Israel’s expanding frontlines, occupying Gaza, Syria, Lebanon

From Gaza to Golan and Lebanon, Tel Aviv’s military presence deepens — raising alarm over legality, human cost, and the future of peace in the region

JERUSALEM, Palestine (MNTV) – Israel is signalling a broader, indefinite military presence not only in the Palestinian enclave of Gaza but also in parts of Lebanon and Syria.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz’s recent statement confirms what many observers had feared –  the establishment of so-called “security zones” across Gaza, southern Lebanon, and parts of Syria will not be temporary.

Instead, Israel intends to maintain military control over these areas for the foreseeable future, citing security needs following Hamas’ October 7, 2023 cross-border attacks.

“In any temporary or permanent situation, Israel will maintain security control in areas necessary to safeguard our population,” Katz declared Wednesday.

This open-ended policy has stoked international fears that Israel is entrenching itself in a long-term military occupation — a development critics say undermines international law, including the principle prohibiting territorial acquisition by force.

In Gaza, where Israel now controls over 50% of the territory, military corridors cut through devastated urban centers, while “buffer zones” have grown steadily along the northern and eastern frontiers. The siege of Rafah in the south, where over one million displaced Palestinians are sheltering, has only intensified the crisis.

Satellite imagery and humanitarian reports paint a stark picture: vast swaths of Gaza have been leveled. With essential infrastructure decimated and entire neighborhoods razed, experts warn that the situation is rapidly becoming unsustainable.

Palestinian leaders have voiced fierce condemnation. Hamas, which still holds 59 hostages, has linked their release to a full Israeli withdrawal and a permanent ceasefire. For its part, Israel insists that withdrawal before “total victory” over Hamas is out of the question.

To Israel’s north, its troops have remained stationed in at least five strategic points in southern Lebanon since a ceasefire agreement with Hezbollah took hold in November 2023. Yet the ceasefire has been punctuated by ongoing Israeli airstrikes on what it labels militant infrastructure — a policy that continues to inflame regional tensions.

Lebanon’s government has denounced the Israeli presence as a blatant violation of sovereignty. Hezbollah has warned that failure to withdraw could reignite conflict, though its ability to retaliate has been weakened by years of war in Syria and internal political turmoil.

In Syria, Israeli forces have reportedly advanced beyond the internationally recognized Golan Heights and entered villages within a decades-old demilitarized buffer zone established after the 1973 Yom Kippur War.

Clashes with local residents and sporadic resistance have accompanied this move. Damascus has condemned the occupation and repeated Israeli airstrikes as acts of aggression designed to destabilize Syrian recovery efforts.

Israel insists its policy is defensive, aimed at preventing Iranian-backed militias and Syrian government forces from positioning themselves near its border. But critics argue that this too amounts to unlawful occupation and a dangerous expansion of hostilities.

International law in question

Legal experts are raising red flags. The Israeli presence in these territories, they say, bears the hallmarks of a de facto occupation with no clear endpoint — a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and the UN Charter, both of which prohibit the acquisition of territory through military force.

Comparisons are being drawn with other global conflicts, notably Russia’s war in Ukraine. “If we condemn one occupation, we must condemn all,” said a former UN special rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories.

U.S. President Donald Trump has supported Israeli plans. He even floated plans to turn postwar Gaza into a tourism hub and encourage Palestinian resettlement in third countries — an idea widely condemned by Palestinians and dismissed as an attempt to erase their right to return.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has echoed these sentiments, calling such displacement “voluntary emigration” and linking it to the post-Hamas vision for Gaza.

With little hope for diplomatic breakthroughs and an emboldened Israeli government pursuing an aggressive regional agenda, the possibility of a broader Middle East conflagration grows more real by the day.

The world now faces a grim question: Is the international order — built on the principles of sovereignty, human rights, and peace — willing or able to confront what many are calling a creeping annexation?