What does Israel want from Syria? Continuous strikes .. Do understandings begin?

Alghad - 06/04
Israel continues to direct focused strikes within the Syrian territories, and the declared goal is to prevent the conversion of Syrian geography into an square invested by regional or international parties, and to prevent the stationing of armed groups or the accumulation of weapons that may threaten their security, including any Turkish military presence. It is an Israeli perspective that Iran out of Syria never means handing over the site to Turkey. What is happening today goes beyond the issue of securing the borders, to reshape the security, geographical and political reality of Syria on the size of the Israeli vision. It is true that the escalation is not limited to the Syrian scene; The return of the war to Gaza, the attempts to change the West Bank equation, and the repeated strikes in Lebanon, all meet to indicate a stage of escalation that exceeds the borders of American satisfaction to direct participation. Washington today undertakes the management of the Yemeni file, carried out strikes against the Houthis, and even issues explicit threats to target Iran militarily in unprecedented ways. This American trend must push Tehran to contain pressure through two tracks: either by showing diplomatic flexibility by opening up to dialogue, or through indirect escalation through the fronts adjacent to Israel, which in turn leads Israel to fortify these fronts proactive, and this may also include further fronts, such as Iraq, to ​​prevent their conversion to threatening platforms in the next stage. The escalating Israeli pressure on Syria clearly expresses intentions that go beyond security to reconstruct the political map of this country. The new Syrian regime places the merit of dealing with this escalation, within a narrow margin of options. The option of regional support from Türkiye appears to be an attractive theoretical, but it is practically difficult to achieve in light of the current confrontation climate and the American solid position in supporting Israeli policies. This reality is clearly evident in the Israeli targeting of areas that Ankara expressed its desire to turn it into military bases. The Turkish response came through the statements of Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, who stressed that his country does not want any confrontation with Israel in Syria, but rather indicated that reaching "certain understandings" between Damascus and Tel Aviv remains an internal Syrian affair. The fall of the regional option, and the decline of bets on international alliances, pushes the regime in Damascus to search for possible understandings with Washington. Especially since the American position on the regime is still not settled, while the sanctions continue to deepen isolation. Here, an American pursuit may seem to accept the only option available to the Syrian administration. But the fundamental question remains: What do Washington want from Damascus? From internal policies, to what the American President's envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkev, hinted over the possibility of Syria and Lebanon's accession to Abraham's agreements. So, while the threat to Iran has become an American and is no longer an Israeli exclusive, Israel continues the escalation strategy to impose a new reality and turn it into a reality. Even the idea of ​​reshaping regional relations through peace agreements, including Syria and Lebanon, does not appear at the present time within the priorities of Tel Aviv, because it simply implement what they want without the need to legitimize these policies through agreements. However, if it succeeds in stabilizing the features of this reality, peace agreements may later turn into a tool to consolidate what has already been imposed with the power of the de facto.
Israel continues to direct focused strikes within the Syrian territories, and the declared goal is to prevent the conversion of Syrian geography into an square invested by regional or international parties, and to prevent the stationing of armed groups or the accumulation of weapons that may threaten their security, including any Turkish military presence. It is an Israeli perspective that Iran...
[Short citation of 8% of the original article]