Why Israel’s 400+ Strikes on Syria Signal a Dangerous Turning Point
Israel’s recent escalation in Syria, marked by over 400 strikes since the fall of Bashar al-Assad, has raised alarms worldwide. After al-Assad fled to Russia, Israel intensified its aggression, including incursions into the UN-administered buffer zone established in 1974. The attacks have targeted military facilities such as weapon warehouses, ammunition depots, and research centers, along with incursions near Syria’s capital. Despite international protests, Israel defends these actions as necessary for its security. However, this rationale raises questions about Israel’s true intentions in Syria.
For years, Israel has claimed that its operations in Syria aim to counter Iranian military influence. However, Iran denies having any forces in Syria, shifting Israel’s justification to eliminating Syrian military infrastructure. The focus has now turned to preventing weapons from reaching groups like Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the opposition force that played a pivotal role in al-Assad’s downfall. This evolving narrative has led to widespread speculation about whether Israel’s actions serve a larger geopolitical agenda rather than mere self-defense.
The strategic significance of the Golan Heights is central to Israel’s military operations. Since 1974, this region has been a demilitarized zone under a UN-brokered ceasefire. However, Israel occupies two-thirds of the area and has now deployed military units into the buffer zone. Reports of Israeli tanks advancing into Qatana, just 10 kilometers from Damascus, have further heightened tensions. While Israel denies these incursions, such actions suggest an expanding military footprint aimed at consolidating territorial gains.
Israel’s strikes have also targeted key regions beyond the Golan Heights. Locations like Al Mayadin in the east, Tartous and Masyaf in the northwest, and the Khalkhalah military airport in the south have faced intense bombardment. These attacks signal a broader strategy to neutralize Syria’s military capabilities. Israeli leaders argue that these strikes prevent weapons, including chemical arms and long-range rockets, from falling into the hands of extremists. However, critics argue that such justifications mask a more aggressive regional policy.
Prominent Israeli figures have hinted at potential long-term goals in Syria. Benny Gantz, leader of the National Unity party, described the situation as a “historic opportunity” to reshape relations with Syria’s Druze, Kurds, and other minority groups. Some experts suggest that Israel envisions a fragmented Syria, divided into smaller cantons open to external alliances. This vision reflects broader ambitions to influence the Middle East’s geopolitical landscape, raising concerns about the implications for regional stability.
Israel’s actions in Syria come amid its ongoing conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon, amplifying the perception of an aggressive foreign policy. While Israeli leaders claim these operations are precautionary measures, the lack of transparency fuels suspicions about ulterior motives. As Syria transitions from decades of dynastic rule, the international community faces critical questions about the role Israel seeks to play in shaping its neighbor’s future. The stakes are high, and the consequences of miscalculation could reverberate far beyond the region.
