Israel Must Not Meddle in Syria

By Ali Nasser Mohammed

Arab history witnessed the rise and fall of states. This was most notably the Umayyad state, taking Damascus as its capital and from there on reaching Andalusia. It finally collapsed at the hands of its Abbasid oppressors, who moved the seat of the Umayyad caliphate to Baghdad as lead by Abu al-Abbas al-Saffah.

The Abbasids inturn did not learn from the lessons of the Umayyads and do away with the struggles between themselves until their Arab feature faded and dominated by the Seljuks until the arrival of Saladin, who led the Battle of Hattin in 1187 and broke the power of the Crusaders. After this victory, Saladin regained Jerusalem.

What is happening in the occupied Gaza Strip and the West Bank, Lebanon and Syria is not the last. Today, and now, Israel occupying Mount Hermon and the buffer zone despite an international decision and a 1974 agreement, proving the chain of Zionist expansion and foreign interference in Arab affairs to weaken and subjugate them one after the other.

As for the extended past, Syria rejected normalization according to Israeli whims and strategic interests that may be achieved after the earthquake of 8 December, 2024.

During my meeting with the late President Hafez al-Assad, his attention was drawn to a large copper plaque hanging on the wall of his office depicting the Battle of Hattin. He said: “The Arabs fought the Crusaders for more than 100 years until they expelled them from Jerusalem and other Arab countries, and that the fate of Israel will be like the fate of the Crusades.”

He then spoke about an offer made to him by the also late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, which included withdrawing from the Golan while keeping Lake Tiberias, which he said the Israelis “like to wet their feet in its waters,” in exchange for recognizing the Zionist entity. Al Assad rejected this offer and stressed that the Israeli flag would not be raised in the skies of Damascus except by establishing a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.

Israel incursions

The Golan, which Hafez al-Assad refused to be a deal at the expense of the Palestinian cause, today witnesses an incursion by the Zionist enemy into its buffer zone at the ceasefire line and the enemy’s prime minister’s renewed declaration that the Golan Heights will remain Israeli forever.

Not content with that, Israel launched more than 480 raids that destroyed military sites, strategic weapons depots, surface-to-air missiles, fighter jet squadrons, dozens of helicopters, airports, air defense batteries, and the military infrastructure of the Syrian army, which was founded on 1 August, 1946. At the same time, the Israeli navy carried out large-scale strikes to destroy the Syrian naval fleet, including coastal defense systems and ships containing sea-to-sea missiles.

What is shameful for both the Syrian and Arab sides is that paralyzing the role of the Syrian army does not serve the interests of Syria and the Arab nation, its security, dignity, and national role. The army was actually dissolved without a declared decision, as happened in occupied Iraq in 2003 by America, which made it easy for Israel to achieve a golden goal that it had never dreamed of.

These strategic national gains belong to the Syrian people, not to any regime, regardless of its identity, and they are irreplaceable, which requires the Syrian people and their new government to be deeply aware of the ambitions of the Zionist entity and its allies in the region, which have no end unless Syria’s security and sovereignty are not a priority. Therefore, it has become necessary to work quickly and seriously to preserve what remains of the military establishment, which was and still is the pillar of Syrian power and which has no alternative unless foreign agendas hide something else.

Syria’s recovery from its deep wounds and its strong and majestic return to the Arab arena, in a manner befitting its Arab role and national interests, requires distinguishing the enemy from the friend and clinging to the national interest in addition to unity of ranks, overcoming divisions and the short-sighted policy of revenge.

Our history teaches us that major challenges can only be faced by the will of a unified people and a conscious leadership that realizes that Syria’s strength is a guarantee for the stability of its people and the region and for repelling any aggressive projects that threaten its present and future and the future of the Arab nation.

Today, this nation is in dire need of an Arab project to get it out of the circle of conflicts, wars and sectarianism that undermines the rights of others to draw a better future for the present and the future.

However, this requires vision, will, and insightful and patriotic leadership. Otherwise, Syria and the Arabs will enter a phase of decline, fragmentation and civil wars, and no one will escape this fate from the ocean to the Gulf.

We hope that the Syrian people, who are looking forward to their freedom, independence and sovereignty, will overcome this difficult historical stage in the life of the Syrian state and will be able to achieve their aspirations at the hands of their sons and youth. This is what the Syrian people, with their history and civilization extending deep into history, have accustomed us to.

The writer is a former President of South Yemen before the country was united in 1990.  He wrote this article for the Arabic Al Rai Alyoum

CrossFireArabia

CrossFireArabia

Dr. Marwan Asmar holds a PhD from Leeds University and is a freelance writer specializing on the Middle East. He has worked as a journalist since the early 1990s in Jordan and the Gulf countries, and been widely published, including at Albawaba, Gulf News, Al Ghad, World Press Review and others.

Related Posts

Oslo: Strangling The Dove

By Dr Khairi Janbek

When we do a recap of the Oslo Agreements, they were a series of accords between Israel and the PLO signed in 1993. It was a process meant to lead to a permanent settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict within five year, including decisions on borders, refugees, security, Jerusalem and settlements.

But right from the start, voices were divided over the process, while for others, the whole idea had a built-in mechanism for failure from the start. The Palestinians started seeing that the Oslo Agreements were neither ending the establishment of Israeli settlements nor the end to occupation, while for the Israelis it didn’t seem to end their security concerns.

Indeed, it is pointless to think which comes first, the chicken or the egg, because two different fears and logistics persisted from the start.  But also, it is important to think about the circumstances which brought about the idea of launching the process, and which did put the PLO in a tough position for being perceived as supporting the wrong side which lost; Iraq.

The room for manoeuvre for the late Yasser Arafat was very tight as he stood to lose the legitimacy of the PLO.

What one is trying to say is that, right from the start, outside official circles, many on the Palestinian side were against Oslo probably as many as was the case on the Israeli side.

The gradual erosion of Oslo mainly through the continued Israeli actions kept feeding extremism on both sides.  Nevertheless, the concept was not revoked by any Israeli government because of its effect on Arab public opinion, pressure which is likely to block any peace initiative. Moreover, the international atmosphere was not conducive for such an initiative.

Having said that, one cannot claim that the international atmosphere is currently more indifferent to the abrogation of the Oslo, rather Israel seems to have more leeway in undertaking unilateral actions with more impunity.

Of course, it is not international law that can be counted on in this respect but rather, at least for the time being Donald Trump’s disapproval of the idea of annexing the West Bank by Israel. This is despite the fact that all the Israeli actions of dividing the West Bank from north to south first and currently from west to east, goes unnoticed. But the important thing has been till now, and don’t say the magic word, end of Oslo.

However, the recent development is that Israeli political parties, the partners in Netanyahu’s government are all pushing openly, for the abrogation of the Oslo agreements and cancelling out all the Israeli obligations towards it.

One can only say such an open declaration is a matter of principle by the Israeli government, because the changes on the ground are there for all to see. One supposes all parties are playing for time to see the end of the Palestinian national aspirations.

The columnist is a Jordanian writer based in Paris, France

Continue reading
How Trump Burned Western Friendships

By Jassem Al-Azzawi

Something remarkable is happening today in the corridors of western powers. America’s closest allies are no longer whispering their frustrations behind closed doors; they are now shouting them from the podiums of their parliaments and in press conferences. And US president Donald Trump is responding in kind. The transatlantic alliance, painstakingly built over eight decades, is now fracturing in a live broadcast.

The immediate cause is the American-Israeli war on Iran, launched on 28 February, 2026, without consulting NATO partners, United Nations, or even Washington’s closest friends. But the rift runs deeper than a single conflict; it reflects a strategy that is indifferent to its allies, or even openly contemptuous of them.

“The Americans clearly lack a strategy.”

The breaking point was starkly illustrated in the frank remarks made by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz to students in Marsberg, northwest Germany. Merz likened the conflict with Iran to past US failures in Afghanistan and Iraq.

“It’s clear the Americans don’t have a strategic plan,” he said, describing Washington’s approach as “ill-conceived.”

He went even further, suggesting that the US was being “humiliated” by Tehran’s negotiating tactics which is a stunning public accusation from a Chancellor who, until recently, was one of Washington’s most hawkish European allies.

Trump reacted furiously, writing on his TruthSocial platform that Merz “doesn’t know what he’s talking about” and threatening to reduce the number of US troops stationed in Germany, currently at 36,436. He then told the German chancellor to mind his own business:

“The Chancellor of Germany should spend more time ending the war between Russia and Ukraine, where he has been completely ineffective, and fixing his own battered country… rather than meddling in the affairs of those who are eliminating the Iranian nuclear threat.”

This verbal sparring is transcending all diplomatic norms and is shakening the foundations of the US-European axis.

Starmer: “I’m fed up,” he says publicly.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer invested considerable political capital in cultivating a working relationship with Trump, but that investment has now proven costly. When asked about Trump’s threats to destroy Iran, Starmer told ITV:

“These are not words I would ever use, because I speak from our British values ​​and principles.”

The harshest language came when Starmer placed Trump alongside Vladimir Putin as partners in causing British economic hardship, telling Talking Points:

“I’m fed up with seeing families and businesses across the country struggling with fluctuating energy bills because of Putin’s or Trump’s actions around the world.”

On British military involvement, Starmer was unequivocal: “I will not change my mind, and I will not back down. It is not in our national interest to join this war, and we will not do so.” Trump rewarded this initial stance with a statement to The Sun newspaper: “Starmer has not been cooperative. The relationship is clearly not what it used to be,” he said.

Meanwhile, the International Monetary Fund underscored the scale of the material risks by lowering its 2026 growth forecast for Britain to 0.8 percent. This is a direct consequence of the energy shock Trump’s trade war has inflicted on British households.

Sanchez and Carney: Europe and Canada Draw a Line

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has emerged as the most vocal European leader in his criticism of Trump and his uncompromising stance. After Trump threatened to sever all trade ties with Madrid following Spain’s refusal to allow US troops to use the Rota and Morón air bases, Sanchez did not back down. When the ceasefire was announced, his judgment was scathing:

“A ceasefire is always good news, but this temporary relief cannot make us forget the chaos, destruction, and lives lost. The Spanish government will not applaud those who set the world ablaze just because they have finally appeared with a bucket of water.”

For his part, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney offered a broader structural indictment, stating in a speech at the Lowy Institute in Sydney:

“Geostrategically, dominant powers are increasingly acting without restraint or respect for international norms and laws, while others bear the consequences.”

He described the war as “a failure of the international order,” adding that “the United States and Israel acted without engaging the United Nations or consulting allies, including Canada.”

The alarm bells were not only ringing abroad; Senate Democrats launched a fierce campaign to reclaim congressional authority over a war they deemed illegal, unauthorized, and a diplomatic disaster.

Senator Tim Kaine’s diagnosis was accurate: “There was no clear justification, no clear plan, and no effort to engage allies or Congress. When you make diplomacy impossible, you make war inevitable.”

Senator Chris Murphy was even more blunt.

“We have never seen a foreign conflict so publicly mismanaged. We have become a laughingstock around the world, while hurting Americans who are now paying billions more in fuel prices.” Senator Tammy Duckworth linked the current disaster to America’s post-World War II pattern, saying:

“Our duty is to ensure that our nation never again slides into an endless, self-serving war.” Despite this, all six war powers resolutions introduced by the Democrats failed due to Republican loyalty to Trump, even as the war cost the lives of 13 Americans in its first month and the price of a gallon of gasoline reached $4.30.

Time for reckoning has come…

Whether Trump’s antagonism toward allies is a strategic dismantling or simply the impulsiveness of a leader who confuses aggression with strength, the result is the same. He threatened to withdraw from NATO, imposed trade sanctions on Spain, threatened to withdraw troops from Germany, and pushed the “special relationship” with Britain to the brink of collapse. Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s warning also came to light.

Trump will “re-examine” Washington’s commitments to allies who did not support the war, as a declaration of “conditional friendship.”

America’s friends are being pushed away, its adversaries are watching, and the West, for the first time since 1945, is genuinely unsure whether it can rely on Washington.

Jassem Al-Azzawi is an Iraqi writer and journalist who contributed this article to the Arabic website, Al Rai Al Youm and appears in Crossfirearabia.com.

Continue reading

You Missed

An Egyptian House in a German Town

An Egyptian House in a German Town

Nakba Art

Nakba Art

Palestinian Population Tops 15.5 Million

Palestinian Population Tops 15.5 Million

‘All I Want is to Bury My Family in Dignity’  

‘All I Want is to Bury My Family in Dignity’  

Israeli Army: 18 Soldiers Dead, 910 Injured in Lebanon

Israeli Army: 18 Soldiers Dead, 910 Injured in Lebanon

Watch Out: Israel is Secretly Filling The West Bank With Settlements

Watch Out: Israel is Secretly Filling The West Bank With Settlements