As the campaign against Islamic State (IS) positions in Syria entered its first week, the US and its allies fired hundreds of missiles from warships and planes on sites belonging to the IS and other extremist organisations. The reaction to the strikes in Syria was mixed, with many Syrians voicing concerns over the scope and targets of the operation. Although many Syrians consider the IS as much of an enemy as the regime of Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad, and have thus been supportive of the strikes against the hard-line group, many have had second thoughts once the operations began mostly because of the high rate of casualties among civilians. What has also alienated some Syrians has been the fact that the strikes have targeted groups that have fought against the Syrian regime, unlike the IS which almost generally avoided confrontation with the regime while battling its rivals in the opposition ranks. Mohannad Al-Husseini, president of the Syrian Organisation for Human Rights, said that "the American planes attacked 22 positions in Syria in one day, but failed to achieve their declared goal of deterring the IS." According to Al-Husseini, most of the victims were civilians. He dismissed media reports claiming the deaths of more than 120 fighters from the IS and the extremist Al-Nusra Front as "groundless". Most Syrian opposition armed groups have voiced dissatisfaction with the raids, saying that the targets should have included positions of the Syrian army and its allied militia, not just the IS. Some groups have put their own fighters on alert, saying that they now have to confront not just the regime and the IS, but also the US-led coalition. Many have suspected that the Americans may have coordinated their operations with the Syrian regime. Syrian officials have claimed that the Americans briefed them about the attacks, but Washington has denied the allegations. Among the opposition, there is concern that the US-led coalition may target not only the IS, but also other armed opposition groups, thus giving the regime an edge in the current conflict. Louay Safi, former spokesman of the National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces (NCSROF), said that there was dismay that the coalition had waged its aerial campaign without consulting the Syrian opposition. "We believe that there is indirect coordination [between the Americans and] the Al-Assad regime through the Iraqi leadership," Safi said. "This American strategy is perilous because the targeted groups are positioned in residential areas.” "The international intervention is counterproductive and the outcome is unpredictable," Safi stated. Throughout the aerial bombardment of the IS positions, the Syrian air force has also continued to attack cities and villages across country with barrel bombs. Many Syrians had hoped that the US-led coalition would impose a no-fly zone on the regime before starting the campaign against the IS. The fact that the regime not only went on the offensive during the campaign, but also intensified its attacks on civilians, was disheartening. Abdel-Razeq Aslan Al-Laz, a former Syrian police chief, was horrified by the US shelling of residential areas. "The coalition strikes were misguided, and the timing of the operations was terrible as they led to the deaths of many innocent civilians." "The coalition raids should have been accompanied by a no-fly zone to stop Al-Assad from sending his planes to exterminate his own people," he added. "Who are we supposed to fight now: the regime, the IS, or the extremists supporting the regime? Are we supposed to go into hiding to escape the coalition strikes?" Among Syrian Kurds and Christians, there was a sense that the extremists were now getting a taste of their own medicine. Soliman Youssef, a Christian, voiced hopes that the strikes would ease the attacks on the Christian and Kurdish minorities. The strikes "will relieve the pressure on the besieged Kurdish and Christian communities," he said. However, Youssef questioned the long-term value of the international intervention. "There is a feeling that the US has not attacked these groups in Iraq and Syria in order to protect the Christians, but instead to protect its strategic interests in this part of the world," he added. The opposition groups had hoped that the strikes would include the regime and its allied militias, thus giving the opposition a chance to do better in the current conflict. Rami Abdel-Rahman, director of the Syrian observatory for Human Rights, said that the only way to help the Syrian people was to oust Al-Assad and his regime. "Anyone who wants to help the Syrian people should first dispose of the dictator Bashar Al-Assad and his regime. It is Al-Assad that has turned Syria into a haven for extremists," Abdel-Rahman said. "Attacking the IS cannot mean killing civilians in the process, because this is just what Al-Assad has been doing all along," he added. Syrians now fear that the regime may be the main benefactor of the coalition strikes, as they may now give it the chance to regain lost territory.
