iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Sherko Kirmanj @sherkokirmanj.bsky.social · 13/12/2024

A friend recently asked me about the developments in Syria, particularly the Turkish-backed geopolitical maneuvering, and why the United States and Israel appeared to accept it. To explain, the rationale behind their tacit acceptance lies in a broader strategic goal (see the photo):

$for the past two decades, both the U.S. and Israel have sought to dismantle what is referred to as the “Shiite Crescent.” This crescent emerged following the collapse of Saddam Hussein's Sunni-led regime and represents a geopolitical corridor linking Iran to Hezbollah via Iraq and Syria. The primary objective has been to isolate Iran from Hezbollah and prevent its resurgence after suffering significant military setbacks from Israel. Notably, Israel has launched major offensives against Hezbollah in the 1980s, 1990s, 2006, and most recently, yet Hezbollah has consistently managed to recover and grow stronger, largely due to Iran’s support and the logistical corridor provided by Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria. To counter this, Israel devised a strategy to sever Iran's influence in southern Lebanon. Achieving this required the establishment of a Sunni-led government in Syria, even one with Islamist leanings, as Sunni Islamists are historically antagonistic toward Shiite Iran. Hayʼat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) emerged as a viable candidate to govern Damascus under these circumstances. With the presence of a Sunni Islamist administration in Syria, Iran’s access to Hezbollah is now severely restricted, particularly via land routes, leaving it vulnerable to Israeli air and naval power if the sea is used as an alternative route. In effect, the Shiite Crescent has been fractured effectively, at least for now.$

121