RSS
‘There Is No Blank Check’: Syrian Leader Told to Rein in Jihadis
Syria’s interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa attends an interview with Reuters at the presidential palace, in Damascus, Syria, March 10, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi
Syria‘s President Ahmed al-Sharaa has a lot to prove to win over Western powers. If the first few weeks of his rule are anything to go by, he may be heading in the wrong direction.
The West is watching Syria‘s leaders closely to ensure they rein in the Islamist jihadis who killed hundreds of Alawites, create an inclusive government with effective institutions, maintain order in a country fractured by years of civil war, and prevent a resurgence of Islamic State or al Qaeda.
To hammer home the message, three European envoys made clear in a March 11 meeting with Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shibani in Damascus that cracking down on the jihadi fighters was their top priority and that international support for the nascent administration could evaporate unless it took decisive action.
The meeting has not previously been reported.
“The abuses that have taken place in recent days are truly intolerable, and those responsible must be identified and condemned,” said French Foreign Ministry spokesman Christophe Lemoine, when asked about the message delivered in Damascus.
“There is no blank check for the new authorities.”
Reuters spoke to the three European envoys as well as four regional officials during a trip to Damascus. They all stressed that the authorities must get a grip on security across the country and prevent any repeat killings.
“We asked for accountability. The punishment should go on those who committed the massacres. The security forces need to be cleaned up,” said one European envoy, who was among the group of officials who delivered the message.
Washington has also called on Syria‘s leaders to hold the perpetrators of the attacks to account. US State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said they were monitoring the interim authority’s actions to determine US policy for Syria.
The problem for Sharaa, however, is that his Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) group only comprises around 20,000 fighters, according to two assessments by Western governments.
That makes him reliant on the tens of thousands of fighters from other groups — including the very hardline jihadist factions he is being asked to combat – and moving against them could plunge Syria back into war, five diplomats and three analysts said.
Thousands of Sunni Muslim foreigners, from countries including China, Albania, Russia, and Pakistan, joined Syria‘s rebels early in the civil war to fight against the rule of Bashar al-Assad and the Iran-backed Shi’ite militias who supported him, giving the conflict a sectarian overtone.
One of the reasons Sharaa now depends on a relatively small force of some 20,000 fighters from several disparate groups, including the foreign jihadis, is because he dissolved the national army soon after taking power
While the step was meant to draw a line under five decades of autocratic Assad family rule, diplomats and analysts said it echoed Washington’s decision to disband the Iraqi army after the fall of Saddam Hussein – and could lead to similar chaos.
Sharaa’s move, along with mass dismissals of public sector workers, has deepened divisions in Syria and left hundreds of thousands without income, potentially pushing trained soldiers into insurgent groups or unemployment, worsening Syria‘s instability, according to five European and Arab officials.
Neither Sharaa’s office nor the Syrian foreign ministry responded to requests for comment for this story.
STUCK IN A PARADOX
In addition to the challenge of quelling sectarian violence, Sharaa must also contend with a host of foreign powers from the United States to Russia, Israel, Turkey, and Iran – all turning Syria‘s territory into a geopolitical chessboard.
Turkey holds the north, backing opposition forces while suppressing Kurdish ambitions. US-backed Kurdish-led forces control the east with its vital oil fields, while Israel capitalized on Assad’s fall to bolster its military foothold. It now controls a 400-square-km demilitarized buffer zone, supports the Druze minority, and is opposed to the Syrian leadership.
In response to the massacres of civilians, Sharaa has established an investigation committee and promised to punish those responsible, even those close to him.
But any action against the jihadis who carried out the killings could ignite factional infighting, purges, and power struggles – leaving the new government stuck in a paradox, the diplomats and analysts said.
“Obviously Sharaa doesn’t control the foreign jihadis and does not call all the shots,” said Marwan Muasher, vice president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “What is clear is that the massacres were carried out by people who are Salafi jihadists and are not listening to what he’s saying.”
While diplomats recognize that the inquiry is a step in the right direction, they said its credibility would have been far stronger with UN and international observers.
Ultimately, they said, the true test of Sharaa’s leadership lies not just in the commission’s findings but in how he deals with the fighters responsible for the atrocities.
The massacres were, however, a stark reminder of the forces at play in post-Assad Syria, signaling a brutal reality that toppling a dictator is the beginning of a larger, more perilous battle to shape the country’s future.
Abdulaziz Sager, founder of the Saudi-based Gulf Research Center, said the presence of “rogue groups” – the foreign jihadis – operating outside the law would lead to a collapse in security and undermine the state’s authority.
“Therefore, the new leadership has no choice but to take firm action against such violations,” he said.
An Arab diplomat said political support from Arab states was also not unlimited, and would need to be matched by concrete steps, including inclusive governance, protection of minorities and real progress on the ground.
That means genuine power-sharing with Alawites, Christians, Kurds, and other minorities – and only then can the new leadership stabilize Syria and garner US and European support, the Arab diplomat said.
Washington and European states have tied the lifting of sanctions, imposed under Assad, to the new authorities proving their commitment to inclusive governance and the protection of minorities. Removing these sanctions is crucial to reviving Syria‘s shattered economy, Sharaa’s most pressing challenge.
SAME PLAYBOOK?
But despite promises of reform, the five-year constitution Sharaa unveiled this month gave him absolute power as president, prime minister, head of the armed forces, and chief of national security, as well as granting him the authority to appoint judges, ministers, and a third of parliament – dashing hopes for democratic reforms.
The constitution also enshrines Islamic law as “the main source” of legislation.
Critics argue that the constitution swaps autocracy for Islamist theocracy, deepening fears over Sharaa’s roots as the leader of a hardline Islamist faction once allied with al Qaeda.
Kurds, who control northeastern Syria and recently agreed to integrate with the new government, criticized the temporary constitution for “reproducing authoritarianism in a new form.”
Syria‘s dilemma, analysts say, mirrors the trials faced by Arab states a decade ago when, in 2011, a wave of uprisings ousted dictators in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, and Yemen.
The “Arab Spring” upheavals promised democratic revival, but takeovers by Islamists, military coups, and violent fragmentation turned these hopes into setbacks. The victories were short-lived, with states such as Yemen and Libya descending into violence and chaos.
Syria, having endured a far longer and bloodier conflict, now stands at a similar crossroad.
Analysts say if Syria‘s rulers adopt exclusionary policies that ignore the cultural, religious, ethnic diversity of its citizens, they are bound to fail – just as late Islamist President Mohammed Mursi did in Egypt after the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak.
In Mursi’s case, his divisive constitution failed to meet the people’s diverse demands and led to his toppling by the army. Such a policy in Syria, the analysts add, would fuel domestic resistance, antagonize neighbors, and prompt foreign intervention.
“Some internal and external forces wanted a secular state, while the constitutional declaration reaffirmed the state’s religious-Islamic identity, stating that Islamic law [Sharia] would be the primary source of legislation,” said Sager. “A possible compromise could have been a model similar to Turkey’s – a secular state governed by an Islamic party.”
Muasher at the Carnegie Endowment said Assad’s fall should serve as a warning to those who replaced him in Syria.
He said Sharaa must decide whether to adopt the same playbook that made Assad vulnerable and led to the mass Sunni uprising that eventually ousted him – or adopt a different course.
“Syria‘s new rulers must recognise that the brutal authoritarian model of the regime they replaced was ultimately unsustainable, as is any political system based on exclusion and iron-fisted rule,” Muasher said.
“If they fall back on repression, they will subject Syria to a grim fate.”
The post ‘There Is No Blank Check’: Syrian Leader Told to Rein in Jihadis first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Israel Declares Start of Gaza Ground Operations, No Progress Seen in Talks
Palestinians inspect the damage at the site of an Israeli strike on a tent camp sheltering displaced people, in Khan Younis, southern Gaza Strip, May 18, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Hatem Khaled
The Israeli military said on Sunday it had begun “extensive ground operations” in northern and southern Gaza, stepping up a new campaign in the enclave.
Israel made its announcement after sources on both sides said there had been no progress in a new round of indirect talks between Israel and the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas in Qatar.
The office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the latest Doha talks included discussions on a truce and hostage deal as well as a proposal to end the war in return for the exile of Hamas militants and the demilitarization of the enclave – terms Hamas has previously rejected.
The substance of the statement was in line with previous declarations from Israel, but the timing, as negotiators meet, offered some prospect of flexibility in Israel’s position. A senior Israeli official said there had been no progress in the talks so far.
Israel’s military said it conducted a preliminary wave of strikes on more than 670 Hamas targets in Gaza over the past week to support its ground operation, dubbed “Gideon’s Chariots.”
It said it killed dozens of Hamas fighters. Palestinian health authorities say hundreds of people have been killed including many women and children.
Asked about the Doha talks, a Hamas official told Reuters: “Israel’s position remains unchanged, they want to release the prisoners (hostages) without a commitment to end the war.”
He reiterated that Hamas was proposing releasing all Israeli hostages in return for an end to the war, the pull-out of Israeli troops, an end to a blockade on aid for Gaza, and the release of Palestinian prisoners.
Israel’s declared goal in Gaza is the elimination of the military and governmental capabilities of Hamas, which attacked Israeli communities on October 7, 2023, killing about 1,200 people and seizing about 250 hostages.
The Israeli military campaign has devastated the enclave, pushing nearly all residents from their homes and killing more than 53,000 people, according to Gaza health authorities.
The post Israel Declares Start of Gaza Ground Operations, No Progress Seen in Talks first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Pope Leo Urges Unity for Divided Church, Vows Not To Be ‘Autocrat’
Pope Leo XIV waves to the faithful from the popemobile ahead of his inaugural Mass in Saint Peter’s Square, at the Vatican, May 18, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Alessandro Garofalo
Pope Leo XIV formally began his reign on Sunday by reaching out to conservatives who felt orphaned under his predecessor, calling for unity, vowing to preserve the Catholic Church’s heritage and not rule like “an autocrat.”
After a first ride in the popemobile through an estimated crowd of up to 200,000 in St. Peter’s Square and surrounding streets, Leo was officially installed as the 267th pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church at an outdoor Mass.
Well-wishers waved US and Peruvian flags, with people from both countries claiming him as the first pope from their nations. Born in Chicago, the 69-year-old pontiff spent many years as a missionary in Peru and also has Peruvian citizenship.
Robert Prevost, a relative unknown on the world stage who only became a cardinal two years ago, was elected pope on May 8 after a short conclave of cardinals that lasted barely 24 hours.
He succeeded Francis, an Argentine, who died on April 21 after leading the Church for 12 often turbulent years during which he battled with traditionalists and championed the poor and marginalized.
In his sermon, read in fluent Italian, Leo said that as leader of the world’s 1.4 billion Roman Catholics, he would continue Francis’ legacy on social issues such as combating poverty and protecting the environment.
He vowed to face up to “the questions, concerns and challenges of today’s world” and, in a nod to conservatives, he promised to preserve “the rich heritage of the Christian faith,” repeatedly calling for unity.
Crowds chanted “Viva il Papa” (Long Live the Pope) and “Papa Leone,” his name in Italian, as he waved from the open-topped popemobile ahead of his inaugural Mass, which was attended by dozens of world leaders.
US Vice President JD Vance, a Catholic convert who clashed with Francis over the White House’s hardline immigration policies, led a US delegation alongside Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is also Catholic.
Vance briefly shook hands with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the start of the ceremony. The two men last met in February in the White House, when they clashed fiercely in front of the world’s media.
Zelensky and Leo were to have a private meeting later on Sunday, while Vance was expected to see the pope on Monday.
In a brief appeal at the end of the Mass, Leo addressed several global conflicts. He said Ukraine was being “martyred,” a phrase often used by Francis, and called for a “just and lasting peace” there.
He also mentioned the humanitarian situation in Gaza, saying people in the Palestinian enclave were being “reduced to starvation.”
Among those in the crowds on Sunday were many pilgrims from the US and Peru.
Dominic Venditti, from Seattle, said he was “extremely excited” by the new pope. “I like how emotional and kind he is,” he said. “I love his background.”
APPEAL FOR UNITY
Since becoming pope, Leo has already signaled some key priorities for his papacy, including a warning about the dangers posed by artificial intelligence and the importance of bringing peace to the world and to the Church itself.
Francis’ papacy left a divided Church, with conservatives accusing him of sowing confusion, particularly with his extemporaneous remarks on issues of sexual morality such as same-sex unions.
Saying he was taking up his mission “with fear and trembling,” Leo used the words “unity” or “united” seven times on Sunday and the word “harmony” four times.
“It is never a question of capturing others by force, by religious propaganda or by means of power. Instead, it is always and only a question of loving, as Jesus did,” he said, in apparent reference to a war of words between Catholics who define themselves as conservative or progressive.
Conservatives also accused Francis of ruling in a heavy-handed way and lamented that he belittled their concerns and did not consult widely before making decisions.
Referring to St. Peter, the 1st century Christian apostle from whom popes derive their authority, Leo said: “Peter must shepherd the flock without ever yielding to the temptation to be an autocrat, lording it over those entrusted to him. On the contrary, he is called to serve the faith of his brothers and sisters, and to walk alongside them.”
Many world leaders attended the ceremony, including the presidents of Israel, Peru and Nigeria, the prime ministers of Italy, Canada and Australia, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
European royals also took their place in the VIP seats near the main altar, including Spanish King Felipe and Queen Letizia.
Leo shook many of their hands at the end of the ceremony, and hugged his brother Louis, who had traveled from Florida.
As part of the ceremony, Leo received two symbolic items: a liturgical vestment known as a pallium, a sash of lambswool representing his role as a shepherd, and the “fisherman’s ring,” recalling St. Peter, who was a fisherman.
The ceremonial gold signet ring is specially cast for each new pope and can be used by Leo to seal documents, although this purpose has fallen out of use in modern times.
It shows St. Peter holding the keys to Heaven and will be broken after his death or resignation.
The post Pope Leo Urges Unity for Divided Church, Vows Not To Be ‘Autocrat’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
The ‘Nakba’ Is Not Our Problem
Pro-Palestinian demonstrators during a protest against Israel to mark the 77th anniversary of the “Nakba” or catastrophe, in Berlin, Germany, May 15, 2025. REUTERS/Axel Schmidt
JNS.org – A smattering of Arabic words has entered the English language in recent years, the direct result of more than a century of conflict between the Zionist movement and Arab regimes determined to prevent the Jews from exercising self-determination in their historic homeland.
These words include fedayeen, which refers to the armed Palestinian factions; intifada, which denotes successive violent Palestinian uprisings against Israel; and naksa, which pertains to the defeat sustained by the Arab armies in their failed bid to destroy Israel during the June 1967 war.
At the top of this list, however, is nakba, the word in Arabic for “disaster” or “catastrophe.” The emergence of the Palestinian refugee question following Israel’s 1948-49 War of Independence is now widely described as “The Nakba,” and the term has become a stick wielded by anti-Zionists to beat Israel and, increasingly, Jews outside.
Last Thursday, a date which the U.N. General Assembly has named for an annual “Nakba Day,” workers at a cluster of Jewish-owned businesses in the English city of Manchester arrived at the building housing their offices to find that it had been badly vandalized overnight. The front of the building, located in a neighborhood with a significant Jewish community, was splattered with red paint. An external wall displayed the crudely painted words “Happy Nakba Day.”
The culprits were a group called Palestine Action, a pro-Hamas collective of activists whose sole mission is to intimidate the Jewish community in the United Kingdom in much the same way as Sir Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists did back in the 1930s. Its equivalents in the United States are groups like Within Our Lifetime and Students for Justice in Palestine, who have shown themselves equally enthused when it comes to intimidating Jewish communities by conducting loud, sometimes violent, demonstrations outside synagogues and other communal facilities, all too frequently showering Jews with the kind of abuse that was once the preserve of neo-Nazis. These thugs, cosplaying with keffiyehs instead of swastika armbands, can reasonably be described as the neo-neo-Nazis.
The overarching point here is that ideological constructs like nakba play a key role in enabling the intimidation they practice. It allows them to diminish the historic victimhood of the Jews, born of centuries of stateless disempowerment, with dimwitted formulas equating the nakba with the Nazi Holocaust. It also enables them to camouflage hate speech and hate crimes as human-rights advocacy—a key reason why law enforcement, in the United States as well as in Canada, Australia and most of Europe, has been found sorely wanting when it comes to dealing with the surge of antisemitism globally.
Part of the response needs to be legislative. That means clamping down on both sides of the Atlantic on groups that glorify designated terrorist organizations by preventing them from fundraising; policing their access to social media; and restricting their demonstrations to static events in a specific location with a predetermined limit on attendees, rather than a march that anyone can join, along with an outright ban on any such events in the environs of Jewish community buildings.
These are not independent civil society organizations, as they pretend to be, but rather extensions of terrorist organizations like Hamas and—in the case of Samidoun, another group describing itself as a “solidarity” organization—the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. If we cannot ban them outright, we need to contain them much more effectively. We can start by framing the issue as a national security challenge and worry less about their “freedom of speech.”
But this is also a fight that takes us into the realm of ideas and arguments. We need to stop thinking about the nakba as a Palestinian narrative of pain deserving of empathy by exposing it for what it is—another tool in the arsenal of groups whose goal is to bring about the elimination of Israel as a Jewish state.
When it was originally introduced in the late 1940s, the word nakba had nothing to do with the plight of the Palestinian refugees or their dubious claim to be the uninterrupted, indigenous inhabitants of a land seized by dispossessing foreign colonists. Popularized by the late Syrian writer Constantine Zureik in a 1948 book titled The Meaning of Disaster, the nakba described therein was, as the Israeli scholar Shany Mor has crisply pointed out, simply “the failure of the Arabs to defeat the Jews.”
Zureik was agonized by this defeat, calling it “one of the harshest of the trials and tribulations with which the Arabs have been inflicted throughout their long history.” His story is fundamentally a story of national humiliation and wounded pride. Yet there is absolutely no reason why Jews should be remotely troubled by the neurosis it projects. Their defeat was our victory and our liberation, and we should unreservedly rejoice in that fact.
The only aspect of the nakba that we should worry about is the impact it has on us as a community, as well as on the status of Israel as a sovereign member of the international society of states. As Mizrahi Jews know well (my own family among them), the nakba assembled in Zureik’s imagination really was a “catastrophe”— for us. Resoundingly defeated on the battlefield by the superior courage and tactical nous of the nascent Israeli Defense Forces, the Arabs compensated by turning on the defenseless Jews in their midst. From Libya to Iraq, ancient and established Jewish communities were the victims of a cowardly, spiteful policy of expropriation, mob violence and expulsion.
The inheritors of that policy are the various groups that compose the Palestinian solidarity movement today. Apoplectic at the realization that they have been unable to dislodge the “Zionists”—and knowing now that the main consequence of the Oct. 7, 2023 pogrom in Israel has been the destruction of Gaza—they, too, have turned on the Jews in their midst.
They have done so with one major advantage that the original neo-Nazis never had: sympathy and endorsement from academics, celebrities, politicians and even the United Nations. Indeed, the world body hosted a two-day seminar on “Ending the Nakba” at its New York headquarters at the same time that pro-Hamas fanatics were causing havoc just a few blocks downtown. Even so, we should take heart at the knowledge that nakba is not so much a symbol of resistance as it is defeat. Just as the rejectionists and eliminationists have lost previous wars through a combination of political stupidity, diplomatic ineptitude and military flimsiness, so, too, can they lose this one.
The post The ‘Nakba’ Is Not Our Problem first appeared on Algemeiner.com.