The idea of a “Greater Israel,” a vision of expanded Israeli territorial control stretching into neighbouring countries, has persisted as a polarizing narrative in global politics. While some proponents see it as a reflection of historical entitlement and strategic necessity, the current Middle Eastern realpolitik makes this vision increasingly improbable. Syria, a central piece in this imagined puzzle, epitomizes the hurdles that such ambitions face in the modern geopolitical arena.
Syria’s situation is far from conducive to external territorial annexations. Over a decade of brutal civil war has left the nation fragmented, but not defeated. The Assad regime, although battered, retains significant control, buoyed by the unwavering support of Iran and Russia. According to The Guardian, Iran’s commitment to protecting Syria from Israeli encroachments is rooted not only in ideological alignment but in a deep-seated strategic imperative. “Tehran sees Damascus as a critical link in its resistance axis, stretching from Iran to Lebanon,” the Guardian observed in a 2023 analysis of regional alliances. This interconnectedness of regional players complicates any expansionist agenda.
Russia’s intervention in Syria, driven by its geopolitical interests and strategic foothold in the Mediterranean, adds another layer of complexity. Moscow invested heavily in maintaining the Assad regime and ensuring that Syria remains a loyal ally. A recent BBC report emphasized that “any destabilization of Syria through territorial ambitions would directly threaten Russian military and political gains in the region.” Russian President Vladimir Putin’s close coordination with Iran in stabilizing Syria underscores a shared goal of countering external interference, particularly from Israel.
The larger geopolitical context has also undergone significant changes. The unipolar world of the early 21st century, dominated by US-led interventions, has given way to a multipolar global order. China, as an emerging superpower, has steadily increased its influence in the Middle East, forging partnerships that prioritize stability and economic development over conflict. The Financial Times recently highlighted China’s pivotal role in mediating the Saudi-Iran rapprochement, signaling Beijing’s rising clout as a peace broker in the region. China’s investments under the Belt and Road Initiative further solidify its interest in a stable Middle East, making it unlikely to support actions that could spark broader conflicts.
The BRICS alliance, with Russia and China as its prominent members, further challenges Israel’s ambitions. As these nations promote a world order that resists unilateral dominance, Israel’s pursuit of a “Greater Israel” vision is unlikely to find international backing. In a piece by Al Jazeera, it was noted that “BRICS nations have increasingly positioned themselves as counterweights to Western influence, ensuring that the sovereignty of smaller states remains protected against external aggression.”
The role of the Muslim world also cannot be understated. Despite their internal divisions, Muslim-majority countries remain largely unified in their opposition to Israeli territorial expansion. Iran’s deep involvement in Syria, Turkey’s strategic interests in northern Syria, and the collective opposition from Arab states ensure that any move by Israel would meet stiff resistance. As per CNN, “the Palestinian cause remains the linchpin of Arab solidarity, making any perceived Israeli aggression a rallying point for opposition.” The Arab League, though fractured, would likely find consensus in condemning Israeli actions, drawing on shared historical grievances and the ongoing plight of Palestinians.
In essence, the vision of “Greater Israel” faces insurmountable obstacles in the current geopolitical environment. The complex interplay of regional dynamics, the rise of multipolarity, and the staunch opposition from both local actors and global powers render such aspirations untenable. While the idea may continue to resonate in certain ideological circles, the realities of Middle Eastern realpolitik make it a mirage rather than a feasible strategy. As The Guardian succinctly put it, “in a region already burdened by historical grievances and modern rivalries, the pursuit of territorial expansion is a recipe for perpetual conflict, not enduring peace.” Â
The fractured nature of Syrian politics itself creates a unique deterrent. Unlike Afghanistan, where a single entity like the Taliban emerged as a dominant force, Syria’s conflict has produced a mosaic of factions, many of which are hostile to Israel. The proliferation of Iranian-backed militias across Syria, coupled with Turkey’s military presence, ensures that any territorial encroachment would be fiercely contested. As The New York Times reported in its analysis of the region’s dynamics, “no single actor possesses the unilateral capacity to dictate Syria’s future, making external interventions perilous at best.”
US foreign policy, once a bulwark of Israeli expansionism, is also showing signs of recalibration. While the Trump Administration’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and the Golan Heights annexation emboldened Israel, subsequent developments suggest a shift. A potential Trump 2.0 presidency, according to Foreign Affairs, “might focus more on domestic priorities and countering China than on supporting contentious Middle Eastern policies.” This evolving stance leaves Israel with fewer guarantees of unwavering US support, especially in a region where Washington’s influence is waning.
On the ground, the humanitarian crisis in Syria continues to draw international attention. Years of war have devastated the country’s infrastructure, displaced millions, and created a dire need for global assistance. Any Israeli attempt to annex Syrian territory would likely provoke widespread condemnation from humanitarian organizations and international watchdogs. As Al Jazeera aptly noted, “the global community’s tolerance for unilateral actions that exacerbate human suffering is at an all-time low.”
Israel’s recent normalization of ties with certain Arab states under the Abraham Accords adds another layer of caution. While these agreements have been celebrated as breakthroughs in regional diplomacy, they remain fragile. Pursuing an expansionist agenda could jeopardize these nascent relationships, alienating key Gulf allies. As The Economist observed, “Israel’s future lies in deepening economic and security partnerships with its neighbors, not in reviving outdated territorial ambitions.”
In essence, the vision of “Greater Israel” faces insurmountable obstacles in the current geopolitical environment. The complex interplay of regional dynamics, the rise of multipolarity, and the staunch opposition from both local actors and global powers render such aspirations untenable. While the idea may continue to resonate in certain ideological circles, the realities of Middle Eastern realpolitik make it a mirage rather than a feasible strategy. As The Guardian succinctly put it, “in a region already burdened by historical grievances and modern rivalries, the pursuit of territorial expansion is a recipe for perpetual conflict, not enduring peace.”
The dream of a “Greater Israel” may persist in rhetoric, but the tides of history, geopolitics, and resistance ensure that it remains just that —a dream.
