Major diplomatic progress between Israel and Damascus looks set to materialize within the coming month. US Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer held talks with Syrian Foreign Minister Assad Shaibani in Paris on Tuesday. US Special Envoy Tom Barak mediated the meeting while also conferring with Sheikh Muwafaq Tarif.

Tarif exposed the dire situation facing the Druze population in southern Syria and asked the Americans to create and monitor a humanitarian corridor to As-Suwayda – seeking not just to aid those affected but to safeguard the community's members. The discussion was viewed as an extraordinary diplomatic maneuver. Tarif has strong connections with Syria's separatist faction, led by Hikmat al-Hijri, which promotes the concept of Druze independence from Ahmed al-Sharaa's central authority, even as the Trump administration ostensibly fosters closer ties with Damascus.

Yet countering the Druze separatist aspirations, Syria is developing an alternative narrative centered on preserving the nation's territorial integrity. Remarkably, Syrian media outlets disclosed Foreign Minister Shaibani's encounter "with an Israeli delegation," whereas previously such meetings would have been denied or ignored entirely. The key to understanding the developing accord between Israel and Syria lies in grasping al-Sharaa's evolution.

The former jihadist aligned with al-Qaida has transformed into an internationally recognized leader. TIME magazine named al-Sharaa among its 100 most influential figures globally for 2025, while Presidents Macron and Trump have offered praise and diplomatic embraces. This matters significantly, as international legitimacy serves as a crucial instrument for securing domestic acceptance. Al-Sharaa understands his tenuous grip on a Syrian state fractured and depleted by 14 years of civil conflict. Consequently, global recognition paired with economic assistance could bolster his domestic political standing, deliver stability and security, and enable him to bridge Syria's internal societal divisions.

The post Syria's president will soon become legitimate in Israel's eyes too appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Since the outbreak of the Arab Spring in Syria in 2011, the country's Druze minority has faced existential threats, particularly from Sunni jihadist organizations such as Islamic State and Jabhat al-Nusra - al-Qaida's affiliate and the Islamic State's branch in Syria. These groups, which consider Druze to be heretics, were not content merely with fighting Bashar Assad's regime but aimed to "purify" their controlled territories of religious minorities.

The Druze, comprising roughly 3–5% of Syria's population (some 700,000 people), are concentrated in Jabal al-Druze in the Suwayda province in the south. Even before the civil war, the area suffered from neglect and lack of governance, and during the 14 years of conflict, it became a strategic weak spot in the Assad regime's defenses - vulnerable to jihadist terror and territorial encroachment. Between 2013 and 2018, jihadist forces significantly expanded their presence in southern Syria, at times operating dangerously close to major Druze population centers and even the Israeli border.

In June 2015, Jabhat al-Nusra, led by Abu Muhammad al-Julani also known as Ahmed al-Sharaa., threatened to overrun the village of Hader in the Syrian Golan Heights. It was only the determined resistance of local Druze residents, aided by Assad-aligned militias, that prevented the jihadists from advancing.

Two years later, in November 2017, the Druze faced another wave of violence. After a series of attacks culminating in a car bombing that killed nine people, protests erupted in Israel. Tensions among Israeli Druze communities were so high that IDF Spokesman Brig. Gen. Ronen Manelis issued a statement declaring that "the IDF is prepared to assist the residents of the village and will prevent harm or occupation of Hader out of commitment to the Druze community."

Yet the warning proved short-lived. In July 2018, Islamic State carried out a series of coordinated attacks in Suwayda and nearby villages, killing more than 250 people, most of them Druze civilians, and kidnapping dozens of women and children. "We are ready to act, financially or otherwise," said Rafiq Halabi, head of the Daliyat al-Karmel local council, at a protest rally. The spiritual leader of Israel's Druze community, Mowafaq Tarif, declared the Islamic State attacks to be "a brutal ethnic massacre."

The charm offensive led by Ahmed al-Sharaa, Syria's new ruler, and his efforts to project stability have now suffered a major blow. The ongoing clashes between jihadists and the Druze reveal a harsh truth: Syria's new regime lacks control and cannot contain the armed Islamist factions whose motivations are religious rather than political or diplomatic.

Just as jihadist elements affiliated with al-Sharaa's regime massacred Alawites in March and, in late June, killed 20 Christians in a suicide bombing at Mar Elias Church in Damascus, it now appears to be the Druze community's turn.

al-Sharaa's Syria is spiraling into chaos. A growing number of domestic extremist groups and foreign actors - Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia among them - are increasingly involved. In the absence of strong central leadership, there is a high likelihood of the country sliding into another civil war.

For Israel, this means a need not only for tactical readiness, responding to sporadic terror threats and attacks on Syrian Druze, but for strategic preparation. The emerging scenario involves escalating disorder and the risk of a renewed Syrian civil war, this time without a clear central authority like Assad. Israel must tread carefully to avoid clashes with al-Sharaa's ally, Turkey, or a war of attrition against radical Islamist factions in Syria. A comprehensive strategic posture will require building broad international understandings, particularly with the US, which only recently embraced al-Sharaa.

The post Is a new civil war brewing in Syria? appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

However, at the end of the "12-day war" and following the impressive military success, a central question arises: how to leverage the achievements in the military arena into successes in the political and diplomatic fields. How to prevent Iran from rebuilding its military and nuclear capabilities. The answer lies in one word: enforcement.

The political stage is no less critical than the military one, and it requires a transition from a policy of deterrence and attack to a policy of regulation and enforcement. The war results placed on the negotiating table of the international community (and also of Israel) a one-time opportunity. International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Rafael Grossi himself clarified this point to the Iranians. With the entry into force of the ceasefire between Israel and Iran, Grossi wrote to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi about the importance of cooperation with the organization for a successful agreement, emphasizing that "this step could lead to a diplomatic solution to the years-long conflict surrounding the nuclear program."

Therefore, the central goal of the political move is to exploit the window of opportunities that has opened, the fact that the Iranian regime is wounded but not humiliated, to reach a comprehensive and new nuclear agreement with Iran. The crown jewel of the agreement must be preventing the reconstruction of Iran's nuclear program and the development of long-range ballistic missiles capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. To achieve this goal, there is a need for an agreement that includes tight oversight mechanisms, sanctions, and, most importantly, a binding, effective, and uncompromising enforcement mechanism. In other words, the sword of punishment must always hang over Iran's head.

The best example of the importance of enforcement comes from Lebanon. As part of the ceasefire that took effect on November 27, 2024, and the renewal of understandings outlined in Security Council Resolution 1701 from August 2006, Hezbollah was required to withdraw north of the Litani River, and the Lebanese Armed Forces were to deploy in the south of the country. But the Shiite terror organization never sought to honor agreements, and since the ceasefire came into effect, it has violated it time and again.

However, the difference between the 2006 understandings and those of 2024 is that this time, Israel acts to forcibly enforce the agreement. "I have said many times," Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu explained on November 27, "a good agreement is an agreement that is enforced – and we will enforce it." Indeed, according to data from the Alma Center, since the end of Operation Northern Arrows six months ago, the IDF carried out more than 400 strikes in Lebanon – an average of more than two strikes per day. The message is sharp and clear: a ceasefire does not grant immunity to terrorist activity, but is subject to enforcement. Every violation will receive a severe response.

Therefore, Iran's fate must be Hezbollah's fate in Lebanon. Just as Israel acts to prevent Hezbollah from rebuilding its strength and establishing terror infrastructure in southern Lebanon, so it must ensure that any future understanding with Iran includes clear and rigid enforcement mechanisms.

Past experience, particularly that of the nuclear agreement from July 2015, teaches that without strict enforcement, any agreement, no matter who drafts it, will quickly erode against Iranian determination.

There is a need to exploit the military successes of Operation Rising Lion, draw lessons from previous political initiatives, and lead to an agreement that will provide security for Israel and the entire world. Effective enforcement, including oversight, control, and readiness to act immediately, particularly through military means, is a necessary condition for Israel's achievements to translate into real and stable security.

The post How to prevent Iran from rebuilding appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Recent intelligence reports from Western agencies have raised alarms about the creeping Islamization of Europe, particularly in Germany, Austria, Belgium, Britain, France, the Netherlands, and Spain. This concern extends beyond demographic changes driven by migration that began in the 1960s. The reports highlight a subversive effort to infiltrate social and governmental institutions from within, with the ultimate goal of establishing Sharia-based governance.

The Muslim Brotherhood emerges as a central player in these reports, operating on both local and European levels. Under the guise of youth movements, social organizations, or welfare charities, the group projects a liberal image while advancing its Islamist agenda. Its strategy focuses on influencing Muslim communities, reshaping public consciousness, and gaining political legitimacy to push for legislative changes and special religious rights. Western intelligence agencies describe this approach as "bottom-up Islamization," a deliberate tactic to transform societies gradually.

Although the Muslim Brotherhood is not classified as a terrorist organization in Europe, security services in multiple countries closely monitor its activities, viewing it as an ideological and subversive threat to democratic order.

These reports warn of the creation of parallel societal structures that challenge Europe's core values, with the Muslim Brotherhood aiming to establish an "Islamic caliphate through peaceful means," though leaving room for violence if it serves their goals. Security agencies thus identify the group as a persistent strategic threat.

Paradoxically, the Muslim Brotherhood exploits Western tools to achieve its objectives, even receiving funding from the European Union and Western governments. For instance, over the past decade, the EU has provided more than €40 million to Islamic Relief Worldwide, an organization allegedly tied to the Muslim Brotherhood. Despite presenting itself as a humanitarian charity, Islamic Relief Worldwide promotes extreme antisemitic, anti-Western, and homophobic views. In 2020, its deputy director, Tayeb Abdoun, was sacked after posting a Facebook image of a knife with a caption endorsing violence: "Lay the bodies of the Jews on the top of the mountains, so that no dog in Palestine must suffer hunger."

Additional funding for the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates comes from non-EU countries, notably Qatar and Turkey. These nations support extensive projects, including mosque construction, schools, and charity organizations aiding migrants across Western Europe, as part of a broader effort to promote political Islam. Qatar, a major player, channels approximately 90% of its European donations through entities like Qatar Charity to organizations linked to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Despite strained Israel-Europe relations since October 7, exacerbated by Israel's tarnished image in its conflict with Hamas' terrorism, opportunities for cooperation remain. Israel, with its extensive experience countering extremist ideologies, could play a pivotal role on the international stage –both diplomatically and through intelligence sharing – to expose the Muslim Brotherhood's networks and halt political funding that endangers Europe's free and democratic future.

Israel, long grappling with Hamas – a Muslim Brotherhood offshoot in Gaza – can offer Europe valuable insights into combating these funding networks and exposing how so-called charitable organizations serve as fronts for political Islamization, and potentially terrorism in the future.

The post Europe's silent shift toward Sharia law appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

This isn't the first time the US has let itself be swept away by wishful thinking in the Middle East, particularly in Syria, a path that has led at best to disappointment and at worst to disaster and tragedy.

On March 30, 1949, Syrian army chief of staff Husni al-Za'im staged the country's first military coup, setting the stage for many more to come. Fascinatingly, Za'im received guidance and support from Washington, especially from the CIA. The Americans, in their romanticized view, believed that if Arab nations were led by honest, smart, and courageous leaders willing to act "in the interests of their countries," peace and economic partnerships could follow.

To the Americans, Za'im was the ideal figure to promote these aims and a model for other Middle Eastern nations. He kept his promises: aside from approving the Saudi-American oil company Aramco's pipeline through Syria, shortly before his downfall he even proposed a peace deal with Israel, to absorb Palestinian refugees who had fled to Syria in exchange for land and part of the Sea of Galilee.

The problem was that amid all the euphoria, Za'im developed delusions of grandeur and managed to alienate everyone, including his American allies. On August 14, 1949, he was deposed in another coup and executed that same day. For the Americans, it was a failed experiment.

Admittedly, Syria of 2025 is not Syria of 1949. But after 80 years of involvement in the region, one would expect the US to have learned a thing or two about culture, religious traditions, ideological motivations, and especially the character of local leaders.

This is particularly relevant following the presidential summit between Trump and al-Sharaa. Trump lifted American sanctions on Syria and opened the door to its reconstruction. And just as the US had conditions for Za'im, it now has demands for Syria's new regime. Trump called on al-Sharaa to usher in nothing short of a revolution in Syria's foreign policy: joining the Abraham Accords and expelling Palestinian terrorists from the country. The question is whether al-Sharaa, who has yet to fully consolidate his grip over a fragmented and devastated Syria, is capable of such a bold move.

To date, no Islamist movement that seized power has ever abandoned its ideology. Quite the contrary - every past success has emboldened a wider Islamist surge. This was true in Iran after the 1979 revolution, and again after the Arab Spring, when Islamist movements, many tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, rose to power in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, and now Syria. Given al-Sharaa's past in al-Qaida and Islamic State, a shift in worldview seems unlikely.

Nonetheless, the new Middle Eastern order that Trump laid out during his visit to the region demands that decision-makers in Jerusalem craft an out-of-the-box strategy. Israel did well to enter the buffer zone stretching from Mount Hermon to Hamat Gader, but the next step is now required. If Trump is speaking the language of peace, that doesn't mean we must follow him blindly, but we should listen to what Damascus has to offer and consider what security guarantees the US and Europe might provide if a deal is reached. For now, it is better to be wise than to be right. The "I told you so" can wait.

The post Is the US repeating past mistakes in Syria? appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Over the past few decades, the Egyptian military has undergone significant upgrades. Its military capabilities have expanded since General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi came to power. He has increased the army's involvement in the economy and domestic politics and has accelerated the modernization of Egypt's armed forces since 2014. The official justification for this was the need to combat terrorism by ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood, to project power against Ethiopia, which, according to Egypt, threatens to dry up the Nile with its Grand Renaissance Dam, and to prevent terrorist elements from Libya's western border from infiltrating Egypt.

However, ISIS, Ethiopia, and Libya are merely pretexts. In reality, despite the peace agreement, Egypt has always regarded Israel as an enemy. In its education system, culture, and media, Israel is portrayed as an oppressive, murderous foreign occupier and an imperialist threat to regional peace.

Normalization is not on the table. When the Egyptian public is stirred by Israeli military operations in Gaza or Lebanon, it is evident. Even when then-US President Barack Obama threatened to freeze military aid to Egypt following el-Sisi's 2013 coup, Egyptian political movements across the spectrum called for canceling the Camp David Accords and severing ties with the US.

Moreover, the perception of Israel as an "eternal enemy" is also rooted in a psychological barrier: Israel is a small, modern nation that has managed to transform desert wastelands into thriving landscapes. It is a cohesive society despite its internal disputes. It stands as an example of a flourishing democracy despite existential challenges and threats, whereas Egypt, under dictatorial rule, has struggled and failed.

To counter what it perceives as the Israeli threat, Egypt maintains the 11th-largest army in the world, boasting an air force with approximately 600 aircraft (including 350 fighter jets), an armored corps with around 5,300 tanks, and an overall force of 460,000 active-duty soldiers and 480,000 reservists.

However, a deeper look at the data reveals that Egypt's military is outdated. Domestically, it aims to project strength and national pride, while regionally, it seeks to portray itself as an Arab powerhouse. About half of its tanks date back to the Soviet era. While its air force includes 168 F-16 fighter jets, the rest consists mainly of older Mirage and MiG-29 aircraft.

A collapse of the peace agreement and an Egyptian-Israeli war would cross a red line for the US, triggering a devastating crisis in relations with Washington. Could Egypt sustain a prolonged war if the US were to cut off its ammunition and spare parts supply? Could Egypt's sheer numbers, traditionally an advantage for the Arab side, stand up to Israeli technological superiority? Egypt has not fought a war since 1973. That is why, contrary to popular sentiment, successive Egyptian regimes, from Hosni Mubarak to Mohamed Morsi (of the Muslim Brotherhood) to el-Sisi, have opted to maintain the peace.

For Egypt, peace is a foundation of internal stability, a gateway to international cooperation and Western aid, and a means to allocate budgets toward domestic development (such as the construction of New Cairo). This does not make the Egyptian military any less formidable, particularly in light of its infrastructure buildup in Sinai. However, there is no need to escalate rhetoric or frame Egypt as an imminent threat.

Israel can protest and demand explanations, but disputes should be resolved through the existing diplomatic channels between Jerusalem and Cairo. Ultimately, peace remains a shared Israeli-Egyptian interest.

The post The Egyptians are improving their positions appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

On Dec. 31, the IDF spokesperson released a routine announcement about IDF operations in southern Lebanon. The announcement referred to the discovery and destruction of a weapons cache in the Saluki region. Shortly after, there was a report about thwarting an attempt by Hezbollah operatives to transfer weapons from a warehouse in southern Lebanon to a vehicle parked near the building.

These announcements joined other data published by the IDF about its operations in the first month of the ceasefire on the southern Lebanon front. According to the report, the IDF eliminated 44 Hezbollah members, conducted 25 strikes in Lebanon, and identified 120 violations of the agreement by Hezbollah.

This suggests that if we thought Hezbollah was on its knees, submissive and begging for its life, this isn't the picture that emerges when looking north. Hezbollah is provocative, attempting to rehabilitate and strengthen itself, continuing to see itself as Lebanon's defender. If Israel doesn't maintain the ceasefire to the letter, Hezbollah believes it will be entitled to act.

Moreover, Lebanese sources report that Hezbollah links the situation in Syria to that in Lebanon. The fall of Bashar Assad's regime, the occupation of the buffer zone, violations of Syrian sovereignty – "especially the perpetuation of the occupation of the Golan Heights" – and violations of the ceasefire agreement, all these "grant legitimacy to Hezbollah's internal adherence not to surrender its weapons as if it were a defeated party, while Israel operates without restraint." The message is clear: Hezbollah sees Israeli activity in Syria and Lebanon as justification to maintain its military power and is preparing the ground for continued "resistance" to the "Israeli enemy."

To achieve this goal, Hezbollah operates in several ways:

Public Relations

PR is important to the organization for internal relations and also with the international community. Therefore, Hezbollah operatives transparently display their cooperation with monitoring mechanisms, including UNIFIL and the South Lebanon Army, emphasizing that Israel repeatedly violates agreements – and that they will return to fighting if the situation continues.

In a speech delivered last weekend, Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem said, "There is no timeline that defines resistance actions, neither in the agreement nor after the end of the 60-day period." However, he explained, Hezbollah is giving an opportunity for the agreement's implementation and showing patience, but "this doesn't mean we'll be patient for 60 days." The resistance continues, Qassem announced, adding threateningly: "The occupation in Lebanon cannot continue without resistance."

Rehabilitation

Hezbollah is making enormous efforts to rehabilitate its political and military capabilities. IDF operations in recent weeks demonstrate how determined the organization is to save hidden weapons stockpiles and find ways to smuggle weapons from Syria under cover of its prevailing instability. Hezbollah is also busy filling the void in the organization's military and political leadership, aiming to return to orderly operations. Despite the hit to the organization's operatives (about 3,800 casualties), Hezbollah hasn't lost its ability to fight. It still has tens of thousands of fighters in its regular and reserve forces, waiting for orders.

Finally, maintaining ties with Iran

Without the connection to Iran, Hezbollah has no existence. After the fall of Assad's regime – the bridge connecting Tehran to its Shiite terror arm in Lebanon – both sides are trying to maintain economic and military aid to the organization, whose economic capabilities weren't harmed despite the Israeli Air Force's attack on Hezbollah's banking system in Lebanon last October. The flow of funds, mainly from drug trade in South America, Africa, and the Middle East, continues and provides the organization with the oxygen it needs.

Given that escalation is imminent, along with attempts by Hezbollah and Iran to test Israel's red lines, Israel must continue to keep the IDF in southern Lebanon even beyond the 60-day ceasefire agreement period. It's important to apply heavy pressure on Hezbollah with great intensity to deter it, but mainly to preserve the new balance of power equation against it. That is, unlike in 2006, Israel is now determined to enforce the upgraded Resolution 1701 and not rely on any other entity to do the work for it.

The post Hezbollah rears its head appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

After years of failing to destabilize Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria, Erdogan has finally achieved a breakthrough. Rebels under Turkey's patronage have reached their goal, creating an opportunity to reshape Syria according to Turkish interests—both in terms of the new regime and dealing with the Kurds, long considered an existential threat by Ankara.

Relations between Syria and Turkey have seen better days, but tension and hostility have always lingered in the background. Throughout the 20th century, territorial disputes and support for opposition elements in one another's countries often brought the two nations to the brink of war. Ironically, the rise of Bashar al-Assad initially opened a window for rapprochement between Ankara and Damascus. Hostility gave way to an era of neighborly collaboration, which some characterized as a mentor-mentee dynamic. Military cooperation, economic investments, trade agreements, and cross-border tourism signaled a new chapter. By 2008, Erdogan even confirmed Turkey's role as a mediator in peace talks between Jerusalem and Damascus.

However, Assad's refusal to compromise with domestic opposition following the outbreak of protests in March 2011, and his rejection of Erdogan's calls for reforms, led to a deep rift. Turkey became a hub for military and political opposition to Assad, with Erdogan extending support to rebels of all stripes—secular and Islamist—backed by Qatar.

With US backing, Turkey began training and arming rebel groups to overthrow Assad's regime. Ankara's animosity toward Assad was so intense that it even exhibited flexibility toward ISIS. While Turkey officially condemned the Islamic State's brutal acts, the ongoing "Muslim Cold War" between Sunni and Shiite factions in Syria and Iraq led Ankara to tacitly favor ISIS's challenge to Iranian-Shiite dominance in the region. This leniency included opening its borders to jihadist fighters entering Syria, purchasing oil from ISIS, and providing logistical support to terrorists.

Until recently, it seemed the Shiite axis was prevailing. Assad regained control over most of Syrian territory, and the rebels were confined to Idlib province near the Turkish border. But Erdogan persisted, continuing to back the rebels. On December 8, his efforts bore fruit: the Syrian regime collapsed under a lightning rebel offensive, forcing Assad to flee to Russia.

However, premature celebrations over the fall of Assad—a key ally of Iran and a linchpin in the "Axis of Resistance"—could soon give way to concern. Israel may now face Turkish-Qatari proxies on its northern border. Throughout the Swords of Iron war, Erdogan alternated between public criticism of Israel and more extreme rhetoric, accusing it of genocide, labeling it a "terror state," comparing Prime Minister Netanyahu to Hitler, claiming Hamas is defending Turkey, and even threatening to invade Israel. Most recently, Erdogan protested Israel's incursion into the Syrian buffer zone and urged the US to intervene. This is the same Erdogan who twice invaded Syria and seized territory to combat the Kurds.

Erdogan's Turkey aspires to dominate a new Middle East. Hezbollah's weakened state and Iran's defeat in Syria provide an opening for Turkish influence, even in Lebanon. Last week, Erdogan met with Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati and pledged to support Lebanon "by all available means" in response to Israeli "aggression."

The collapse of strong, stable states almost always invites anarchy and a loss of control. Opportunistic actors often exploit such chaos. In this high-stakes "game of nations," Israel must engage with forces that could become its allies—particularly the Druze and Kurds. It cannot afford to cede the arena to players like the Turkey-Qatar axis, which may appear moderate but ultimately aim to undermine Israel's security foundations.

The post Made in Turkey appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

So far, Ahmad al-Shara (Abu Mohammad al-Julani) is playing his cards right. He calls for tolerance toward minorities in Syria, advocates utilizing the administrative infrastructure of the old regime to quickly restore normalcy, and gives interviews to both Syrian and international media to present himself and his organization, Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham, in a positive light.

Al-Julani has learned how to appeal to the West, giving it exactly what it wants to hear. In an interview with Syria TV, a channel operating out of Turkey, the rebel leader declared: "We must transition from a revolutionary mentality to a state-oriented mentality to govern Syria."

A calculated approach toward the West

Another statement that resonated with the West came when al-Julani, in his first comments regarding Israel, acknowledged that the Syrian people are exhausted after years of war. Consequently, he claimed, the current situation "does not allow for entering new conflicts." He added, "The priority at this stage is reconstruction and stability, not getting dragged into conflicts that could lead to further destruction." Notably, Syria TV did not provide a direct quote about Israel but instead relayed the general tone of al-Julani's comments.

Without a doubt, to an external observer, the terrorist who once belonged to ISIS and Al-Qaeda, who was involved in horrifying acts of violence, and who has a $10 million US bounty on his head, seems to have shed his violent persona, laid down his weapons, and become a man of peace. al-Julani's statements have evidently impressed not only Western media but also the US government. Secretary of State Antony Blinken acknowledged that the US is in contact with rebel groups, including Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham, and stated: "Our message to the Syrian people is this: we want them to succeed, and we are ready to help them achieve that."

However, rhetoric and reality often diverge. Despite his seemingly conciliatory statements about Israel, al-Julani noted that "Israel's claims [about attacks in Syria] have weakened and no longer justify its recent violations," referring to ground incursions into Syria. He added that Israel's actions "threaten unjustified escalation in the region." Last Friday, the Syrian delegation to the UN filed a complaint against Israel, condemning Israeli airstrikes and incursions into Syrian territory.

Syria accused "Israeli aggression" of violating the 1974 ceasefire agreements and called for "firm and immediate measures" to ensure Israel's withdrawal from Syria.

A strategic build-up for future confrontation

If we strip away al-Julani's pacifist veneer, it becomes clear that his organization and the "new Syria" he seeks to govern have already laid the groundwork for a future confrontation with Israel. This clash may not occur now or in the near term, but the pretext is already on: If Israel does not withdraw from Syria or continues targeting military assets and strategic infrastructure, it risks conflict.

We must not be misled. Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham's name reflects its goal. Its mission extends beyond liberating Syria – it seeks to establish "Greater Syria," which includes Lebanon, Jordan, and Israel. Even now, numerous videos of rebel groups are circulating, declaring that their next stop is Al-Aqsa in Jerusalem. Al-Shara's choice of the alias "Al-Julani" (from the Golan) was not coincidental.

Returning to the interview with Syria TV, one of al-Julani's additional remarks reveals the depth of his religious commitment, which has driven his fight against the Assad regime and continues to guide his vision for Syria: "We are tools used by Allah to achieve victory over the decayed regime, but the effort is the effort of all Syrians."

If Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham is, as al-Julani describes it, a tool in Allah's hands, today Allah has chosen to use it to overthrow the Assad regime. Tomorrow, it could be directed against any other perceived enemy – including Israel.

The post Al-Julani aims for a 'greater Syria' appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

It may sound paradoxical, but Jews and Shiites share remarkably similar founding narratives. We are a people who emerged twice from the crucible. Our nation was born when we escaped slavery in Egypt and rose to flourishing national revival from the ashes of the Holocaust. Our worldview is rooted in the biblical verses "But the more they were oppressed, the more they multiplied and spread," (Exodus 1:12) and "And also the Glory of Israel will not lie nor repent" (1 Samuel 15:29). We are here to stay. "The eternal people do not fear a long journey," as Rabbi Yehoshua Weitzman, head of Yeshivat Ma'alot, once said.

Surprisingly, Shiites hold a parallel perspective. Shiism emerged from a deep sense of discrimination, persecution, and oppression. The founding figure of Shiism, Ali ibn Abi Talib, was repeatedly passed over in the succession of Muslim leadership after prophet Muhammad's death. When he finally became caliph in 656, he was assassinated just five years later. 19 years after that, his younger son Hussein sacrificed his life at the Battle of Karbala, fighting for leadership and what he believed to be the true and proper way of Islam. The massacre of Hussein and his 70 warriors became a defining moment in Shiite history, shaping the sect's identity to this day.

For centuries, Shiites endured social and economic hardship, which manifested in political marginalization. They suffered from inadequate representation and disunity. Their sense of persecution ran so deep that in 1974, when Shiite Imam Musa al-Sadr established a representative movement in Lebanon, he named it "Movement of the Deprived." The movement championed social justice and rights for Shiites within Lebanon. Later, inspired by Iran's Islamic Revolution in 1979 and partly through the establishment of Hezbollah in 1985, their struggle gained a significant international dimension – particularly in confronting Israel and the West. Since then, Shiites are no longer a humiliated and despised sect. They proudly carry the legacy of oppression, jihad, self-sacrifice, and martyrdom (istishhad). In the name of events from the seventh century, they remain willing to fight today.

In October 2023, Hezbollah missed an opportunity to fulfill its mission of destroying Israel. Since then, it has suffered significant blows but remains undefeated. While we view victory as a decisive triumph through conventional military metrics, for Hezbollah and Hamas resistance means patience and sacrifice. From their perspective, survival equals victory. Though we've eliminated many of their commanders and fighters, this isn't their measure of failure. On the contrary, their metric for success is their organization's steadfastness, its ability to fight back against Israeli forces, and its capacity to strike population centers while spreading fear.

That's why, after the Second Lebanon War, Hassan Nasrallah could declare with triumphant pride: "Did any of us imagine that a few thousand members of the Lebanese resistance could stand firm for 33 days on bare, exposed ground, under the open sky, facing the strongest air force in the Middle East?" In their view, in a war of the few against many, "victim" versus "tyrant" – every achievement is a victory. In 2010, his deputy and successor, Naim Qassem, wrote: "Instilling the desire for victory doesn't guarantee achieving it... Instilling the willingness for martyrdom yields the fruits of all capabilities and achieves victory, martyrdom, or both together." Their long history proves that unwavering faith and sacrifice are their tools for victory.

About 2,500 years ago, Sun Tzu wrote "The Art of War," one of the most influential books on military strategy. In the third chapter, he wrote: "If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle."

We know ourselves well, guided by human morality and Jewish values. Now is the time to understand our adversaries – not just militarily, but religiously and culturally – to achieve victory.

Dr. Yehuda Balanga specializes in Arab affairs at the Department of Middle Eastern Studies at Bar-Ilan University.

The post Know your enemy appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.