Good morning,

I hope you’ve had a good week. This is your Thursday morning edition of The Intel Brief.

Reporting Period: 9 - 12 December 2024

Bottom-Line Up Front:

US, Israel Carry Out Operations In Syria As Assad Regime Collapses

Summary
On 9 December, the US Department of Defense announced that US Central Command (CENTCOM) will continue operations to prevent ISIS from regaining a foothold in Syria. US forces have conducted more than 75 airstrikes on ISIS targets since the Assad regime collapsed. Israel also carried out a large-scale air and naval campaign against Syrian military targets. The Israeli Defense Force (IDF) seized a buffer zone between Syria and the Golan Heights and is reportedly less than 40 kilometers from Damascus.

Findings

• Background: On 8 December, Syrian President Bashar Assad fled to Moscow following the seizure of Damascus by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HST), a rebel group with ties to Al Qaeda. The development brought the sudden end to Assad’s 14-year dictatorship in Syria.

• USA: President Biden said the US will help establish a democratic government in Syria. Prior to Biden’s commitment, President-elect Trump said the US should “stay out of it.” A Department of Defense spokesperson provided a clearer US policy position: “to counter ISIS and to support our local partners on the ground, the Syrian Democratic Forces, to ensure that ISIS can never reestablish a safe haven there.”

• Israel: In addition to seizing a buffer territory between Syria and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, the IDF have carried out over 310 naval and air strikes on Syrian military sites, including naval ports, warehouses, depots, airports, and research facilities. IDF officials stated the strikes were proactive and aimed at preventing “strategic weapons” from falling into the hands of Iran-aligned extremists. Syria’s military is effectively destroyed.

Why This Matters
The conflict in Syria is one of the most complex and multifaceted in recent history. Despite the commitment to establish a democratic government there, the US is likely to be challenged by various factions competing for their own strategic interests

I’ll attempt to explain those interests to show how the situation in Syria poses significant risks to regional stability:

• Assad’s Regime: Despite fleeing to Moscow in exile, his interests can still be pursued. Assad’s government receives diplomatic, economic, and military backing from Russian and Iran. Additionally, Assad benefitted from Hezbollah’s support, as the Lebanon-based group were combating Syrian rebel factions. It is possible that pro-Assad factions could carry out operations to secure a foothold in Syria and, eventually, bring Assad back to power.

• HST: Hayat Tahrir al-Sham has become the dominant rebel faction following their capture of Damascus. HST’s ambition is to establish an Islamic government in Syria. The Al Qaeda-linked group receive backing from Turkey due to Istanbul’s disdain for the Kurdish ethnic forces operating in the region.

• Kurds: Kurdish groups, mostly under the leadership and protection of the YPG, control northeast Syria along the border with Turkey. They seek to establish a autonomous Kurdish state and have been resolute in combating ISIS, a position that has earned them US backing.

• Turkey: Opposes Kurdish autonomy, considering the YPG a terrorist group linked to the PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party). Supports Syrian rebels and controls parts of northern Syria through military incursions.

• United States: Focuses on combating ISIS and supporting the SDF while maintaining limited military presence in Syria. The more serious the US becomes about establishing a democratic government in Syria, the more likely it is that US troops will deploy there.

• Israel: Israel is committed to destroying Hezbollah and other Iranian proxies in Syria so that they cannot coordinate attacks or grow support against Israel.

Sources: Department of Defense, BBC, Flight Global, Defense One, The Intel Brief, Reuters

Trump And Zelenskyy Want Peace, Disagree About NATO

Summary
On 7 December, President-elect Trump, French President Macron, and Ukrainian President Zelenskyy met on the sidelines of the reopening of Notre Dame Cathedral in France. Following the event, from their home countries, Trump and Zelenskyy agreed that reaching a peace deal should be a priority in 2025. However, the pair have conflicting outlooks on NATO.

Findings

• USA: On Truth Social, Trump wrote that Russia and Ukraine should pursue an immediate ceasefire and begin peace negotiations. Trump maintains an ultimatum for NATO, stating that if member states do not pay their fair share the US will cut funding and aid, and may withdraw from the alliance. President Biden, with weeks left in office, continues to push as much aid through the Presidential Drawdown Authority as possible.

• Ukraine: President Zelenskyy, while open to peace negotiations, said such an agreement would need to be “just and robust” and not something that could be subverted in the future. Zelenskyy touted the idea of foreign troops being deployed to Ukraine to increase deterrence as Kyiv waits for NATO and EU membership. Ukraine has suffered over 400,000 casualties.

• NATO: During the July 2024 NATO Summit in Washington, the alliance declared that Ukraine’s NATO membership was inevitable. Despite that statement, the alliance lacks unanimous agreement and has not offered Kyiv membership. Germany and the US are particularly against the idea while Ukraine remains at war. Mark Rutte, the NATO Secretary General, has avoided the topic in recent interviews and statements. Ukrainian membership would bring significantly increased risk to the alliance.

• Russia: Russian officials have repeated Putin’s willingness to begin peace negotiations. Russia controls nearly 20% of Ukrainian territory and will likely pursue a deal based on the absorption of those regions into the Russian Federation, in addition to restrictions regarding Ukrainian NATO membership. Russia has suffered over 1,000,000 casualties.

Why This Matters
Establishing a lasting peace is dependent on vastly divergent interests and security concerns. It cannot be said that NATO and the EU support all of Ukraine’s interests.

As it stands, given Russia’s possession of Ukrainian territories, a deeper weapons supply, and a larger pool of manpower, a peace negotiation likely favors Russian interests.

What might this look like?

• Forfeiture of Ukrainian oblasts to Russia (i.e. Crimea, Kherson, Zaporizhia, Donetsk, and Luhansk)

• Suspension of NATO accession

• Suspension of EU accession

• Energy transit deal (i.e. Ukraine opens Russian pipelines to Europe)

Additionally, the chances of a successful peace deal are complicated by international diplomacy. For example, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Putin in 2023. The UN also wants to investigate Russian war crimes and charge Russian officials. It should also be noted that over $210 billion in Russian assets were seized through international sanctions as a result of the war.
On 10 December, the US Treasury announced that it was providing Ukraine a $20 billion loan funded by seized Russian assets.

Sources: AP News, Washington Post, AP News, The Guardian, Reuters, The Hill

Congressman Claims Drones Over New York And New Jersey Are Iranian, FBI And FAA Investigating

Summary
Reports of unidentified drones flying over sensitive sites in New York and New Jersey have persisted since November. On 11 December, citing confidential sources, Rep. Van Drew (R-NJ) claimed the drones are of Iranian origin and are being launched from a site off of the East Coast. The FBI and FAA are investigating the ongoing situation but have failed to identify any drone platforms or their operators. New Jersey State Senator Joseph Lagana has called for a “limited state of emergency.”

Findings

• Sightings: Witnesses reports began in November and suggest the drones are larger than typical commercial models. In December, there have been more than 30 sightings. The drones have been observed flying over sensitive sites in NY and NJ, such as critical infrastructure and military installations and arsenals.

• Response: In testimony to Congress, the FBI provided no clarity on what drones are being used or by whom. The FAA have imposed temporary flight restrictions over areas where the drones have been observed, particularly military sites.

• Impact: There is no telling what information has been acquired through surveillance. The potential for sabotage and disruption remains high. One incident resulted in disrupted hospital operations when a helicopter was prevented from transporting a patient.

Why This Matters
The ongoing incident highlights gaps in national security related to emerging technologies and, potentially, hybrid warfare operations.

• National Security Risks: The situation shows the persistent vulnerability to critical infrastructure and sensitive facilities. Without identifying the platforms and operators, it is not possible to rule out the potential for sabotage or terrorism. Additionally, the incident acts as a “proof of concept” for future actors.

• Policy: The inability for the federal government to identify details and institute control mechanisms shows a gap in how drone usage is regulated. The situation also highlights the ineffectual nature of current emergency protocols. It is likely that legislators will seek new laws in order to monitor drone flights and mitigate potential threats.

FAA radar and military ISR platforms should have no issues tracking and monitoring the drones - especially if they are operating out of a known location off the coast.

Sources: NY Post, Newsweek, Newsweek, Fox News, ABC News

Taiwan On High Alert As Large-Scale Chinese Maneuvers Continue

Summary
After more than a week of warnings of a possible Chinese exercise around Taiwan, the Taiwanese Ministry of Defense has reported significant PLA maneuvers. In response, Taiwan has placed military assets on high alert, including fighters and air defense batteries. Reuters and CNN reported that these are the largest maneuvers in “decades” and involve hundreds of aircraft sorties, 60 warships, and 30 PLA Coast Guard vessels.

Findings

• Scale: Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense has persistently reported on the ongoing maneuvers:

  • 9 December: 47 aircraft, 12 naval vessels, and 9 other ships operated around Taiwan. The MOD instituted combat readiness drills and maintained Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) missions to monitor.

  • 11 December: 53 aircraft, 11 naval vessels, and 8 other ships operated around Taiwan.

    PLA deployments extended into the Pacific, establishing a defensive posture beyond Taiwan’s immediate perimeter, including areas south of Japan and towards the Philippines.

• Strategy: Taiwanese officials state the ongoing PLA maneuvers are a show of force intended to draw a “red line” for President-elect Donald Trump as he builds his Indo-Pacific strategy. The maneuvers reflect Chinese precedent, as President Lai recently visited Hawaii and Guam, a US territory. Xi Jinping does not typically let Lai’s diplomacy go unpunished.

Why This Matters
While Chinese aerial and naval incursions into Taiwanese territory are not unusual, this situation is unique. Taiwanese officials previously warned of an imminent Chinese exercise (i.e. a third iteration of the Joint Sword-2024 exercise). It is uncertain whether these are simply large-scale, ad hoc maneuvers or if they are a formal exercise.

Regardless of what formal designation the maneuvers fall under, they are reflective of China’s intent to seize Taiwan through forceful means.

These maneuvers are very likely a rehearsal; a small part of a cohesive operational plan that involves a sudden strike on Taiwanese defenses through an air campaign, naval blockades, missile strikes, electromagnetic attack, and an invasion by ground forces.

Sources: NPR, CNN, Taiwanese Ministry of Defense, Reuters, Radio Free Asia

End Brief

That concludes this brief.

Before you go, can you provide some feedback? Feel free to leave a comment as well.

Thanks,

Nick