In a significant escalation of tensions in the Middle East, Israeli warplanes launched a barrage of airstrikes deep within Syrian territory on Tuesday, December 10th. Simultaneously, reports emerged – though denied by Israel – of a ground troop advance into a buffer zone established after the 1973 Arab-Israeli War. The scale of the operation is unprecedented, with the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) confirming over 350 strikes in the preceding 48 hours.
The IDF targeted what it described as ‘strategic weapons stockpiles’ to prevent them from falling into the hands of extremist groups. These strikes reportedly included air defense systems, missile depots, military airfields, and weapons production facilities, some located within the Syrian capital, Damascus. Residents reported hearing explosions throughout the city overnight and into Tuesday morning. Adding to the complexity of the situation, Israeli naval forces reportedly launched missile strikes against Syrian navy facilities, with private security firm Ambrey claiming the destruction of at least six Soviet-era missile ships.
While Israel vehemently denied any ground advance towards Damascus, Lt. Col. Nadav Shoshani, an IDF spokesperson, confirmed the deployment of troops within the buffer zone, stating that their actions were solely for defensive purposes to safeguard Israel’s security. This directly contradicts reports from the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and Mayadeen TV, which claim Israeli troops advanced to within 25 kilometers (15 miles) of Damascus along the Syrian-Lebanese border. These reports are fueling concerns about a significant escalation of the conflict.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirmed the airstrikes, explaining that the operation aimed to dismantle military capabilities remaining from the Assad regime. He surprisingly also expressed openness to establishing relations with Syria’s new leadership, although he refrained from further elaboration on this proposition. The apparent contradiction between the aggressive military action and a simultaneous offer of diplomatic engagement further highlights the complexity and ambiguity of the situation.
The Israeli incursion has drawn sharp criticism from several regional powers. Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia have accused Israel of exploiting Syria’s instability and violating international law. Turkey, a significant backer of Syrian opposition forces, condemned the action, characterizing it as a display of ‘occupier’s mentality.’ The United Nations also voiced strong criticism, with UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric characterizing the Israeli actions as a violation of the 1974 disengagement agreement and calling on both sides to uphold its terms. The international community is now closely monitoring the situation, anticipating further developments and potential repercussions in the volatile region.
The situation remains highly fluid, with conflicting reports and escalating tensions. The long-term implications of this major Israeli military operation in Syria are yet to unfold, raising serious concerns about regional stability and the potential for further escalation. The international community is closely watching for any signs of de-escalation or further conflict.
