“Israel’s” Incursion in Southern Syria: Partition, Sectarianism and the Creation of “David’s Corridor”

By Mohamad Hammoud

Lebanon – “Israel’s” recent military and political activities in southern Syria have sparked significant concerns about its long-term ambitions in the region. Reports indicate that “Israel” is escalating its presence in three key Syrian governorates—Sweida, Daraa, and Quneitra—under the pretext of protecting minorities, particularly the Druze community.

Analysts argue that this activity is part of a broader strategy to partition Syria, create sectarian divisions, and reshape the region’s political and territorial landscape. Central to this strategy is the concept of the “David’s Corridor,” a proposed land route linking “Israel” with Kurdish-controlled territories in northern Syria and beyond. This essay examines “Israel’s” recent actions in southern Syria, the implications of its strategy, and the broader geopolitical consequences for the region.

Escalation in Southern Syria: A Strategic Push

Reports suggest that “Israel” has embarked on an aggressive phase of escalation in southern Syria, focusing on the governorates of Sweida, Daraa, and Quneitra. Each of these areas holds immense strategic importance. Sweida is home to the Druze minority, whom “Israel” has sought to support financially and militarily under the guise of protecting them from threats posed by Syria’s central government. Meanwhile, Daraa and Quneitra border the occupied Golan Heights, a region annexed by “Israel” in 1981 in defiance of international law. These territories form a critical buffer zone for “Israel’s” security calculations.

“Israeli” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s calls for the complete demilitarization of southern Syria underscore these ambitions. Netanyahu has explicitly stated that the Syrian military must not operate south of Damascus, effectively declaring the southern provinces a no-go zone for the Syrian government. This would not only prevent the central government from reasserting its sovereignty but also create a power vacuum that could be filled by “Israeli”-backed militias and separatist factions loyal to its interests.

By escalating its presence in these regions, “Israel” appears to be pursuing two interconnected goals. First, it seeks to create a buffer zone to shield its borders from perceived threats, particularly Iran-backed militias and Syrian forces. Second, it aims to weaken Damascus by preventing the reintegration of these territories into a unified Syrian state. The fragmentation of Syria serves a broader purpose in undermining the state’s territorial integrity and ensuring that “Israel” can exercise dominance over the region.

The “David’s Corridor”: A Vision of Partition

At the center of “Israel’s” strategy in Syria lies the concept of the “David’s Corridor.” This proposed land route would connect “Israel” to Kurdish-controlled territories in northern Syria and Iraq, creating a transportation and weapons supply axis that bypasses both Iran and Turkey. The corridor would traverse southern Syria, including Sweida, and extend into the Kurdish autonomous region of Rojava in the north. This vision aligns with the broader “Israeli”-American objective of fracturing Syria into smaller, sectarian-based autonomous regions that are easier to control.

The “David’s Corridor” is not a novel idea in “Israeli” political discourse. It reflects the Zionist vision articulated by Theodor Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism, who envisioned a Jewish state stretching from the Nile River in Egypt to the Euphrates River in Iraq. This vision, often referred to as "Greater ‘Israel’", has been a driving force behind many of “Israeli” territorial ambitions, with religious and ideological undertones shaping its policies.

If successful, the corridor would serve multiple strategic purposes. It would provide “Israel” with a direct land route to its Kurdish allies in northern Syria and Iraq, facilitating the movement of weapons, personnel and supplies. It would also effectively sever Syria from Jordan, curtail Iranian and Turkish influence in the region and pose new challenges for Iraq, which is already grappling with Kurdish separatist movements. By carving out this corridor, “Israel” would effectively create an alternative Syria—one fragmented into sectarian enclaves and divided along ethnic lines.

Exploiting Sectarian Divisions: The Role of the Druze and Kurds

A key element of “Israel’s” strategy in southern Syria is its support for the Druze minority in Sweida. While “Israel” frames this support as an effort to protect an endangered community, critics argue that it is a calculated move to create divisions within Syrian society. Reports indicate that “Israel” has offered financial incentives and military backing to Druze leaders, encouraging them to cooperate with its plans. Additionally, there have been proposals to allow Druze workers from Sweida to enter the occupied Golan Heights for employment, further strengthening ties between the Druze and “Israel.”

This support for the Druze complements “Israel’s” backing of Kurdish forces in northern Syria, particularly the so-called Syrian Democratic Forces [SDF], which are also supported by the United States. Together, these alliances serve to fragment Syria and prevent the central government from consolidating its authority. The creation of a Druze-controlled autonomous region in Sweida would not only weaken Damascus but also create a loyal buffer zone for “Israel” along its northern border.

Regional Implications: Destabilization and Escalation

“Israel’s” actions in southern Syria are part of a broader pattern of aggression aimed at reshaping the region’s political landscape. By supporting separatist movements and carving out autonomous zones, “Israel” is effectively working to dismantle Syria as a unified state. This effort aligns with remarks made by “Israeli” Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar, who has publicly called for the fragmentation of Syria into separate ethnic and religious enclaves. While Sa’ar frames this as a necessary measure to protect minorities, critics see it as a thinly veiled attempt to weaken the Syrian state.

The consequences of this strategy are profound. A fragmented Syria would not only destabilize the country but also have ripple effects throughout the region. It could embolden Kurdish separatists in Turkey and Iraq, fuel sectarian conflicts, and create new opportunities for extremist groups to exploit power vacuums. Furthermore, “Israel’s” actions risk alienating its neighbors and escalating tensions with regional powers such as Turkey and Iran, potentially leading to broader conflict.

Conclusion: The Need for Accountability

“Israel’s” recent incursions into southern Syria represent a dangerous escalation with far-reaching implications for the region. By pursuing the “David’s Corridor” and exploiting sectarian divisions, “Israel” aims to partition Syria and create an alternative political order that serves its strategic interests. This strategy threatens Syria’s territorial integrity, fuels regional instability, and risks triggering larger conflicts involving neighboring countries.

To prevent further escalation, regional and international actors must hold “Israel” accountable for its actions in Syria. The international community must reaffirm its commitment to Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity while addressing the legitimate security concerns of all parties involved. Without coordinated efforts to de-escalate the situation, the prospect of a fragmented and destabilized Syria will continue to threaten the stability of the broader Middle East.