Israel’s strategic shift in Syria: Redrawing the map

Syria has witnessed remarkable developments in recent days, with Israel taking a new approach that goes beyond traditional security arrangements in border regions. This shift signals significant strategic transformations on the horizon.

Following the events of October 7, Israel adopted what can be termed a strategy of “redrawing the security geography.” At its core, this involved dismantling the geographical frontlines on Israel’s borders in response to Iran’s “Unity of Fronts” doctrine, which Tehran has pursued in recent years. This explains Israel’s direct moves to reshape the surrounding geography with each escalation of the conflict.

Over the past few weeks, Israel has been altering Syria’s geographical reality under the pretext of security needs, controlling areas like Mount Hermon and the Golan Heights, and striking Syria’s military infrastructure to prevent any future military use of its territory.

However, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s latest statements go beyond securing geographical control. He has declared that Israel will not withdraw from buffer zones and has insisted on the demilitarization of southern Syria, rejecting the presence of any armed groups in the provinces of Daraa, Suwayda, Quneitra, and the Golan Heights, extending to areas south of Damascus and its outskirts.

Another striking development is Netanyahu’s reference to the Druze community in Syria and his warning to Damascus against endangering the Druze population in the south. This suggests a deeper Israeli engagement in Syria, shifting from merely redrawing the geographic map to actively reshaping Syria’s political landscape. 

This evolving situation reopens the trajectory of Syria entirely. Ahmad al-Shar’a, also known as “al-Jolani,” who has been striving to position himself as Syria’s leader by navigating Arab and regional dynamics, now faces an unprecedented challenge. His authority is being put to the test at a critical time as he seeks to consolidate his influence over Syria’s political and geographical components. 

Meanwhile, his international recognition remains uncertain, with stalled efforts to lift sanctions or gain political credibility, particularly amid rising separatist tendencies across various Syrian factions. On the other hand, the US stance remains unclear, though it appears less inclined to fully adopt the approach of the previous American administration. 

Al-Shar’a’s options are increasingly limited, especially as the Trump administration aligns closely with Israeli policies, leaving Washington in control of the sanctions issue. This suggests that the new Syrian leadership’s room to manoeuvre may be extremely narrow, making acceptance of the emerging reality inevitable. Israel’s strategic moves come at a time when regional power balances are shifting, marked by Iran’s retreat following setbacks to its proxy networks and the absence of strong regional alliances, including Turkey.

Given this landscape, adapting to the new reality appears to be al-Jolani’s only viable course of action. Reaching an understanding with Syrian factions, accepting autonomy models, and aligning with U.S. preferences might ultimately push him toward seeking normalization with Israel. In the long run, this could lead to his pursuit of a peace agreement and potential integration into the Abraham Accords as a means to gain Washington’s acceptance, secure international legitimacy, and ultimately lift sanctions on “New Syria.”

The region’s escalation is not confined to Syria alone. The West Bank is witnessing unprecedented developments, with on-the-ground changes accelerating, including the dismantling of refugee camps and the forced displacement of residents. The effort to isolate Jerusalem from the West Bank and consolidate control over the city is also intensifying. Meanwhile, delays in implementing the second phase of the Gaza agreement could trigger further escalation. However, the broader concern is that the conflict is no longer solely about military objectives; rather, it has entered a new phase where security justifications are being used to impose political realities and reshape the region’s future.