How Israel's strikes on Syria are backfiring
Since the fall of former President Bashar Al-Assad's regime last December, one of the most pressing questions has been whether a new Syrian administration would be able to consolidate its base amid deep ideological and political divisions across the country.
To understand Syria's current political transition, it is essential to examine how the Sweida-centred conflict and Israel's involvement will affect the cohesion of the new administration's support base.
The recent escalation in southern Syria began with clashes between Druze and Bedouin militias, prompting intervention by the Syrian army. Israel then launched air strikes in Damascus targeting critical military installations, including the army's headquarters, with bombing also reported near the presidential complex.
After the withdrawal of Syrian forces from Sweida, clashes continued between Druze and Bedouin groups, deepening divisions and raising serious concerns about civilian safety in the region.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
The Syrian army and its key ally, Turkey, have gained extensive combat experience through years of conflict. Together, they played a crucial role in overthrowing the Assad regime and reducing the influence of Iran and Russia in the region.
Israel, which for nearly two years has been committing genocide in Gaza, is closely monitoring these developments and appears intent on using Druze leaders to further destabilise Syria. Its primary objective is to prevent the consolidation of the new Syrian administration, which it views as a threat, particularly given the regime's close cooperation with Turkey.
Shifting tactics
In response to Israel's air strikes on Damascus, and by demonstrating loyalty to the state, tribal groups have effectively become a new frontline for the administration of the interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa. The tribes have employed innovative strategies, such as using urban cover and burning tyres to obscure aerial surveillance, enabling them to advance to Sweida's city centre by Friday.
Israel has not yet been able to carry out an effective intervention, as air strikes are not a practical method of targeting tribal groups situated in mountainous terrain.
From Damascus to Gaza, Israel's doctrine of domination has one fatal flaw Read More »
Syria's new administration has been plagued by questions around how to achieve political consolidation by bridging the internal diversity of its supporters.
This challenge extends beyond the task of integrating groups such as the Kurds -the Democratic Union Party (PYD) and Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF)- and the Druze. The new Syrian administration includes a broad spectrum of ideological and political perspectives that must be effectively engaged, both militarily and politically.
Israel's targeting of Damascus has concerned all supporters of the new Syrian administration, while facilitating greater cooperation at the local level, as demonstrated by the recent tribal operations. This dynamic is helping to ease the internal integration of the regime's supporters.
Druze groups have also sought mediation through Damascus, with some leaders advocating for disarmament and integration within the new Syrian administration. In light of recent developments, these leaders appear to be gaining influence over Israel-aligned figures such as Hikmat al-Hajri. If the Druze successfully integrate, this would have significant implications for the disarmament process of Kurdish forces.
Israel's targeting of Damascus has thus led many supporters of the new Syrian administration to prioritise responding to external threats. The integration of Druze groups into the central administration in Damascus would contribute to the country's national unity, while reshaping the broader power dynamics across Syria.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
an hour ago
- The National
In the absence of formal accountability for Gaza atrocities, it's critical to shout the truth loudly
July 17 marked International Criminal Justice Day – commemorating the 1998 adoption of the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court (ICC). For those of us working in the field of accountability – pursuing war criminals and justice for survivors – it should be a day of reflection and progress. Yet in 2025, it feels like an act of resistance just to believe that justice is possible. The odds are stacked against us. Criminals often walk free, shielded by powerful states. We see images of children in Gaza dying from malnutrition – victims of Israel's starvation policy as found by ICC prosecutors – while our mechanisms to stop it are blocked at every turn. The ICC Office of the Prosecutor has launched an investigation into Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for the deliberate targeting of civilians and the use of starvation as a method of warfare. But progress is painfully slow. The Court has no jurisdiction over the US or Israel, and both actively obstruct it. During the 1998 Rome negotiations, the US refused to join, citing fears of 'politically motivated' prosecutions. Israel claims its military operates within the laws of war. Earlier this month, Mr Netanyahu travelled to Washington to meet with US President Donald Trump, defying international pressure. In retaliation for the ICC investigation, the US imposed sanctions on ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan – restricting his travel and freezing assets. The US has also targeted Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur, on the occupied Palestinian territories, who continues to speak out despite pressure. Journalists, investigators and human rights workers must keep the pressure high. It worked in Bosnia. It worked in Kosovo. It can work again While Mr Khan has remained largely silent, Ms Albanese has not. On the same day she was sanctioned, she condemned Italy, France, and Greece — ICC member states — for allowing Mr Netanyahu's aircraft to cross their airspace instead of arresting him. Meanwhile, the UN's top court, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), has issued orders for Israel to allow humanitarian aid and halt military actions that risk genocide. Yet these rulings rely on enforcement by the Security Council—where the US has repeatedly used its veto to protect Israel from accountability. Still, the evidence grows. Just last week, renowned genocide scholar Omer Bartov, an Israeli Jew and former Israeli soldier, published an op-ed in The New York Times arguing that Israel is committing genocide. It was a watershed moment, not just for the clarity of his language but for where it was published. But even as the case against Israel strengthens, we must confront the painful truth: the very systems designed to deliver justice are being blocked or undermined. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres has issued some of the strongest statements I've seen from a UN leader, and his adviser Melissa Fleming continues to condemn Israel's attacks on civilians. Still, several Security Council votes calling for a ceasefire have been vetoed by the US. On July 20, the General Assembly overwhelmingly passed a resolution, drafted by Spain, condemning the use of starvation as a method of warfare. Yet even as that resolution passed, Israeli forces bombed a Catholic church in Gaza and continued killing hundreds daily, many of them women, children and people waiting at feeding stations. In short, it would appear that Mr Netanyahu is mocking international justice. But it is not hopeless – if we accept that justice is a long game. Since the Second World War, alternative pathways for accountability have evolved. This is where civil society must lead. My team at The Reckoning Project focuses on creative approaches to accountability. We combine international courts, third-state prosecutions, UN mechanisms, and civil society pressure. Justice is rarely linear, but it is possible. Everything hinges on political will. Countries such as Spain and Ireland are stepping up. But when the US, UK and Germany actively block legal mechanisms, they become complicit. Britain continues arms transfers to Israel, and recent revelations show it is also sharing battlefield intelligence. This is where advocacy matters. Journalists, investigators and human rights workers must keep the pressure high. It worked in Bosnia. It worked in Kosovo. It can work again. The ICC case can and must be strengthened – with robust documentation, clear evidence chains, and legal submissions under Article 15. We must link Netanyahu directly to command decisions and demonstrate intent. Countries with universal jurisdiction, such as Germany, Belgium, South Africa, and Argentina, can open domestic cases. These can be reinforced by the ICJ's initial findings and ongoing proceedings in the genocide case. Targeted sanctions, such as Magnitsky-style bans – that is, laws providing for governmental sanctions against foreigners who have committed human rights abuses or been involved in corruption – should be imposed by countries such as Norway, Ireland and Spain. But this depends on political will. Which brings me to the most powerful tool we have: the court of public opinion. The truth must be told, clearly and relentlessly. In the case of Gaza, the horror doesn't need exaggeration as the facts speak for themselves. Free press can drive public protest and shift political inertia. The alternative is complicity in what has been described by legal experts as genocide, and as shown in the mounting evidence before the ICJ. I have witnessed three genocides in my lifetime. I cannot remain silent as another unfolds. To look away would be to abandon our shared humanity.
Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
US envoy Tom Barrack accused of plotting Turkey's partition
When billionaire-turned-diplomat Tom Barrack arrived in Ankara in May as US President Donald Trump's ambassador to Turkey, he delivered an unexpectedly emotional speech. 'I think it's a really monumental day for me, feeling the echo of this land from which my ancestors came,' he said. 'But I come with a really simple message from President Trump: his desire to raise the level of the alliance between Turkey and the United States to where it rightfully belongs.' Two months later, Turkish officials are convinced that Barrack is among the most influential US ambassadors ever to serve in the country. His ever-expanding portfolio, now encompassing both Syria and Lebanon, aligns with Ankara's priorities, such as preserving a unified Syrian state under President Ahmed al-Sharaa with a single military. Both Ankara and Barrack seek a stable region. Turkish officials hope that Barrack, who has a direct line to Trump, could help resolve longstanding issues, from the stalled purchase of F-35 fighter jets to the removal of sanctions on Turkey over its purchase of Russia's S-400 missile system. Barrack also made several remarks expressing his admiration of Turkey and its history. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters However, Turkish public opinion paints a starkly different picture. Newspapers and political influencers have launched a campaign against the US envoy, accusing him of attempting to break up the country. Despite Turkey's longstanding history of anti-American sentiment, rooted in the US partnership with Syrian Kurdish groups and its harbouring of the late Fethullah Gulen and his supporters, for the first time in years, an American ambassador is under attack not from government media, but from the opposition, over his conduct. Misquoted The controversy began with Barrack's interview with Turkey's public Anadolu news agency in late June, where he referenced the Ottoman Empire's millet system, which oversaw religious communities from Christians to Jews. Barrack explained that the millet system, which granted religious communities limited autonomy over their own affairs, ensured the survival of diverse groups in the region. He added that a new dialogue between states and cultures was needed today. 'To me, Izmir is the example of how you blend all these communities - Jews, Muslims and Christians living side by side,' he said. 'I see this as the model of what needs to happen in the Middle East and the world. And I think Turkey can be the centre point of it all.' Why Turkey abruptly cancelled an Iraqi oil pipeline agreement Read More » Within days, a flurry of social media posts and newspaper articles misquoted him, claiming that he had advocated for the millet system as the ideal order for modern Turkey, a statement he never made. For many Turkish citizens, the millet system evokes painful memories of a weakened Ottoman Empire in the 19th century, teetering on the brink of partition along ethnic and nationalist lines. 'US Ambassador Tom Barrack showered praise on the Ottoman's religion-based millet system!' wrote Arslan Bulut, a journalist for the nationalist opposition newspaper Yeni Cag, earlier this month. 'For this, Turkey must be stripped of its nation-state status!' Husnu Bozkurt, a former parliamentarian from the Republican People's Party (CHP), took it further: 'For years, we've warned that imperialist America seeks to divide the secular Republic of Turkey by transforming it into a religiously-governed state under its control, destroying the unitary nation-state structure, turning it into a federation, and eliminating linguistic unity by splitting the nation along sectarian and ethnic lines - the ultimate goal of the Greater Middle East Project (BOP).' Barrack is viewed as unconventional among western ambassadors in Turkey, spending much of his time in the region and in Istanbul. His candid interviews with various publications are often taken out of context, as he speaks without reservation. PKK peace talks As Barrack grapples with these reactions, Turkey is engaged in peace talks with the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and its jailed leader Abdullah Ocalan, after more than 40 years of conflict. Earlier this year, the PKK announced an end to its armed struggle and, in a symbolic ceremony this month, burned its weapons, a development that has left many Turks uneasy about the country's future. Retired Colonel Unal Atabay argued that Barrack's alleged suggestion to revive the Ottoman religion-based millet system would undermine Turkey's status as a nation-state. Syrian Kurds face 30-day ultimatum from US and Turkey Read More » 'Isn't it interesting… This is exactly what Ocalan refers to as Middle Eastern unity,' he said. 'It's about ensuring the formation of a separatist Kurdish region while transforming Turkey into an Ottoman-like state.' Barrack's recent interview with the Associated Press about Israeli strikes on Damascus and Sweida in Syria over the weekend did little to help his case. He suggested that Israel would rather see Syria fragmented and divided than governed by a strong central state. 'Strong nation-states are a threat - especially Arab states are viewed as a threat to Israel,' he said. But in Syria, he noted, 'I think all the minority communities are smart enough to say, 'We're better off together, centralised.'' Turkish media and commentators interpreted Barrack's criticism of Israel as indirect approval of US efforts to partition strong nation-states in the region. At the same time, Devlet Bahceli, a Turkish nationalist leader within President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's ruling coalition, proposed that Turkey could, in the future, appoint two vice presidents, one Kurdish and the other Alevi, a minority religious group that has sometimes reported persecution. Mehmet Ali Guler, a columnist for the opposition Cumhuriyet daily, argued that Bahceli's proposal and Barrack's comments on the Ottoman millet system all serve the same purpose: 'The Lebanonisation of Turkey'. Bahceli in a statement strongly rebuked the allegations, calling them 'distortions'. The US Embassy in Ankara has remained silent in the face of these accusations.
Middle East Eye
3 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Israel kills Palestinian journalist and family in Gaza strike
An Israeli air strike killed Palestinian journalist Walaa al-Jabari along with her entire family in Gaza City on Wednesday, raising the number of media workers killed during Israel's war on Gaza to at least 231. Jabari, who was pregnant at the time, was killed when her home in the Tal al-Hawa neighbourhood in southwest Gaza City was bombed. The strike also killed her husband, Amjad al-Shaer, and four of their children. Local reports said the force of the blast was so intense it ejected her unborn child from her womb. Images circulating on social media show a fetus wrapped in a shroud, though Middle East Eye could not independently verify their authenticity. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Jabari worked as a newspaper editor for several local media outlets and is one of many Palestinian journalists killed in what rights groups and press advocates have called targeted Israeli attacks on the media. Her death brings the total number of journalists killed by Israeli forces since October 2023 to at least 231, according to Gaza's Government Media Office. Earlier this week, Israeli forces shot and killed photojournalist Tamer al-Zaanin during a raid near a Red Cross facility in Rafah. During the same operation, an undercover Israeli unit detained Dr Marwan al-Hams, the director of field hospitals in the Gaza Strip. 'Systemic crimes against journalists' The Government Media Office called on international organisations and the broader international community to condemn what it described as 'systematic crimes against Palestinian journalists and media professionals'. AFP warns Gaza journalists risk starving to death amid ongoing Israeli siege Read More » "We also call on them to exert serious and effective pressure to stop the crime of genocide, protect journalists and media professionals in the Gaza Strip, and stop the murder and assassination of them," the office said. "We ask God Almighty to grant all our martyred colleagues and journalists mercy, acceptance, and Paradise, and to grant their families and the Palestinian press family patience and solace. We also wish a speedy recovery to all the wounded journalists." Israel's war on Gaza has been described as the "worst ever conflict" for journalists, according to a report published in April by the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs. The report, titled News Graveyards: How Dangers to War Reporters Endanger the World, said the Israeli assault on the Gaza Strip since October 2023 had "killed more journalists than the US Civil War, World Wars I and II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War (including the conflicts in Cambodia and Laos), the wars in Yugoslavia in the 1990s and 2000s, and the post-9/11 war in Afghanistan, combined".
