Post-War Calculations in Syria: ‘Israel’ Plans to Expand Lebanon Occupation with US Backing
Translated By Al-Ahed News, Al-Akhbar Newspaper
It no longer requires much effort to decipher the enemy’s strategy in Lebanon. Since the launch of the new era of war on Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria a year and a half ago, Benjamin Netanyahu has introduced practical modifications to "Israel's" military and security doctrine.
The concept of expansion—embedded in "Israel’s" ideology since its establishment—has been a cornerstone of its policy since October 7, 2023. The "Israeli" leadership now feels obligated to impose new military, political, and security realities on the surrounding region, which it deems essential to its so-called "strategic protection."
The conflict with Lebanon and "Israel’s" response to Operation Al-Aqsa Flood demonstrated that Tel Aviv had primarily been preparing for war along its northern border. While resistance forces in Gaza managed to deceive "Israel," they were aided by the enemy’s arrogance in viewing them as a secondary threat. The entirety of "Israel’s" political, security, and military focus had been concentrated on confronting what it considers the "most dangerous threat": Hezbollah and Iran-backed forces in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq.
In time, the war’s ongoing evaluations will yield results that are made public. Preliminary conclusions, however, indicate that "Israel" has acted—and continues to act—on the belief that it is entitled to do whatever it deems necessary to serve its interests. Simply put, "Israel" seeks to conduct an open-ended military campaign in Lebanon and Syria, ending only when it so chooses.
Diplomatic Documents: Paris Realized Before the November Ceasefire That Washington Is Preparing a New Order in Lebanon
As "Israel" boasts of its so-called "achievements" in Lebanon in order to rally Western support for its war against its enemies, its officials have overstated the significance of several operations. Just a few days ago, Netanyahu boasted about targeted assassinations in Lebanon—such as the killing of Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah—and the “Pager” operation, presenting them as integral to his broader plan to reshape the Middle East.
Netanyahu’s narrative—marketed both to the "Israeli" public and Western allies—focuses on "disrupting the terrorist ring around 'Israel'," referring to the growing presence of the Axis of Resistance in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq.
He continues to assert that “the mission is not over,” using the slogan to justify the ongoing war in Gaza, continued attacks on Lebanon and Syria, and covert security operations in other regions of the world.
"Israel" is currently focused on “consolidating and expanding its gains” both in Lebanon and across the region. In this context, its field behavior and future plans must be understood. US endorsement of "Israeli" policies has only emboldened Tel Aviv to commit further acts of aggression. Meanwhile, Washington pressures Beirut to make concessions under the pretext of reducing "Israeli" justifications for war.
This revives an old question: Do "Israel" and the US aim to destabilize Lebanon, or are they seeking to install a compliant regime responsive to "Israeli" demands?
Prior to the November ceasefire, talks held at the UN and among Arab and Western capitals revealed the contours of US-"Israeli" strategic thinking. They also showed that Western and anti-resistance Arab governments are either complicit in the project or too weak to alter its trajectory. Evidence of this can be found in the activities of the international oversight committee monitoring the enforcement of the ceasefire in Lebanon.
Fall Negotiations
According to Arab diplomatic cables obtained by Al-Akhbar, several major issues emerged during and after the ceasefire negotiations. A source in the French Foreign Ministry revealed that the US is “seeking vital changes to Lebanon’s political structure by imposing political and administrative elites more aligned with its regional interests.”
Speaking to an Arab diplomat in Paris, the French source referred to an American attempt to “restructure Lebanon’s political system,” encouraged by "Israeli" military advances and a belief that the Axis of Resistance can be defeated.
The source also expressed Paris’ frustration at being sidelined by Washington in Lebanon, as the US deliberately withheld information from France during negotiations. “They want us to approve what they are doing without informing us,” the source said.
French sources confirmed that Paris rejected Washington’s initial ceasefire proposal for Lebanon, which included deploying a multinational force in southern Lebanon—a move that would undermine UNIFIL’s role, and by extension, France’s influence in Lebanon.
A second French official described close coordination between France and Saudi Arabia during the war, led by Jean-Yves Le Drian and Nizar Al-Aloula. The official noted that France attempted to engage Tehran to contain the conflict’s repercussions on Lebanon, despite American and "Israeli" disapproval.
Arab diplomatic sources stated that the US was irritated by France’s diplomatic outreach to Iran in ceasefire efforts that lacked coordination with Washington.
What Changed After November 27?
Signs point to a dramatic shift in "Israeli" strategy after the Lebanon ceasefire, largely driven by rapid developments in Syria.
While details remain unclear regarding the sudden collapse of the Syrian army within ten days, sources increasingly suggest that a US-brokered security and diplomatic deal occurred behind the scenes. Netanyahu even claimed in a recent speech that the assassination of Nasrallah had an impact on the Assad regime—signaling that "Israel" views Syria’s weakening as a Resistance Axis stronghold as a strategic opportunity.
Abu Dhabi Talks: Sharaa Committed to US and "Israeli" Demands to Prevent Palestinian Attacks from Syrian Territory
Current negotiations between the US and Ahmad Al-Sharaa’s [previously known as Abu Mohammad Al-Julani] government are based on "Israeli" terms, disregarding internal Syrian dynamics. Certain Syrian factions mistakenly believe that "Israel" will protect their interests. In reality, "Israel" is willing to strike a temporary deal with Shar’ if he complies with its demands.
Mediation by the UAE between Sharaa and both the Americans and "Israelis" has led to multiple meetings and understandings. Notably, "Israeli" airstrikes on Syria ceased days before Al-Shaara’s visit to the UAE. Abu Dhabi reportedly assured Sharaa that "Israel" would not expand its buffer zone in southern Syria—a promise upheld until recently, when "Israeli" drones struck armed groups near Sahnaya. Damascus had been informed of the targets and the rationale behind the strike. The operation was reportedly requested by Sheikh Mowafaq Tarif, who claimed Netanyahu had personally promised him support for Druze secession from Damascus’ control.
The strike was less intense than previous ones. Al-Sharaa responded by taking actions demanded by "Israel," including cracking down on Palestinian resistance groups in Syria. Islamic Jihad leaders were targeted, and Al-Shaara’s government reached out to Hamas to ensure no operations would be launched against "Israel" from Syrian territory. Security coordination was also bolstered to monitor the Syrian-Iraqi and Syrian-Lebanese borders, preventing Hezbollah from exploiting them.
Pro-Al-Sharaa forces even engaged in symbolic battles along the Lebanese border, apparently to reassure "Israel" that Damascus remains committed to containing Hezbollah.
Still, these steps fall short of "Israel’s" ultimate objective: reshaping Lebanon in a way that enables a decisive blow against Hezbollah. Even though "Israel" is aware that its Lebanese allies are clashing politically with the resistance, and that the Lebanese Forces justify Zionist aggression, it does not believe such moves will neutralize Hezbollah. Hence, it is exploring direct means to target the resistance.
Is Netanyahu Preparing for a Ground Invasion?
In this context, "Israeli" and American statements and actions warrant close monitoring. During a recent visit to Washington, Netanyahu presented a proposal to expand the war on all Iranian-backed fronts—despite Trump’s willingness to negotiate with Iran and his warning against escalating in Yemen or Iran before talks conclude, according to Western diplomatic sources speaking to Al-Akhbar.
Trump did not object to "Israel’s" aggression against Lebanon and Palestine, further raising fears of an escalation.
According to the same sources, Netanyahu laid out a detailed proposal for expanding military operations in Lebanon. He emphasized the necessity of a large-scale ground invasion due to the limited success of airstrikes and Hezbollah’s continued resilience.
Reports indicate that the "Israeli" army has already drafted plans for a full ground invasion. These plans update older strategies, now considered more feasible due to developments in Syria. They involve using territory "Israel" occupies from the eastern Lebanese border to Syria’s Quneitra and western Damascus to launch a pincer movement into Western Beqaa, Rachaya and Hasbaya. Simultaneously, forces along the Arqoub border would invade southern Lebanon.
According to Western diplomatic sources, "Israel" is amassing a large ground force in preparation for such a campaign, which would be preceded by a renewed air assault.
