The Geopolitical Context of Syrian Strikes

 

Introduction: The Longstanding Tensions

The Syrian Civil War, which erupted in 2011, has attracted a multitude of foreign powers and regional actors. Among them, Israel has maintained a cautious but strategic interest in the conflict. Since the outbreak of hostilities, Israel has conducted numerous airstrikes in Syria, focusing on military targets with the aim of curbing the influence of Iranian-backed groups such as Hezbollah, as well as preventing the establishment of Iranian military infrastructure near its borders.

The Role of Iran and Hezbollah in Syria

One of the primary reasons behind Israeli airstrikes in Syria is Iran’s growing influence in the region. Tehran has supported the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad through direct military involvement and the mobilization of proxy forces, including Hezbollah. These groups have positioned themselves near the Israeli border, prompting Israeli concern about their capabilities and the potential for missile and rocket attacks against Israeli civilians.

The Israeli Strategy: Preemptive Strikes and ‘The Mowing the Lawn’ Policy

Israel’s approach to the Syrian conflict can be summarized by its preemptive strike strategy, often referred to as "mowing the lawn." This strategy entails periodic military strikes aimed at degrading the capabilities of hostile groups without escalating into full-scale warfare. Israeli officials have emphasized that their primary goal is to prevent Iran from establishing a permanent military presence in Syria, which could alter the regional balance of power and pose a direct threat to Israeli security.

Israeli Airstrikes: Targeting Iranian and Hezbollah Assets

Israeli airstrikes in Syria have typically focused on key military installations linked to Iranian and Hezbollah operations. These include weapons depots, missile warehouses, and air defense systems. The airstrikes are carefully timed to avoid direct confrontation with the Syrian regime’s forces, although incidents of Syrian forces responding to Israeli attacks have occurred, leading to a dangerous escalation at times.

Syria’s Response and the Russian Angle

The Syrian government has generally condemned Israeli airstrikes as violations of its sovereignty. However, Syria has been unable to effectively retaliate against Israel due to the disparity in military capabilities. Russia, a key ally of Syria, has also found itself in a delicate position. While Russia has publicly called for Israel to stop its airstrikes, its ability to prevent them has been limited by its complex relationship with Israel and its own strategic interests in Syria.

The Impact of Israeli Strikes on Syria’s Military and Civilian Infrastructure

Military Disruption: Diminishing Iranian Influence

Israeli airstrikes have had a significant impact on Iranian and Hezbollah military infrastructure in Syria. These operations have slowed the flow of advanced weapons systems into the region, including long-range missiles that could potentially target Israel. Despite these setbacks, Iran has adapted by relocating its military infrastructure to more secure locations and utilizing more covert methods of support for its proxies.

Civilian Suffering and Infrastructure Damage

While Israel primarily targets military sites, civilian infrastructure has inevitably been damaged during these strikes. Syrian civilians, already suffering from the effects of a long-standing civil war, are often caught in the crossfire. Hospitals, schools, and residential areas have been hit, compounding the humanitarian crisis in Syria. This raises questions about the morality and effectiveness of Israel’s military strategy in Syria, especially when civilian casualties increase.

The Regional Ripple Effects of Strikes on Syria

The consequences of Israeli airstrikes are felt well beyond Syria’s borders. They impact the broader Middle East and shape the strategies of regional players. For instance, airstrikes may prompt Hezbollah to escalate its own actions along Israel’s northern border, or lead to retaliation by Iranian-backed forces. The strikes also contribute to rising tensions between Israel and its Arab neighbors, as many of these countries are concerned about the further destabilization of the region.

International Reactions to Israeli Strikes in Syria

The United States: Balancing Support and Diplomacy

The United States has been a key ally of Israel, supporting its right to self-defense. However, the American government has also been involved in peace efforts in the region and has attempted to balance its support for Israel with concerns about regional stability. The United States has occasionally called for restraint in Israeli airstrikes, but it has largely refrained from directly challenging Israel’s military operations in Syria.

Russia: A Complicated Relationship

Russia, which has provided significant military support to the Syrian regime, has often found itself in a difficult position in regard to Israeli airstrikes. Moscow has expressed its displeasure with the strikes, particularly when Russian assets or personnel are inadvertently caught in the crossfire. However, Russia’s broader geopolitical goals in Syria, which include maintaining influence over the Syrian government, have made it hesitant to engage in direct conflict with Israel. Instead, Russia has sought to mediate and de-escalate tensions, while maintaining a diplomatic relationship with Israel.

Iran’s Role and Proxy Warfare

Iran’s role in Syria and its relationship with Hezbollah are critical factors in the Syrian conflict. Tehran views Syria as a vital corridor for its influence in the region and has invested heavily in supporting the Assad regime. Israeli airstrikes, which primarily target Iranian military installations, are part of Israel’s broader strategy to curb Iran’s regional ambitions. Iran has responded to these strikes by increasing its support for Hezbollah and other militant groups, creating a complex web of proxy warfare that complicates the situation further.

Arab League and Regional Reactions

The Arab League, which includes many of Israel’s traditional adversaries, has voiced concerns about Israeli actions in Syria. However, the Arab world’s response has been muted, in part due to shifting alliances and the broader regional realignments that have occurred in recent years. Many Arab nations, particularly those in the Gulf, are increasingly focused on countering Iran’s influence in the region, which has led to a de facto understanding with Israel on some security issues. This has complicated the Arab League’s ability to take strong action against Israeli military operations in Syria.

The Future of Israeli Strikes in Syria: What Lies Ahead?

The Possibility of Escalation

While Israeli strikes in Syria have largely been contained within the scope of targeted military operations, there remains a significant risk of escalation. As Iran continues to entrench itself in Syria and Hezbollah expands its presence along Israel’s northern border, the likelihood of a direct confrontation increases. The situation is made even more volatile by the presence of Russian and American forces in Syria, each with their own interests and goals.

A Changing Middle East: The Shift in Alliances

The Middle East is undergoing a significant shift in alliances, with former adversaries finding common ground in their opposition to Iranian influence. This changing dynamic could alter the calculus for Israeli airstrikes in Syria. As Israel normalizes relations with more Arab countries through agreements like the Abraham Accords, the balance of power in the region may change, affecting Israel’s military strategy in Syria.

The Role of Diplomacy in Resolving the Conflict

Despite the heavy reliance on military action, there is a growing recognition that diplomacy must play a role in resolving the broader conflict in Syria. The ongoing negotiations between Russia, the United States, and other regional actors may eventually pave the way for a more comprehensive solution to the conflict. However, given the entrenched interests of the various parties involved, achieving a lasting peace remains a formidable challenge.