Enab Baladi – Mowaffak al-Khouja
Media reports have indicated that the Syrian government has begun conducting discussions with Israel through intermediaries or directly, while the Israeli army continues to launch strikes on Syrian territory under security pretexts.
Despite the implications of this move suggesting possibilities for normalization between Syria and Israel, internal obstacles in Syria act as a deterrent to any steps in this direction, making it likely that this path will remain on hold for the medium to long term.
UAE sponsorship
A report by Reuters was the first to shed light on these discussions, stating on May 7 that the UAE had opened the door for negotiations between Israel and Syria.
According to Reuters, the talks focused on “technical matters,” security, intelligence, and building trust between Syria and Israel, as the two countries do not have formal relations.
One source told the agency that “there are no limits to what may eventually be discussed,” while military issues, particularly those related to the Israeli army’s activities in Syria, have been excluded from the current channel.
These discussions followed a visit by transitional Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa to the UAE on April 13, accompanied by a Syrian delegation that included Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shibani.
At the time, the visit carried a traditional tone in the leaders’ statements, discussing “ways to enhance joint cooperation for the benefit of the peoples of both countries,” without addressing the issue of talks between Syria and Israel, aside from condemning the bombing and Israeli intervention.
What are the details of the discussions?
The details of the Israeli-Syrian talks were reinforced by another report from the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, which included specifics about these negotiations.
Three meetings took place at a venue belonging to an Emirati governmental figure, involving two Israeli academicians from a security background and three aides to al-Sharaa.
The discussions focused on security aspects, with Syrians expressing their dissatisfaction with the Israeli army’s operations inside Syria and its occupation of strategic sites, firmly requesting an end to airstrikes.
The Syrian side reported al-Sharaa’s statement, asserting that Syria has no interest in conflict with any of its neighbors, including Israel.
The Israeli side described al-Sharaa’s statements as “positive, but not sufficient.”
Conversely, the Israelis expressed concerns about the vulnerability of the Druze community in Syria, affirming that Israel will not tolerate attacks on “our blood brothers,” as they termed it.
Direct path
In addition to the indirect negotiations, Israeli media mentioned direct paths involving Syrian officials entering Israel.
The Israeli newspaper Haaretz quoted non-governmental Syrian sources indicating that Israel is in direct contact with the new Syrian government, adding that a delegation of Syrian officials, including two high-ranking officials, recently visited Israel.
The newspaper described the visit as “secret,” occurring at the end of April and lasting several days, during which delegation members met with Israeli security officials.
The Syrian government did not comment on what the Western and Israeli media reported, but al-Sharaa hinted at indirect negotiations with Israel to “calm the situation.”
There are indirect negotiations taking place through intermediaries to ease the situation and attempt to absorb it, so that matters do not reach a point of losing control by both sides.
The Israeli interventions are random and violated the 1974 agreement. Since our arrival in Damascus, we have informed all concerned parties that Syria is committed to the 1974 agreement, and the UNDOF forces should return to the ceasefire line (the so-called blue line).
Several visits to Damascus have been made by UNDOF forces, and we are trying to speak with all countries that have communication with the Israeli side to pressure it to stop interfering in Syrian affairs, violating its airspace, and bombing some of its facilities.
Ahmed al-Sharaa, Transitional Syrian President
Postponed but not impossible
Syrian political researcher Dr. Nader Khalil said that the scenario of direct normalization between the new Syrian authority and Israel is still premature and remains unlikely in the short term but is conceivable in the medium to long term.
He added to Enab Baladi that the regional context and the multiplicity of mediation channels suggest that flexible negotiation paths may lead to limited local security understandings in the foreseeable future.
The discussions are conducted through indirect channels and under the umbrella of Emirati mediation, which is being used as a future groundwork for comprehensive political rapprochement in the medium to long term.
These understandings may involve issues such as border control, exchanging security information, and even implicit agreements regarding spheres of influence and de-escalation.
Meanwhile, regional mediations, despite differing agendas, remain tools to shape a political environment that could eventually allow for a new positioning of Syria within the regional and international alliance landscape.
Khalil believes that such steps do not constitute normalization in its full political sense but lay the groundwork for gradual cooperation that can be built upon in the future.
A negotiation card… “Smart postponement”
Political researcher Nader Khalil sees al-Sharaa wagering on a “smart postponement” strategy, using the normalization file as a negotiation tool rather than a final objective.
Although al-Sharaa does not reject the principle of understandings, he realizes that full normalization at this stage could be fraught with risks, especially as his solid base within the new army and its supporting factions hold conservative religious orientations, with some adopting a clear Islamic rhetoric.
This structure makes normalization a sensitive step that could destabilize internal cohesion and threaten al-Sharaa’s authority if not postponed or framed within clear pragmatic contexts, according to Khalil.
The political researcher speculates that al-Sharaa may leverage the normalization issue as a negotiation card, indicating willingness to engage in the medium term in exchange for economic and security guarantees, and possibly international support for reconstruction efforts.
This postponement provides a time margin to restructure security apparatuses and solidify his authority, enabling bolder steps or deeper transformations in foreign policy later on.
Khalil believes that al-Sharaa will exploit the point concerning the bases of his authority and supporters, betting on using it as leverage to convince Israel and its supporters to delay normalization for the medium or longer future.
He justified this by stating that al-Sharaa is attempting to buy time to stabilize the foundations of his rule and reorganize his forces and the supportive power of alliances within the security and army apparatus he is forming or restructuring.
According to Yedioth Ahronoth, during the negotiation sessions held in the UAE, the Syrian side requested that Israel allow al-Sharaa “time to prepare and stabilize a new internal system within Syria.”
The Syrian side highlighted the difficult economic situation in Syria during its sessions with the Israeli side, according to the Israeli newspaper.
It stated that the goal is to continue discussions and transition to economic issues, including Israel’s options to provide medical knowledge and invite Syrian students to specialize in Israel, along with other matters of interest to the Syrian leadership and people.
Do the Syrians agree?
The discussions about negotiations and normalization between Syria and Israel are not new, as they began in the early days following the fall of the previous Syrian regime on December 8, 2024.
Several American officials have pointed to the possibility that Syria may follow the path of normalization with Israel and join the Abraham Accords.
The Abraham Accords are a series of normalization agreements between Israel and Arab countries brokered by US President Donald Trump during his first term, resulting in the normalization of relations between the UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco with Israel under US sponsorship.
Enab Baladi conducted a survey on its website, with about 100 participants, regarding the likelihood of Syrian-Israeli negotiations leading to a peace agreement.
According to the survey, 55% of the participants answered “yes,” while 45% believed the negotiations would not lead to peace.
The Syrian Center for Public Opinion Studies (Mada) also conducted a survey on Syrians’ views toward relations with Israel, with about 2,550 Syrians participating from all Syrian provinces.
According to Mada, 46% of Syrians rejected signing agreements with Israel, while 39.88% agreed, and the remaining 13.76% were uninterested.
According to the report, Israel remains the biggest threat to Syria’s security in the current phase, as 76% of the Syrian participants in the survey confirmed this stance.
The Israeli side continues to view the new Syrian government as a threat to its security, as indicated by statements from Israeli officials who have accused al-Sharaa and his government of extremism based on his previous jihadist background.
Despite the negotiations suggested by Reuters and Israeli newspapers, Israel remains on alert along its borders and continues its airstrikes inside Syria, with one targeting a site near the presidential palace in Damascus.
Israeli Central Command Chief Avi Blot indicated during his tour of Israeli army positions on May 8 that changes in military tactics along the border with Syria are due to the changing enemy, according to Israeli media.
We are approaching a significant turnaround in the eastern arena. In fact, we are already witnessing a change because the enemy has changed, the threats have changed, and the threats coming from Syria have changed. Therefore, we must also change.
Avi Blot, Israeli Central Command Chief
Azerbaijan and Turkey: A different path
On another front, Turkey is conducting negotiations with Israel hosted in the Azerbaijani capital, Baku, via several rounds, with the third session (the latest as of the time of this report) held on May 8.
Israeli broadcasting agency (Makan) reported that the third round was at a higher representation level compared to previous rounds.
The negotiations focus on the increasing tension over Turkey’s role in Syria, and according to Makan, Israel will raise two main demands: first, “the absence of a military force threatening Israel near the border with Syria,” and second, “the absence of strategic weapons in Syria that could threaten Israeli security.”
For his part, Syrian researcher Nader Khalil believes that the Emirati-Syrian and Azerbaijani-Turkish mediation paths do not operate in a fully complementary manner, but carry some signs of regional competition.
He explained that the UAE seeks to strengthen its presence as a mediator in sensitive files, while Turkey, for tactical political reasons, allows al-Sharaa room for maneuver through the Emirati channel to position himself as an independent actor not completely subordinate to Ankara.
It is essential to differentiate between the topics of negotiation in the two paths:
The talks hosted by Azerbaijan focus on balancing military dynamics in Syria, especially concerning the Turkish military influence, which Israel perceives as a national security threat. In contrast, the negotiations in the UAE revolve specifically around the relationship between the new Syrian regime and Israel and pertain to bilateral security arrangements paving the way for subsequent normalization.Dr. Nader Khalil, Syrian political researcher
Negotiation paths between Syria and Israel: Normalization postponed Enab Baladi.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Negotiation paths between Syria and Israel: Normalization postponed )
Also on site :