Last month, Israel launched a new round of air strikes on Syria, hitting targets near Damascus, Homs and the southern province of Sweida. Presented as attacks on Syrian government forces and under the pretext of protecting the Druze minority, they aim to advance the Zionist regime’s ongoing campaign of regional domination and fragmentation.
Since the fall of Bashar al-Assad in December 2024, Israel has expanded its aggression, occupying more than 400 sqkm of additional Syrian territory and systematically destroying what remains of the country’s military infrastructure. This escalation comes as Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, now in its 23rd month, continues to reverberate across multiple fronts.
The United States has also carried out air strikes and raids, backed Kurdish forces in the northeast and facilitated Israeli attacks – all to maintain its foothold in Syria and prevent the rise of any force that could challenge its order.
While the US prioritises geostrategic control and the protection of its energy and security interests, Israel seeks to break Syria into ethnic and sectarian enclaves as part of a decades-old strategy to fragment the Arab world and cement its own regional hegemony.
This policy follows the approach both have pursued since the outset of the Syrian war in 2011. At its core lies a shared objective: to dismantle Syria as a unified, sovereign state and ensure that no regional or global actor can challenge the American-Israeli order in the Middle East.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on
Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
Fragmenting Syria
Israel’s strategy in the Arab world can be traced back to the early days of the Zionist state. Internal Israeli strategic documents from the 1950s, including proposals by the Israeli foreign ministry and Mossad, advocated for a Kurdish state as a buffer against Arab nationalism.
This vision was later crystallised in the infamous 1982 Yinon Plan, authored by Oded Yinon, a former Israeli foreign ministry official. The plan called for “the dissolution of Syria…into districts of ethnic and religious minorities…[as] Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run…Syria will disintegrate into several states along the lines of its ethnic and religious structure”.
Israel’s dominance depended on fragmenting the Arab world into sectarian and ethnic enclaves, replacing strong, unified countries with weak, balkanised statelets
The Yinon Plan argued that Israel’s security and dominance depended on the dissolution of Arab states into smaller sectarian and ethnic entities, including Druze, Alawi, Kurdish, Maronite, Coptic and others.
The aim was to replace strong, centralised Arab states with weak, balkanised statelets that posed no threat to Israel and could potentially become allies or proxies under Israeli protection.
In the case of Syria, this strategy involves the partition of the country into four main zones of influence: 1) a Druze homeland centred in Sweida in southern Syria, where Israel hopes to foster a Druze-aligned mini-state under its influence; 2) an Alawi statelet in the coastal region under Russian protection, centred around Latakia and Tartus; 3) a Kurdish zone in northeastern Syria, backed by the US, where the Democratic Union Party (PYD) and People’s Protection Units (YPG) control vast swathes of territory; and 4) a Sunni Arab belt under Turkish influence, especially along the northern and northwestern borders and the heartland.
This partition model directly serves Israeli goals by keeping Syria weak, divided and unable to re-emerge as a regional actor capable of supporting the Palestinian resistance or opposing Israeli expansionism. It has long been embedded in Zionist strategy for the Middle East.
One of the most influential Zionist thinkers and advisers to American and Israeli officials, Bernard Lewis, wrote in 1992: “Most of the states of the Middle East…are…vulnerable to such a process [of ‘Lebanonisation’]. If the central power is sufficiently weakened…the state then disintegrates…into a chaos of squabbling, feuding, fighting sects, tribes, regions, and parties.”
Crippling Syria
Since 2013, the Zionist regime has waged a sustained aerial campaign on Syrian territory, often under the pretext of targeting Iranian or Hezbollah positions.
After 7 October 2023, these attacks expanded to include the assassination of senior Iranian and Hezbollah commanders on Syrian soil, as part of a wider assault on the so-called “Axis of Resistance” – targeting Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah and allied forces across the region, including in Syria.
Follow Middle East Eye’s live coverage of Israel’s war on Gaza
Israel’s destabilisation efforts in Syria mirror the siege and destruction it is inflicting on Gaza, and are aimed at weakening resistance forces and accelerating the long-standing plan to divide the country.
Over time, Israel has destroyed Syria’s air defence systems, weapons depots, military bases and scientific research centres. In recent months, this strategy has sought to deter Iran, prevent Syria from rebuilding its military capacity and enforce permanent Israeli military and psychological superiority in the region.
Controlling Syria
The US strategy in Syria aligns with its post-Cold War grand strategy of preventing any regional or global rival from gaining ground.
During the Cold War, Washington viewed Syria, especially under former President Hafez al-Assad, as a Soviet client state and a supporter of Arab nationalist causes, Palestinian resistance and regional alliances opposed to US influence.
After the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the US sought to isolate Syria and prevent it from filling the regional vacuum left by Saddam Hussein’s ouster. Since Syria’s 2011 uprising, the US has adopted a policy of selective engagement: backing Kurdish forces in the northeast under the guise of countering extremist groups and limiting Iranian influence, while allowing Israeli strikes.
Syria after Assad: Why Israel’s vow to ‘protect’ the Druze is hollow
Read More »
Even though the US appears to support a de facto partition of Syria, its objective is not necessarily Israeli-style ethnic fragmentation. Rather, it seeks to preserve a military and political presence that blocks Russian and Iranian access to the eastern Mediterranean and ensures any future Syrian government aligns with Washington’s strategic interests.
The recent escalation in the southern Druze-majority city of Sweida underscores Israel’s interest in carving out a loyal enclave along its northern front – a goal consistent with the Yinon Plan’s strategy of cultivating alliances with minorities who might favour autonomy under Israeli patronage.
Yet the Druze community remains divided, with many rejecting foreign interference.
While Israel pushes for this statelet, the US is cautious – calling for calm but avoiding any condemnation, wary of backlash in neighbouring states and among Druze communities inside Israel. It also fears that further fragmentation could strengthen extremist groups or open the door to Russian and Iranian gains.
The US, therefore, prefers a controlled, divided Syria – weak enough to be pliant but not totally collapsed – where it can retain influence without triggering wider regional instability. Israel, by contrast, is more willing to tolerate, or even foment, chaos if it means permanently removing Syria as a potential threat, especially having already annexed the Syrian Golan Heights.
Turkey’s stake
Turkey plays a crucial role in Syria’s current reconstruction. Ankara initially sought regime change in Damascus by backing opposition groups and militant factions. However, after failed attempts to unseat Assad and growing concerns over Kurdish autonomy near its borders, Turkey shifted focus.
Turkish forces moved into parts of northern Syria, where they support Syrian Arab and Turkmen militias in order to check and limit Kurdish influence. Since the ouster of Assad, Turkey has become the main power backing and supporting the current Syrian regime.
Turkey’s interests diverge sharply from those of the US and Israel, which have focused on empowering Kurdish militias and Druze separatists, respectively. While the US and Israel have supported Kurdish actors as counterweights to Assad and Iran, Turkey considers any Kurdish autonomy a national security threat.
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan recently declared: “Turkey will intervene against any attempts to fragment Syria or allow militant groups to gain autonomy…We are warning you: no group should engage in acts towards division.”
Fight for the ‘Heartland’
A famous principle of geopolitical theory, put forward by British academic and politician Halford Mackinder, states: “Who rules Eastern Europe commands the Heartland; who rules the Heartland commands the World Island; who rules the World Island commands the world.”
Unless regional actors form a coordinated response, Syria’s dismemberment could become a permanent reality
By analogy, Syria occupies a central node in the Arab world, controlling vital transit routes, trade corridors and regional alliances – much like Mackinder’s Heartland. Regional and global powers believe that whoever controls Syria, or a major part of it, will influence – if not shape – the entire Middle East.
In this context, the US and Israel are executing a two-pronged policy in Syria. For the US, Syria is a chessboard on which it seeks to block adversaries, protect petrodollar hegemony and secure Israel’s position without becoming too entangled. For Israel, Syria is an existential threat to be dismantled and restructured into a patchwork of mini-states.
The danger lies in the prolonged suffering of the Syrian people, the erosion of Arab sovereignty and the potential explosion of wider conflict.
Unless regional actors – particularly Turkey, but also Iran and Arab states – form a coordinated response, Syria’s dismemberment could become a permanent reality, fulfilling the long-standing Zionist blueprint for a fractured, compliant Middle East.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
