In March 2020, following a devastating 10-month military campaign, Iranian militias and forces of the former Syrian regime — under Russian air cover and guidance — seized control of numerous cities, towns and villages in northwestern Syria. The offensive displaced over a million Syrian civilians, leaving the remaining population crammed into a narrow strip of land that became a focal point for propaganda from the regime and its allies.
The campaign triggered a severe and wide-ranging humanitarian crisis, with a desperate need for housing and shelter accompanied by shortages of food, drinking water and employment opportunities. The fallout drove waves of migration to neighboring countries and to Europe, intensifying existing economic, political and social pressures on host nations.
Years of unrelenting hardship, coupled with the collapse of hope for a political solution that would alleviate the suffering, led to mounting frustration among the people of northwestern Syria. This frustration turned into intense pressure on local factions to initiate military action to liberate occupied areas and allow displaced populations to return. Protest movements arose, which threatened to destabilize the administration in the province of Idlib and fueled a pervasive sense of disillusionment among the factions there.
Faced with this turmoil, the factions in northwest Syria chose to set aside past disputes, learn from the missteps of the 2019 campaign and adopt new and more unified strategies. The result was the establishment of the al-Fath al-Mubin (Manifest Victory) Operations Command, a coalition of active factions formed after the 2019 campaign. The coalition found itself constrained by the challenging geography and borders of northwest Syria and initially focused on defensive measures to preserve what remained.
The war in Ukraine struck a heavy blow to Russian hubris, acting as an unexpected lever that helped pull the Syrian revolution out of the quagmire into which it had sunk. As the war dragged on and Russian losses mounted, the strain on Moscow negatively impacted its ability to retrain and rehabilitate the remnants of the defunct Syrian regime’s army. This created a cold but escalating conflict between Iran and Russia over control and influence within the regime’s remaining military and security apparatus. This internal power struggle further eroded the regime’s military capabilities, as it became entangled in competing loyalties and conflicting agendas.
A second, unforeseen factor benefiting the Syrian revolution was the intensification of Israeli strikes targeting Iranian forces and their allied militias in Syria. These attacks weakened the already fragile military and security structures of the regime and exposed collusion between certain regime figures and Israel against Iran. This dynamic led to the sidelining of prominent individuals, including key officers, creating a power vacuum and accelerating the regime’s disintegration.
The tipping point came with Israel’s direct targeting of Hezbollah and other Iran-backed militias, which were either integrated into or collaborating with the regime’s forces. These militias formed the backbone of the regime’s infantry and specialized military units. Their involvement in escalating tensions in Lebanon diverted their focus, effectively neutralizing a critical element of the regime’s military capabilities at a decisive moment.
The Syrian people underwent a remarkable transformation in a short period, moving from the depths of repression — marked by a paralyzing, pathological fear — to a sense of possibility that seemed fluid and, at times, chaotic. This period became an intense experiment, akin to learning through trial and error. While this process consumed significant time, resources and opportunities, it also proved invaluable in filtering out ineffective ideas and validating approaches that were logical and realistic.
This evolution resembled the stages of human growth: an innocent childhood, followed by a tumultuous adolescence and, eventually, a phase of maturity and balance. The progression becomes evident when comparing the military, political, behavioral, security and media performance of Manifest Victory factions — later reorganized as the Military Operations Directorate — with that of earlier operations commands. The stark contrast between the pragmatic and disciplined mindset of today and the disjointed mentality of the past underscores the lessons learned through hardship and perseverance.
In mid-2020, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the strongest faction in the operation, began a significant transformation in its rhetoric and behavior. This shift led to the defection of several cadres and forces, who accused HTS and its leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa, of deviation and treason. Despite the backlash, HTS sought rapprochement with groups and figures previously hostile or opposed to it. It worked to build alliances with military factions in the northern Aleppo countryside while asserting its presence in the region.
The Turkish government maintained a clear policy that prioritized military bases, contrasting with HTS’ growing influence in the northern Aleppo countryside. Additionally, the civilian government HTS helped establish in 2018 — the Salvation Government — intensified its activities. Media reports began to surface about HTS’ cooperation with Western entities on issues such as counterterrorism (particularly against the Islamic State group), combating organized crime and coordinating against mutual adversaries.
By early 2023, Manifest Victory ramped up its communications and strategic planning, incorporating factions with significant popularity and historical importance, such as Ahrar al-Sham and Jaysh al-Izza. The liberation of Aleppo, along with reclaiming areas lost in the last military campaign, was identified as a strategic objective for an upcoming large-scale military operation. This operation aimed to mark a new phase in the Syrian revolution.
During the battle for liberation, Manifest Victory faced significant challenges, both internal and external. Internally, one of the most prominent crises was the so-called “agents’ issue” within HTS. Acting on misleading information allegedly provided by an external intelligence agency, HTS’ security apparatus arrested hundreds of its own military cadres, accusing them of collaborating with Russia and the Syrian regime. These arrests were accompanied by forced disappearances, severe torture and widespread intimidation.
As the case dragged on, the number of those implicated grew, including influential figures such as Abu Maria al-Qahtani, the organization’s second-in-command at the time. Mounting dissatisfaction within the military wing escalated, with some factions on the brink of rebellion. The situation worsened when a senior leader, Abu Ahmed Zakur, defected and threatened to expose what he called the crimes of HTS’ leadership, including its security chief.
Ultimately, the organization’s leader intervened directly to resolve the crisis, curbing the abuses of the security forces and restoring a degree of cohesion. His charisma and the trust of his soldiers played a critical role in defusing tensions and redirecting the organization’s focus toward the goal of liberating Aleppo.
Externally, Manifest Victory encountered resistance from Turkey, which was wary of Syrian military forces operating independently of its influence. Turkey had successfully consolidated many factions of the Syrian revolution into the so-called Syrian National Army (SNA), effectively transforming them into a private security force serving its political agenda, including operations beyond Syria’s borders.
Turkey’s dominance over much of the Syrian revolution’s weaponry was combined with its control of political institutions like the Syrian National Coalition and the interim government. The presence of Manifest Victory — a disciplined, organized military force that was not directly aligned with Turkey — posed a challenge to Ankara’s strategy for managing its presence in Syria. This led to both overt and covert confrontations between Manifest Victory and the Turkish government.
By early September 2024, the Battle of Aleppo dominated discussions in both private and public forums. The population was sharply divided: A minority supported the battle, seeing it as a necessary step toward liberation, while the majority opposed it, fearing catastrophic consequences if it failed. In an interview this week, al-Sharaa, now Syria’s interim president, said some feared a reenactment of the civilian suffering in Gaza.
Society was gripped with anxiety, with many businesses disrupted and a wave of unofficial displacement from cities and towns that were expected to become major targets. Financial strains compounded the tension, as salary deductions of up to 50% were imposed on civilian and military employees in Idlib, further heightening unease within the local population.
The Syrian regime initially dismissed the possibility of the battle with arrogance and disdain. However, as regional threats grew, particularly to its ally Iran, the regime’s confidence gave way to rising tension. Military movements near Manifest Victory’s lines, classified by the regime as serious and ongoing, signaled a looming escalation. The regime correctly assessed that both its forces and its loyalist base were severely weakened by years of war and mounting losses.
Adding to this pressure was a state of continuous military alertness, effectively serving as psychological warfare. The regime’s forces were fatigued, beset by internal grievances and misled by intelligence reports regarding the timing of the actual attack. This succeeded in creating confusion and sapping the morale of regime troops.
On the political front, the situation was no less complex. Intense communications unfolded with regional and international actors interested in the Syrian issue, most notably Turkey. Initially, Turkey was wary of such a battle, due to the potential severe humanitarian and political consequences it could unleash. Such a battle could exacerbate the refugee crisis, placing immense strain on its resources.
However, as the battle approached, Turkey’s stance shifted, and it informed the operations command that it might intervene militarily or politically to impose a ceasefire if the balance tilted decisively in favor of the regime. Turkey feared that if the regime gained the upper hand, it would exact brutal retribution on those remaining in opposition-held areas, sparking another massive refugee exodus into Turkish territory.
At dawn on Nov. 27, the battle began on the fronts in the Aleppo Governorate’s western countryside. Initially expected to last nearly a year, it was decided, remarkably, in just two days.
Two critical special operations played a decisive role in this swift outcome. The first operation involved a team infiltrating one of the enemy’s front lines two days prior to the main offensive. At the designated hour, they struck from behind, causing a rapid breach in the defenses and inflicting heavy casualties, including high-ranking field officers and Russian advisers.
The second operation targeted the regime’s leadership. A local militia commander, supported by Iran, was secretly persuaded to cooperate. He facilitated the infiltration of four special forces operatives, disguised as his escort, into a meeting of the Security and Military Coordination Committee in Aleppo. At a critical moment, the commander withdrew, allowing the operatives to eliminate senior officers from the regime’s army and intelligence, including a high-ranking Iranian adviser.
These two operations caused a dramatic collapse in the regime’s defenses, plunging its ranks into chaos. Exploiting the disarray, the rebels’ forces launched a large-scale offensive, opening long fronts and deploying substantial reinforcements. The regime’s aerial bombardments, aimed at halting the advance, proved ineffective against the rapid and coordinated assault.
The speed and intensity of the operation, named Deterrence of Aggression, inspired their fighters, who escalated their efforts and advanced rapidly. The regime’s forces, overwhelmed by the collapse of their command structure, began to unravel. Officers fled the battlefield, leaving their soldiers behind. Witnessing their leaders’ retreat, many soldiers abandoned their posts, discarding their uniforms and weapons as they fled in turn.
A defining aspect of the battle was the effective use of psychological warfare by the Military Operations Directorate. Well before the battle began, social media accounts were created, masquerading as supporters of the regime. These accounts, controlled by the directorate, gained the trust of the regime’s audience by posting news relevant to their concerns, particularly highlighting corruption and deteriorating living conditions. This strategy gradually eroded the confidence of regime soldiers in their political, military and security leadership.
As the battle commenced, these accounts flooded their audience with demoralizing news designed to weaken the resolve of regime supporters and fighters. Simultaneously, the directorate maintained tight control over its own media outputs to prevent the enemy from exploiting any information. Instead, it focused on broadcasting messages encouraging regime soldiers to surrender.
Within just two days of fierce battles, the Deterrence of Aggression forces liberated vast areas fortified with significant defenses and stocked with military equipment. The collapse of these defensive lines left the path to Aleppo wide open. The strategy of the Deterrence of Aggression forces was clear: to maintain relentless pressure on the regime, giving it no chance to regroup or establish new defensive positions.
By the afternoon of Nov. 29, the vanguard of the Deterrence of Aggression forces entered the New Aleppo and al-Hamdaniya neighborhoods — key southwestern gateways to the city. These areas were strategically crucial, housing major military and security centers. They were also home to many of the regime’s officers and militia leaders and had never before been liberated. The news of the Deterrence of Aggression forces’ entry into these neighborhoods struck like a thunderbolt, shattering the remaining morale of the regime’s fighters and supporters.
The western neighborhoods of Aleppo, which the Deterrence of Aggression forces entered during the city’s liberation, were among its wealthiest and most upscale areas. Residents initially feared that the fighters might mirror the behavior of the regime’s shabiha militias or even the so-called National Army in the Aleppo countryside, both of which had been notorious for widespread abuses and violations. These fears fueled concerns about potential looting, plundering or chaotic invasions during the city’s liberation.
The reality proved starkly different. The ideological discipline instilled in the Deterrence of Aggression fighters, coupled with the strong central military control exercised by their leadership, ensured that such violations did not occur. The liberation of western Aleppo became a testament to their commitment to principled conduct, serving as a powerful form of moral propaganda. This success not only reassured the residents of Aleppo but also encouraged cooperation and support from Syrians in other cities, facilitating the peaceful handover of additional areas.
The forces were mindful of Aleppo’s collective memory of the rebels’ excesses and violations during 2012, and they worked to ensure that such events were not repeated, thus ensuring that moral victory was achieved as well.
The liberation of Aleppo was a monumental achievement on all levels, setting off a chain reaction that signaled the regime’s inevitable collapse. The fall of Aleppo became the first domino, quickly followed by the liberation of Hama on Dec. 5. These victories convinced Syrians that the regime was a sinking ship, with loyalists scrambling to abandon it.
The momentum built rapidly as residents of Homs, Daraa and the Damascus countryside — areas the regime had reentered through settlements in 2018 — rose up, accelerating the comprehensive liberation process. This paved the way for Deterrence of Aggression forces to advance swiftly toward Damascus. Meanwhile, new operations commands were formed in southern and eastern Syria, further dispersing the regime’s efforts in its desperate attempts to defend what remained of its territory.
On Dec. 8, Bashar al-Assad was overthrown, and Damascus was liberated. Deterrence of Aggression forces entered the capital at dawn, taking the Syrian desert route instead of waiting to approach from the northern gate via Homs, which was declared liberated on the same day.
In the days leading up to the liberation, hundreds of thousands of Alawites loyal to regime leaders fled from Homs and Damascus to the countryside and coastal areas, particularly in Latakia and Tartus. The Military Operations Directorate provided safe passage for these groups, assuring them of their safety. Many Alawites, disillusioned with the regime’s corruption and oppression, cooperated with civil groups and local notables to collect weapons and hand them over to the directorate, facilitating the peaceful entry of forces into these regions.
The Military Operations Directorate protected the Alawite population from retaliatory attacks, maintaining discipline and decisiveness to prevent violations. This approach helped stabilize the situation, culminating in the announcement of a caretaker government that assumed duties from the former prime minister. The revolution’s victory was celebrated nationwide, with live broadcasts showing the horrors of Sednaya prison and the crimes against humanity committed by the former regime.
The success of the operation that overthrew Assad exhibited a sophisticated approach to managing state institutions and communicating both internally and externally. The campaign dealt a decisive blow to the Iranian axis, severing Iran’s supply line to Hezbollah in Lebanon and leaving Tehran isolated to face the consequences of its regional destabilization efforts.
However, the challenges facing the directorate and the newly formed government are immense, particularly in rebuilding the country and providing essential services. The energy crisis, the need for widespread reconstruction and the collapsed economy pose significant burdens that complicate the path forward.
Despite these challenges, there are opportunities on the horizon. Syria’s strategic location as a vital crossroads for neighboring countries positions it as a potential partner in regional development projects. Additionally, its substantial human resources — proven to be highly effective in critical fields — offer a valuable asset for the country’s recovery and growth.
Operation Deterrence of Aggression was not the result of a short-term effort but a culmination of 13 years of relentless struggle by the Syrian people, supported by advocates worldwide. This victory, achieved through profound sacrifices, marks a turning point. However, preserving and properly investing in this achievement will take a new and equally demanding battle — one that is no less difficult.
“Spotlight” is a newsletter about underreported cultural trends and news from around the world, emailed to subscribers twice a week. Sign up here.