TEHRAN – The persistence of Israeli military aggression in southern Syria, reported on Tuesday even as negotiations were underway in Paris, illustrates the contradiction between declared diplomatic efforts and the reality of the regime’s expansionist policies. 

This contradiction is structural rather than incidental. It reflects a long-term strategy that transcends changes in Syrian leadership and reveals the pursuit of territorial consolidation under the guise of security.

The collapse of Bashar al-Assad in late 2024 and the rise of Ahmad al-Sharaa did not bring about a reduction in hostilities. Instead, Israeli military operations intensified, underscoring that Assad himself was never the central issue. The voiding of the 1974 disengagement accord after Assad’s fall was not a defensive necessity but a calculated maneuver. By discarding the agreement, Israel removed international constraints and created a legal vacuum in which it could expand its presence deeper into Syrian territory. This escalation demonstrates that the real objective was not regime change but the opportunity to advance territorial ambitions.

The pattern of Israeli raids averaging nearly two a day since Assad’s fall—points to a broader ideological project: the advancement of the Greater Israel vision. This project seeks to extend influence beyond internationally recognized borders, particularly into the Golan Heights and southern Syria. The annexation of the Golan Heights, recognized only by Washington and rejected by most of the international community, serves as a precedent for further expansion. Demands raised in negotiations, from demilitarization of southern Syria to full diplomatic recognition, are not about immediate security but about embedding military presence and normalizing annexation.

The Paris talks, mediated by the United States, brought together delegations led by Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shibani and intelligence chief Hussein al-Salama on one side, and on the other, Israel’s Ambassador to Washington Yechiel Leiter, Military Secretary Maj. Gen. Roman Gofman, and acting National Security Adviser Gil Reich. Oversight is provided by Trump’s envoy Tom Barrack, who also serves as ambassador to Turkey.

The composition of these delegations reveals the seriousness of the negotiations, yet the substance of the demands exposes their imbalance.

Syria’s position remains consistent: withdrawal and cessation of hostilities. Israel’s position, however, escalates with each round, shifting from humanitarian corridors to demands for diplomatic relations, showing that the talks are less about peace than about legitimizing expansion.

The narrative of “security threats” and “terror groups” serves as a convenient pretext for incursions, but the underlying reality is the determination to reshape the territorial map. By framing its actions as defensive, Israel masks a broader ambition to consolidate control over southern Syria.

The repeated incursions into Quneitra, the establishment of checkpoints, and the arrests of civilians are not isolated incidents but part of a systematic effort to erode Syrian sovereignty and normalize foreign military presence.

Evolving demands during negotiations reveal a strategy of incremental expansion. What began as calls for humanitarian corridors into Sweida under the guise of protecting the Druze minority later escalated into demands for full diplomatic relations. This progression shows a calculated plan: secure footholds, legitimize them through diplomacy, and ultimately normalize annexation. 

For now, the Greater Israel scheme unfolds through military incursions, diplomatic maneuvers, and exploitation of instability. For Syrians, the demand remains simple and unchanged—foreign armies must leave their land.