Geographical Scope:

**Category:** Geopolitical Analysis / Proxy Wars **Geographical Scope:** Syria – Northern Region (Aleppo and its surroundings) **Timeframe:** The post-“freezing” phase of the Syrian war and the reopening of fronts (2023–2025)

**Countries Involved:** Syria, Turkey, United States, Israel

**Organizations and Armed Groups:** • Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) • Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) • Syrian Arab Army • U.S. Forces in Syria • Regionally backed armed factions

**Aleppo Once Again: The Jolani–Kurdish Confrontation as a Managed Proxy War**

**Introduction: When Aleppo Returns to the Forefront of Chaos**

The clashes that erupted in the city of Aleppo and its surroundings between **Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS)**, led by **Abu Mohammad al-Jolani**, and Kurdish factions were not a passing security incident or a limited local confrontation. Rather, these confrontations once again reveal that the war on Syria has not ended; it has merely been reconfigured into **managed conflicts**, in which non-state actors are employed as tools to keep the country in a state of permanent attrition.

Aleppo—whose liberation in 2016 marked a major turning point in the Syrian war—has returned today as a testing ground for reshuffling the deck: who controls, who is exhausted, and who is politically and media-wise recycled?

Before proceeding with the political analysis, it is important to review several key figures and facts related to the escalation in Aleppo (January 2026).

**Key Figures and Facts**

**1. Human Casualties** • The number of fatalities resulting from the escalating violence in Aleppo ranged between **22 and 24 deaths**, according to preliminary data from multiple sources, including civilians and combatants. • In addition, dozens were wounded and transferred to hospitals. The Kurdish Red Crescent reported that **more than 100 people** sustained injuries of varying severity as a result of the clashes.

**2. Displacement** • The fighting led to large-scale displacement, with **more than 140,000 people** fleeing neighborhoods of Aleppo that witnessed intense clashes. • Some sources also reported the displacement of thousands from predominantly Kurdish neighborhoods, particularly **Sheikh Maqsoud and Ashrafieh**.

**3. Arrests and Evacuations** • More than **300 Kurdish fighters** were arrested during the advance of government forces in certain neighborhoods, according to official statements. • Approximately **400 Kurdish fighters** were evacuated from the city as part of an organized withdrawal following the decline in hostilities.

**4. Material Destruction** • Local reports estimated that **over 300 homes** suffered partial or complete destruction in Aleppo neighborhoods subjected to heavy shelling and artillery fire. • Civilian infrastructure—including hospitals, schools, and residential buildings—sustained extensive damage due to indiscriminate shelling and the use of heavy weaponry.

**5. Active Parties to the Conflict** • Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), led by Abu Mohammad al-Jolani (primary armed actor). • Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), Kurdish-led, with previous U.S. backing. • The Syrian Arab Army and government forces, which later entered to retake areas and restore control. • Indirect external actors (Turkish pressure, Israeli threats, and U.S. mediation).

**Analysis**

**First: Jolani — From “Terrorist” to Functional Asset**

Abu Mohammad al-Jolani is not merely the leader of a hardline Islamist militia; he represents a stark example of how extremist actors are **recycled** when geopolitical necessity demands it. Emerging from the ranks of al-Qaeda and leading Jabhat al-Nusra—internationally designated as a terrorist organization—Jolani was gradually reintroduced as a “local actor” with whom coexistence became acceptable.

An examination of Jolani’s trajectory reveals three central facts: 1. The ideological core of the organization has not changed as much as its rhetoric. 2. Implicit international tolerance of HTS expansion in Idlib and the Aleppo countryside was not accidental, but rather the result of calculations aimed at keeping northern Syria outside state control.

3.Jolani performs a dual function: restraining the Syrian state on the one hand, and containing or exhausting other factions—including Kurdish ones—on the other.

In other words, Jolani is not “out of control,” but rather part of a **chaos-management equation**.

**Second: The Kurds Between the American Promise and Repeated Betrayal**

Kurdish forces—particularly those affiliated with the **Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF)**—once again find themselves in an extremely vulnerable position. Since the beginning of the Syrian crisis, the Kurdish card has been used first as a pressure tool against Damascus, then as a means to contain Iran, and finally as a bargaining chip in negotiations with Turkey.

The clashes with Jolani’s forces reveal that: • Kurdish presence in northern Syria lacks strategic protection. • U.S. support is conditional and temporary, receding whenever priorities shift. • Kurds are repeatedly pushed into secondary conflicts that exhaust them and weaken their ability to impose a fair political settlement.

Each time, the same scenario is reproduced: **support → exhaustion → abandonment**.

**Third: Why Aleppo?**

Aleppo is not merely a major city; it is Syria’s **economic and symbolic nexus**. Controlling or destabilizing it means: • Undermining any serious path toward reconstruction. • Preventing Syria’s return as an economically coherent state. • Keeping supply lines between Damascus and the north under constant threat.

Thus, reigniting tensions in Aleppo is not coincidental, but a political and security message: **there is no stability without external consent**.

**Fourth: External Players — Who Manages the Conflict?**

**Turkey** Ankara plays a central role in northern Syria: • Turning a blind eye to HTS expansion when it serves its interests. • Using armed factions as leverage against both the Kurds and Damascus. • Seeking to prevent the emergence of any stable Kurdish entity along its borders.

**United States** Washington manages the conflict from behind the scenes: • Militarily backing the SDF without providing genuine political cover. • Using its military presence to prevent the Syrian state from restoring sovereignty over its entire territory. • Leaving the field open for “controlled” confrontations between its proxies and their adversaries.

**Israel** Tel Aviv is the silent beneficiary: • Any exhaustion of Syria directly serves its interests. • Continued chaos prevents the formation of a secure environment for the Axis of Resistance. • Israeli airstrikes fit within the same context: preventing Syria’s strategic recovery.

**Fifth: The Axis of Resistance Perspective**

From the standpoint of the Axis of Resistance, what is unfolding in Aleppo is not a conflict between “Islamists” and “Kurds,” but a new chapter in the project of dismantling the Syrian state. This axis maintains that: • Sovereignty is indivisible. • Militias, regardless of shifts in rhetoric, remain tools. • Any genuine solution must pass through the restoration of Syrian state authority, decision-making, and original borders—away from the control of Jolani’s gangs.

**Sixth: Media — Whitening Jolani and Erasing Context**

Western and Gulf media play a decisive role in: • Reintroducing Jolani as a potential partner. • Ignoring his violent record. • Selectively highlighting Kurdish suffering when it serves political narratives, and silencing it when it does not.

This constitutes a psychological and media war no less dangerous than battlefield confrontations.

**What Is Not Said About the Battle for Aleppo**

Despite the abundance of media coverage, the essence of what occurred in Aleppo remains surrounded by striking silence, raising more questions than answers.

The manner in which HTS expanded, the timing of the clashes, and the absence of any effective deterrence suggest that what happened was not a sudden security breakdown, but an escalation **allowed to occur within calculated margins**.

Once again, Kurdish forces appear as a party drawn into unequal confrontations, often based on external assurances that quickly evaporate—reflecting a recurring pattern of functional use followed by abandonment. In the background, questions persist regarding the roles of regional and international intelligence services, whose presence seems closer to deliberate observation than prevention or containment.

At the level of funding and armament, the continued ability of armed groups to maneuver and fight raises serious questions about support networks that remain active despite declared international oversight. Most importantly, the political timing of the escalation suggests that Aleppo is once again being used as a strategic obstruction tool whenever discussions of stability, reconstruction, or genuine restoration of Syrian sovereignty gain momentum.

In this sense, what occurred in Aleppo cannot be read as a local conflict between rival factions, but rather as another chapter in the management of chaos—where local actors are exhausted, the state is frozen, and Syria remains hostage to external equations whose tools change while their objective does not.

**Conclusion: Where Is Aleppo Heading?**

The latest clashes warn that Aleppo may once again become a long-term arena of attrition unless the logic of managed proxy wars is broken. The equation is clear:

**Either a unified, sovereign state—or a mosaic of competing functional entities.

****🔵**[Link to the article in Arabic ](https://t.me/almuraqb/356)