Israel moves quickly to protect itself from the consequences of revolution in Syria.

The "international community" isn't pleased, but we should be.

While Western governments, analysts, and journalists try to figure out whether the rebel forces that toppled the Assad regime are good jihadists or bad jihadists, Israel isn’t taking any chances. Or maybe it already knows the answer.

Either way, Israel has acted. Last week it launched a major operation to destroy the Syrian military’s strategic capabilities, including chemical weapons sites, missiles, air defenses, and air force and navy targets. The purpose was to prevent them from being used against the Jewish state, either by the jihadists now in charge of Syria, some other militant Syrian faction, or Hezbollah.

The “international community” was quick to condemn Israel. The Washington Post, which likely shares the sentiment, reported:

Israel launched waves of heavy airstrikes across Syria on Tuesday, hitting what it said were military targets to prevent abandoned weapons from falling into the hands of rebel fighters.

The intensified aerial campaign, carried out in parallel with Israel’s first ground operation in Syrian territory since the 1973 Yom Kippur War, drew international condemnation and added another dangerous variable to the fast-moving situation in Syria, where armed groups are trying to create a new political order after the overthrow of dictator Bashar al-Assad. . . .

“We are continuing to see Israeli movements and bombardments into Syrian territory,” Geir Pedersen, the U.N. special envoy to Syria, said Tuesday. “This needs to stop.” Similar urgings have come from governments across the Middle East, from Baghdad to Riyadh.

But Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Norway (Mr. Pedersen’s home country) don’t face the prospect that Syrian weapons will be used against them. For Israel, that prospect is all too real.

Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (known as HTS) is the triumphant group that ousted Assad and seized control of Damascus and other major Syrian population centers. It’s a militant Islamist group that was aligned with al Qaeda and whose leader had ties to ISIS. In 2018, the U.S. State Department designated HTS a terrorist organization.

These days, HTS tries to present a more moderate image. So far, reportedly, it has not persecuted Christians in the areas it captured.

As for Israel, the leader of HTS, Abu Mohammed al-Jolani. has declared that his group does not seek conflict with the Jewish state. But note his reason:

The general exhaustion in Syria after years of war and conflict does not allow us to enter new conflicts.

This is not a renunciation of intent to wage war against Israel. It’s a candid admission that Syria is in no position to wage such war at this time.

I think Israel can be excused for not waiting until Syria recovers from its exhaustion and considers whether to attack it.

No one knows for sure what the future holds for Syria. But unlike its critics, Israel faces a major threat if the future breaks the wrong way.

Here’s what history teaches us about how things are likely to break in Syria: The most extreme and war-like faction usually emerges as the winner of violent revolutions. This history goes back at least as far as the French Revolution and applies to many 20th century revolutions, such as the Russian and the Iranian.

The second likeliest outcome of a revolution like Syria’s is prolonged chaos. Libya is a good example.

Either outcome — control by militant extremists or prolonged chaos — threatens Israel. Militant extremists might well come after Israel once their power is consolidated and they have caught their breath.

Prolonged chaos means multiple factions and warlords. Some of them might well be even more of a threat to Israel than HTS if Syrian chemical weapons (for example) fall into their hands. I should also note that, in a scenario of competing factions, a successful attack on Israel might increase the prestige of the attacking faction.

A third possible outcome is that after a power struggle, a non-Islamist regime will take power. That sounds like a better outcome, but Israel has had to fight secular powers in the past.

Saddam Hussein and the Assads weren’t Islamists, yet were extremely hostile to Israel. Israel would certainly be safer if a regime like that lacked the capacity to strike it.

The international community can condemn Israel all it wants. The government has acted wisely to destroy Syria’s strategic military capabilities.

I believe it is also acting wisely to shore up its presence in the Golan Heights — another defensive move for which Israel has been condemned. At present, around 50,000 people live on the Israeli-controlled side of the heights. About half are Jews and half are Druze. Israel’s cabinet has given unanimous approval to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s plan to double that population.

Israel conquered this territory from Syria in the 1967 Six Day War and annexed it in 1981. Most of the world does not recognize the move. However, the U.S., under Donald Trump, granted recognition in 2019.

The stronger the Israeli presence on the portion of the Heights it controls, the less likely it can be overrun in an invasion like the one Hamas carried out last year in Southern Israel. Netanyahu’s plan doesn’t expand Israel’s territorial reach. It simply helps safeguard territory Israel already holds as a buffer against aggression.

After October 7, 2023, Israel came to realize once again how perilous its position is. With the near destruction of Hamas and the substantial weakening of Hezbollah and Iran, Israel’s position has vastly improved.

Neutering Syria wasn’t part of the plan, although Israel was always prepared to do it. Now that the opportunity has arisen, I applaud Israel for seizing it.