Why Didn’t Israel Bomb the Presidential Palace or Assassinate Syria’s New Leader?

Since President Ahmad Al-Shar’ assumed leadership in Syria, Israeli aggression against Syrian territory has continued unabated. Despite Damascus making it clear—on several occasions—that it has no intention of launching hostilities against the Zionist entity and is focused solely on internal reconstruction, Tel Aviv persists in its airstrikes.

The Zionist regime has cited various pretexts for its attacks: sometimes claiming to protect its northern borders from advancing Syrian forces, other times under the excuse of dismantling remnants of the former regime’s military capabilities, or even in the name of protecting the Druze minority.

Most recently, the Israeli military struck near the Republican Palace—a significant escalation that raises a critical question:

If Israeli missiles can reach the presidential palace, why didn’t they bomb it directly or assassinate Ahmad Al-Shar’?

Some analysts argue that Israel hasn’t done so due to lack of international cover. In Gaza, Western powers justified the bombardment by invoking the October 7 Hamas operation. But in Syria’s case, where the military has not fired a single bullet toward Israel, there’s no narrative to legitimise such an act on the global stage.

The Real Reason? Fear of Uncontrollable Consequences

However, this view may overlook a crucial factor: the nature of tyranny itself. The same regime that ruthlessly flattens Gaza, violates international law, and ignores UN resolutions with U.S. impunity would likely have no moral qualms about assassinating a Syrian head of state—if it served its interests.

So why hasn’t it?

The answer may lie in the basic law of survival. Even the weakest creature fights to the death when cornered. A direct strike on the Syrian presidency would obliterate the structure of statehood and force Syrians—regardless of political alignment—into existential resistance.

It would revive dormant armed factions that once opposed Bashar’s regime and now lie absorbed into the state. The result? A grassroots insurgency not against a domestic tyrant but against a foreign occupying enemy.

This would invite regional chaos. Fighters from beyond Syria’s borders would flood in under the banner of sacred jihad, threatening not just Israel but the broader balance of power. Arab regimes, long paralysed by diplomacy and international dependency, would find themselves cornered by public outrage. Meanwhile, neither the U.S. nor the UN—both proven incapable of restraining Israel—would be prepared to contain such a backlash.

A Calculated Balance: Weak Syria Over Collapsed Syria

During the previous regime, Israel’s airstrikes mostly targeted Iranian Revolutionary Guard bases or supply routes to Hezbollah. Tel Aviv made it clear: Assad’s regime posed no real threat, even with chemical weapons in its arsenal. Netanyahu himself stated that Bashar’s survival served Israel’s interests.

But today, Syria is led by a government with Islamic roots and aspirations for sovereignty and justice. The Zionist strategy has shifted toward controlled destabilisation—maintaining Syria as a fractured, weak state rather than destroying it entirely.

Israel’s broader plan includes:

• • Supporting Kurdish autonomy to prevent Syrian unity

• • Encouraging a Druze statelet in the south, exploiting Druze citizens inside Israel to influence the Syrian Druze

• • Using the excuse of “minority protection” to justify future intervention

Why the Palace Remains Untouched—for Now

Another key deterrent is Turkey. Ankara supports Syria’s new leadership to prevent a Kurdish entity along its borders and ensure regional stability. If Israel were to target the Syrian presidency directly, Turkey would interpret it as a direct threat to its national security.

Though Turkey currently prefers to focus on economic recovery and avoid confrontation, a strike on Syria’s political core would trigger a dramatic policy shift—and Israel knows it.

Thus, for now, Israel chooses to maintain a fragile Syria, one fragmented by sectarianism, plagued by insecurity, but not yet provoked into total collapse.

Syria’s Struggle: Between Internal Reconstruction and Zionist Provocation

President Ahmad Al-Shar’s government is engaged in a delicate process: rebuilding the nation, unifying its territories, and defending against attempts at partition—all while absorbing constant Israeli provocations without escalation.

Syria knows that a direct military confrontation with Israel is premature and unwise, but it also knows that every act of patience is calculated, and every strike endured builds the moral and political ground for the day when resistance is no longer an option, but a duty.

“And Allah has full power and control over His affairs, but most of mankind know not.”

— Surah Yusuf (12:21)