A/HRC/24/46 main lines of communication in Aleppo and Idlib. They disrupted supply lines linking armed groups to their networks across the borders. 26. Government forces continued to rely on heavy and often indiscriminate firepower to target areas they were unwilling or unable to recapture through ground operations. A variety of fire assets, including missiles, jet fighters and artillery, were systematically employed against restive localities to prevent a return to normality under armed group control and to sanction the local population. 27. Battle-hardened and growing accustomed to fighting an insurgency, government forces benefited from wide logistical support and personnel provided by allies, including the deployment of military advisers. The army was invigorated by the increased support of the National Defence Forces 3 and by the involvement of foreign irregular forces, in particular Hizbullah. These regenerated combat power, replacing losses through deaths, defections and the increasingly difficult recruitment of new troops. 28. Defections continued to spare the core of military and security forces and steadily declined, even among the less -trusted units. 2. Anti-government armed groups 29. Anti-government armed groups reinforced their control over large swathes of the northern and eastern governorates, but failed to hold key positions in Homs and Damascus. Persistent divisions and lack of logistical support seriously limited their operational capacity to face the latest offensives of government forces. 30. A number of diverse and initially profoundly divided insurgent groups have evolved into a more organized force. Alliances operated across several fronts, with increasing collaboration among groups. They failed, however, to unify their structures under a coherent command owing to their divergent objectives and resources. The efforts of the Supreme Joint Military Command Council were undermined by its inability to centralize logistical support and to integrate existing command networks. More recently, discord grew among groups with different loyalties, occasionally leading to confrontation over areas and resources. 31. The fluctuating and erratic support provided by a number of countries and wealthy individuals to the armed groups was sufficient to escalate hostilities, but is unlikely to fundamentally determine the course of the conflict. Support mainly benefited the armed groups operating along the borders. Those positioned in central areas recently lost control of their supply lines. 32. Anti-government armed groups were equipped mainly with small arms and light weapons, although they occasionally increased their use of anti-tank and anti-aircraft systems. They also employed mortars and artillery guns to target military and security positions, including those within residential areas. 33. Despite efforts to limit the extremists’ influence in opposition circles, the radicalization of anti-government fighters continued. Alongside a growing number of foreign fighters, the discipline and operational abilities of radical fighters, combined with better access to reliable sponsors, allowed them to outmatch the fractious moderate groups. The most radical, such as Jabhat Al-Nusra and the Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham (ISIS), developed their own strongholds in the north. ISIS subsumed the Islamic State of Iraq, a group which, with Al-Nusra, is on the sanctions list maintained by the Security Council Committee pursuant to resolution 1267 (1999). 3 6 A/HRC/23/58, para. 22.