Syria, the new version of the blitzkrieg

He even led the second of these coups, although it would take a third coup - known as the ‘corrective movement’ - on 16 November 1970 for him to be propelled to the head of state.

After the final coup, al-Assad was elected president of the Republic in a rigged referendum in 1971 and remained in power until his death in June 2000, while keeping the ousted president, Nureddin al-Atasi, in prison for 23 years.

During those three bloody and grim decades, the country closed in on itself, leaving its few friendly or protective countries to a small core, mainly Russia and Iran. During this period, there was no hesitation in imposing barbarities such as a state of emergency, gagging the opposition and the press, and banning public demonstrations against the government and its policies.

On the dictator's death, his son Bashar Al-Assad - a shy-looking ophthalmologist and much more sensitive than his father - came to power through a referendum, held without opposition, thus establishing a North Korea-style hereditary dictatorship by assuming the same repressive powers and policies as his father.

Contrary to appearances, Bashar has been ruling Syria with an iron fist for 24 years and has not hesitated to violently suppress - even using chemical weapons in large quantities - a political-democratic revolt in 2011; a revolt that turned into one of the bloodiest and most fratricidal wars of the century, leading to the threat of direct US intervention, and forcing the emergence and global backing of the Chemical Weapons Organisation (CWO) for the first time in a real and significant conflict.

In any case, that event and others of lesser importance that have followed have meant that Syria has become a military chessboard where skirmishes and military actions of varying degrees have not ceased to exist. This fact is compounded by the variety and complexity of the peoples of different origins and beliefs that inhabit Syria. These peoples have many internal and external enemies and supporters, which undoubtedly gives rise to many skirmishes or clashes in the country.

Its main and almost only friends and regional allies, each of them guided by diverse or different interests and political, religious or geostrategic reasons (Russia, Iran and Hezbollah) have been keeping the autocratic regime on life support for many years, because they really benefited more from their alliances than the costs they incurred. It was also a way to put their common enemy, the US and its allies in the region, mainly Turkey and Israel, in check.

This support has been greatly diminished to the point of almost disappearing due to the evolution of the different current war scenarios (Ukraine and Israeli reactions to the attacks on its territory). There is no doubt that such high-intensity and prolonged activities have caused a great deal of wear and tear on each and every one of them.

It is therefore time to highlight the role and efforts of all the actors involved in each conflict against Syria's friends, and it is at this point that the role played by Turkey and Jordan in wearing down those who were unwavering supporters of al-Assad comes to the fore.

In the midst of this situation of military weakness of the regime, or a lack of real foresight, or as a result of nefarious intelligence on the part of both al-Assad and his main external supporters - with almost no one noticing - eleven days ago, on 27 November, a dazzling offensive began, carried out by almost unknown Islamists, which did not take long to conquer several cities in the northwest and centre of the country, controlled by the regime for more than fifty years.

Rebels, led by certain Islamists captained by a certain Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS) - a terrorist whose head has a rather high CIA price on his head - who brought down the main Syrian cities and military positions and on 8 December announced and televised their entry into Damascus, at the same time that Iran certified that Bashar Al-Assad left the country by plane, that the plane soon stopped launching its transponder trace while a sharp drop in level was noticed so as not to fly at high altitude, and thus avoid being shot down.

At the time of writing this little analysis, a curfew is in force over Damascus and the future of the country is uncertain, as is the size and quality of the repression that will undoubtedly be carried out, even if today most Syrians appear on the streets of the big cities brimming with joy, because these almost unknown Islamists do not have a very good reputation and some experts even believe that their reactions may be much harsher than those carried out on the civilian population in Afghanistan after their forced liberation from US and NATO protection.

It is not yet the time to analyse in depth and reach valid conclusions that will allow us to discover the causes of such a stunning defeat; whether it could have been due to the poor preparation of the regular forces, their exhaustion due to the fatigue of fighting for so many years in poor conditions, the lack of real military capacity of the Syrian regular forces, the lack of adequate intelligence or whether they have finally been sold by Russia and/or Iran to a better or less demanding bidder.

Time will tell, but it is clear that it seems impossible that a force, almost rabble, unquantified for the moment, equipped with little or no small calibre and range weaponry, without aviation, artillery or tanks in any number, was able to take the hardy and combative Syria in just eleven days.

Nevertheless, and it may just be a coincidence, I think we should not rule out Trump's possible influence in the shadows to favour or catalyse the disappearance of the traditional supporters of Al-Assad - to avoid greater evils in the future - by saying that he did not want to intervene in the conflict, that he was leaving them to their fate, while supporting Zelenski in Paris - at the reopening of Notre Dame - while wearing a gaudy yellow tie (coincidentally the colour of the jihadist rebels, the current masters of Syria), when he usually wears red.

If so, it could be a new way of intervening in conflicts or of favouring their closure at any price, using as a tool the antithesis of the Cid Campeador to win battles without intervening in them, before he was in his post, while the other won them, after he was dead.

In any case, we will have to be very expectant of the development of immediate events, because, without a doubt, everyone will be looking to relocate and for some it will not be easy, and Europe with its Mediterranean may suffer serious consequences or be splashed by riots or mass migrations.