Meetings between Syria and Israel under US auspices have resumed after a 25-year hiatus. In the past quarter-century, Washington has served as the main sponsor of the “political solution” to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
The most recent meeting, chaired by Tom Barrack, the US special envoy for Syria, was held in Paris and marked the second such encounter following an earlier meeting in Baku, Azerbaijan, during Syrian President Ahmed Al-Sharaa’s visit on 12 July.
According to many reports, the Paris meeting — described as “honest and responsible” — did not produce tangible results but paved the way to a new round of talks between Syria and Israel. Damascus had earlier confirmed indirect contact with Israel aimed at returning to the 1974 Disengagement Agreement, which established a buffer zone that Israel has occupied for the past several months.
The Syrian delegation included Foreign Minister Asaad Al-Sheibani and representatives of the General Intelligence Service, according to the official Syrian News Agency. On the Israeli side, Minister of Strategic Affairs Ron Dermer and National Security Adviser Tzachi Hanegbi were present, according to the Israeli English-language news site Yedioth Ahronoth.
The discussions centred on the possibility of reactivating the disengagement agreement with international guarantees, alongside Syria’s demand for the immediate withdrawal of Israeli forces from the positions they have recently occupied.
Following the ouster of Bashar Al-Assad in December, Israel occupied a UN-monitored buffer zone that had separated the two countries’ forces in the strategic Golan Heights. Since then, Israeli forces have advanced deeper into southern Syria, calling for the complete demilitarisation of the area. Syria and Israel have been officially at war since 1948. Israel has occupied the Syrian Golan Heights since 1967.
Following Al-Assad’s removal, Israel launched hundreds of air strikes across Syria, violating Syrian sovereignty in what it claimed were efforts to prevent weapons from reaching the newly established Islamist authorities.
This month, Israel launched air strikes on Damascus and the Druze-majority province of Sweida, portraying itself as a protector of the Druze minority. Many observers view this as a pretext to push Syrian government forces further away from the occupied Golan Heights.
In Sweida, southern Syria, armed Bedouin tribes clashed with Druze forces. The new Islamist regime in Damascus joined the conflict. The fighting resulted in over 1,000 deaths, more than two-thirds of them Druze, and displaced more than 128,000 people who fled their homes in fear of continued violence.
The crisis was resolved when government forces and Sunni Bedouin tribes withdrew from the area and Sweida came under a form of local administration, though the extent of its autonomy vis-à-vis Damascus remains unclear.
During the recent meeting, the Syrian delegation said “national unity and territorial integrity are non-negotiable,” stressing that “Sweida and its people are an integral part of the Syrian state.”
A report by Yedioth Ahronoth, citing the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, indicated that the talks also addressed a potential US-backed arrangement for Sweida. Under the emerging proposal, pro-regime forces would withdraw beyond Druze-inhabited areas, with local Druze groups conducting verification sweeps to ensure compliance.
The draft agreement also calls for the establishment of local councils in Sweida to provide civil services, the formation of a joint committee to monitor violations and report directly to the US, and the demilitarisation of the Quneitra and Daraa governorates, both bordering Israel. In these areas, local security committees with no access to heavy weaponry would replace current armed forces. UN agencies would be granted access to Sweida, while groups affiliated with the Syrian regime would be prohibited from operating there.
No international media outlets have reported any concrete discussions of peace between Syria and Israel, despite earlier reports of US-mediated contacts aimed at reaching an agreement between the two countries. Absent from these reports is any mention of what Damascus might receive in return for normalisation. Would it be the full restoration of the Golan Heights? A partial Israeli withdrawal from the buffer zone occupied after the fall of Al-Assad? Or simply a tacit Israeli guarantee not to target the new Islamist regime, allowing it to entrench itself and expand its authority countrywide?
Al-Sharaa’s government remains in a precarious position. It engaged in heavy fighting with Alawite militias in their coastal strongholds, clashed with Druze forces, experienced tensions with Christian communities — in the events known as the Maaloula incident — and continues to grapple with mutual distrust in its relationship with the Kurds.
Not all Syrian Sunnis — the majority demographic in the country — support Islamist movements. Significant segments of Syria’s business elite, often referred to as the Merchants of Damascus and Aleppo, along with the middle class, had benefited from the stability of the Assad regime for five decades.
Many observers believe the complete return of the Golan Heights is highly unlikely, given that the idea had provoked the anger of Israeli extremists and led to the assassination of prime minister Yitzhak Rabin who was close to concluding a deal with Hafez Al-Assad that would have returned the Golan Heights to Syria in exchange for full normalisation. Rabin’s assassination has since become a psychological and political constraint on Israeli leaders in any negotiations with Syria.
The idea of dividing the Golan Heights also appears unworkable. Some Israeli and Western reports have floated the notion of splitting the territory into three zones: one under Syrian control, one under Israeli sovereignty, and a third whose status would be resolved at a later stage. However, such a division is widely seen as impractical.
Since its occupation in 1967, the Golan Heights have become a hub of Israeli vineyard and wine production, as well as a popular domestic tourism destination despite the persistent opposition of the region’s Druze population — numbering more than 30,000 — who continue to reject Israeli nationality, identify as Syrian Arabs, and maintain close ties with their Druze counterparts in Syria.
On the other hand, Al-Sharaa’s regime would face internal backlash if it agreed to any deal that did not involve the return of the Golan Heights, or at least part of it. Such a concession would position it below Al-Assad’s regime, which consistently refused any peace deal that excluded the Golan Heights.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 6 August, 2025 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: