up of the Syrian civil war," Turse wrote.

"This is not our fight," he wrote in all caps. "Let it play out. Do not get involved!"

Government forces have been backed by Russian airstrikes, Hezbollah, and Iraqi militia fighters.

— (@)

Anti-war lawmakers in the U.S. have repeatedly questioned the role of American troops in Syria in recent years and launched efforts to force their withdrawal.

The resolution was voted down by 170 Republicans and 150 Democrats.

Months later, the U.S. Senate tanked a similar effort.

The explosion of Syria's civil war in recent days has been disastrous for civilians in the crossfire.

commondreams.org · by Jake Johnson · December 7, 2024

11. Frontline report: Ukraine destroys Russian S-400 shield to target North Korean training camps in Kursk

The more north Korean military forces that can be killed in Russia/Ukraine, the less we will have to kill should Kim Jong Un miscalculate and try to attack the South.

Frontline report: Ukraine destroys Russian S-400 shield to target North Korean training camps in Kursk

Russia’s attempt to secretly integrate North Korean soldiers into its depleted marine units backfired as Ukraine’s air force exploited gaps in repositioned forces.

https://euromaidanpress.com/2024/12/07/frontline-report-ukraine-destroys-russian-s-400-shield-to-target-north-korean-training-camps-in-kursk/

Reporting from Ukraine

07/12/2024

3 minute read

North Korean troops. Photo: rusi.org

Frontline report: Ukraine destroys Russian S-400 shield to target North Korean training camps in Kursk

Today, there are a lot of updates from the Kursk direction.

Here, Ukraine’s precision air strikes have begun targeting a surprising and covert element in Russia’s war effort, namely North Korean forces in training. The exposed vulnerabilities of these concentrated units, undergoing a last-minute change of plans in their integration with Russian brigades, create critical disruption opportunities.

The battlefield situation in Russia’s Kursk Oblast. Photo: Screenshot from the video

Russia tries to masquerade North Korean forces

Recent intelligence has revealed a secret Russian plan to deploy North Korean troops in the region. But instead of forming standalone North Korean units adhering to their own military tactics and standards, Russia opted to integrate these troops into existing Marine brigades. This approach aimed to camouflage their presence while leveraging Russian command structures, aligning North Korean forces with Russian operational needs.

Buryats in the Russian army. Photo: Screenshot from the video

A key element of this plan was the formation of so-called special Buryat battalions. Officially labeled as volunteers, this designation exploited the physical resemblance between Buryats, an ethnic group in Russia, and Koreans in an attempt to obscure the identity of the North Korean personnel. These battalions were intended to blend into the Russian Marine brigades, starting with the 155th Brigade, which had begun initial training exercises with the North Korean soldiers.

North Korean troops. Photo: Screenshot from the video

However, the plan quickly unraveled as the 155th Brigade suffered catastrophic losses in Kursk after being thrown into relentless frontal assaults again and again by the Russian commanders, effectively ceasing to function as a combat-effective unit. The brigade’s destruction disrupted the integration process, leaving North Korean troops without functioning partner units.

Russia’s 155th Brigade suffered catastrophic losses in Kursk. Photo: Screenshot from the video

Plan B: Russian VDV airborne units take over

This forced the Russian command to adjust its strategy. Reports now indicate that Russian Airborne units have been redeployed to Kursk specifically to facilitate the integration of North Korean troops as replacements for the destroyed Marines. Elements of the 76th VDV Division, including the 104th Regiment, were redeployed from other fronts to Kursk to backfill losses and create a framework for training North Korean detachments. Joint training exercises are reportedly underway, marking the first stage of their operational integration.Elements of Russia’s 76th VDV Division were redeployed from other fronts to Kursk Photo: Screenshot from the video

Such big redeployments create movements that are easier to track, which helps the Ukrainians localize force concentrations and training bases. In the face of this development, Ukrainian commanders decided to target them and actively disrupt their deployment on the battlefield. As part of a broader effort to prepare the battlefield for an air strike campaign against concentrated enemy forces, the Ukrainians destroyed a radar station of an S-400 air defense system in the region.

Ukraine’s surgical strike

With the skies clear, the Ukrainian Air Force conducted a precise JDAM strike on a Russian deployment site located southeast of Sudzha using a Su-27 fighter jet. Geolocated footage from a Ukrainian surveillance drone shows how two JDAM bombs destroy a large building used as a base by the Russians.

Ukrainian JDAM bomb destroys a building used as a base by the Russians. Photo: Screenshot from the video

This was the first attack, and such moves served two purposes: degrading Russian operational capabilities in Kursk and disrupting the integration of North Korean troops, signaling Ukraine’s readiness to exploit the vulnerable positioning of newly arrived VDV units and North Korean troops as they train and prepare together.

Ukrainian JDAM bomb destroys a building used as a base by the Russians. Photo: Screenshot from the video

Overall, Russia’s reliance on North Korean troops highlights the severity of its manpower shortages. The attempt to conceal their deployment under the guise of a special Buryat Battalion reflects both the Kremlin’s secrecy and its willingness to adapt unconventional strategies. However, integrating undertrained North Korean personnel into depleted Russian units is unlikely to yield significant tactical advantages, especially given the high attrition rates already suffered by Russian forces in Kursk.

The coming weeks will likely see intensified Ukrainian air strikes on Russian and North Korean troop concentrations, aiming to preempt any offensive operations and further destabilize the Russian command structure in the region.

In our regular frontline report, we pair up with the military blogger Reporting from Ukraine to keep you informed about what is happening on the battlefield in the Russo-Ukrainian war.

12. Blending AI with Human Judgment: Man, Machine, and the Battlefield in Modern Warfare

Excerpts:

Integrating AI into military operations is not a distant possibility—it is happening now. The challenge is to ensure that as this technology becomes more deeply embedded in the decision-making process, it is done in a way that upholds the principles of just war and the ethical standards that define the American military.

This will require a combination of training, wargaming, and cultural adaptation. Commanders must be comfortable using AI, but they must also be comfortable questioning it. They must learn to recognize when AI offers the best solution and when it falls short. This kind of learning can only come from experience—from exercises that force them to confront AI's limitations and consider the broader consequences of their actions.

Ultimately, the goal is not to replace human decision-makers but to enhance them. AI can potentially make the American military faster, smarter, and more effective. But it must do so in a way that respects human judgment and upholds the values that define the military and the nation it serves.

The future battlefield will demand decisions at the speed of events across all domains. AI can provide the answers, but only humans can determine whether those answers are right or wrong. The challenge is to blend the speed and power of AI with the conscience and judgment of the human mind to ensure that as warfare becomes more complex, it does not lose its humanity.

Blending AI with Human Judgment

Man, Machine, and the Battlefield in Modern Warfare

https://www.strategycentral.io/post/blending-ai-with-human-judgment?utm

STRATEGY CENTRAL

For And By Practitioners

By Monte Erfourth - December 8, 2024

Introduction

Artificial intelligence is on the verge of revolutionizing modern warfare's speed, scale, and complexity, surpassing the human mind's capabilities. AI promises to solve this problem—helping to sift through data, recognize patterns, and make multi-domain decisions in real-time. But as the U.S. military increasingly looks to AI to address tactical and strategic challenges, a fundamental question looms: How do we blend AI’s computational power with human moral and professional judgment? It is not enough to build smarter systems; those systems must serve human ethics and law, particularly concerning lethal force.

AI as a Game Changer for Decision Making

Modern combat is no longer confined to a single domain. On any given day, operations may occur simultaneously in the air, land, sea, space, and cyberspace. This all-domain nature of warfare creates complexity that is almost impossible for human minds to manage effectively in real-time. AI can solve problems efficiently, providing real-time analysis and offering decision-making solutions to address threats as they emerge. It is a capability that is not optional; it is imperative for remaining competitive against peer adversaries.

AI is increasingly seen as an invaluable partner in speeding up the decision-making process while maintaining, if not improving, the accuracy of those decisions. However, there is a delicate balance to strike—AI must not replace humans. Instead, it must work in concert with military professionals who can apply moral and ethical considerations, particularly when lethal force is involved.

The American military is clear: A human must always be in the loop. Humans can weigh options, consider unintended consequences, and make value-based decisions—crucial elements when lives are at stake. This isn't a matter of mere caution; it’s a matter of ethical duty. The ethical implications of allowing a machine to make lethal decisions are enormous, and the potential consequences could be tragic if things go wrong.

The compromise somehow integrates the best of both man and machine. However, integrating AI into military decision-making is not as simple as handing over rapid decision-making to a machine and letting a human push a button. It requires a level of understanding and training that allows military personnel to both trust and question the decisions suggested by AI. One way the military is preparing for this future is through AI-driven wargaming.

Imagine a wargame where participants must consider tactical or operational solutions in each domain simultaneously and reconcile those solutions with the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC). In such a scenario, AI offers solutions based on data, statistics, and probabilities—delivering outcomes that maximize military advantage while minimizing risk to friendly forces. However, the participants—human commanders and operators—must evaluate these solutions with a keen awareness of ethical and legal boundaries. They need to determine whether those decisions align with international law, the moral standards expected of the American military, and, ultimately, their conscience.

An AI-driven wargame might present an example like this: A drone strike is proposed on a target that AI has identified as a high-value military asset. The system’s analysis indicates a 95% success rate, with minimal risk to U.S. personnel. However, there is a 5% chance that a civilian structure nearby could be affected. The AI might calculate this as an acceptable level of collateral damage based on the expected strategic advantage. But the human in the loop must ask: Is that risk acceptable? Does it comply with the LOAC, which requires minimizing civilian harm? Could there be unintended consequences—such as negative political or social repercussions—that the AI cannot fully evaluate?

These wargames and others should also be part of the development of the Rules of Engagement (ROE). Programmers and lawyers should have time to help identify problems and solve them well before the time and risk elements of war demand rapid decision-making from the man-machine interface. Studies on risk and risk tolerance, political objectives and cultural sensitivities should be part of wargaming and teaching the man-technology system to solve them in peace as a matter of routine to enhance their linked process.

Such wargames force participants to recognize the inherent correctness of AI’s tactical or strategic solutions and their limitations. The technology experts, lawyers, psychologists, ethicists, strategists, anthropologists, weapons experts, and other assorted experts must be part of a production and pre-deployment training package. The improved kill-chain systems and the AI used to develop strategy require the best man-machine integration we can field. AI does not possess moral judgment, nor can it understand the complex political and human consequences that extend beyond the battlefield. Human commanders and operators, by contrast, must bear the weight of these decisions and be prepared to justify their actions legally and morally.

Accelerating Decisions Without Losing Humanity

This discussion highlights the speed and a quality of “correctness” in applying deadly force. However, two parts of AI-enabled decision-making are at play, as presented here. Slower strategic decisions should be enabled by AI, as well as kill chain decisions that require speed and accuracy in the use of lethal force. Speed in the application of the ethical use of lethal force is the central issue, as it is the primary problem of integrating the full power of AI with the slower but more nuanced human mind. Slow thinking (a less immediate threat that requires deliberate decision-making) in developing a strategy is full of issues to be resolved. Still, the AI-human integration at speed in applying lethal force is the more vexing of the two parts of a symbiotic relationship.

The key to integrating AI into the kill chain is forging a symbiotic relationship that enhances decision speed and accuracy without sacrificing our humanity or core democratic values. AI offers rapid data analysis, tactical recommendations, and precision—but it must always serve human oversight rooted in ethical responsibility. The integration must mesh the objective analysis of AI with the subjective human capabilities to maximize the effect of weapons and preserve and protect civilian lives, infrastructure, and the environment.

On the future battlefield, decisions must be made in seconds, not minutes. AI can assist by providing swift, data-driven solutions, but the ultimate judgment must come from humans who can evaluate the broader consequences. Human operators must blend tactical advantage with moral and strategic considerations, ensuring adherence to the principles of ethical conduct and the Laws of Armed Conflict. The nightmare scenario—AI making lethal decisions autonomously—risks removing the essential humanity from warfare, replacing nuanced ethical judgment with cold calculations that could lead to tragic outcomes. This remains true, even when making slower-paced strategic decisions. AI’s cold rationality must not allow us to create monstrous strategic objectives like genocide, starvation, or enslavement.

We must also consider that AI may, in time, surpass humanity in ethical and legal reasoning at speed. This would create a truly unprecedented event where ethical AI systems may lead and fight warfare. AI could become more ethically human than humanity. Without greed, will-to-power, hatred, anger, fatigue, and human foibles, AI trained by the best legal and ethical minds could become more suitable to fight wars than humans. Synergy would take on a new meaning in a world where AI was our ethical superior. But until that day, man must be the final decision-maker. Synergy must be strived for through a relentless quest to improve man, machine, and process.

Synergy requires ongoing training that goes beyond technical skills. Military personnel must grasp AI's capabilities and limitations, recognizing when it might lead to unintended outcomes or when human judgment is stretched too thin. By promoting critical thinking and experience, the military can build trust in AI while ensuring that human operators retain ultimate authority and prioritize ethics over speed. This integration allows for quick and precise actions while adhering to the principles of just warfare. The overall process demands that AI enhances operational tempo without compromising human values, preventing indiscriminate harm and upholding moral standards defined by LOAC. Ultimately, AI is a force multiplier that empowers, not replaces, humanity.

Responsibility and Legal Constraints

The American military must adhere to the Laws of Armed Conflict (LOAC) and its ethical code. The use of AI in warfare raises critical questions about how compatible these laws and values are with machine decision-making. A key concern is the principle of distinction, which requires identifying combatants versus non-combatants. While AI can identify targets accurately, it cannot grasp context like humans.

Consider a situation where AI identifies individuals with weapons in a conflict zone and suggests they are combatants, recommending a strike. A human operator, however, may know these individuals are part of a local militia not actively fighting or civilians defending themselves. The information available to humans can accurately assess the context and decide if a strike is justified. Conversely, AI may have updated intelligence, which is the basis for a more accurate assessment. The human must be trained to make snap decisions on which to trust while complying with LOAC and ROE.

The issue of accountability is crucial. If a mistake occurs, like targeting civilians, who are responsible? A human can be held accountable for errors, but what about an AI? This lack of clear accountability is one reason the military insists on keeping a human in the loop—someone must be responsible for decisions made on the battlefield.

A Vision for the Future

Integrating AI into military operations is not a distant possibility—it is happening now. The challenge is to ensure that as this technology becomes more deeply embedded in the decision-making process, it is done in a way that upholds the principles of just war and the ethical standards that define the American military.

This will require a combination of training, wargaming, and cultural adaptation. Commanders must be comfortable using AI, but they must also be comfortable questioning it. They must learn to recognize when AI offers the best solution and when it falls short. This kind of learning can only come from experience—from exercises that force them to confront AI's limitations and consider the broader consequences of their actions.

Ultimately, the goal is not to replace human decision-makers but to enhance them. AI can potentially make the American military faster, smarter, and more effective. But it must do so in a way that respects human judgment and upholds the values that define the military and the nation it serves.

The future battlefield will demand decisions at the speed of events across all domains. AI can provide the answers, but only humans can determine whether those answers are right or wrong. The challenge is to blend the speed and power of AI with the conscience and judgment of the human mind to ensure that as warfare becomes more complex, it does not lose its humanity.

Bibliography

1. Allen, Gregory C., and Taniel Chan. Artificial Intelligence and National Security. Harvard Kennedy School, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, 2017.

2. Crootof, Rebecca. "The Killer Robots Are Here: Legal and Policy Implications." Cardozo Law Review 36, no. 1 (2014): 1837-1915.

3. Scharre, Paul. Army of None: Autonomous Weapons and the Future of War. W.W. Norton & Company, 2018.

4. Singer, P.W. Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century. Penguin Press, 2009.

5. Sparrow, Robert. "Killer Robots." Journal of Applied Philosophy 24, no. 1 (2007): 62-77.

6. United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs. The Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons and the Use of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems. United Nations, 2019.

7. U.S. Department of Defense. Directive 3000.09: Autonomy in Weapon Systems. November 21, 2012.

8. Walzer, Michael. Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations. Basic Books, 2015.

13. State Department aims to get more career ambassadors in place before 2nd Trump term

I had not heard what is stated in the headline. But can't the next president undo any of these appointments (as noted as President Reagna did)? Won't this undermine the credibility of the State Department if it is giving the appearance that it is trying to do something contrary to what might be the incoming President's intent?

Excerpts:

ANTONY BLINKEN: Those of us who are entrusted, for a brief period of time, with responsibility for leading this institution owe it to the institution, and owe it to the institution's people, to try to leave it a little bit stronger, a little bit more effective, a little bit more fit for purpose than when we found it.

KELEMEN: There are some changes he made that could last. Blinken has made it easier for Americans to renew their passports online, and he had more diplomats focused on China.

BLINKEN: We built what we call China House, an office that brings together experts from across the department and other agencies under one roof, where they can better coordinate and better manage this most complex and consequential relationship.

KELEMEN: But he also had his department focus more on disinformation, climate diplomacy and anti-corruption, topics unlikely to get much focus in the second Trump administration. As the transition approaches, U.S. ambassadors are drafting their letters of resignation. Usually, only the political ambassadors leave, while career diplomats tend to stay put, says retired Ambassador Eric Rubin.

ERIC RUBIN: Only once since FDR has an incoming president fired all of our ambassadors, including our career foreign service ambassadors. That was 1981, Ronald Reagan.

KELEMEN: Back then, it took only a few months to get a new ambassador vetted and through the Senate confirmation process. Now Rubin says it can take a year or more, so firing all the ambassadors would be disruptive.

RUBIN: If he fires all the ambassadors, we just won't have any ambassadors anywhere. And China will have an ambassador in every single country.

State Department aims to get more career ambassadors in place before 2nd Trump term

December 3, 20244:40 AM ET

Heard on Morning Edition

https://www.npr.org/2024/12/03/nx-s1-5195145/state-department-aims-to-get-more-career-ambassadors-in-place-before-2nd-trump-term

Michele Kelemen

Listen· 4:24

4-Minute Listen

Playlist

As the transition to a new administration approaches, what is the likely impact on a decidedly nervous State Department?

A MARTÍNEZ, HOST:

Secretary of State Antony Blinken is making a last-ditch effort to get more career ambassadors confirmed by the Senate. He's tried to rebuild a department gutted during the previous Trump administration. As NPR's Michele Kelemen reports, those reforms may not last long.

MICHELE KELEMEN, BYLINE: In a recent speech, before Donald Trump was reelected, Secretary Blinken looked back on what he calls his deep attachment to the State Department, where he started his government career three decades ago.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

ANTONY BLINKEN: Those of us who are entrusted, for a brief period of time, with responsibility for leading this institution owe it to the institution, and owe it to the institution's people, to try to leave it a little bit stronger, a little bit more effective, a little bit more fit for purpose than when we found it.

KELEMEN: There are some changes he made that could last. Blinken has made it easier for Americans to renew their passports online, and he had more diplomats focused on China.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

BLINKEN: We built what we call China House, an office that brings together experts from across the department and other agencies under one roof, where they can better coordinate and better manage this most complex and consequential relationship.

KELEMEN: But he also had his department focus more on disinformation, climate diplomacy and anti-corruption, topics unlikely to get much focus in the second Trump administration. As the transition approaches, U.S. ambassadors are drafting their letters of resignation. Usually, only the political ambassadors leave, while career diplomats tend to stay put, says retired Ambassador Eric Rubin.

ERIC RUBIN: Only once since FDR has an incoming president fired all of our ambassadors, including our career foreign service ambassadors. That was 1981, Ronald Reagan.

KELEMEN: Back then, it took only a few months to get a new ambassador vetted and through the Senate confirmation process. Now Rubin says it can take a year or more, so firing all the ambassadors would be disruptive.

RUBIN: If he fires all the ambassadors, we just won't have any ambassadors anywhere. And China will have an ambassador in every single country.

KELEMEN: Concerns about China's influence in the world is something that also animates the head of the American Foreign Service Association, Tom Yazdgerdi. He welcomed the Biden administration's decision to open up five new embassies in the Maldives, Tonga, the Seychelles, Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands.

TOM YAZDGERDI: That's great. And I think there was bipartisan support for that - as there should be - but we have more work to do. Everybody has an interest in not sort of ceding the diplomatic field to China.

KELEMEN: This year, the State Department saw its largest-ever class of foreign service officers. But Yazdgerdi says the department is still recovering from the Trump years.

TOM YAZDGERDI: I think we're still playing catch-up ball, to be honest with you. There are still - particularly at the mid-level, we have vacancies. You can see that when you go over - abroad and visit our embassies, we have vacancies. We have vacancies in Washington, as well.

KELEMEN: Many at the department are nervous that President Trump may try to reclassify jobs as political in order to fire career professionals. Others are predicting an exodus of experienced diplomats who might retire rather than serve.

DAN SPOKOJNY: I think that one has to approach this as a normal transition and see how the cards fall.

KELEMEN: That's Dan Spokojny, a former foreign service officer who says career diplomats need to do their jobs, offering nonpartisan advice to the incoming team.

SPOKOJNY: Every foreign service officer, every civil servant - whether they're in national security or otherwise - has to go into their work knowing their own ethical red lines. They understand, deeply understand, their oath to the Constitution.

KELEMEN: He's founder and CEO of fp21, a think tank dedicated to modernizing the State Department, which he says has been losing influence for years.

SPOKOJNY: One could make too much of this just being a Trump effect. I think that there's a broader issue here of the foreign service's authority, supposedly as being the institution of foreign policymakers within our national security establishment. But they haven't been able to play that role for decades, and I think that that's a shame.

KELEMEN: Spokojny says it's a good idea for Blinken to make one last attempt to get career diplomats confirmed. Transitions are tenuous times, he says, and it would be good to have professionals in place, even if the new administration might reassign them.

Michele Kelemen, NPR News, the State Department.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

14. In the Syrian Regime’s Hour of Need, Its Patron Iran Makes an Exit

In the Syrian Regime’s Hour of Need, Its Patron Iran Makes an Exit

The collapse of a partnership built over four decades would reshape the balance of power in the Middle East.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/07/world/middleeast/iran-syria-rebels.html?utm_source=flipboard&utm_content=topic/world

Rebel fighters near a defaced portrait of President Bashar al-Assad in Daraa, Syria, on Saturday.Credit...Sam Hariri/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

By Farnaz Fassihi

Dec. 7, 2024

For decades, Iran has expended much blood and money in support of Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, helping him survive a civil war that threatened his dynastic rule. Iran operated military bases, weapons warehouses and missile factories in Syria, which it used as a pipeline for arming its militant allies across the region.

Now, just as Mr. al-Assad needs help to repel a rapid advance by rebel forces, Iran is heading for the exits. On Friday, the country started evacuating its military commanders and personnel, as well as some diplomatic staff, according to Iranian and regional officials.

It is a remarkable turnabout: Iran not only appears to be abandoning Mr. al-Assad, its closest Arab ally, but also relinquishing everything it had built and fought to preserve for 40 years in Syria, its main foothold in the Arab world.

With the rebels expected to advance soon on Damascus, Iran is unable to muster a defense of the Assad government after a damaging year of regional wars that began with the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by Hamas, an Iranian ally.

A collapse of Iran’s partnership with Syria would by all accounts reshape the balance of power in the Middle East. The “axis of resistance” that Iran has formed with its militant allies in Lebanon, the Palestinian territories, Syria, Iraq and Yemen would be weakened. Israel and its Arab allies would be strengthened.

“For Iran, Syria has been the backbone of our regional presence,” Hassan Shemshadi, an expert on Iran’s proxy militant groups who was for years a documentary filmmaker on the battlefields of Syria, said in an interview from Tehran. “Everything that Iran sent to the region went through Syria. It is now extremely difficult to keep these channels open.”

Image

Trucks carrying diesel fuel from Iran crossing the border from Syria into Lebanon in 2021. A collapse of Iran’s partnership with Syria would by all accounts reshape the balance of power in the Middle East. Credit...Bilal Hussein/Associated Press

Initially, the Iranian government was shocked at how quickly the rebels in Syria gained ground and the Syrian Army abandoned its bases, according to three Iranian officials, two of them members of the elite Revolutionary Guards, and two prominent Iranian analysts close to the government.

By midweek, the mood had turned into full panic, the officials said, as the rebels were on a march that would hand them city after city, from Aleppo to Hama to Deir al-Zour and Daraa.

Publicly, Iranian officials vowed to remain fully committed to supporting Mr. al-Assad. But privately, as the rebels gained control over more and more territory where Iran and its proxy militias had reigned, they wondered if events were outpacing their ability to turn the tide, the officials said.

Get the best of The Times in your inbox

Sign up for The Morning:Make sense of the news, every day, with David Leonhardt.
Sign up for Opinion Today:Get expert analysis of the news and a guide to the big ideas shaping the world every weekday morning.
Sign up for The Great Read:On weekdays and Sundays, we recommend one piece of exceptional writing from The Times — a narrative or essay that takes you someplace you might not expect to go.

By the end of the week, several senior officials had made statements on social media that Mr. al-Assad’s ouster was seemingly inevitable and Iran’s setback monumental.

“The potential fall of the Syrian government to Islamist extremists would be one of the most significant events in the history of the Middle East,” Mohammad Ali Abtahi, a former vice president, wrote on X. “Resistance in the region would be left without support. Israel would become the dominant force.”

Although Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, who has traveled to Damascus, Baghdad and Doha, Qatar, for consultations on Syria, at first struck a defiant tone, he later said that Mr. al-Assad’s fate would be left to “God’s will.”

Image

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi of Iran arriving in Doha, Qatar, on Saturday.Credit...Karim Jaafar/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

An internal memo from a Revolutionary Guards member that was viewed by The New York Times described the situation in Syria as “unbelievable and strange.” It is as if “Iran accepted the fall of Assad and has lost the will to resist,” the memo says.

State television in Shiite-majority Iran switched from calling the Sunni rebels “infidel terrorists” to “armed groups” and reported that they had so far treated Shiite minorities well.

Soheil Karimi, a former fighter in Syria turned political pundit, said on a state television news program that Mr. Araghchi’s pledges of support to Syria’s government were nothing but false hope.

“The reality in the field is not what he says,” Mr. Karimi said, citing reports from his contacts in Syria. “Our guys are not in the battlefield in Syria now. They have not been allowed.”

A video posted on Friday on social media accounts affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards showed a Shiite shrine near Damascus almost empty. A narrator says, “These may be the last images you see of the shrine, everyone has left Syria, all the Iranians have evacuated.” He then breaks into sobs.

The shrine, Sayyidah Zaynab, is the tomb of the granddaughter of the Prophet Muhammad, and it has played a central role in Iran’s war narrative in Syria. Iranian soldiers who fought in Syria are commonly referred to as “defenders of the shrine.”

Image

Syrians praying at the shrine, Sayyidah Zaynab, in Damascus in 2022. The shrine has played a central role in Iran’s war narrative in Syria. Credit...Omar Sanadiki/Associated Press

The three Iranian officials said that Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, the main rebel group advancing in Syria, sent Iran a private diplomatic message this week. The group promised that it would protect Shiite religious sites and Shiite minorities and asked Iran not to fight its forces, according to the officials. Iran, in turn, asked the group to allow safe passage of its troops out of Syria and to protect the Shia shrines, according to two officials.

Iran deployed commanders and troops to Syria in 2012 at the start of the anti-government uprising, helping to defeat both the opponents of the Assad regime and the Islamic State terrorist group.

It used its continued foothold in Syria to maintain a robust weapons supply chain to Hezbollah in Lebanon and to Palestinians in the West Bank, including through two shipping ports and airports. More recently, Iran partnered with smuggler gangs and some members of Bedouin tribes in Jordan to send arms from Syria to the West Bank.

But the dynamics of the Middle East have changed vastly in the past year.

Iran suffered significant blows as Israel attacked Iranian assets and bases in Syria, including its embassy compound in Damascus. Israel killed at least two dozen Iranian forces, some of them senior commanders in charge of regional operations, according to Iranian media.

In addition, Iran’s key ally Hezbollah was battered after an intense period of fighting with Israel in Lebanon. Russia, another ally of Syria, is focused on its own war with Ukraine. And more crucially, Syria’s Army has demonstrated an unwillingness to fight.

Yet another concern for Iran was Israel’s threat to attack any mobilization of Iranian troops in Syria, according to analysts inside and outside the country. Two flights by a private Iranian airline en route to Damascus were turned around this past week after warnings by Israel that it would shoot them down if they entered Syria’s airspace, according to Iranian and Israeli officials. Israel said the flights were transferring weapons.

Image

Damaged vehicles at the site of a reported Israeli strike in the al-Mezzeh neighborhood of Damascus, Syria, in October. Israel has threatened to attack any mobilization of Iranian troops in Syria. Credit...Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

“For Iran to enter this fight it would require massive logistical and financial resources,” as well as help from allies and Syria itself, said Mehdi Rahmati, a Syria analyst in Tehran who has advised the government. “None of these conditions exist right now.”

“Syria and Lebanon are like our left and right wings,” Mr. Hemati said. “They are being clipped, and it’s hard to imagine one without the other.”

Afshon Ostovar, an associate professor of national security affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School in California and an expert on Iran’s military, said Iran was in a bind, particularly with Donald J. Trump returning to the presidency and expected to enforce a policy of “maximum pressure on Iran.”

“Losing ground in Syria will make Iran look increasingly weak to its enemies in Tel Aviv and Washington,” Mr. Ostovar said. “If Iran doubles down on Syria, it could be throwing men and materiel into a losing battle. But if Iran falls back, it will appear weak, be admitting defeat, and cede hard-fought territory to its enemies.”

Farnaz Fassihi is the United Nations bureau chief for The Times, leading coverage of the organization, and also covers Iran and the shadow war between Iran and Israel. She is based in New York. More about Farnaz Fassihi

15. The Pentagon knows it's got a drone problem. Here's what it's doing about it.

Excerpts:

Despite these efforts, the Pentagon acknowledges that there's still work to be done considering the direction that drone warfare is headed.

"The rapidly evolving nature of the threats posed by adversary use of unmanned systems means that the Department will need to continually reassess our efforts," the fact sheet said, but "this strategy sets a foundation for action to meet this challenge."

The Pentagon knows it's got a drone problem. Here's what it's doing about it.

Business Insider · by Jake Epstein

Military & Defense

Jake Epstein

2024-12-06T19:13:10Z

Facebook Email X LinkedIn Copy Link Impact Link

Read in app

A contractor hand-launches a drone at a counter-UAV training site in California in January 2020. US Army photo by PFC Gower Liu, 11th ACR Public Affairs

This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Have an account? .

The Pentagon has released a new strategy to combat the growing threat of drones.
Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said that drones are threatening US forces and changing warfare.
The military sketched out some of the ways that it will approach this threat in the future.

The US military is increasingly realizing that drones are a substantial problem it's going to need an answer for.

The Pentagon has developed a new counter-drone strategy to address the growing threat that drones pose to US forces at home and abroad, from mysterious uncrewed systems troublingly hanging around American bases to one-way attack drones killing US military personnel overseas.

"In recent years, adversary unmanned systems have evolved rapidly," Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said in a statement as the Department of Defense rolled out the strategy Thursday. "These cheap systems are increasingly changing the battlefield, threatening US installations, and wounding or killing our troops."

The new strategy reflects the Pentagon's evolving approach to the increasing drone challenge and offers a plan for the military to defeat the threat, building on some existing initiatives.

What is the drone problem?

Drones have played a prominent role in the Ukraine war and throughout the ongoing Middle East conflicts. One-way attack drones have been fired repeatedly at US forces stationed in the region over the past year; one serious incident in Jordan killed three American troops and wounded dozens more.

In conflicts around the world, drones are being used for intelligence and reconnaissance, improved firing solutions, bombing missions, precision strikes, naval warfare, mine laying and detection, and more by both state-level and non-state actors.

The Pentagon has acknowledged that drones are reshaping military tactics, making it more difficult to maneuver on the battlefield, giving adversaries easier methods of attack, and lowering the barrier for entry on precision strike capabilities. And as technology advances, these uncrewed systems will only increase in lethality over time.

A trainer holds an electronic-warfare device used to counter drones in January 2020. US Army photo by PFC Gower Liu, 11th ACR Public Affairs

"The relatively low-cost, widely available nature of these systems has, in effect, democratized precision strike," the Pentagon wrote in a fact sheet on the new counter-drone strategy.

It added: "Technological advances in the mid- to long-term will likely render unmanned systems increasingly capable, affordable, autonomous, and networked — able to loiter for longer timespans, to communicate better with other systems, move and act as swarms, and to carry larger payloads. These dynamics risk eroding deterrence and creating new and uncertain escalation dynamics."

What does the US military plan to do about the problem?

The fact sheet, which offers limited insight into the classified counter-drone strategy, sketches out five steps that the US will take to tackle the drone problem in the near, mid, and long term.

The steps will include working to better understand the threat, increasingly focusing on degrading and disrupting "threat networks," improving active and passive defenses, investing in both the quantity and quality of counter-drone systems, and emphasizing drone defense in future force development. The Pentagon said it will work with Congress and the defense industry and collaborate closely with allies and partners to implement the strategy fully.

"Taken together, these approaches will allow the Department to maintain our advances and our ability to fight and win our Nation's wars, if called upon," the fact sheet says.

The new counter-drone strategy builds upon a range of existing initiatives to not only boost US drone capabilities but also strengthen defenses. For instance, in early 2020, the US Army set up the Joint Counter-small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Office, which was tasked with developing anti-drone technology and training soldiers to engage uncrewed systems in battle.

Another example is the Replicator 2 initiative, the directive for which was issued by the defense secretary in September. This project, a follow-on to the initial Replicator program, is aimed at protecting key installations and force concentrations from small drone attacks.

Despite these efforts, the Pentagon acknowledges that there's still work to be done considering the direction that drone warfare is headed.

"The rapidly evolving nature of the threats posed by adversary use of unmanned systems means that the Department will need to continually reassess our efforts," the fact sheet said, but "this strategy sets a foundation for action to meet this challenge."

Drones

Business Insider · by Jake Epstein

16. Why the Syrian army collapsed so quickly in northern Syria

A lesson: Which way the Army goes, so goes the country. WIthout support from Russia, Hezbollah, or Iran the Army would not turn on its people. This is a key lesson for resistance, insurgency, and unconventional and irregular warfare, and dealing with authoritarian/totalitarian/dictatorship regimes. This is why these Armies need to be a key target for sustained Psychological Warfare. It is not just about the use of Armies for large scale combat operations. They are also key to propping up authoritarian regimes which is why they need to be psychologically targeted in the gray zone of irregular and unconventional warfare.

Why the Syrian army collapsed so quickly in northern Syria

middleeasteye.net · by Nader Durgham

For four years, it seemed as if President Bashar al-Assad's army had largely won the civil war in Syria.

Regional and international actors were re-establishing ties with the Syrian government, believing the conflict to have generally wrapped up, with Syrian and Russian forces occasionally targeting rebel-held pockets in the northwest.

Travel vloggers were regularly invited to trips to Damascus, Aleppo and other areas to promote tourism while the government’s main concerns were the increasing Israeli strikes on Iranian and Hezbollah positions and figures in the country.

All that carefully balanced relative calm collapsed when the Syrian army, seemingly overwhelmed and overpowered, lost the major cities of Aleppo and Hama in a single week following a surprise rebel offensive.

While rebels have engaged in fierce fighting with government forces in some areas and encountered some resistance, their advances have been relatively smooth, capturing large swathes of land around Aleppo and Hama as Syrian government officials say they are regrouping outside the lost cities.

New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch

With the groups reportedly getting closer to the strategic city of Homs, many questions were raised over the Syrian army’s fighting capabilities, and why it has failed to fight off rebel advances.

A coalition that ‘no longer exists’

With the help of Russia, Iran, Lebanon’s Hezbollah and other groups, Assad was able to retake several key territories his government had lost during the first few years of his country’s 13-year civil war.

But with his allies diverted by other crises, as Russia fights its war in Ukraine and Hezbollah suffering heavy losses in its war with Israel, the Syrian army has found itself fighting its own battles mainly alone.

Tellingly, the rebels launched their offensive in northern Syria the same day a fragile ceasefire went into effect between Hezbollah and Israel.

“Earlier in the war, the so-called government forces were a patchwork coalition that included the army, expanded security branches recruiting additional fighters, auxiliary forces, Hezbollah, foreign pro-Iranian militias, [Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps] advisors, and Russia’s air support,” Armenak Tokmajyan, a nonresident fellow at the Malcolm H Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut, told Middle East Eye.

“Today, that coalition no longer exists. That’s the likely explanation for the regime's inability to withstand the opposition's advancing forces.”

Meanwhile, the Financial Times reports that rebel forces, particularly those led by Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), seem to have been able to absorb some rival rebel factions, as well as Syrian army defectors, foreign Islamist fighters and rebels who may not share HTS’s ideology.

HTS was also able to easily procure basic weaponry, as Syria was flooded with weapon supplies over the years from Turkey and some Arab states who, with US support, initially tried to strengthen the rebels against Assad’s government.

All this happened while the Syrian government and its allies hoped the agreements made in the Kazakh capital Astana, and sponsored by Russia, Iran and Turkey, would hold firm, according to Tokmayjan.

Under UN auspices, the agreements, which consisted of indirect talks between some rebel factions and the government, aimed at reaching a political solution through de-escalation. Some criticised them as one-sided, as the government was accused of violating the terms on several occasions while hoping the talks would continue.

“They were wrong,” said Tokmayjan. “On the ground, the simple reality was that the regime lacked the necessary fighting capacity, compounded by minimal support from its allies.”

Organised groups, drone warfare

Following his troops’ withdrawal from Hama, Syrian Defence Minister Ali Mahmoud Abbas said that, “what happened in Hama today is a temporary tactical measure and our forces are still around the city”.

Shaheen drones: The new rebel weapon in Syria's skies

Abbas said rebel forces are trying to spread “chaos and misinformation” on the situation on the ground and warned citizens against believing them.

Despite this, footage from Homs showed highways packed with cars leaving for Syria’s coastal cities, as people believe the rebels may be close to taking the city.

“The army’s collapse is a reflection of a more general collapse in Syrian state institutions,” said Jihad Yazigi, editor-in-chief of the Syria Report.

Syria’s years-long economic crisis, increased repression and continued instability may have contributed to a general lack of morale and organisation in government-held areas.

“There is a deep sense in regime areas that things are not only not improving, but that there are no prospects of things getting better,” Yazigi added.

Amidst the chaos unfolding on the battlefield, Assad said he will hike the salaries of active-duty soldiers by 50 percent in what experts believe is an attempt to boost army morale.

“It is clear that the collapse in army morale is something well seen and understood for anyone watching Syria,” said Yazigi.

'The army’s collapse is a reflection of a more general collapse in Syrian state institutions'

- Jihad Yazigi, Syria Report

Tokmayjan said that, in contrast, “the HTS-led coalition seems to be well-organised and prepared”.

The group has even deployed some locally manufactured drones, which may have contributed in tipping the scale of the battle in their favour.

Heiko Wimmen, project director for Iraq, Syria and Lebanon at the Crisis Group, said that the Syrian army may have not been prepared for this kind of “warfare and innovations” used by the rebels.

“Conventional armies that are not used to that, then confronted with this, fare very badly at the beginning at least,” he said.

Despite seeming efforts from the Syrian government to reorganise, and hints from its ally Hezbollah that it will “stand by it” to stave off the rebel advances, experts say the difficulties its army faces leaves the future uncertain.

“The signals are far from reassuring for Assad and the regime in Damascus,” said Tokmayjan.

middleeasteye.net · by Nader Durgham

17. Syria's Assad resigns and leaves the country after stunning rebel blitz, Russia says

Resistance, insurgents, rebels win when the Army does not fight.

Syria's Assad resigns and leaves the country after stunning rebel blitz, Russia says

ABCNews.com · by ABC News

In a stunning turn, the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad appears to have fallen after rebels advanced into the capital Damascus, catching government forces by surprise 10 days after a lightning advance by insurgents first began.

Early Sunday morning local time, the rebel military operations command for the Islamist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham group, or HTS, claimed the president was no longer in the capital, writing: "We declare the city of Damascus free of the tyrant Bashar al-Assad."

The Russian Foreign Ministry said in a Sunday morning statement that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad "decided to leave the presidential post and left the country, giving instructions to transfer power peacefully." Russia and Iran were the two most important foreign backers of Assad's government. Assad's whereabouts remain unknown.

The collapse of Assad's government ends a 24-year reign, the president having succeeded his father Hafez al-Assad in 2000. The Assad family had ruled Syria since 1971.

An opposition fighter steps on a broken bust of the late Syrian President Hafez al-Assad in Damascus, Syria, on Dec. 8, 2024.

Hussein Malla/AP

MORE: Middle East live updates: Syrian rebels claim Assad has fled Damascus

Assad oversaw Syria's slide into brutal civil war in 2011. His security forces sought to crush a mass protest movement demanding democratic reforms as the Arab Spring buffeted the region. The standoff devolved into a bloody civil war that split the nation on political, ethnic and religious lines.

The chaos allowed ISIS to rise in the Iraq-Syria border region and seize swaths of territory in the Levant region. The conflict also became a proxy battleground drawing in major world powers including the U.S., Russia, Iran, Israel and the Gulf states.

The United Nations estimated some 307,000 civilian dead in Syria by the end of 2022, with 12 million people -- more than half of the country's 2011 population of around 22 million -- forced from their homes, approximately 5.4 million of whom were still living as of late 2022.

Assad retained nominal control of much of the country with Russian, Iranian and Hezbollah assistance. But last month's surprise rebel offensive revealed the weakness of the regime as fighters surged out of rebel-held Idlib province in the northwest of the country and quickly seized multiple major cities on their way to Damascus.

Syrian opposition fighters celebrate after the Syrian government collapsed in Damascus, Syria, on Dec. 8, 2024.

Omar Sanadiki/AP

Videos on social media showed Syrian forces abandoning their posts and melting away. There were also reports of Syrian military troops surrendering in other cities.

A few hours earlier, the rebel group first announced it had advanced directly into the capital city, reaching Sednaya prison, a government facility dubbed the "human slaughterhouse" by the human rights group Amnesty International.

"Our forces have begun entering the capital Damascus," HTS said in one message. In a follow-up statement, the group said it was "the end of the era of injustice of Sednaya prison."

The Syrian prime minister, Ghazi al-Jalali, released a video saying the government was ready to "extend a hand" to the opposition and hand over its functions. Rebel leaders have instructed their fighters not to approach Syrian government sites, an apparent attempt to quell any fears in the city and await a formal handover in the morning.

President Joe Biden was "closely monitoring the extraordinary events in Syria," White House National Security Council spokesperson Sean Savett said in a statement.

Speaking at a defense conference earlier in the day, before rebels advanced into the capital, U.S. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said the speed and scale of their rapid advance came, in part, because Assad's chief backers -- Iran, Russia and Hezbollah -- had all been "weakened and distracted," in recent months.

That has left Assad "basically naked," Sullivan said at the Reagan National Defense Forum in California. "His forces are hollowed out."

President-elect Donald Trump, meanwhile, said in a post to Truth Social early Sunday that Assad "is gone" and had "fled his country." Russia, Trump added, "was not interested in protecting him any longer."

The incoming president said Moscow and its partners in Iran had been weakened by events in Ukraine and Israel's recent military successes across the Middle East.

Anti government forces ride past a Syrian regime military vehicle overturned on the road, after rebel took control of the central Hama governorate, on December 7, 2024.

Omar Haj Kadour/AFP via Getty Images

MORE: Syrian army withdraws from key city of Hama amid rebel surge, state news reports

Lighting advance by rebel groups

Overall, the insurgent group claimed credit for taking over four Syrian cities in 24 hours -- Homs, Daraa, Queinetra and Sweida -- in a series of rapid advances by opposition fighters that was largely been met with little resistance from government forces.

Throughout the day Saturday, as the rebel forces were on the move, the Syrian army withdrew from much of southern Syria, leaving more areas of the country, including two provincial capitals, under the control of the rebels, according to the military and an opposition war monitor.

In a statement released earlier Saturday, the Syrian government at first denied Assad had fled the country, issuing a statement calling media reports to the contrary "rumors and false news."

U.S. intelligence had been preparing for Assad's front line to collapse under the press of rebel forces, and the U.S. had intelligence that Assad's family had left the country for Moscow.

Armed rebels celebrate their advances in Hama, Syria, by firing shots into the air on December 6, 2024. Rebels led by HTS have intensified their offensive, seizing control of key areas in Aleppo and Hama and pushing further towards Homs, sparking widespread displacement and heightened instability in west-central Syria.

Bilal Alhammoud/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty

MORE: Syrian insurgents reach the capital's suburbs

Earlier this week, government forces withdrew from Hama, Syria's fourth largest city, which sits between the capital Damascus to the south and Aleppo -- Syria's second city -- to the north.

Aleppo fell to the lightning rebel offensive on Nov. 29. Hama was one of the few major cities that did not fall to anti-government forces following the unsuccessful 2011 revolution against Assad's rule.

Who are the Syrian rebels?

The rebel offensive is being waged by HTS and a collection of Turkish-backed Syrian militias known as the Syrian National Army.

HTS, which has its roots in al-Qaida, is considered a terrorist organization by the U.S.

HTS is led by Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, who in recent days has been trying to distance himself from his jihadist past. Jolani was born in Saudi Arabia to Syrian parents from the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights and and raised in Damascus.

Jolani said in an interview with PBS in 2021 that he fought for al-Qaida in Iraq during the American occupation. Jolani said he was arrested by American forces and held for more than five years in several detention facilities, including the infamous Abu Ghraib and Camp Bucca prisons.

Jolani said his ideology has since evolved. HTS said it has severed ties with al-Qaida in recent years and sought to remake itself by focusing on promoting civilian government and military action, according to The Associated Press.

Hayat Tahrir al-Sham leader Abu Mohamed al-Jolani is pictured at the site of an earthquake in the village of Besnaya in Syria's rebel-held northwestern Idlib province at the border with Turkey, on Feb. 7, 2023.

Omar Haj Kadour/AFP via Getty Images

MORE: Who are the opposition fighters overrunning Syria?

If Assad flees the country and HTS gains control of Syrian government institutions, it's unknown how they will seek to govern.

"Will they revert back more to that when it was affiliated with al-Qaida?" said Javed Ali, associate professor at the University of Michigan's Ford School of Public Policy, during an appearance on ABC News Live.

"Or will it look more like the Taliban in Afghanistan -- which is Islamist, conservative, but not, for the most part, intent on threatening its neighbors or having its country be used as a launchpad for attacks against the West."

What officials are saying about the situation in Syria

Ali called the developments a "catastrophic loss" for Iran, which has long supported the Assad regime and a "black mark" for the Russian government, which has also propped up Assad.

Citing media reports, both countries appear to have pulled advisers and equipment out of the country, Ali said.

"If these withdrawals continue, both on the Iranian and the Russian side, it's only basically the Syrian military and security forces left," he said. "And much like we saw in Afghanistan in 2021, they are probably not going to be able to hold back against HTS and all the other rebel groups that are on the outskirts of Damascus right now."

Trump weighed in on the developments in the Syrian civil war on his social media platform Truth Social on Saturday and said the U.S. should stay out of the matter entirely.

A portrait of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is pictured with its frame broken, in a Syrian regime's Political Security Branch facility on the outskirts of the central city of Hama, following the capture of the area by anti-government forces, on December 7, 2024.

Omar Haj Kadour/AFP via Getty Images

"Syria is a mess, but is not our friend, & THE UNITED STATES SHOULD HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. THIS IS NOT OUR FIGHT. LET IT PLAY OUT. DO NOT GET INVOLVED!" Trump posted.

In the post, Trump noted that Russia, which has long supported Assad's regime, is "tied up in Ukraine" and apparently unable to intervene in Syria. Trump said Assad being forced out "may actually be the best thing that can happen" to the Russian government.

Meanwhile earlier Saturday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov commented on the rebel offensive in Syria, saying Russia would oppose it "in every way possible" but Russia "will actively promote the need to resume dialogue with the opposition," meaning between the government and the rebels.

ABCNews.com · by ABC News

18. Guam: The U.S. Military's Achilles Heel in War with China?

Guam: The U.S. Military's Achilles Heel in War with China?

19fortyfive.com · by Brent M. Eastwood · December 7, 2024

Key Points: Guam is central to U.S. strategy in East Asia but remains vulnerable to China’s extensive missile arsenal, including DF-26 “Guam Killer” ballistic missiles.

-Aegis Ashore, Patriot, and THAAD systems are planned for 2027, but their readiness is slow, and intercepting hundreds of missiles remains a daunting challenge.

-Congressional lawmakers are urging faster deployment and enhanced shelters for personnel.

-Adding naval assets with ship-borne Aegis systems could help but strains resources elsewhere.

-China’s ability to overwhelm Guam’s defenses or use electronic warfare underscores the urgency for robust, integrated missile defenses to protect Guam and maintain stability in the Indo-Pacific.

Can Guam Be Defended from Chinese Missiles?

Guam is the key to U.S. military strategy in East Asia. It is an island that would be disastrous for the Americans if it came under attack and became incapacitated. Without Guam, China would have unfettered access to the Pacific Ocean – an unthinkable dilemma for the Pentagon. China has an enormous arsenal of missiles that could hit Guam to devastating effect. Would the United States be able to defend Guam from such a dangerous attack?

Murdered By ‘Guam Killers’

China even has ballistic missiles that are nicknamed “Guam Killers.”

The main one to fear is the DF-26 intermediate-range ballistic missile.

The DF-26 is a dual-threat conventional and nuclear weapon that has U.S. military leaders, strategists, lawmakers, and battle planners up in arms.

The DF-26 ranges 2,000 or more (some sources have this higher, at 3,100 miles or more), and Guam is in its crosshairs.

J-20 Fighter. Image Credit: Chinese Internet.

The Pentagon believes that China has 250 launchers and at least 500 intermediate-range ballistic missiles that could hit Guam.

U.S. Ground Defenses May Be Insufficient

They would be difficult to eliminate if China decided to attack the island.

“The missile also has maneuvering capabilities and won’t necessarily follow a ballistic trajectory, which makes it very difficult to engage if you’re shooting at it from the ground,” J. Michael Dahm of the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies told Air & Space Forces Magazine.

But There Are Also Missiles from Ships and Airplanes

Then there are all of the short-range missiles and drones that could be launched from Chinese fighter jets, bombers, and ships that could also overwhelm Guam.

This would be a complex simultaneous attack with different speeds, trajectories, and distances, making their entire elimination next to impossible.

There Is a Plan for Missile Protection

Fortunately, the U.S. Department of Defense has a plan for defending the potential apocalypse, but it is costly.

The Pentagon wants to spend $1.5 billion to deploy the land-based anti-missile Aegis Ashore system, plus Patriot air defense batteries and the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD).

However, this integrated and layered system will not be ready until 2027, even though the United States will require at least two live fire tests per year for the next ten years.

Fujian, China’s new aircraft carrier. Image Credit: Chinese Internet.

What About Shelters for the People on Guam?

Congressional lawmakers are not happy with the current Guam missile defense systems, claiming that they are inadequate. Earlier in the spring, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Representative John Moolenaar (R-MI) penned a letter to Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall and Secretary of the Navy Carlos Del Toro. The missive said that enhancements to the missile defense system on Guam need to be made rapidly. The lawmakers also want more bomb shelters for uniform and civilian personnel on the island.

“We are concerned about the alarming lack of urgency by the Department of Defense in adopting such defensive measures. U.S. bases in the region have almost no hardened aircraft shelters compared to Chinese military bases,” the legislators wrote.

Too Many Chinese Missiles to Eliminate

In addition to the shelter problem, the huge Chinese advantage in missiles makes defending against them exceedingly difficult. The Aegis, Patriot, and THAAD integrated plan will require a massive number of interceptors that must be loaded quickly by crews.

It may not be enough, and several Chinese munitions could break through the defenses and destroy Andersen Air Force Base and other installations on Guam, including civilian housing.

Add Ships to Protect Guam

So far, no solution is perfect. One addition that I would make would be to have a flotilla of U.S. Navy ships surround Guam and use ship-borne Aegis systems to take out enemy ballistic missiles. This deployment could help, except for the problem of numbers. American vessels are also needed in other parts of the Indo-Pacific.

Chinese J-10 fighter. Image Credit: Creative Commons.

Due to the nature of these open-source reports, China is quite aware of its advantage against Guam. On Day One of a conflict, the United States would not only have to protect Guam but also stymie anti-ship missiles that could sink aircraft carriers.

Speed Up the Deployment of the Missile Shield

The only thing the United States can do for Guam is move quicker to get the entire integrated defense layer functioning. But missile defense is not easy. You are basically trying to hit a bullet with a bullet, and some enemy missiles are bound to slip through the screen.

Even a Test Launch Would Be Ugly

It is not clear if China would try an attack on Guam on Day One, but they could send a few launches in the vicinity of the island to show the Americans that Beijing is not fooling around. After that, diplomacy would have to take over after a cease-fire could be put in place.

Jamming U.S. Radar Installations

Before Day One, China would likely send the message that it could use electronic warfare and cyber-attacks to incapacitate defenses on Guam. The United States may have to waive the white flag and turn to diplomatic efforts at that point.

As you can see, the situation looks grim. Fortunately, strategists and U.S. military battle planners and Congress members know the problem and are working on solutions.

The overall problem is that China knows that a quick and decisive victory against Guam could change the security balance in East Asia, and that gives Beijing confidence and satisfaction that it has the upper hand.

About the Author: Dr. Brent M. Eastwood

Brent M. Eastwood, PhD, is the author of Don’t Turn Your Back On the World: a Conservative Foreign Policy and Humans, Machines, and Data: Future Trends in Warfare, plus two other books. Brent was the founder and CEO of a tech firm that predicted world events using artificial intelligence. He served as a legislative fellow for U.S. Senator Tim Scott and advised the senator on defense and foreign policy issues. He has taught at American University, George Washington University, and George Mason University. Brent is a former U.S. Army Infantry officer. He can be followed on X @BMEastwood.

19fortyfive.com · by Brent M. Eastwood · December 7, 2024

19. Austin: U.S. Leadership, Alliances Make for a More Secure World

Excerpts:

Over the last several years, upgrades to U.S. posture across the Indo-Pacific have been made, fortifying its position from Northeast Asia to Australia and the Pacific Islands. He cited some examples:

Modernizing the command-and-control frameworks with Japan;
Forging a Defense Cooperation Agreement with Papua New Guinea;
Signing landmark defense-industrial-cooperation deals with India;
Securing trilateral security cooperation among the United States, Japan and South Korea;
Providing Taiwan with the self-defense capabilities;
Expanding the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement with the Philippines to allow U.S. access to four more sites in the Philippines — for a total of nine;
Integrating Japan into troop rotations in Darwin, Australia; and
Deepening the trilateral AUKUS partnership between the U.S., Australia and United Kingdom.

Elsewhere in the world, Austin said the U.S., allies and partner nations have come to the defense of Ukraine.

Austin: U.S. Leadership, Alliances Make for a More Secure World

defense.gov · by David Vergun

American leadership rallies its allies and partners and inspires ordinary people around the world to work together toward a brighter future, said Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, who delivered the keynote address today at the Reagan National Defense Forum in Simi Valley, California.

Austin at the Reagan National Defense Forum

Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III speaks at the Reagan National Defense Forum at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif., Dec. 7, 2024.

Download: Full Size (583.68 KB)

Credit: Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza

VIRIN: 241207-D-PM193-2238

Autocrats worldwide and terrorist groups want to weaken America's leadership and its alliances and partnerships, he said.

"Our unmatched network of alliances and partnerships is one of America's great strategic advantages. Our allies and partners magnify our strength. They project our power. And they deepen our security," Austin said.

The secretary pointed to the strength of its alliances and partnerships, noting the 32 member nations of NATO, alliances with Australia, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea and Thailand, 14 major non-NATO allies and major defense partners.

The U.S. also has access to agreements with more than 40 countries and logistics agreements with more than 120, he said. "That helps us project power with our partners where we need to, when we need to, and how we need to."

As Austin prepares to leave today for a visit to Japan, he said that much progress has been made with friends in the Indo-Pacific region, particularly significant at a time when China has become increasingly aggressive and bullying to its neighbors.

Over the last several years, upgrades to U.S. posture across the Indo-Pacific have been made, fortifying its position from Northeast Asia to Australia and the Pacific Islands. He cited some examples:

Modernizing the command-and-control frameworks with Japan;
Forging a Defense Cooperation Agreement with Papua New Guinea;
Signing landmark defense-industrial-cooperation deals with India;
Securing trilateral security cooperation among the United States, Japan and South Korea;
Providing Taiwan with the self-defense capabilities;
Expanding the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement with the Philippines to allow U.S. access to four more sites in the Philippines — for a total of nine;
Integrating Japan into troop rotations in Darwin, Australia; and
Deepening the trilateral AUKUS partnership between the U.S., Australia and United Kingdom.

Elsewhere in the world, Austin said the U.S., allies and partner nations have come to the defense of Ukraine.

View From Above

Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, who delivered the keynote address today at the Reagan National Defense Forum in Simi Valley, Calif., Dec. 7, 2024.

Download: Full Size (983.04 KB)

Credit: Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza

VIRIN: 241207-D-PM193-5667

The Ukraine Defense Contact Group has helped ensure that Ukraine has had what it needs to defend itself — and to forge a future force to deter more Russian aggression, he said. "Together, we have helped Ukraine survive an all-out assault by the largest military in Europe."

In the Middle East, the U.S. has worked to support Israel to ensure that Hamas can never again commit atrocities. The U.S. has also pushed hard to protect Palestinian civilians — and to rush humanitarian aid into Gaza, Austin said, adding that the U.S. also sent a strong message of deterrence to Iran and its proxies.

The Defense Department has also invested in the defense industrial base in order to outpace any rival and ensure an enduring military advantage.

"We're growing our production capacity. We're implementing the first-ever National Defense Industrial Strategy to modernize the defense industrial base. That will make our supply chains more resilient and our acquisitions more flexible," he said.

The department has also invested in its people — service members, veterans and their families, he said.

Base pay for troops is up almost 10% since January 2021 and the 2025 budget proposal seeks another 4.5% pay raise, he said.

The department has also taken actions to make moves easier, help military spouses pursue their own careers, introduce universal pre-K in Department of Defense Education Activity schools and expand access to affordable child care and high-quality early childhood education, he said.

The department has also worked hard to end sexual assault and harassment, prevent suicides and increase recruiting and retention, he said.

"Today's U.S. military is an extraordinary gathering of volunteers — brave men and women of every race, color and creed. America's greatest strategic asset has always been the talents of the American people. And we are stronger when we welcome every qualified patriot eager to serve. That's not just a matter of national principle. It's a matter of national security," he said.

American values matter, he said, pointing out that every service member swears to defend not just the United States but also the Constitution.

"The baton will soon be passed. Others will decide the course ahead. And I hope that they will build on the strength that we have forged over the last four years," he said.

defense.gov · by David Vergun

20. This Chinese Drone Company Found a Workaround to Congress's Ban on Doing Business in the US—Before the Ban Is Even Passed

Excerpts:

"The root cryptographic key is what allows the hardware to communicate with the firmware," Anzu's attorney told the select committee. "At this point in time, Anzu's products have hardware that is identical to that found in DJI drones—as would be expected for a product that is manufactured through a license between BYD and DJI. The key is thus the same, and DJI controls that key."

"In theory, this means that DJI could overwrite the firmware and install its own firmware on an Anzu drone," Anzu's attorney added.

Top Democratic members of Congress are also spooked over Anzu's business model, with China Select Committee ranking member Raja Krishnamoorthi (D., Ill.) calling the arrangement "exceptionally risky."

"The Select Committee launched this inquiry to better understand Anzu and its relationship with DJI," Krishnamoorthi told the Free Beacon. "But far too many questions remain for Americans to take comfort in this relationship. I appreciate Anzu's cooperation with the Committee, but partnerships with companies like DJI and other similar PRC firms are exceptionally risky and put our security and privacy at risk."

Warnas did not return a request for comment.

This Chinese Drone Company Found a Workaround to Congress's Ban on Doing Business in the US—Before the Ban Is Even Passed

Business records reveal how DJI has already maneuvered to sidestep its pending US ban

freebeacon.com · by Andrew Kerr · December 7, 2024

Congress intended the upcoming 2025 NDAA—the annual defense funding package—to seal off the country from DJI, the sanctioned Chinese drone company deemed a national security threat by the U.S. intelligence community that sells nearly 80 percent of unmanned aircraft flying in American airspace today.

But business records reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon show that DJI has already set up a workaround to a measure in the defense package that will ban the Chinese company and its affiliates from selling any new drones in the United States. The records show that DJI has already positioned itself to continue selling its drones in the United States through a startup Texas company called Anzu Robotics, which claims to have no business relationship with DJI. Those revelations have congressional China hawks concerned that the law won't go far enough.

Federal authorities have long harbored concerns that DJI drones flying in American airspace surreptitiously transmit sensitive surveillance data back to the Chinese Communist Party. After all, Beijing's national security laws require Chinese companies to provide "mandatory access to devices and programs through backdoors" to the CCP. At least seven states have in recent years grounded their fleets of DJI drones amid the concerns. The company was sanctioned in 2021 for its involvement in surveilling Uyghur Muslims, and the Department of Defense classified DJI a "Chinese Military Company" in 2022.

As pressure reached a fever pitch against DJI, so entered Anzu Robotics. Launched in April this year, the firm sells drones that bear remarkable similarities to DJI's. They share the same hardware and run the same software, with the only notable difference being Anzu's drones are green whereas DJI's are gray.

That's because Anzu's products are rebranded DJI drones, a fact that Anzu's CEO, former DJI employee Randall Warnas, didn't hide during a May interview with the New York Times. Warnas told the Times that DJI approached him in early 2023 with an offer to Americanize its drones and "somehow cleanse the Chinese-ness from their technology" to bypass pending congressional scrutiny. Warnas in subsequent podcast interviews touted Anzu's "first of its kind" licensing agreement with DJI to manufacture drones in Malaysia for sale in the United States.

But Anzu is singing a different tune after the U.S. House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party opened an investigation into the Texas firm in August. Now, Anzu says it has no business relationship with DJI.

Business records provided to the China Select Committee and reviewed by the Free Beacon show that Anzu contracted with another Chinese firm in an apparent effort to create distance between itself and DJI. Anzu signed a contract with a Malaysian affiliate of BYD, another CCP-linked firm, to manufacture drones "built to the specifications of the DJI Mavic 3 Enterprise and Mavic 3 Thermal," Anzu's attorney told the committee in a September 17 letter.

BYD, in turn, has a licensing agreement with DJI to build its drones in Malaysia on behalf of Anzu, of whose details Anzu claims to have no knowledge.

"There are no contracts between Anzu and DJI or any affiliates of DJI," Anzu's attorney told the China Select Committee. "BYD entered into a licensing agreement with DJI. Anzu is not a party to this agreement."

"Though Anzu presumes that this licensing agreement is a fairly standard agreement under which BYD pays DJI a commercially reasonable amount for access to its intellectual property, it does not know this for certain," the attorney added.

China Select Committee chairman John Moolenaar (R., Mich.) said he didn't buy Anzu’s spin.

"These documents expose how Anzu repackages DJI drones through another CCP-aligned company, BYD, as a way to get around the national security restrictions that Congress and multiple states have put in place to protect Americans from CCP surveillance technologies," Moolenaar told the Free Beacon. "We must remain vigilant against the CCP's efforts to circumvent these and other national security restrictions."

This isn't the first time the CCP has leveraged BYD to launder scrutinized Chinese products into the United States. The Commerce Department reported in 2022 that BYD circumvented 2012 solar tariffs by shipping products to Southeast Asia for final assembly before delivery into the United States, the Free Beacon reported.

The business records that Anzu provided to the China Select Committee also call into question Warnas's claims during interviews over the summer that his company had painstakingly modified DJI's software to ensure Anzu drones send no data to Chinese servers. Warnas said the modifications were made to placate concerns that China could have built a backdoor into the drones his company sells.

But Anzu's attorney revealed to the China Select Committee that BYD installs unmodified DJI firmware onto Anzu's drones, firmware provided by DJI that DJI retains full control over.

"The root cryptographic key is what allows the hardware to communicate with the firmware," Anzu's attorney told the select committee. "At this point in time, Anzu's products have hardware that is identical to that found in DJI drones—as would be expected for a product that is manufactured through a license between BYD and DJI. The key is thus the same, and DJI controls that key."

"In theory, this means that DJI could overwrite the firmware and install its own firmware on an Anzu drone," Anzu's attorney added.

Top Democratic members of Congress are also spooked over Anzu's business model, with China Select Committee ranking member Raja Krishnamoorthi (D., Ill.) calling the arrangement "exceptionally risky."

"The Select Committee launched this inquiry to better understand Anzu and its relationship with DJI," Krishnamoorthi told the Free Beacon. "But far too many questions remain for Americans to take comfort in this relationship. I appreciate Anzu's cooperation with the Committee, but partnerships with companies like DJI and other similar PRC firms are exceptionally risky and put our security and privacy at risk."

Warnas did not return a request for comment.

Published under: CCP , China , Drones , Espionage , National Security , Sanctions

freebeacon.com · by Andrew Kerr · December 7, 2024

De Oppresso Liber,

David Maxwell

Vice President, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy

Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation

Editor, Small Wars Journal

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

Phone: 202-573-8647

email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com

De Oppresso Liber,

David Maxwell

Vice President, Center for Asia Pacific Strategy

Senior Fellow, Global Peace Foundation

Editor, Small Wars Journal

Twitter: @davidmaxwell161

email: david.maxwell161@gmail.com

If you do not read anything else in the 2017 National Security Strategy read this on page 14:

"A democracy is only as resilient as its people. An informed and engaged citizenry is the fundamental requirement for a free and resilient nation. For generations, our society has protected free press, free speech, and free thought. Today, actors such as Russia are using information tools in an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of democracies. Adversaries target media, political processes, financial networks, and personal data. The American public and private sectors must recognize this and work together to defend our way of life. No external threat can be allowed to shake our shared commitment to our values, undermine our system of government, or divide our Nation."

Access NSS HERE

Company Name | Website