Six months ago, the Israel Antiquities Authority authorized the purchase of 100 documents from what was originally, and misleadingly, termed the “Afghan Genizah.” Twenty-nine manuscripts from the same collection, obtained three years ago, are currently in the custody of Israel’s national library. Nir Hasson writes (free registration required):

Scholars now know that the source of the manuscripts is not a genizah—[a place for storing discarded manuscripts] like the one found in Cairo—but rather the archive of a Jewish family of traders who lived on the Silk Road in Afghanistan in the 11th century. The head of the family is named in the manuscripts as Abu Nassar ben Daniel, and the family apparently lived in the central-Afghan city of Bamyan. (The city made headlines eleven years ago when the Taliban blew up two huge statues of Buddha there.) The collection of manuscripts came to light a few years later, after the fall of the Taliban. Rumor has it that the collection was found in a cave or deep rock crevice somewhere in Afghanistan, where it had been secreted by its owners about 1,000 ago.

The manuscripts were written in a wide variety of languages—Aramaic, Hebrew, Persian, Judeo-Arabic, and Judeo-Persian; the last two languages are, respectively, Arabic and Persian written in Hebrew letters. Legal and commercial manuscripts can be found in the collection along with sacred writings and personal letters.

In a momentous meeting with the Syrian president Ahmed al-Sharaa in Riyadh, President Trump announced that he is lifting sanctions on the beleaguered and war-torn country. On the one hand, Sharaa is an alumnus of Islamic State and al-Qaeda, who came to power as commander of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which itself began life as al-Qaeda’s Syrian offshoot; he also seems to enjoy the support of Qatar. On the other hand, he overthrew the Assad regime—a feat made possible by the battering Israel delivered to Hizballah—greatly improving Jerusalem’s strategic position, and ending one of the world’s most atrocious and brutal tyrannies. President Trump also announced that he hopes Syria will join the Abraham Accords.

This analysis by Eran Lerman was published a few days ago, and in some respects is already out of date, but more than anything else I’ve read it helps to make sense of Israel’s strategic position vis-à-vis Syria.

Israel’s primary security interest lies in defending against worst-case scenarios, particularly the potential collapse of the Syrian state or its transformation into an actively hostile force backed by a significant Turkish presence (considering that the Turkish military is the second largest in NATO) with all that this would imply. Hence the need to bolster the new buffer zone—not for territorial gain, but as a vital shield and guarantee against dangerous developments. Continued airstrikes aimed at diminishing the residual components of strategic military capabilities inherited from the Assad regime are essential.

At the same time, there is a need to create conditions that would enable those in Damascus who wish to reject the reduction of their once-proud country into a Turkish satrapy. Sharaa’s efforts to establish his legitimacy, including his visit to Paris and outreach to the U.S., other European nations, and key Gulf countries, may generate positive leverage in this regard. Israel’s role is to demonstrate through daily actions the severe costs of acceding to Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s ambitions and accepting Turkish hegemony.

Israel should also assist those in Syria (and beyond: this may have an effect in Lebanon as well) who look to it as a strategic anchor in the region. The Druze in Syria—backed by their brethren in Israel—have openly expressed this expectation, breaking decades of loyalty to the central power in Damascus over their obligation to their kith and kin.