Saudi Arabia has condemned Israel’s seizure of a buffer zone in Syrian
territory as an effort to sabotage Syria’s chance of restoring
stability, amid Tel Aviv’s exploitation of its neighbour’s evolving
situation.

Following the collapse of former President Bashar Al-Assad’s regime
and the Syrian opposition’s take-over of much of the country, Israeli
forces moved further into Syrian territory from the occupied Golan
Heights, seizing the area that had served as a buffer zone for
decades.

Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, announced that the
decision was made due to apparent fears that the changing situation in
Syria after Assad’s fall may pose security threats to Tel Aviv,
claiming that the move was “temporary” until the situation became
clearer and justifying it by saying the 1974 disengagement agreement
between Syria and Israel was no longer valid.

Since the initial move, reports have emerged that Israeli occupation
forces have advanced even further beyond the buffer zone, reaching
within just dozens of kilometres from the capital, Damascus.

In a statement on Monday, Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Ministry then
criticised the escalation, stressing that the occupation forces’ act
“affirmed Israel’s continued violations of international law and its
commitment to sabotaging chances for Syria to reclaim its security,
stability and its territorial integrity”.

Riyadh called on the international community to condemn the Israeli
move and urged respect for Syria’s sovereignty, reiterating that “the
Golan is occupied Syrian land”.

Israel army chief declares Syria a fourth ‘fighting front’

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20241210-saudi-arabia-condemns-israel-incursion-further-into-syria-territory-as-sabotaging-chances-for-stability/

On 12/12/2024 8:29 am, NefeshBarYochai wrote:
> Saudi Arabia has condemned Israel’s seizure of a buffer zone in Syrian
> territory as an effort to sabotage Syria’s chance of restoring
> stability, amid Tel Aviv’s exploitation of its neighbour’s evolving
> situation.
>
> Following the collapse of former President Bashar Al-Assad’s regime
> and the Syrian opposition’s take-over of much of the country, Israeli
> forces moved further into Syrian territory from the occupied Golan
> Heights, seizing the area that had served as a buffer zone for
> decades.

The Australian news services do include the Israeli claim that their
interest is in destroying Bashar Al-Assad's stocks of weapons including
the chemical weapons.

> Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, announced that the
> decision was made due to apparent fears that the changing situation in
> Syria after Assad’s fall may pose security threats to Tel Aviv,
> claiming that the move was “temporary” until the situation became
> clearer and justifying it by saying the 1974 disengagement agreement
> between Syria and Israel was no longer valid.

He might even be telling the truth of once.

> Since the initial move, reports have emerged that Israeli occupation
> forces have advanced even further beyond the buffer zone, reaching
> within just dozens of kilometres from the capital, Damascus.
>
> In a statement on Monday, Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Ministry then
> criticised the escalation, stressing that the occupation forces’ act
> “affirmed Israel’s continued violations of international law and its
> commitment to sabotaging chances for Syria to reclaim its security,
> stability and its territorial integrity”.

It's not as if Syrian's chemical weapons conformed to international law.

> Riyadh called on the international community to condemn the Israeli
> move and urged respect for Syria’s sovereignty, reiterating that “the
> Golan is occupied Syrian land”.

Which Syria used to bombard Israeli communities.

> Israel army chief declares Syria a fourth ‘fighting front’
>
> https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20241210-saudi-arabia-condemns-israel-incursion-further-into-syria-territory-as-sabotaging-chances-for-stability/

Getting rid of Bashar Al-Assad is probably a step towards stability. His
family had been in control of Syria for fifty years, but the only stable
component in their rule was their persistence. There's no guarantee that
their replacement will be any better, but it's hard to imagine how they
could be worse.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney