°®Âþµº

Ìý

It's with characteristic savagery that the Assad regime, bolstered by Iranian forces,, the area considered by many to be the birthplace of Syria's 11-year-old revolution.Ìý

Unlike other areas of Syria liberated by the rebels only to be militarily conquered by Assad, Iran and Russia, Daraa was to be different.ÌýRussia, sensing an opportunity to become the major hegemonic power in the Middle East, decided that liberated Daraa would be spared the that had been visited upon other rebel-held areas it had helped the Assad regime to conquer.ÌýÌý

But in contrast to the role of Russia as the imperialistic pacifier of the rebellious people, the ceasefire deal in Daraa was supposed to showcase its other role -Ìýits role as the coloniser;Ìýas capable of providing 'reconciliation' and stability as it was of destruction.ÌýAnd so Russia thought of its grand colonial vision of 'reconstruction', which really meant Russia becoming the imperialist suzerain over what's left of Syria.Ìý

In Russia's vision for Syria, Ìýprovides itÌýwith all kinds of money-spinning ventures bringing in investment from Russia's allies, and the ever-more. This in turn could prompt and western world to get in on the 'scramble for Syria' somewhere along the way.

"The Daraa deal was supposed to, in the face of the US retreat, announce that Russia was now the main guarantor of stability in the region"

But underpinning all of this, was proving to the region and the world that there was stability in Syria -ÌýIsrael would ramp up on Iranian forces close to its border, while Jordan wants to avoid more refugees adding to the 700,000 Syrians it already hosts, or the destabilisation of its southern border.Ìý The Daraa deal was supposed to, in the face of the US retreat, announce that Russia was now the main guarantor of stability in the region.Ìý

That's why Russia did not allow the same genocidal fate of Aleppo and Homs to befall Daraa when the pro-regime forces looked to conquer it in 2018.ÌýIt's now clear to everyone that Russia is theÌýguarantor of very little in Syria, and that the foundations of the deal were always built of sand.ÌýAssad-Iran only grudgingly supported it, with the expectation that the ceasefire was merely a means to pave the way for their total conquest of Daraa.Ìý

Under the 2018 deal, the province was to be split inÌýtwo: the eastern side, fully occupied by the Assad regime, and the western side, including Daraa City, was to be put under semi-autonomous control of rebel forces and civilian revolutionary forces, forming elected Central Committees representing different areas of the semi-autonomous zone.ÌýÌý

Heavy shelling of Daraa al-Balad by the Assad regime has resumed. The neighborhood is full of civilians

— Elizabeth Tsurkov (@Elizrael)

The regime would take over the running of social provisions, and the rebels would hand over heavy weaponry and be incorporated into the Russian-created 'Fifth Corps' of the Syrian Arab Army, which would work with Russia to police the area, denying Assad and Iran any military access.

Since the deal was struck, Assad has.ÌýWith in Assad's kleptocratic rump state putting Syrians atÌý, Daraa has become a of resistance and protest.ÌýThe fact it operates with elected central committees and with essential autonomy has made it antithetical to the regime, especially if it provides an incentive to other suffering Syrians.Ìý

When the autonomous province decided to boycott the absurd fixed presidential election earlier this year that saw the Syrian dictator returned to power with 95% of the vote, Assad began a.Ìý

"Since the deal was struck, Assad has probed for ways to tear it apart"

The siege then turned into an all-out offensive, with Assad shelling civilian areas, leading to over 90 deaths, including women and children. have been 'evacuated', while Daraa al-Balad, the name for the southern part of Daraa city, is now.Ìý

To anyone who has paid attention to Syria's civil war, these genocidal tactics are all too familiar.ÌýBut so far, they're missing the Russian ingredient that could be decisive.ÌýThe rebels have managed to put up and have on many occasions got the better of the regime - without Russian airpower, regime forces remain vulnerable.Ìý

Russia's attempts to create what we're supposed to believe could be a lasting ceasefire within a ceasefire would be comical were it not for the scale of the tragedy at stake.ÌýThough Russian intervention assured Assad's military success, in reality, Russia finds itself increasingly overstretched in the country;Ìýit has not carved stability out of Assad's parochial ultra-corrupt rump stateÌýand Iran's often quite divergent interests.

Ìýand has the most control over Assad, given many of its Revolutionary Guard forces and proxy militias give the regime much needed manpower.ÌýAs we've seen during this conflict in Daraa, Iran is Russian 'peace' negotiations with the central committees, indicating it wants to prompt a total conquest of the region.

It could be that Russia concedes and decides there is more to be gained from the destruction of Daraa than there is to allow it to remain alive in peace.

Or it could be that Russia secures another fragile 'peace', but for how long?Ìý The conditions that led to the confrontation aren't simply going to disappear. The Assad regime isn't suddenly going to become a force for peace, and the people of Daraa are not going to willingly surrender their liberty.

Though the world ought to care about the people of Daraa, the reality is that their fate lies in the hands of forces that have pursued a war of extermination against Syrians with vicious gusto.ÌýThe usual superficial condemnations from the US and international community aside, there will be scant outrage if Daraa becomes yet another of the atrocities carried out by Assad that litter Syria's recentÌýhistory.

Ìý

Sam Hamad is a writer and History PhD candidate at the University of Glasgow focusing on totalitarian ideologies.

Join the conversationÌý.

Have questions or comments? Email us at: editorial-english@alaraby.co.uk.

Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of °®Âþµº, its editorial board or staff.

Ìý