More than a year after the “Al-Aqsa Flood” operation and the subsequent “Israeli” aggression against Gaza, then the West Bank, then Lebanon, with regional extensions that include Yemen, Iraq, and Iran, the position of the Syrian regime is still difficult to understand and explain except for some signs here and there, as it remains The only party of the “axis of resistance” outside the framework of resistance in word and deed.
A different war
The current war waged by the occupying state does not resemble any previous war it waged against the Gaza Strip (nor does Lebanon), nor does its present resemble its beginnings. Over the past year, it has witnessed a major change in concepts, methods, goals, and scope.
The occupying state's traditionally accepted concepts of war have changed. The current war is neither quick nor lightning, nor is it on enemy territory. It was not initiated by the occupying state. It has proven that it is more capable of bearing its human losses (dead, wounded, and prisoners), military, economic, and other than the stereotyped image of it.
The methods changed, and the 2023 aggression began where it ended in 2014, with the bombing of buildings and residential complexes, and continued to target and demolish every component of life, including infrastructure, service centers, hospitals, schools, shelter centers, and places of worship, in addition to mass killing, siege, and starvation, which politically and legally deserved the description of “genocide.”
The objectives of the war have changed over the past months from restoring deterrence, liberating prisoners, and destroying the capabilities of the Hamas movement so that it does not repeat the same attack with an attack like the 7th of October, to trying to occupy the Gaza Strip, empty it of its population, and impose a new administrative and security system there, in order to reach farther and more complex objectives. Such as eliminating the resistance movements: Hamas and Jihad in Gaza, and Hezbollah in Lebanon, imposing a new security reality in southern Lebanon and “redrawing the maps of the Middle East.”
The scope has changed, of course, to include all those previously mentioned, and most likely other parties that have not been mentioned until now, and here is the point of this article. The occupying state believes that it is actually waging an existential war, that is, a war that will determine its future in the region in the long term. Therefore, it is behaving with the brutality of a wolf who was wounded and did not die, in a relentless effort to confront and undermine all the threats that surround it, or what it calls the “ring of fire” from Iran and its allies. This is helped by the unlimited support from Washington and other Western capitals, as well as its exposure to the harshest political, legal and popular blame, criticism and criminalization it can possibly face, which prompts it to try to complete all the files at once.
Where is Damascus?
Since the start of the “Israeli” aggression against the Gaza Strip, Hezbollah launched its support front, Tehran issued supportive positions, Ansar Allah in Yemen engaged in an economic blockade of the occupation ports through their operations in the Red Sea, and Iraqi factions affiliated with Iran adopted several attacks against the occupation, while The Syrian regime has remained almost silent until now.
We are not talking here about direct military action, but even at the level of official statements, positions and statements, of which you can hardly find anything related to the war on Gaza (and then Lebanon) that goes beyond the fingers of the hands, and in cold language and formulations, as if they are commenting on an event in Latin America, or As if Syria is a Scandinavian country and not a major pillar of the “axis.”
Therefore, it was not surprising that the Syrian leadership was absent from the speeches of the resistance movements. Hamas mentioned it at the beginning of the war and then disappeared, and Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah mentioned it only once or twice in his speeches in a general context. Moreover, Syrian media figures pointed out that Syrian official television did not broadcast the latter’s speeches as usual.
The “Axis” puts this within the framework of distributing tasks according to capabilities or “supporting the resistance militarily, materially and morally” without entering the battle, as Nasrallah said. While many read it in the context of a new position of the regime in this war, in harmony with its desire to float and return to the official Arab system, in light of reports that spoke of “Israeli” threats, and others of understandings it concluded with the American administration through Arab mediators to guarantee its future in exchange for its neutrality, and a third of disagreements. With Iran against the backdrop of repeated assassinations of its leaders on its territory.
Among these people, there are those who believe that the regime is not able to provide any tangible practical support to the resistance. Given its reality and potential, as well as the challenges it faces, silence or neutrality is an attempt to avoid the worst, which is targeting and projection.
Deterministic path
So, it seems that the regime in Damascus intended to distance itself from the ongoing war and remain at a clear distance from it, out of a desire for gain or fear of paying a price, but it miscalculated.
The most likely expectation is that the war is expanding, not stopping, as Netanyahu, the military and security establishment, and his partners in the government will not stop before reaching a point where they can present an image of victory to the “Israeli” interior, a point that is still very far away in southern Lebanon, to say the least.
The occupying power has not yet responded to Iran's latest strike, which in turn threatened that any attack on it would be responded to in a different way, including infrastructure, which indicates a wave of mutual strikes, at the very least, in the near future. In addition to the decision-maker in Tel Aviv's conviction of the necessity of confronting all threats, even if gradually and in stages.
This initial estimate is supported by three indicators:
1- First, the ground war that “Israel” deems necessary against Hezbollah will include – and may even begin from – the occupied Syrian Golan, as a path that can spare the invading forces some losses in ambushes in the south and/or represent additional pressure and a factor of surprise for the party’s fighters.
Some indications of this appeared when the occupation forces advanced last Saturday a few hundred meters in the southern Quneitra countryside, bulldozed it and then annexed it by placing barbed wire.
2- Second, the expected state of escalation between Iran and “Israel” will affect Syrian territory and locations within it, as has been happening for years, and has been repeated many times during the current war.
3- Third, “Israel” speaks clearly and publicly about confronting all threats and about a Middle East whose new maps it will draw, and there is no doubt that Syria is one of the threats for it, considering it a major part of the “axis of evil” or the “curse” that Netanyahu announced from the United Nations podium. last month.
The head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Division, Amos Yadlin, called in a recent article to think about striking the Assad regime, “which represented the main bridge for military supplies and the growth of Hezbollah,” and to give it a choice between continuing in the same approach, endangering its survival, or closing its borders.
In conclusion, the attempt to avoid involvement in the current war seems to be a self-fulfilling expectation, that is, attempts that push towards the fate that is intended to be avoided, and therefore, according to logical data, it does not seem that the Assad regime can keep itself out of the framework of being affected by the current war and its expected future developments.
Even if he thought that the understanding with Washington or the Russian military presence might protect him, he is delusional. The Russian presence has not yet prevented the repeated Israeli invasion of Syrian airspace and sites, and the United States is walking shoulder to shoulder with Netanyahu in this war, despite the alleged differences that are closer to camouflage and repeated political cover.
Even Turkish President Erdogan has been declaring on a daily basis about Netanyahu’s ambitions in the region, and that Turkey and Syria are next after Palestine and Lebanon, warning against harming his country’s national security. It is inconceivable that there is someone in Damascus who ignores that war sometimes chooses you even if you do not choose it, or that he will be immune. Protect his country from the flood with a mountain of understandings or a protection ship.
All this is under the Biden administration, which does not have more respect or appreciation for Netanyahu, so what if the next presidential elections bring Trump as president again?
The opinions expressed in the article do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al Jazeera Network.