At a recent military ceremony in Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a provocative statement about the new Syrian government, outlining his nation’s strategy since the fall of the Assad government. His speech emphasized three key points.
Firstly, Netanyahu said Israel would not permit the new Syrian government to deploy forces south of Damascus, calling for the “full demilitarization” of that area – specifically Quneitra, Daraa and Sweida provinces.
Secondly, Netanyahu positioned Israel as a protector of the minority Druze community, aligning with Defense Minister Israel Katz’s recent statements about strengthening ties with “friendly populations” in southern Syria.
Thirdly, Netanyahu reiterated Israel’s commitment to occupying Syrian lands, asserting that Israeli forces would remain “indefinitely” in the buffer zone and Mount Hermon area.
This stance reinforces Israel’s ongoing agenda of territorial expansion and occupation, particularly in the Golan Heights. Netanyahu’s overarching goal appears to be the systematic weakening and fragmentation of Syria, ensuring it remains under Israeli occupation, devoid of a central government, and mired in sectarian conflict.
This environment of “controlled chaos” would prevent Syria’s recovery after more than a decade of war, turn it into a failed state, and empower Israel under the pretext of minimizing any potential threats from the new Syria.
Fragmenting Syria
This approach is not new. It has been a consistent element of Israeli policy since the state’s establishment, applied in various contexts and regions, including Lebanon.
Demilitarizing the area south of Damascus would hinder the Syrian government’s authority, potentially leading to a weakened state presence. This could enable the formation of Israeli-backed local militias pushing for a “state within a state”.
Israel’s strategy also aims to encourage other minority groups in northern Syria to challenge the Syrian government, thus fragmenting the country, even if only in a de-facto manner.
The explicit mention of the Druze community reflects Israel’s “alliance of minorities” doctrine, which seeks to forge alliances with minority groups in the region against the Sunni majority. This divide-and-rule policy fosters animosity, suspicion and sectarianism, using minorities as leverage to provoke violent responses from the majority.
Israel has previously employed this strategy in Lebanon, collaborating with the Christian and Shia communities. It is now attempting to do the same with Syria’s Druze, Kurds and Alawites. But this approach is destructive and counterproductive, ultimately harming both the minorities involved and those who seek to manipulate them.
Netanyahu’s demand for the demilitarization of southern Syria, coupled with Israel’s surge of air strikes on Syrian military positions, has not elicited a response from western countries or the broader international community. This lack of reaction is interpreted by Netanyahu as a green light to continue such policies.
From the new Syrian government, Israel’s provocative and aggressive actions have spurred a multifaceted response. Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa [aka Jolani] has balanced restraint with defiance, an approach shaped by several critical factors, including Syria’s weakened military, economic and political position; his need to maintain legitimacy as a leader, while extending state control to all Syrian territories; and the process of rebuilding the nation.
