What does Israel want from Syria’s Druze?

Against the backdrop of escalating events in Syria since the new administration and its president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, assumed power, bloody clashes broke out in recent weeks between armed Druze fighters and factions loyal to the administration. These confrontations resulted in numerous casualties in the towns of Sahnaya and Jaramana in the Damascus countryside.

Israel did not wait long to intervene. It quickly launched military strikes under the pretext of "protecting the Druze minority" against groups it labeled "extremist." It also bombed the vicinity of the Presidential Palace in a clear threat to al-Sharaa, declaring that “Israel will not allow any harm to come to the Druze.”

Recently, Israel has been hosting Druze from Syria on religious visits, while simultaneously warning the Syrian administration that it will not tolerate any harm to them. What lies behind their "manufactured" protection?

This protection took on a so-called "humanitarian" form when Israel announced that an Air Force helicopter delivered humanitarian aid and equipment to members of the Druze community in southern Syria. This initiative was to "enable the Druze to cope with humanitarian challenges," according to Israeli sources. 

Additionally, an Israeli army spokesperson announced the evacuation of Syrian Druze civilians by helicopter for medical treatment inside Israeli territory.

However, observers and analysts are well aware that behind this manufactured “protection,” which coincides with Israel’s promotion of religious visits by delegations from the Syrian Druze community to Israeli territory, lie expansionist policies and interests that Israel has never hidden – particularly those that became evident after the fall of the Assad regime and were translated into incursions, occupation, and the imposition of control over land.

Expansion under the guise of "protection"

“The plans of Benjamin Netanyahu are rooted in expansionist ambitions fueled by the dreams of the far-right Israeli movement that dominates the government. This has been used to justify all of Israel’s aggressive actions in the past two years, especially with ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich holding significant sway,” said Mohamed al-Laithi, a researcher specializing in Israeli affairs.

“Driven by these ambitions, Netanyahu declares his full support for the Druze and pledges to defend them. This support is part of a strategy to play the minority card in order to achieve geopolitical objectives,” he added.

Al-Laithi sees Israel’s hosting of Druze delegations as a calculated overture to Syrian Druze, part of a broader plan to divide Syria by igniting sectarian strife among the country’s various communities. He points out that Israel has exploited the relationship between Palestinian Druze inside Israel and Syrian Druze to pave the way for its expansionist goals.

On another front, Ayman al-Raqab, Professor of Political Sciences at Al-Quds University, notes that Israel has its eye on the Golan Heights and Mount Hermon – areas inhabited by the Druze minority. 

“These are high peaks from which the heart of Damascus can be seen. As such, they are strategic zones, and Israel is targeting their residents in order to tighten its grip on them,” he told Raseef22.

"Supporting the Druze in Syria is rhetorical posturing and lip service aimed at driving wedges within Syrian society. This is not a new strategy; it dates back to the period following the 1967 war. At that time, Israel attempted to implement such a plan, but it was thwarted by Druze leaders in Syria, Lebanon, and the occupied Golan."

Is Israel seeking sectarian mini-states in Syria?

When asked whether Israel aims to spark sectarian strife in Syria, al-Laithi replied that, indeed, “Israel is trying to ignite sectarian strife and conflict in Syria in order to weaken the country and then seize and annex large swaths of land – just as it did with the occupied Golan Heights – as part of a long-term strategy.”

Dr. al-Raqab supported this statement, asserting that Israel is attempting to undermine and disrupt Syria’s social fabric by stirring internal conflict and escalating tensions in an overt and deliberate way. He emphasized that the goal behind stirring up the Druze issue is to provoke sectarian strife and push Syria toward fragmentation.

For his part, Ayman Shaib al-Din, an independent lawyer and human rights activist from Sweida, told Raseef22 that given Israel’s status as an occupying state, “and because some Arab nations have normalized relations with it, and considering Syria’s unstable transitional situation and the Salafi jihadists’ rise to power, Israel fears the approach of these groups to its presumed borders. Therefore, it is interested in establishing a buffer security zone.

"This cannot be called Israeli support for the Druze of Syria. These are Israeli political and security interests, which it is utilizing by exploiting Syria’s Druze."

Commenting on the "change" mentioned by the spiritual leader of the Druze community in Israel, Muwaffaq Tarif – when Tarif stated Netanyahu had issued directives regarding the events in Syria and that a change was imminent – Laithi responded, "This comes as a message within the context of the internal disputes that sparked the clashes. But the Druze in Syria are fully aware of the importance of Syria’s territorial unity and sovereignty.”

“Supporting the Druze in Syria is rhetorical posturing and lip service aimed at driving wedges within the Syrian body,” said lawyer and writer Said Naffaa, who stressed Israel’s policy aimed at dividing Syria into sectarian mini-states.

"This is an old plan, but Israel now sees a golden opportunity to implement it, especially since sectarian strife greatly serves such a scheme. It tried to do so after the 1967 war, but the Druze and their leaders in Syria, Lebanon, and the occupied Golan thwarted it."

The "fictitious" link between Israel and Syria’s Druze

"There is no relationship between the Druze of Syria and Israel. This is a false claim that must be corrected," says Shaib al-Din. "There is only a connection between the Druze of Syria and the Druze of Palestine. They are one clan and have been linked by these ties since before Israel occupied Palestinian land – just as Palestinian refugees after the 1948 Nakba remain connected with their brothers and relatives who stayed inside the ‘48 territories."

In this context, al-Laithi notes, "Members of the Druze community are present in Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan, and within the Palestinian territories. It is true that some from the latter serve in the Israeli military, but the Druze community, despite the borders separating its members, seeks to preserve its social cohesion."

Naffaa, for his part, says that one can speak of a bond between Israel and the Druze inside Israel. 

"This occurred solely through the force of Israeli law – especially the mandatory conscription law imposed on our youth. But with regard to the rest of the Druze in the region, there is no connection whatsoever. Their true bond is with their Arab and Islamic sphere," he said.

The opposition of Syrian Druze to the current regime does not stem from a desire to separate from Syria or align with Israel, but rather from a position aimed at building a democratic national state founded on equal citizenship, justice, the separation of powers, and the principles of human rights.

"Israel seeks to foster this bond between itself and the Druze because it significantly reinforces sectarianism – especially given that the State of Israel is founded on a collection of different ethnic and sectarian groups," said al-Raqab. He pointed out that Israel sees the Druze, by virtue of their religious doctrine, as a group inclined to pledge allegiance to the ruling state – or in this case, to Israel. This is the reality that Israel is attempting to impose and solidify.

What do the Syrian religious visits signify?

Naffaa explains that Druze visits to Syria began in the year 2000 as a communication initiative. 

“I was among the organizers until it was halted in 2010,” he shared. As for the visits from Syria to the Palestinian interior, they were intended for pilgrimages to the Druze holy site – the tomb of the Prophet Shu'ayb – located in the plain of Hattin. The delegations that came were from villages occupied by Israel during the October War of 1973, such as the village of Hadar, according to Nafaa, who believes that the purpose of a delegation of Syrian Druze visiting and staying in Israel is purely political, serving the interests of the Israeli establishment and its loyalists among the Druze in the country, and aims to undermine the Syrian national fabric. 

“Strangely, the information suggests that it took place in coordination with the new regime in Damascus,” he adds.

Shaib al-Din, however, rejects the exaggeration of the significance of the Druze delegation’s visit to Israel – especially as it was a visit to a religious site sacred to the Druze community. He points out that it stems from a bond of blood between the Druze of Syria and those of Palestine, a connection that predates the establishment of Israel by centuries.

“That visit took place with the official approval of the Syrian authorities,” he clarifies. “The delegations crossed the border officially and returned officially – it was not conducted in secret.”

“Opposition to the regime does not mean alignment with Israel”

“We are peaceful and do not harbor ideological hostility toward anyone. We see Israel as an occupying state – it occupies Syrian land. And we believe that the restoration of our land and rights, as well as those of the Palestinian people, must be achieved through peace, diplomacy, international law, and civil nonviolent resistance,” Shaib al-Din said.

“We see clearly how much radical resistance has harmed Palestine, the Palestinian people, and their cause. And on the other hand, how the Arab and Islamic states have betrayed and exploited the Palestinian cause – rushing into unilateral normalization with Israel without holding a public referendum or securing the Palestinian people’s right to recover their land and their rights.”

Shaib al-Din emphasizes that the voices of the Syrian Druze are Syrian voices – not sectarian – and they seek peace for Syria. Their stance is transparent and above the table, unlike the covert normalization stances the Syrian regime is now trying to adopt, just as most Arab regimes have.

“We are Syrians. We stand with the will of the entire Syrian people – not with the unilateral decisions of the regime. This is a crucial matter and must not be taken lightly.”

Despite the claims about Druze accepting Israeli intervention in Syria, Naffaa affirms that the vast majority of Syrian Druze are opposed to any relationship with Israel. He notes that the Druze, by virtue of history and geography – and regardless of their numbers – have played a major role in Syria and its independence, starting with the Great Syrian Revolt of 1925, which was led on behalf of the Syrian people by the Druze leader Sultan Pasha al-Atrash.

Shayb al-Din affirms that the Druze community – which constitutes barely 2 to 3 percent of Syria’s population – is historically recognized for its patriotism and steadfast loyalty to the Syrian homeland. He explains that the current opposition of Syrian Druze to the regime does not stem from a desire to separate from Syria or align with Israel, but rather from a position aimed at building a democratic national state founded on equal citizenship, justice, the separation of powers, and the principles of human rights.

“Unfortunately, the ruling authorities in Syria today have not worked toward any of these principles. The constitutional declaration was disappointing and lays the foundation for a new form of despotism in Syria – both political and religious.”

This approach echoes Israel’s attempts to co-opt the Maronite Christian community in Lebanon.

It is worth noting that last March, President Sharaa signed an agreement with the Druze of Sweida stipulating their integration into the country’s transitional institutions, the formation of local police forces from within the community, and official recognition of their cultural identity. Although the agreement came into effect a few weeks ago in an effort to end armed clashes between regime-aligned factions and local residents, it has drawn sharp criticism from several Druze figures.

Hikmat al-Hijri, one of the Druze religious leaders in Syria, accused the government of killing its people using extremist militias, and called for international protection and direct aid.

Peace with Israel?

In light of the ongoing controversy regarding the new administration’s stance on normalization with Israel, political analyst al-Raqab believes that the interim Syrian president cannot afford to enter into a confrontation with Israel. He asserts that Israel’s aim is to pressure and blackmail Syria into signing a peace agreement in the near future.

Antoine Shalhat, a researcher on Israeli affairs, notes that Israel is attempting to use the Druze in Syria as a tool in its power struggle with Turkey. It is also working to undermine Syrian President Ahmed Sharaa’s efforts to unify the country under centralized rule – believing that Sharaa will establish a dangerous jihadist regime.

Speaking to Raseef22, Shalhat explains that many Israeli analyses point out how this strategy echoes Israel’s historical attempts to co-opt the Maronite Christian community in Lebanon, particularly during the 1982 war, as well as its support for the Kurdish minority in Iraq as an operational base against Saddam Hussein’s regime and later against Iran.

“What inspires hope is the near-total rejection among Syrian Druze of this manipulative Israeli agenda. Many see it as a foreign threat that endangers Syria’s national fabric,” he concluded. “This external threat aims to divide Syria and redraw its political map. Therefore, it must be resisted and confronted.”