Still the largest city in southern Israel, Be’er Sheva plays a key role in the narratives of Abraham and Isaac in Genesis—and is mentioned 33 times in the Hebrew Bible altogether. Nathan Steinmeyer examines what several decades of archaeological work have uncovered about the city’s past:

From the 9th century until its destruction by Sennacherib in 701 BCE, Be’er Sheva functioned as the main administrative center of the Negev Desert. Indeed, for much of this period, Be’er Sheva was the only major Judahite city in the Negev. In addition to a large administrative structure, dubbed the “Governor’s Palace,” three large storehouses were constructed next to the gate complex. The storehouse complex covers roughly 6,500 square feet, with each storehouse featuring two rows of stone pillars. Hundreds of vessels were uncovered in the storehouses, showing their use in gathering oils, grains, and other products from the smaller villages of the region. These storehouses were possibly constructed by King Hezekiah in the late 8th century BCE in preparation for Judah’s conflict with the Neo-Assyrian Empire.

Built into the wall of one of the storehouses was one of the most interesting finds discovered in Tel Be’er Sheva, a horned altar. The altar had been dismantled and used as building material in the wall of the storehouse. The altar was reconstructed at three cubits high (5.25 feet) and closely matches the description of such altars given in the Hebrew Bible (Exodus 30:2). The altar shows that the city once held a cultic structure, possibly dedicated to the Israelite God.

Be’er Sheva was also an incredibly well-planned city. The city includes a belt of houses running along the casemate wall with a six-foot-wide peripheral street running parallel to the walls. Additional streets radiated through the city in straight lines to provide a high degree of organization and movability. The city also included a covered drainage ditch, a large city square, and a complex water system. The excavators suggested that Be’er Sheva was built as a planned city, in which the earlier town was actively dismantled and the later Iron Age city constructed according to a preconceived plan at a single time.

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.