The Metatron Project is an engineering and defensive structure constructed along the 1949 Armistice Line, with exceptions made for strategically justified segments. Its primary objective is to ensure Israel’s long-term security while preserving the possibility for diplomatic resolution. In the area adjacent to the Golan Heights, the project takes into account both historical threats and the ongoing necessity to control key elevations and infrastructure. The barrier is located strictly within territory under Israeli sovereignty and does not extend into the Golan Heights, which remain under military occupation pending the conclusion of a peace agreement.
Historical and Strategic Overview: The Eastern Shore of the Sea of Galilee and the Syrian Threat Before 1967
From 1949 to 1967, the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee was located in an area controlled by Syria. Although the 1949 Armistice Line (commonly referred to as the “Green Line”) formally designated this territory as demilitarized, Syria in practice transformed it into a platform for exerting pressure on Israel.
From elevated positions overlooking the lake, Syrian forces regularly carried out artillery attacks targeting Israeli civilian settlements and fishing boats. Communities such as Ein Gev, Tiberias, and adjacent agricultural zones were frequently subjected to shelling. In addition, Syrian troops made repeated attempts to seize territory and disrupt Israeli civilian activity, including interference in national water intake infrastructure.
The Sea of Galilee is a critical source of fresh water for Israel and supplies the National Water Carrier. Its strategic importance extends beyond agriculture or domestic consumption; control over the lake constitutes an existential safeguard for the state’s long-term stability.
Strategic Importance of the Golan Heights and Mount Hermon for Israel’s Security
The Golan Heights constitute a natural fortress. Their topography provides a commanding vantage point over vast areas of northern Israel, including Tiberias, Haifa, and Hamat Gader. Israel’s occupation of the area in 1967 was a direct response to persistent and escalating threats originating from Syrian-controlled territory.
Mount Hermon, the highest peak in the region (~2,200 meters), holds particular strategic significance. It hosts key early warning, intelligence, and surveillance installations. Loss of this position would result in a critical gap in Israel’s northern defense posture.
Legal Status and Diplomatic Framework of the Occupation
Israel’s 1981 annexation of the Golan Heights was condemned by United Nations Security Council Resolution 497, which declared the measure “null and void and without international legal effect.” However, from Israel’s perspective, its continued presence in the territory is based on defense imperatives, not expansionist intent.
Israel has consistently maintained that any withdrawal from the Golan Heights can occur only within the framework of a comprehensive bilateral peace agreement, not under external pressure or threat. In the absence of such an agreement, continued control of the Golan Heights remains a security necessity.
Metatron Project: Implementation Principles in the Area Adjacent to the Golan Heights
Route Alignment
The Metatron Project is implemented strictly along the 1949 Armistice Line, thereby ensuring its international legitimacy. At the same time, Israel explicitly states that the construction of the barrier does not constitute recognition of the 1949 line as a final or politically binding border. It is solely an engineering structure located entirely within Israeli sovereign territory.
Exception: Eastern Shore of the Sea of Galilee
Given its strategic importance, the section of the barrier near the Sea of Galilee is routed to the east of Highways 87, 92, and 98, keeping these roads and adjacent infrastructure under full Israeli control. Direct access by Syrian civilians to the eastern shoreline may only be considered after a minimum of ten consecutive years without any acts of aggression from Syria against Israel.
Conditional Scenario for the Return of the Golan Heights: Peace Uptime Protocol
Israel affirms that any de jure consideration of returning the Golan Heights shall be contingent solely upon the conclusion of a comprehensive peace agreement with Syria. Such an agreement must include:
- Full Syrian control over its border with Israel and the complete cessation of all hostile activities, following the model applied along the Israeli–Lebanese frontier.
- Joint patrols along designated segments of the border, accompanied by international verification mechanisms.
- A special status for Mount Hermon, under which Israel retains engineering infrastructure and a limited security presence.
Peace Uptime Protocol
- Following the entry into force of a peace agreement, Israel will be prepared to initiate a phased military withdrawal from the Golan Heights, provided that no hostile incidents (including but not limited to rocket fire, infiltration, or provocation) occur for a continuous period of three years.
- Should any violation take place, the three-year “uptime” period shall be reset, and the countdown shall recommence from zero.
- This condition is intended to foster verifiable mutual trust without exposing Israel to the risks of unilateral concession.
Right to Self-Defense
Israel reserves the right to conduct military operations throughout the entire territory of the Golan Heights in response to any threat originating from Syria that endangers Israeli citizens or infrastructure. This includes preemptive action in cases involving the deployment of hostile forces (such as Iranian proxies), preparations for attacks, or the establishment of subversive cells.
Conclusion
The Metatron Project is not a tool of isolation, but a mechanism of stability rooted in engineering, history, and international law. Israel demonstrates its willingness to consider compromise – but only within the framework of a sustainable peace, governed by verifiable conditions. The Golan Heights are not disputed real estate; they represent a vital security buffer between national resilience and regional instability. Until Syria can reliably ensure security on both sides of the border, this barrier will remain in place.
EN 
RU