The Israeli-Syrian issue – just a lull?

By:Dr. Mirko Wittwar & Dr.Fariborz Saremi

There is general agreement that the fall of the Assad regime in Syria has produced two clear
Losers – Russia and Iran – and two clear winners – Turkey and Israel. However, the
Destruction of Iran´s and Russia´s de facto rule of Syria – since the civil war Bashar al-Assad
Was merely a puppet on the mercy of these two powers – is likely to result less in easing the
Tensions than in renewing them. This is due to the following facts:
– The claim by Syria´s new de facto leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa, that the country has no
interest whatsoever in war against whoever is doubtlessly credible. Currently as well
as in the foreseeable future Syria will simply be incapable of exerting violence against
any of its neighbouring countries, and certainly not against a military heavyweight
such as Israel. However, al-Sharaa´s Hay´at Tahrir al-Sham is doubtlessly an
extremely conservative Muslim, if not Islamist movement. And unfortunately one
feature shared by all movements of this kind is their hostility towards Israel, although
occasionally to different degrees. Thus, one will have to wait and see if in the long run
Hay´at Tahrir al-Sham´s attitude towards Israel will remain as moderate as it seems to
be the case for the moment.

– The power politically and militarily backing Hay´at Tahrir al Sham is Turkey. And
unfortunately this is less for altruistic reasons than for this mixture of religious
Islamist and great power aspirations which is the main feature of Turkey´s President
Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Erdogan´s aspirations cover nothing less than the whole Near
East region, the reestablishment of Turkey as the dominating power being the final
goal. In a way, Erdogan aspires a resurrection of the Ottoman empire, both politically
and religiously, although he is certainly aware that this will not be possible in the
literal sense. But where direct Turkish rule cannot be achieved, at least political
domination is a goal which he believes to be feasible. And above all, in recent years
Erdogan´s stance towards Israel has become ever more hostile, again for both religious
and political reasons. Thus, a Syria whose rulers are certainly obliged to Turkey, if not
dependent on the country and thus subject to political domination, might once again
well serve as a basis for political and possibly even military action against Israel. In a

way, Turkey might inherit Iran as a power aspiring political domination over the
region and as Israel´s main opponent.
– Israel, on the other hand, has already started action, by attacking and destroying what
is left of the capacities of Syria´s army and by occupying Syrian territory on the far
side of the Golan Heights. This is part of Israel´s typical attitude of forward defence:
strike the (possible) enemy before the enemy may lash out at you. This stance has
even been reinforced by Hamas´s genocidal attack on Israel of October 7 th , 2023.
Israel´s recent moves against Syria are clearly driven by the fear that the country
might serve as a base for whatever kind of military or militia grouping which might
attack Israel. However, it must be doubted that this kind of action is fruitful even in
terms of Israel´s safety. As said above, for the foreseeable future Syria´s current rulers
cannot have the least interest in taking action against Israel, of all. To be sure, for the
time being nobody can rule out that Syria will disintegrate into factions and that some
such faction might be hostile towards Israel and take control of the border region, to
attack the country from there. However, as yet nothing like this is in sight. Should
such a development occur, there would be ample opportunity for Israel to react, may it
be with boots on Syrian ground or not.
This given, one may even question the reasons officially stated by Israel´s
government. At least Prime Minister Netanyahu´s warning against any attempt by
Syria´s new rulers to support Iranian aspirations against Israel does not make any
sense at all: Hay´at Tahrir al Sham is a sworn enemy of Iran and thus absolutely
unlikely to support any of Tehran´s aspirations, against Israel or anybody else. This
raises the question if Netanyahu´s statement is perhaps just a pretext. Since the civil
war, Israel´s reputation among the Syrian people has been rather positive, as it was
Israel which hosted and medically treated wounded opponents of the Assad regime,
something which has not been forgotten among the Syrian people. Israel´s current
actions on Syrian territory, most of all the occupation of the far side of the Golan
Heights, runs the danger of destroying this basically positive reputation and of thus
alienating the Syrian people, of contributing to instead of working against
destabilisation in the country, and thus of precisely provoking the hostility against
Israel one wants to prevent.
Everything depends on how seriously Syria´s new rulers will take the country´s national
independence. As yet it seems as if Ahmed al-Sharaa and his entourage are most of all bent on
rebuilding Syria, however the question is to which degree they will be able to resist Erdogan´s
demands, who must be expected to present the bill for his support. The combination of Hay´at
Tahrir al-Sham´s Islamism and Turkish pressure together with both parties´ hostile attitude
towards Israel – which is certain for Erdogan and may at least basically be presumed for
Hay´at Tahrir al-Sham – might well lay the foundations for a clash with Israel. This may be
prevented by building on the basically not hostile attitude of the Syrian people. Thus, for
Israel a moderate, wait-and-see attitude towards what is going on in Syria would be a wiser
strategy than overhasty, preemptive military action which is much more likely to provoke
hostility among Syria´s people and new leadership than to serve as a deterrence. Instead,
Israel could exploit the current situation by supporting the rebuilding of Syria, in the context
of which a variety of possible measures – financial, political, humanitarian etc. – may be

considered. This way, by offering an alternative, Israel might even succeed with loosening the
ties of Syria´s current leadership to Turkey. Instead of claiming Syrian territory – if only
temporarily – for the sake of its security, Israel could present itself as another guarantor of
Syrian independence. Of course, vice versa Syria would have to take an at least neutral stance
towards Israel, a price which Hay´at Tahrir al-Sham and certainly the people of Syria may
well be supposed to be ready to pay. For Israel, the gain would be a double one: putting an
end to any threat from Syria and reducing Turkey´s influence on the country. Currently, Syria
is an effective buffer against Iranian action against Israel. Provided Israel offers a hand for the
reconstruction and reconsolidation of Syria, the country may well serve as a buffer also
against Turkish aspirations. Should this not work out, there will be time enough to still take
action. Any aggressive stance by Israel towards Syria – even if it is due to understandable
concerns – may produce the result that instead of lastingly easing the situation there will just
be lull followed by renewed and increased tension – this time with Turkey as a main driving
force.

Dr. Mirko Wittwar
Tel.: 0049/x2294/7391
e-mail: MirkoWittwar@aol.com

Dr. Fariborz Saremi
Politikwissenschaftler
Mitglied des Landesfachausschusses
Außen-, Sicherheit-, Europa- und
Entwicklungspolitik der CDU Hamburg
Mitglied der Deutschen Atlantischen Gesellschaft
Tel.: 0049/x40/464606
0171/6012866
e-mail: Fari-Saremi@gmx.de