Regional armed organizations under the geopolitical framework

Groups such as Hayʼat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), Houthi militants, Al-Qaeda, and the Taliban are dynamic and complex armed organizations with significant geopolitical implications. After thorough analysis, I have chosen to refer to them as "regional armed organizations" to indicate their importance in global geopolitics, rather than focusing solely on the organizations themselves. While these groups have existed for years, often under various names and structures, recent developments in regions like Syria have introduced new challenges that require a nuanced understanding, writes Kung Chan, the founder of ANBOUND.

The Assad regime, spanning from the era of Hafez al-Assad to Bashar al-Assad, with its 50-year history in Syria, formidable armored forces, a brutal intelligence apparatus, and the backing of Russia’s air and naval power, fell swiftly within 24 hours to HTS. This clearly shows the increasing capacity of regional armed organizations to influence outcomes on the global stage.

To provide another example, consider the Taliban’s recent actions in Afghanistan. Despite being backed by the world’s most powerful nation, the Afghan government was swiftly overthrown by the Taliban, often before the US State Department could react. Hamas similarly illustrates the growing power of such organizations.

Thus, "regional armed organizations" may not adhere to traditional notions of nation-states or defined borders. However, they exert significant influence through controlled territories, popular support, ideologies, and structured organizations. These elements enable them to shape geopolitical dynamics in profound ways.

In an increasingly fragmented global landscape, traditional powers like the U.S., Russia, and China have seen their relative influence diminish, particularly due to their standoff against one another. This has created new spaces conducive to the rise of regional armed organizations. Hence, it is becoming evident that major powers will soon recognize the importance of leveraging these organizations for geopolitical success. For instance, Iran supports the Houthi militants in the Red Sea region, Turkey has its own regional groups, the U.S. backs Kurdish forces along Turkey's border, and China maintains its own similar entities.

The future of global geopolitics will depend on how major powers navigate and utilize regional armed organizations in conflict. While global powers are locked in mutual confrontation, it is these organizations that are capable of generating global upheaval. Their influence is already being felt across the globe, and the next three decades of geopolitics will depend on which nations can effectively leverage them.

This requires not only the expertise of intelligence and geopolitical theorists but also the participation of individuals capable of sparking the emergence of new regional armed organizations. These players can ignite existing conflicts, achieving geopolitical outcomes that even major powers like the US have failed to secure over the past 80 years, as demonstrated by figures like Abu Mohammad al-Julani in Syria or the Houthi militants in Yemen. These organizations are often more effective than many realize.

The direction of global geopolitics is increasingly shifting away from traditional powers and towards the margins. Regional armed organizations are poised to become more significant tools in international relations than nuclear weapons. Israel and Russia are already adept at utilizing them, while the U.S. and China remain constrained by outdated thinking and domestic political challenges.

Share this article: