Al Jazeera net: Israel is pushing Syria towards one of two fates

Qatari, al Jazeera network website, published analytics talks about Israel’s strategy toward Syria, as middle east region is currently witnessing major transformations that reveal Israel’s ambitions in Syria, its objectives appear to be going beyond the traditional concept of national security to a contemporary colonial project, concealed behind various pretexts aimed at reshaping the regional landscape amid intense international competition.

In a speech delivered to the Knesset on March 3, 2025, Benjamin Netanyahu indicated that Israel was waging a war on seven fronts, emphasizing that “complete victory” was the ultimate goal.

This victory included recovering all prisoners, destroying Hamas’s military capabilities, and ensuring that Gaza would not pose a future threat.

However, these seemingly defensive statements conceal a long-term Israeli strategy in Syria, relying on traditional colonial tools to impose comprehensive Israeli influence in the region and exploit the chaos to confront its adversaries, most notably Türkiye.

Since the collapse of Assad regime in December 2024, Israel has intensified its military operations in Syria, declaring its intention to establish a zone of influence extending 60 kilometers inside Syrian territory, under the pretext of preventing the transfer of heavy weapons to factions such as Hay’at Tahrir al Sham and Hezbollah.

However, this security objective masks a broader colonial ambition based on traditional colonial methods used to break the will of the people.

Israel seeks to divide Syrian society by reinforcing sectarian and tribal divisions that have intensified since the fall of the regime.

This resembles old colonial strategies, such as what Britain used in India between Hindus and Muslims to ensure its control.

Israel also seeks to control essential resources, including agricultural land, water sources, and strategic sites, to keep the Syrians in a state of perpetual dependence, similar to what France did with its colonies in North Africa.

Furthermore, Israel is adopting a media campaign to distort the image of the Syrian people to the world, portraying them as a society incapable of self-governance, justifying its intervention as a civilizational power, echoing the rhetoric of European colonialism in the Middle East and Africa during the nineteenth century.

In addition to these ambitions, the Israelis fear the rise of Türkiye as a regional power, especially with Ankara’s support for the new Syrian regime led by Ahmed al Sharaa.

Netanyahu considers Syria, which has become an arena for international conflict between major powers such as the United States and Russia, a pretext to confront Turkish ambitions in the region.

Israel views Türkiye, with its support for pro-Turkish factions in northern Syria and its efforts to impose its political and economic model, as a greater threat than even Iran.

This is what is driving Tel Aviv to strengthen its military presence in Syria, not only to confront Hezbollah or Iran, but also to create a balance of power that limits Türkiye’s influence in the region.

In this regard, Israel is looking for one of two scenarios for Syria:

A Protracted Civil War or Forcible Conquest, as Israel sees two possible fates for Syria, both of which serve its interests.

The first is a protracted civil war similar to what occurred in Lebanon from 1975 to 1990, where divisions and armed conflicts persist for years, leading to the disintegration of the Syrian state and weakening its ability to pose any future threat to Israel.

Thus, Israel is working to fuel this chaos by targeting the warring parties.

The second scenario is to taming Syria through escalating military attacks targeting its civilian and military infrastructure, turning it into a weak and paralyzed state, unable to resist.

This scenario is similar to what France attempted to impose on Algeria before facing violent popular resistance.

Israel’s ambitions in Syria go beyond mere military deterrence to a colonial goal seeking to impose a new reality in the region.

However, despite Israel’s considerable military might, the larger question remains: Can it achieve its goals, or is it sowing the seeds of a conflict that could turn against it in the future?

Igniting a civil war or attempting to subdue Syria could have broad regional repercussions, extending to neighboring countries such as Lebanon and Jordan, and could provoke violent popular resistance, as occurred in previous colonial cases.

Confronting an increasingly powerful Türkiye could also put Israel in an even more complex position.

History alone will reveal whether this strategy will succeed, but it’s clear that the region is entering a period of challenges and conflicts that will impact regional balances for decades to come.