It is clear that the current balance of power does not allow for any one party to triumph. At the same time, this situation cannot lead to a realistic formula for peace because of the nature of the conflicting forces.

Given that the north and north-east of Syria are considered to be the country’s bread basket and that the burning fields in Iraq are situated in fertile Mesopotamia, this may be just the beginning of a much larger disaster.

Today, life is still difficult in many respects. Water is supplied from a place called Ain Dhikr to the north, but we still have no electricity and must continue to use solar panels to generate power for the time being. The JKBW’s presence also meant that some houses and other buildings were booby-trapped with explosives. Like other areas in Syria, we have been impacted by the fuel crisis caused by American sanctions.

Of these different trends, the ‘mainstream’ reaction to the group’s defeat is the easiest to explain. It is also the least interesting since it follows the same line as much conventional analysis: that is, stressing that IS will ‘remain’ (Arabic: baqiya), and that the loss of territory does not mean the true end of the caliphate. This is a line that IS’ propaganda has promoted for some time.

This is particularly scary for Europeans states since they may not have enough evidence to incriminate every single returnee. To avoid the risk, countries are opting to strip their nationals of their citizenship, sparking uproar and debate among rights activists and policymakers.

AQ supporters assert that HTS’ leaders disobeyed Zawahiri and undertook steps without appropriate consultation. For example, prior to the formation of HTS in January 2017, Jabhat al-Nusra had rebranded itself as Jabhat Fatah al-Sham in July 2016, which was presented to the media as some kind of breaks with AQ.

The Israeli-Iranian conflict visibly is no longer ‘cold’, with the two countries exchanging direct blows over Iran’s efforts to establish a permanent military presence in Syria. The recent exchange of fire reflects a signalling of seriousness by both Israel and Iran. Israel signals that it would remain assertive even after the withdrawal announcement. Iran signals that it will not tolerate Israeli strikes within Syria and that it will fire at Israel in such cases.