A Strategic Reckoning: Protecting Syria’s Druze Without Fueling the Fire
Protect the Druze, Respect Allies, Build for the Future
The Israeli airstrike on Damascus on 16 July 2025 was not merely a tactical error—it was a spectacular failure of foresight. As someone who has consistently defended Israel’s right to act in its strategic interests across Lebanon, Gaza, Yemen, and Iran, this operation strikes me as uniquely self-sabotaging. My critique is not born of naïveté about regional threats, nor—as some have lazily insinuated—a lack of concern for imperilled Druze lives. It springs from cold-eyed realism: this strike has endangered the very community it purported to save, alienated critical allies, and undermined the fragile architecture of Syrian stability. To dismiss these concerns is to ignore the complex tapestry of interests at play.
Israel: The Sole Actor Sabotaging the Arab-US Rescue of Syria
While Iran, Turkey, and jihadist remnants all threaten Syria’s transition, Israel alone chose to directly assault the institutions underpinning its US-Arab-backed unity. The strike on Syria’s Defence Ministry was a targeted blow to the Saudi-American vision for post-Assad stability:
Saudi Arabia pledged $12 billion for reconstruction, conditioning aid on Damascus guaranteeing minority rights;
The US lifted sanctions and brokered the Suwayda ceasefire hours before Israel’s strike;
Jordan and the UAE shared intelligence to contain tribal violence.
By bombing Damascus as this coalition stabilised Syria, Israel ignored a cardinal rule: When Washington, Riyadh, Amman, and Abu Dhabi unanimously oppose an action, it isolates rather than strengthens.
In response, the US Embassy in Syria issued this statement:
Amman, July 19, 2025 - Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Ayman Safadi, Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad Al-Shaibani, and U.S. Special Envoy for Syria Thomas Barrack held a trilateral meeting today to discuss the situation in Syria and efforts to stabilize the ceasefire that was reached earlier this morning in the Syrian governorate of Suwayda, in order to prevent further bloodshed and safeguard the safety of civilians. During the meeting, Safadi and Barrack affirmed their support for the ceasefire agreement and the Syrian government’s efforts to implement it. They stressed the full solidarity of Jordan and the United States with Syria, its security, stability, sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the safety of its citizens, emphasizing that Syria’s stability is a cornerstone of regional stability. Safadi, Al-Shaibani, and Barrack agreed on practical steps to support Syria in implementing the agreement, in a manner that ensures the country’s security and stability, protects civilians, and upholds the sovereignty of the state and the rule of law throughout Syrian territory. These practical steps include consolidating the ceasefire, deploying Syrian security forces in Suwayda Governorate, releasing detainees held by all parties, advancing community reconciliation efforts, promoting civil peace, and facilitating the delivery of humanitarian aid. Safadi and Barrack also welcomed the Syrian government’s commitment to holding accountable those responsible for violations against Syrian civilians in Suwayda Governorate, and supported efforts aimed at rejecting violence, sectarianism, sedition, incitement, and hatred. Al-Shaibani expressed appreciation for the role and efforts of Jordan and the United States in reaching the ceasefire, supporting its implementation, and ensuring Syria’s security, stability, and the safety of its people.
The Damascus Blunder: Treason, Targets, and Tribal Fallout
Scenes of Druze factions in Suwayda raising Israeli flags after the strike were a geopolitical gift to Israel’s adversaries. Overnight, the Druze—already caught in Syria’s sectarian crossfire—were branded as traitors by millions across the Arab world. Inviting foreign bombardment of a nation’s capital is, in the regional psyche, an unforgivable betrayal. This perception has transformed them into targets for vengeful tribes and militias from Baghdad to Beirut.
Yet Israel cannot possibly shield them alone. With ongoing operations in Gaza, Lebanon, the West Bank, and Iran, the notion of sustained ground protection in Syria is a fantasy. The question is not whether the Druze deserve safeguarding—they absolutely do—but how to achieve it without making them targets for every Sunni across the region, including the moderates who detest ISIS-linked and radical Sunni groups in Syria.
Beyond Tribal Hypocrisy: A Doctrine of Consistency
Let us confront the tribalist elephant in the room. When Shia Muslims faced persecution in Sunni states, did we endorse Iranian intervention to protect "brothers and sisters"? We did not—and rightly so. Sovereignty matters. If unilateral strikes to rescue ethno-religious kin abroad become normalised, the Middle East’s fragile order collapses. Israel’s moral duty to its own Druze citizens is unambiguous; its right to bomb Damascus over violence against Syrian Druze is not.
This is not advocacy for abandonment. I have explicitly called for a safe zone to protect the Druze—but one negotiated through Riyadh, Amman, and Washington, not unilaterally imposed by Israel’s air force. The Damascus strike, by contrast, was a reckless provocation that even Israel’s closest allies opposed. When the United States, Saudi Arabia, prominent voices in the UAE, and Jordan uniformly condemn an action as counterproductive, it is worth asking why.
The Roadmap: Interests Over Symbolism
De-escalation demands three concrete steps:
First, Israel must immediately cease unilateral strikes on sovereign Syrian institutions. The bombing of the Defence Ministry was not self-defence—it was an act that shattered nascent Syrian goodwill toward peace. Interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa’s subsequent pivot toward anti-Israel rhetoric ("the entity") is direct collateral damage.
Second, establish a US-brokered safe zone in Suwayda, enforced by Jordanian and neutral observers, not Israeli troops. Saudi Arabia must leverage its influence with Damascus to guarantee Druze autonomy, conditioning reconstruction aid on tangible protections. This isolates extremists without painting a target on the Druze.
Third, anchor the solution in great-power diplomacy. A confidential US-Saudi-Israeli trilateral forum can align security red lines, ensuring Israel’s legitimate border concerns are met through intelligence sharing and cooperation—not symbolic strikes. Meanwhile, Amman should lead ceasefire monitoring to prevent tribal reprisals.
No Saints, Only Survivors
To romanticise the Druze as blameless victims is to ignore Syria’s grim reality. They maintain armed militias, reject state authority, and—like every faction in this war—have blood on their hands. This does not justify their suffering, but it underscores that sustainable protection requires engaging Syria’s US-backed transitional government, not undermining it.
Conclusion: The Hawk’s Path Forward
As a strategic hawk, I believe Israel must always act in its interest. But interests are not served by alienating potential partners, empowering antisemitic narratives and conspiracy theories, or turning allies into pariahs. Ariel Sharon’s adage bears repeating: Victory cannot be won by the sword alone.
The Damascus strike ignored this wisdom. It abandoned statecraft for tribalism, and security for spectacle. The path ahead is clear: protect the Druze through coalition-building, not coercion; stabilise Syria through Riyadh’s statecraft, not Israel’s bombs; and recognise that Israel’s greatest strength lies not in isolated defiance, but in strategic alliances. To do otherwise is not toughness—it is myopia.
ISIS-stabilized