Syria Rebels Say Planning Damascus Spring Offensive

إقرأ هذا الخبر بالعربية W460

Rebels in southern Syria say they are planning a spring offensive against Damascus, which regime and opposition sources say will include fighters trained by Western forces in neighboring Jordan.

The Syrian army, meanwhile, is redeploying troops in Quneitra province located on the ceasefire line with Israel, and stepping up shelling on rebel positions in Daraa on the Jordan border to stop any advance, opposition fighters say.

The looming showdowns come after regime and opposition representatives failed last week to reach consensus at talks in Geneva, and amid reports that some Gulf Arab states have pledged to arm the rebels.

Both regime and opposition sources say the offensive on Damascus will involve thousands of rebels who have been receiving combat training for the past year from the United States and other Western countries in Jordan.

"Daraa (province) is the gateway to Damascus. The battle for Damascus starts from here," said rebel commander Abdullah al-Qarazi, an ex-officer in the Syrian army.

"For now, we only have guarantees (for weapons) from the countries that support" the revolt against President Bashar Assad, he said.

"If the promises are honored, God willing we will reach the heart of the capital," in a bid to break army sieges on the Western and Eastern Ghouta districts outside the capital, Qarazi told AFP.

Qarazi, a brigadier general in the Syrian army before defecting, said rebels in Daraa have "made steady progress in recent months" despite intensifying army bombardment of the province.

Since last summer, rebels have seized parts of Daraa city and several positions close to the border with Jordan, which could be used as a conduit for arms.

Rebels also set up a coalition of 47 factions and opened communications channels with fighters in Damascus province and in Quneitra, the main town in the Syrian Golan Heights parts of which have been annexed by Israel.

But the army is preparing to fight back, "redeploying troops" to the Quneitra front from areas of Damascus, said Ali al-Jolani of Quneitra's rebel military council.

And a Syrian politician told AFP that a major battle is planned in Daraa ahead of a possible fresh round of peace talks between the regime and the opposition.

The second round broke down on the weekend with no progress achieved and no date was announced by the U.N.-Arab League envoy Lakhdar Brahimi.

A source close to the regime has said the talks could resume next month but this could not be independently verified.

Meanwhile the Syrian army has in recent days stepped up air raids on the southern province and pounded rebel areas and villages with explosive-packed barrels, a monitoring group said.

On Tuesday, the air force launched three barrel bomb attacks, one of which killed 13 people including three children, said the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

Last week the Wall Street Journal reported that Gulf backers of the anti-Assad revolt were preparing to deliver weapons to the rebels, including "both shoulder-fired missiles capable of taking down military aircraft and anti-tank missiles."

Comments 8
Thumb joker37 18 February 2014, 16:55

Keep betting on the west abul geeb. The best they would do is offer slightly more effective arms to the rebels in order to tilt the balance away from the army's favor and back into stalemate. The aim of course would be the utter destruction of syria.

Thumb jabal10452 18 February 2014, 17:00

Strange how they telegraph their plans to each other.

Thumb scorpyonn 18 February 2014, 17:11

Maybe Obama will send antiaircraft guns to destroy those dreaded Russian helicopters that drop these crude barrel bombs.

Thumb joker37 18 February 2014, 17:31

youre still dreaming of a nato offensive to "destroy his airforce"? lol sober up man and get real. NATO offensive is never coming no matter what bashar does.

Thumb joker37 18 February 2014, 23:06

@texas nato doesnt care about neither democracy for syrians nor for preserving syrian lives. It cares only for its strategic interests in the region which in my opinion lay in laying waste to any arab state that is not friendly, or at least neutral towards israel. Hence the destruction of iraq and syria.
Nato doesnt want to see a collapse of assad for several reasons, they are interested in a fragmented syria that suffers from a long civil war that will polarize muslims for decades to come. Assad regime at this point is too fragile to withstand a military strike, as is the diplomatic relation with russia and to a lesser extent china.

Thumb joker37 19 February 2014, 00:40

texas, this conflict was initiated by saudi, prolonged by saudi, and will be fueled by saudi.
saudi, if any, bears responsibility for this conflict. iran is in the position of reaction here, reaction being support of the regime. saudi is in the position of action, action being support of the rebels in their bid to topple the regime.
if you are to blame anyone for the destruction of syria, blame the side that took action, not the natural reaction of supporting an allied regime.
besides it is russia, not iran, that assad ultimately obeys. it is clear that moscow's support, rather than tehran's, is what kept assad afloat until now. what assad has done, and is doing, until now is based completely on moscow's advice as they are the ones offering assad the diplomatic support and manoeuvring the regime through the murky world of global geopolitics.

Thumb joker37 19 February 2014, 01:37

Texas "Russia is ready to drop Bashar, and agreed with US/West on new Syria. Iran who is providing the bulk of support on the ground to Bashar, has not yet come to terms with that agreement. "
Pure speculation. I could go on and speculate that part of iran's deal with the world powers on the nuclear program included a pro assad settlement but neither me nor you are qualified to speculate with unsupported theories.
What I can comment on is what I see daily on the news; that russia is a staunch supporter of the assad regime and that the west are half hearted supporters of the opposition at best.
P.s. russia is expert at tricky diplomatic tactics and deceptive official and semi official statements. It is very difficult to gauge their commitment to any mysterious post assad "agreement"

Thumb joker37 19 February 2014, 10:14

@texas for russia and putin its not about the money. Its about influence. Syria was never lucrative for russia financially. It was a state firmly aligned with moscow.
As for al sisi and putin, I dont think saudi arabia was very pleased with the russian reproachement.
As for HA's value to iran, I think that by preventing assad's collapse they proved their value and I see no scenario where tehran would 'give up' on HA so to speak.