
Key players in Syria's latest eruption of violence, from the Druze and Bedouin to government forces
The violence underscored the difficulties facing the Syrian new government struggling to consolidate control over the country, months after Islamist-led insurgents ousted longtime autocrat Bashar Assad in a lightning offensive last December.
Some key players and alliances in Syria are different now than during the civil war, but the landscape remains complex.
Here's a look at the main parties in the four days of violence in Sweida province before a ceasefire mediated by the United States, Turkey and Arab countries took effect. The truce mostly held on Thursday, though scattered violence was reported.
The government
Interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa leads the new government and is Syria's international face. His Hayat Tahrir al-Sham group, once an al-Qaida affiliate that later split from it, spearheaded the anti-Assad charge.
Since taking power, al-Sharaa has taken a more moderate tone, preached coexistence and formed diplomatic ties with Western countries, including the U.S.
His government has faced suspicion from minority communities — including Assad's Alawite sect, Christians, Syrian Kurds and the Druze — and there have been outbreaks of sectarian violence. Damascus also struggles to turn a patchwork of former rebel groups — including some extremists — into a professional army.
In Sweida, al-Sharaa's government forces intervened in clashes that started between local Bedouin tribes and Druze militias, but ended up themselves clashing with the Druze, drawing Israeli airstrikes, purportedly in defense of the Druze. Some government fighters allegedly killed Druze civilians, and looted and burned houses.
The Druze
The Druze sect began as a 10th-century offshoot of Ismailism, a branch of Shiite Islam. More than half the roughly 1 million Druze worldwide live in Syria. Others mostly live in Lebanon and Israel, including in the Golan Heights, which Israel captured from Syria in the 1967 Mideast War and annexed in 1981.
During Syria's civil war, the Druze were split between supporting Assad, who offered them a degree of autonomy and exemption from army conscription, and his opposition. They established their own militias, partly to defend against Islamic militants who consider them heretics.
Until this week's clashes, the Druze were split between those who wanted to integrate with the new government and those seeking to maintain autonomy.
The Bedouins
While predominantly Druze, Sweida is also home to Bedouin tribes who are Sunni Muslim and who have on occasion clashed with the Druze.
In 2000, unrest broke out after a Bedouin killed a Druze man in a land dispute. Assad's forces intervened, shooting Druze protesters. After a 2018 Islamic State group attack on the Druze in Sweida that killed more than 200 people, the Druze accused the Bedouins of helping the militants.
The latest escalation began with a Bedouin tribe in Sweida setting up a checkpoint and attacking and robbing a Druze man, which triggered tit-for-tat attacks and kidnappings, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a Britain-based war monitor.
Al-Sharaa's forces then intervened, ostensibly to restore calm, but sided with the Bedouins. Some Druze groups allegedly carried out revenge attacks against Bedouins after a ceasefire was reached.
Israel
Israel frequently launched strikes on Iranian and Iran-backed forces who were Assad's allies during Syria's civil war. Since Assad's fall, Israel has been suspicious of the new Islamist authorities in Damascus.
Israeli forces seized have control of a U.N.-patrolled buffer zone in Syria and carried out airstrikes on military sites in what officials they was a move to create a demilitarized zone south of Damascus.
Washington has been pushing for Syria and Israel to move toward normalizing relations. Syrian officials have acknowledged holding indirect talks with Israel to defuse tensions.
Israel stepped up its intervention during the Sweida escalation this week, saying it was acting to protect the Druze, who are seen as a loyal minority in Israel and often serve in the military. Israel launched dozens of airstrikes on convoys of Syrian forces around Sweida and struck the headquarters of the Syrian Ministry of Defense in the heart of Damascus.
The U.S.
In a watershed moment, President Donald Trump met with al-Sharaa during a visit to Saudi Arabia in May, a major boost from Washington as the new Damascus authorities try to consolidate control.
Amid the Sweida violence, the U.S., which has been pushing to broker ties between Syria and Israel, launched a flurry of diplomacy to push for a ceasefire.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the U.S. was 'very worried' about the violence, describing it as a 'direct threat to efforts to help build a peaceful and stable Syria,' and added that Washington was in 'repeated and constant talks with the governments of Syria and Israel' to deescalate.
Turkey
Turkey, an ally of both the U.S. and al-Sharaa's government, was also part of the mediation efforts over Sweida.
Ankara wants a strong state in Damascus and is primarily concerned with curtailing the influence of Kurdish groups in Syria along the border with Turkey — specifically, the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces, or SDF.
While the Kurdish SDF fighters are allied with the U.S. and were key in defeating the Islamic State militants, Ankara considers them terrorists because of their association with the Kurdistan Workers' Party, or PKK, which has waged a long-running insurgency in Turkey.
The Kurdish-led forces
The Kurdish-led SDF controls much of northeast Syria and was not part of the Sweida violence. But its fighters have in the past clashed with Turkish-backed groups that are now part of the new Syrian government forces.
In March, the SDF and Damascus signed a landmark deal — backed by Washington — under which the Kurdish-led forces would merge with the new Syrian national army. The deal also said Syria's border crossings with Iraq and Turkey, as well as airports and oil fields in the northeast that are now under the SDF control would be turned over to the central government.
But the details of the deal were left vague, and the two sides have been at odds over how to implement it. The Sweida escalation could further sideline those discussions.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
No proof Hamas routinely stole UN aid, Israeli military officials say
Now, with hunger at crisis levels in the territory, Israel is coming under increased international pressure over its conduct of the war in Gaza and the humanitarian suffering it has brought. Doctors in the territory say that an increasing number of their patients are suffering from -- and dying of -- starvation. More than 100 aid agencies and rights groups warned this past week of 'mass starvation' and implored Israel to lift restrictions on humanitarian assistance. The European Union and at least 28 governments, including Israeli allies like Britain, France, and Canada, issued a joint statement condemning Israel's 'drip-feeding of aid' to Gaza's 2 million Palestinian residents. Advertisement Israel has largely brushed off the criticism. David Mencer, a government spokesperson, said this past week that there was 'no famine caused by Israel.' Instead, he blamed Hamas and poor coordination by the United Nations for any food shortages. Advertisement Israel moved in May toward replacing the UN-led aid system that had been in place for most of the 21-month war in Gaza, opting instead to back a private, American-run operation guarded by armed US contractors in areas controlled by Israeli military forces. Some aid still comes into Gaza through the United Nations and other organizations. The new system has proved to be much deadlier for Palestinians trying to obtain food handouts. According to the Gaza Health Ministry, almost 1,100 people have been killed by gunfire on their way to get food handouts under the new system, in many cases by Israeli soldiers who opened fire on hungry crowds. Israeli officials have said they fired shots in the air in some instances because the crowds came too close or endangered their forces. The military officials who spoke to The New York Times said that the original UN aid operation was relatively reliable and less vulnerable to Hamas interference than the operations of many of the other groups bringing aid into Gaza. That's largely because the United Nations managed its own supply chain and handled distribution directly inside Gaza. Hamas did steal from some of the smaller organizations that donated aid, as those groups were not always on the ground to oversee distribution, according to the senior Israeli officials and others involved in the matter. But, they say, there was no evidence that Hamas regularly stole from the United Nations, which provided the largest chunk of the aid. A Hamas representative did not immediately respond to requests for comment. An internal US government analysis came to a similar conclusion, Reuters reported Friday. It found no evidence of systematic Hamas theft of US-funded humanitarian supplies, the report said. Advertisement 'For months, we and other organizations were dragged through the mud by accusations that Hamas steals from us,' said Georgios Petropoulos, a former UN official in Gaza who oversaw aid coordination with Israel for nearly 13 months of war. The senior military officials and others interviewed by the Times spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly on behalf of the military or government. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In a statement, the military said that it has been 'well documented' that Hamas has routinely 'exploited humanitarian aid to fund terrorist activities.' But the military did not dispute the assessment that there was no evidence that Hamas regularly stole aid from the United Nations. The Israeli government and military have often clashed over how to conduct the war in Gaza. Early last year, top commanders urged a cease-fire with Hamas to secure the release of hostages. Netanyahu's government instead expanded the ground operation in southern Gaza. Israel used the rationale that Hamas steals aid when it cut off all food and other supplies to Gaza between March and May. In March, after a cease-fire between Hamas and Israel collapsed, Netanyahu said: 'Hamas is currently taking control of all supplies and goods entering Gaza,' and he declared that Israel would prevent anything from entering the territory. That blockade, and problems with a new aid system that launched in May, brought hunger and starvation in Gaza to the current crisis levels. For most of the war, the UN was the largest single source of aid entering Gaza, according to data from the Israeli military unit that oversees policy in the territory. Advertisement Now, the new aid system is managed instead by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a private American company led by a former CIA agent. It was intended to eventually replace international aid organizations and the UN role. But it has only a few distribution hubs, compared with hundreds under the former UN-run operation. The new system's rollout at the end of May was quickly followed by near-daily episodes of deadly violence near distribution sites. Desperate and hungry Palestinians must go to the few aid distribution sites located in areas controlled by Israeli forces. The hours of operation are limited and supplies run out, so crowds arrive early, with some walking for miles to get there. Since May 19, when Israel allowed emergency supplies to resume entering Gaza after its two-month blockade, half of the aid has been distributed by the United Nations and international organizations, with the other half coming through the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, the Israeli military says. Petropoulos welcomed the notion that some Israeli officials had recognized the UN-led aid system as effective during the war. But he said he wished that endorsement had come much sooner. 'If the UN had been taken at face value months ago, we wouldn't have wasted all this time and Gazans wouldn't be starving and being shot at trying to feed their families,' he said. This article originally appeared in


San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Cameroon's election board bars main opposition candidate from presidential race
YAOUNDE, Cameroon (AP) — Cameroon 's electoral commission on Saturday rejected the candidacy of Maurice Kamto in the upcoming presidential election, fueling fears of unrest and increasing the likelihood of another Biya victory. Kamto, a former government minister, is seen as the main challenger to long-serving President Paul Biya. The electoral commission, ELECAM, said it approved 13 presidential candidates, excluding Kamto. No reason was given. Biya is included. Kamto, who has two days to appeal, was considered Biya's strongest rival in past elections. He came second during the last presidential election in 2018 with 14% of the vote, while Biya cruised to victory with over 70% in an election marred by irregularities and a low turnout. Biya, 92, the world's oldest serving head of state, said last month he would seek reelection on Oct. 12 despite rumors that his health is failing. He has been in power since 1982, nearly half his lifetime. Biya's rule has left a lasting impact on Cameroon. His government has faced various challenges, including allegations of corruption and a deadly secessionist conflict in the nation's English-speaking provinces that has forced thousands out of school. Security forces were deployed around the ELECAM headquarters and along major roads in Yaoundé, the capital, and in Douala, the economic hub. The United Nations Department of Safety and Security had warned Friday that the announcement could trigger protests in the capital.


New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Democrats' approval rating craters to 35-year low: WSJ poll
Democrats' approval rating with registered voters has plunged to a 35-year low, while Republicans maintain an edge on most of the top issues Americans care about, a new poll found. A whopping 63% of registered voters view Democrats unfavorably, dramatically eclipsing the 33% who had a positive impression, marking the lowest rating they scored since 1990, according to a Wall Street Journal survey. That abysmal rating for Democrats comes against the backdrop of lackluster figures for President Trump and Republicans. Trump's approval rating sits at 46%, with 52% who disapprove of the commander in chief. The figure is higher than this point during his first term, which was 40%. Republicans' approval rating clocked in at a net seven points unfavorable. If congressional elections were held today, 46% of voters indicated they'd back a Democrat, compared to 43% who would support a Republican. 3 The poll suggests that House Democrats have their work cut out for them to ensure they can flip control of the lower chamber. AP 3 Democrats are also carefully eyeing pickup opportunities in Senate races. AP A majority, 51%, also said the change Trump is bringing has resulted in dysfunction and chaos, compared to 45% who agreed the president was making positive adjustments. Still, across the board, voters preferred the GOP approach over the Dem position on a range of key issues. Voters trusted Republicans over Democrats on inflation by about 10 points; on immigration by 17 points; and handling illegal immigrants by 17 points, the survey found. In one unique finding, respondents disapproved of Trump's tariffs by 17 points and Republicans still scored 7 points higher than Democrats on that issue. 'The Democratic brand is so bad that they don't have the credibility to be a critic of Trump or the Republican Party,' John Anzalone, a Democratic pollster who helped conduct the survey, told the outlet. 'Until they reconnect with real voters and working people on who they're for and what their economic message is, they're going to have problems.' Anzalone teamed up with Republican Tony Fabrizio, Trump's trusted pollster during the 2024 campaign cycle, to conduct the survey for the Wall Street Journal. 3 President Trump's approval rating was underwater but higher than at this point during his first term, the poll showed. REUTERS One area where congressional Democrats topped Republicans was vaccine policy and healthcare, per the poll. Democrats are still reeling from their 2024 election loss, and key figures within the party have openly vented that the party doesn't have a strong message or sense of direction. Typically, the party out of power in the White House is favored to have a strong performance in the midterm elections, which is why many observers believe the Democrats are well-positioned heading into 2026. However, the Wall Street Journal poll shows Democrats are still remarkably anemic as the party struggles to find its footing. Around this time in 2017, voters called themselves Democrats over Republicans by 6 percentage points, per the poll. Democrats later went on to flip 40 House seats in the 2018 midterm elections. This go-around, Republicans have a 1-point edge in party identification over Democrats. Republicans have a threadbare 219 to 212 House majority and are scrambling to defy history by retaining control during the 2026 midterms. The Wall Street Journal poll sampled 1,500 registered voters between July 16–20 with a margin of error of plus or minus 2.5 percentage points.