As of the morning of Tuesday, December 10, the Israeli military had advanced to within 20 kilometers of Damascus. During this time, it occupied numerous villages, seized control of Mount Hermon and the Quneitra governorate, and expanded towards Daraa. In addition, Israel carried out over 300 airstrikes, destroying Syrian aircraft, ships, missile systems, and research facilities.
Israeli media has been explicit about two major strategic plans for Syria. The first involves establishing a buffer zone within Syrian territory equipped with radar and early-warning systems, cutting off geographic connections between Syria and southern Lebanon. The second aims at forging ties with various Syrian factions—ethnic or sectarian groups, specifically Kurds, Druze, and armed opposition forces in southern Syria—to ensure Israeli influence inside the country. In some cases, these plans include aspirations to form local militia-like forces akin to the South Lebanon Army, acting as a first line of defense and sowing divisions within Syrian society.
Strategic Expansion and Land Claims
Israeli narratives now also include claims over tens of thousands of dunams within Syrian territory, alleging that these lands were purchased by Baron Edmond James de Rothschild during the Ottoman era for the Jewish Agency. This highlights how Israeli settlement projects in the Arab region remain on hold, awaiting favorable conditions. This reminds us of the killing of Israeli archaeologist Ze’ev Erlich (71 years old) in southern Lebanon last November. Erlich had joined the Israeli military to excavate anything that could serve as a historical pretext for legitimizing Israeli settlements in southern Lebanon.
In reality, we face two dimensions: ongoing incursions, bombings, and destruction, and Israeli ambitions, which may seem like speculative rhetoric but are not merely journalistic chatter. For Israel, such ambitions are often actionable, involving contact with Syrian factions. Historically, Israeli policy has extended well beyond its immediate geographic sphere, and within its closer surroundings, it consistently works to ensure its security, anticipate future shifts, and strengthen its position by exploiting opportunities and enhancing its defense and offensive capabilities.
Syrian Leadership and Missed Opportunities
Amidst these developments, people are preoccupied with the current situation, whether regarding the Assad regime, which, instead of relying on its people to confront Israel, chose to displace millions of its citizens and destroy their cities rather than pursue a national reconciliation that could preserve the country. This approach neither preserved Assad’s rule nor protected the nation or its resources. Additionally, Assad did not consider safeguarding his military assets or transferring them to regional allies.
On the other hand, the new opposition leadership raises questions about its stance toward Israeli incursions into Syrian territory and ongoing attacks on the nation’s resources. At a minimum, they could appeal to the international community, using the interim government to protest Israeli aggression through the United Nations.
The Broader Israeli Strategy
What is more critical than these debates is understanding Israel’s behavior toward the Arab world and the transformations within it. Israel does not allow any Arab country to stabilize without extracting guarantees. All theories of patience and strategic waiting collapse under Israel’s proactive measures. Stability in the region is conditional upon Israeli superiority, which often involves undermining Arab dignity and sovereignty. Consequently, the Palestinian cause becomes a pan-Arab issue—not merely a Palestinian one—extending to every Arab country.
Regardless of regional arrangements concerning the Syrian scene, it is clear that Syria currently lacks the capacity to confront Israeli aggression. Moreover, groups like Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham, listed as terrorist organizations, provide Israel with a pretext to expand its aggression. The ceasefire on the Syrian front, based on a disengagement agreement rather than a peace treaty, also allows Israel to act as though it is perpetually at war.
Recognizing Israel’s agenda to solidify its dominance over neighboring states must become a priority for any new governing force, especially one emerging in opposition to decades of prior rule.
Undermining Neighboring States
Israel’s desired superiority primarily aims to enforce military, economic, and social fragility on neighboring states. In certain instances, Israel seeks explicit or implicit alliances with local factions based on sectarian or ethnic divisions. This push toward fragmentation serves Israel’s interests not only by weakening Arab states but also by normalizing its sectarian character in the region.
To ensure its strategic depth, Israel alternates between drawing countries into the Abraham Accords, creating strategic footholds within other nations, or establishing spheres of influence through direct military action, known as the “battle between wars.” In the cases of Syria and Lebanon, this translates into what Israel calls “mowing the grass,” a tactic frequently used in the West Bank. Such actions underscore the necessity of keeping the Israeli issue at the forefront of regional awareness and preparedness.
