3 days Ago
File photo: Taliban walk in front of a military airplane a day after the US troops withdrawal from Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul, Afghanistan. Rebel fighters stand guard next to a heavy weapon placed at Abbasiyyin Square, after rebels seized the capital and ousted Syria's Bashar al-Assad, in Damascus, Syria. A rebel fighter holds his weapon as he stands in front of a military vehicle in Menagh, north of Aleppo, Syria.
File photo: Taliban walk in front of a military airplane a day after the US troops withdrawal from Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul, Afghanistan. Rebel fighters stand guard next to a heavy weapon placed at Abbasiyyin Square, after rebels seized the capital and ousted Syria's Bashar al-Assad, in Damascus, Syria. A rebel fighter holds his weapon as he stands in front of a military vehicle in Menagh, north of Aleppo, Syria.
File photo: Taliban walk in front of a military airplane a day after the US troops withdrawal from Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul, Afghanistan. 1 2 3 We all remember the made-for-TV images of the Taliban parading through the streets of Kabu l, flaunting US-made weapons and driving American military vehicles abandoned during the chaotic withdrawal in 2021. These scenes not only symbolized the end of a two-decade military campaign but also highlighted the unintended consequences of leaving behind vast quantities of advanced weaponry.
Now, a similar scenario may unfold in Syria, as the collapse of Bashar al-Assad 's regime raises concerns that Russian-supplied military equipment could fall into the hands of insurgent groups, mirroring Afghanistan’s aftermath. Reports indicate that Syrian rebel forces, particularly Hayat Tahrir al-Sham ( HTS ), have seized significant stockpiles of arms originally provided by Moscow to support Assad’s military efforts. These include tanks, artillery, and advanced missile systems.
Why it matters US weapons have empowered the Taliban and helped solidified their rule in Afghanistan. It has also expanded Taliban's capacity to project power. US weapons in Afghanistan may resurface in global terror networks, posing risks to US interests and allies.
In fact, some US weapons have reportedly resurfaced even in Jammu and Kashmir. Russian arms in Syria, captured by rebel groups, could bolster insurgent capabilities and destabilize the Middle East. Zoom in: US in Afghanistan As per reports, When the US withdrew from Afghanistan in August 2021, it left behind $7 billion worth of military equipment.
This trove included 250,000 rifles, 95 drones, over 23,800 Humvees, and nearly 900 combat vehicles, much of which fell into Taliban hands. The withdrawal from Afghanistan marked the end of two decades of US involvement. As the Taliban swiftly took control of the country, they inherited a significant portion of the US military equipment intended for the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces (ANDSF).
Key details include: Quantity : The $7 billion figure represents just a fraction of the $83 billion in total security assistance provided by the US to Afghanistan since 2001. Among the items left behind were small arms, heavy vehicles, communications equipment, and aviation platforms, though much of it was considered older or second-tier gear. Operational challenges: A Department of Defense report noted that much of the equipment required specialized maintenance that the Taliban lacks the expertise to provide.
However, smaller items like rifles and mortars can be easily used or sold, increasing the risk of proliferation. The strategic impact of these losses is still unfolding. While the US mitigated risks by retrograding or destroying its most advanced systems, the Taliban’s acquisition of such a large arsenal poses long-term security risks for the region.
Zoom in: Russia in Syria Russia’s losses in Syria differ from those of the US in Afghanistan, as they are largely tied to battlefield attrition rather than a strategic withdrawal. According to a Foreign Policy report, the Russo-Syrian arms relationship originated during the Cold War, when the Soviet Union leveraged its extensive military-industrial complex to supply aircraft, tanks, artillery, and missiles to allied states worldwide. According to data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, Soviet weapons constituted 94 percent of Syria’s total arms imports between 1950 and 1991.
Syria suffered substantial losses of military equipment during the 1967 and 1973 Arab-Israeli wars. Despite this, from 1975 to 1991, the Soviet Union resupplied Hafez al-Assad’s forces, providing or selling Syria 20 bombers, 250 fighter aircraft, 117 helicopters, 756 self-propelled guns, 2,400 infantry fighting vehicles, 2,550 tanks, over 7,500 anti-tank missiles, and more than 13,000 surface-to-air missiles. As the Syrian civil war began in 2011, the Syrian Air Force maintained a fleet of roughly 700 fixed and rotary-wing aircraft at varying states of readiness.
Its ground forces were equipped with around 5,000 tanks, 4,000 armored vehicles, 3,400 artillery units, 2,600 anti-tank weapons, and 600 reconnaissance vehicles, the FP report said. Battlefield captures : Rebel groups, particularly HTS, captured Russian-supplied weapons as they overran Assad regime positions. These included 150 tanks, 69 infantry fighting vehicles, 64 multiple rocket launchers, and 75 artillery pieces.
Airstrikes: Israeli airstrikes targeting Syrian military depots further degraded these stockpiles, reportedly destroying up to 70-80% of the Assad regime’s military capabilities in recent strikes. This included fighter jets, tanks, and strategic missiles. Russian evacuations: Amidst shifting priorities, Russia has begun relocating some advanced weaponry, including S-400 air defense systems, from Syria to other conflict zones like Libya, highlighting resource constraints, a Wall Street Journal report said.
Quantity vs quality The US losses in Afghanistan were massive in volume but mostly involved older, less sophisticated weapons tailored for counterinsurgency operations. Russia, on the other hand, lost more advanced, high-value equipment in Syria, including tanks, aircraft, and missile systems, which directly impact its military readiness and operational capabilities. Strategic implications For the US, the losses primarily reflect a failure to ensure oversight and accountability over weapons supplied to the ANDSF.
While the immediate impact is limited, the long-term risk lies in the proliferation of these arms. For Russia, the losses in Syria underscore the vulnerabilities of its military engagements abroad, particularly as it grapples with resource constraints exacerbated by its conflict in Ukraine. What’s next As per the WSJ report, the Syrian bases have been central to Moscow's power projection in the Middle East and Africa, acting as a hub for deploying troops, mercenaries, and arms.
The naval base in Tartus has served as the Russian navy’s only replenishment and repair facility in the Mediterranean. Currently, Russia seems to be shifting focus to another longtime ally, Libya, as a means to maintain regional influence and support a naval presence in the area, which hosts bases and warships belonging to the US and other North Atlantic Treaty Organization members. A US official stated that it remains uncertain whether the weapons systems, including the S-400 components, will remain in Libya or be transported back to Russia, the WSJ report said.
Ahmad al-Sharaa , who leads HTS and is known as Mohammed al-Golani , has pledged to form an inclusive government and protect minorities in the wake of their victory. However, US secretary of state Antony Blinken, speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations, cautioned the group against repeating the Taliban’s mistakes in Afghanistan, where initial promises of moderation gave way to oppressive policies and global isolation. Blinken urged HTS to adopt a non-sectarian approach and prioritize minority protection, counter-terrorism, and dismantling chemical weapons to gain international legitimacy.
The bottom line While the US lost more in sheer numbers and monetary value in Afghanistan, Russia’s losses in Syria involved higher-value strategic assets that directly impacted its military capabilities. Both scenarios reveal the unintended consequences of extended military engagements, underscoring the challenges of maintaining control over vast arsenals in unstable regions. (With inputs from agencies).
