The Ftinas have no bearing upon hampering the overall goals. In the later periods, such as the 9th century, the Abbasid were still primarily holding the dominant hand in the region of Armenia until 864-869, when Umar al-Aqta was ambushed and killed. Prior to this point, the 837-839 invasion of Anatolia by Caliph al-Mu'tasim was a total success, both in the pitched battles strategic goals and siege battles. The battle of Anzen saw Emperor Theophilos defeated by al-Afshin and the weakening of the alliance between Byzantium and the Khurramiyyah (the defeat of Theophilos caused a rift between the two allies) and al-Mu'tasim himself captured Amorium and sacked the city bringing to Samarra thousands of slaves that year. Byzantium in the next 20 years, would be raided consistently by Umar al-Aqta who was gifted authority of the Emirate of Malatya and led his own band of Arab mujahadeen to raid, pillage and attack the Byzantine ruled Anatolia. This is long after the major fitnas, though Byzantium was able to recover from this setback and would gain the upperhand in 863- (death of Umar al-Aqta and fall of Malatya soon after) 870, the Islamic Caliphate did not need to have to destroy the Byzantine state this early, the Abbasid need only gain more success than what it had in otl, even the survival of Umar al-Aqta means Basil I has a much more difficult situation in his eastern regions than otl.