Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on Tuesday the indefinite occupation of Syrian territory by Israeli troops, marking a significant escalation amid the tumultuous backdrop of the Syrian civil conflict. This territory, located within the 400 square kilometers buffer zone, formerly established as demilitarized per the 1974 ceasefire agreement, has become the focus of both military strategy and international scrutiny.
During his visit to the summit of Mount Hermon, Netanyahu stated, "We will stay ... until another arrangement is found to assure Israel's security." This declaration signifies Israel's commitment to maintaining its military presence following the ouster of President Bashar al-Assad and his regime, which has left Syria embroiled in chaos.
Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz accompanied Netanyahu and emphasized the importance of swift military fortification within the zone. Katz described the summit as “the eyes of the state of Israel to identify our enemies who are nearby and far away.” This reflects Israel’s broader strategic objectives amid rising tensions within the region, especially following the recent developments surrounding the Assad government.
Netanyahu’s visit on December 7, the same day unidentified armed men attacked UN forces, highlights the heightened military activity and instability within Syria. The decision to occupy this demilitarized buffer zone, which coincided with the defense of the Golan Heights, stirred immediate accusations from critics who argue this move violates international law.
The historical relationship between Israel and the Golan Heights cannot be overlooked. Israel seized these heights during the 1967 Arab-Israeli War and formally annexed them during the 1981 Golan Heights Law—an act not recognized internationally. Israel's newfound occupation of the Syrian buffer zone is viewed by many as taking advantage of the prevailing chaos to solidify territorial claims.
Critics of the decision to maintain troop presence include various regional and international stakeholders. The United Nations has condemned the advance of Israeli troops, with spokesman Stephane Dujarric stating, "occupation is occupation, whether it lasts a week, a month, or a year, it remains occupation." This comment underlines the long-standing contention surrounding Israel's military actions within the region.
Alongside these military maneuvers, Israel has conducted airstrikes across Syria, targeting numerous facilities where insurgent groups are believed to store weapons granted through the fallout from Assad's regime. The Israeli military claims these strikes are necessary to eliminate strategic threats posed by these factions, particularly those with links to extremist groups. Reports indicated over 350 targets have faced Israeli military action to prevent military build-up by groups such as Hezbollah, al-Qaeda affiliates, and the remnants of ISIS.
The strategic importance of Mount Hermon and the buffer zone extends beyond merely geographic interests; it serves as Israel’s frontline defense against potential incursions from both state and non-state actors. Netanyahu noted the increased significance of this location, citing his past experiences as a soldier on the same mountaintop more than five decades ago, stating, "the summit's importance to Israel’s security has only increased."
This situation has not gone unnoticed by neighboring nations and regional powers. The Egyptian Foreign Ministry voiced strong opposition, condemning what it described as Israel's appropriation of Syrian territory, claiming it violates international norms and reflects Israel's exploitative behavior amid political instability. Similarly, Saudi Arabia lamented Israel's actions, emphasizing their adverse impact on Syria's capability to regain stability.
Domestically within Syria, there’s complex interaction with insurgent groups, primarily dominated by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which played pivotal roles during the Syrian uprising. The group has publicly criticized Israel’s military actions, declaring them pretexts for land acquisition, yet, there is no strong inclination to engage militarily with Israel at this time due to the focus on internal rebuilding.
Netanyahu's remarks and the Israeli military's operations reflect the broader geopolitical currents at play. The military operations symbolize not just Israel's security concerns but also address historical grievances surrounding regional conflicts. Many analysts assert the consequences of these actions will reverberate throughout the region as Syria's stability remains tenuous, raising questions about possible escalations involving regional powers, Iran, and resistance groups.
The situation continues to develop, with international observers watching closely. There is recognition among various governments of Israel’s continuous military asserting itself within this volatile environment, foreshadowing future military engagement and political ramifications for both Syria and Israel.
With geopolitical boundaries rapidly shifting due to persisted violence and upheaval, Israel's indefinite occupation of this buffer zone stands as just one of many intriguing dynamics steering the future political landscapes of both Israel and Syria.
