Enab Baladi – Khaled al-Jeratli
The joy of Syrians overthrowing Bashar al-Assad’s regime was short-lived, as Israel moved under the pretext of security concerns regarding changes in Syria, targeting military bases, weapon depots, and airports of the former regime’s army across various Syrian provinces, coinciding with an ongoing ground incursion in the south.
Despite repeated Israeli statements that its army had not exited the buffer zone (the demilitarized zone), movements of Israeli vehicles were spotted in the western countryside of Daraa, and others in Mount Hermon, which is outside the buffer zone.
At the same time, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that the Israeli forces that occupied parts of Syria recently would remain there indefinitely.
The American news agency Associated Press quoted Netanyahu, saying that Israel plans to stay for a while in Mount Hermon, “until another arrangement is reached that guarantees Israel’s security.”
Netanyahu had expressed interest in establishing relations with the “new regime” in Syria just days after the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Damascus.
Where did Israel enter?
On December 11, just three days after the Assad regime’s downfall, the Israeli army clarified the distribution and deployment of its forces in southern Syria.
The spokesperson for the Israeli army to the Arab media, Avichay Adraee, noted that four combat divisions comprising infantry, commando, engineering, armored units, and the Yahalom (IDF combat engineering corps) were actively performing a proactive front-line defense mission led by Division 210, which is deployed in Syria.
Adraee added via “X” that the forces of Combat Brigade 474 continue their operations at control points within the buffer zone, working against “threats along the border line and targeted terrorist objectives.”
Adraee also mentioned that during sweep operations, the Israeli army discovered several unused Syrian tanks and confiscated them.
For his part, the Chief of Staff of the Israeli army stated, “We do not interfere in what happens in Syria. We are here to prevent the positioning of terrorist elements in the region.”
He continued, “I believe that the preparations along the border, from Mount Hermon to the point where the Israeli-Syrian-Jordanian borders meet, are correct and good preparations.”
While the Israeli movements along the Syrian border are shrouded in ambiguity, Israeli army radio reported a military source as saying that controlling the buffer zone in Syria is a “temporary” operation following “militia threats.”
What does Israel want?
The relationship between Israel and the previous Syrian regime has always been superficially tense, but it did not appear so when Israel launched its military operations in Lebanon against the regime’s ally, Hezbollah.
Since October 7, 2023, when the Al-Aqsa Flood operation broke out in Palestine, Israel has adopted a strategy of direct attack and imposing reality by force, as it has done in Gaza, Lebanon, and now Syria, according to military affairs researcher at the Harmoon Center for Contemporary Studies, Nawar Shaaban.
Shaaban added that what Israel has done is not only related to the fall of the Syrian regime but also concerns securing its borders, among other issues. However, its strategy relies on shifting from “surgical strike” to “direct assault.”
The researcher stated that Israel has entered Syria from four axes: the first at Khan Arnabah and the city of al-Baath in the Quneitra province, the second in the southern countryside of the province, along with two significant axes, which are the summit of Mount Hermon and Beit Jinn in the western countryside of Damascus.
Israel has expanded its movements southward, reaching the Saida al-Golan area located at the triangular border between Jordan, Syria, and the occupied Syrian Golan. This approach reflects, according to Shaaban, that there is no intention to withdraw from Israel, despite Israeli officials talking about a temporary period.
Israel treats the southern Syrian region solely from the perspective of its security interests, meaning it does not care about agreements or what is happening practically inside Syria, according to the researcher.
Al-Sharaa: No justification for Israeli movements
Enab Baladi has repeatedly contacted the public relations office of the Military Operations Administration to obtain a comment on its position regarding Israeli movements and the options available to stop these movements, but received no answers up to the time of publishing this news.
The commander of the Military Operations Administration, Ahmed al-Sharaa (Abu Mohammad al-Jolani), stated that Israel’s justifications have ended, asserting that there are no justifications for foreign intervention in Syria now after the factions ended Iran’s presence in the country.
Al-Sharaa explained that the current situation does not allow for entering any new conflicts, indicating that the Israelis have clearly crossed engagement lines in Syria, which threatens an unjustified escalation in the region.
Meanwhile, the Chief of the General Staff of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), Herzi Halevi, responded to al-Sharaa’s statements, asserting that Israel focuses on its security.
Halevi stated that Israel focuses on its security and has no intention to intervene in Syria, rejecting al-Sharaa’s statements and considering that the Israeli army is focused on securing the occupied Golan from “extremist threats,” and that Israel does not interfere in what happens within Syria nor intends to govern it, according to what was reported by the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth.
Syria has no options
When asked about the available options to counter the Israeli movements in southern Syria, Ahmed al-Sharaa told the British BBC news network that he would confront these movements through diplomatic channels and international councils.
He added that Syria is a weary state and cannot fight today.
At the same time, Arab condemnations of the Israeli movements in southern Syria have poured in since they began, without any change on the ground.
The researcher at the Century International Research and Policy Institute, Sam Heller, stated to Enab Baladi, “It seems that the Syrian opposition does not have many good options, and it is likely that it will not be able to engage in more than symbolic resistance.”
He added that even symbolic resistance could lead to a “devastating Israeli retaliation.”
As much as Israel targeted Syria before December 8, it now appears to be entirely unrestrained, perhaps due to the diminished Russian footprint in the country, and at the same time, the United States cannot be relied upon to rein in Israel, according to the researcher.
Regarding the Israeli strikes, Heller anticipated that Israel would exhaust its stock of targets in Syria and then cease its airstrikes.
For his part, researcher at the Harmoon Center Nawar Shaaban believes that the new government in Syria has no capability to move against Israel, except for political and diplomatic activity.
At the beginning of this year, Russian observation points spread in southern Syria, aimed at regulating the activities of Iranian-aligned groups in the area.
The Russian Ministry of Defense announced on January 3, two new points in the occupied Syrian Golan to monitor the ceasefire between Syria and Israel.
The Deputy Head of the Russian Reconciliation Center for Syria (affiliated with the Russian Defense Ministry), Admiral Vadim Kolet, stated that his country had established two military points in southern Syria in light of the rising frequency of provocations in the demilitarized zone.
According to a report by the Russian TASS news agency, the new points were occupied by units of the Russian military police to “monitor the ceasefire.”
Today, the fate of Russian forces in southern Syria is unknown, but it is likely they have withdrawn toward the Russian military airbase in Latakia province on the Syrian coast.