[Damascus] Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa has signaled a willingness to explore the possibility of normalizing relations with Israel, according to senior Syrian officials. The move would represent a major shift in Damascus’ longstanding stance toward its southern neighbor, which it has technically been at war with since 1948.
The remarks were made during a meeting earlier this month in Damascus with US Representatives Marlin Stutzman and Cory Mills and were first reported by Bloomberg News. Syrian government sources confirmed the account to The Media Line, emphasizing that any such normalization process would need to preserve Syria’s unity and full sovereignty.
Historical tensions and shifting dynamics
The Syrian-Israeli conflict dates back to 1948, when Syria joined other Arab nations in the first war against the newly declared State of Israel. The two countries later engaged in several military confrontations, most notably the 1967 war, during which Israel occupied the Golan Heights—an area that remains a core symbol of Syrian sovereignty and a central obstacle to peace.
Despite decades of hostility, the 1990s saw discreet efforts at reconciliation, particularly following the Madrid Conference and during the tenure of President Hafez Assad. Sporadic attempts continued under Bashar Assad, especially after the 2007 Annapolis Conference. However, negotiations repeatedly collapsed over one issue: Israel’s refusal to fully withdraw from the Golan.
Nir Boms, chairman of the Syria Research Forum at the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies at Tel Aviv University, told The Media Line that recent shifts across the region are influencing Damascus’ calculus. “This isn’t happening in isolation. We are living in the post–October 7 reality. The Iranian axis is weakened. The counter-offensive against Iran’s proxies has left Hezbollah weaker. Syria is in a different place now, and Iran is under pressure. The opposition, sidelined for years, now has a chance to raise its voice,” he said.
Syria signals interest in the Abraham Accords
During his meeting with the US delegation, President al-Sharaa stated that “Damascus is open to the Abraham Accords,” referencing the US-brokered normalization agreements between Israel and several Arab states since 2020. While this does not amount to a commitment to normalize ties, it signals political pragmatism and a shift in regional strategy.
According to Rep. Stutzman, al-Sharaa firmly rejected any political arrangement that compromises Syria’s territorial integrity. He also demanded an end to Israeli airstrikes within Syrian territory, calling them a destabilizing force that fuels regional tensions.
Boms further reflected on how regional dynamics have evolved in recent years. “In 1948, Israel fought against four Arab countries. In the 2023–2025 Gaza war, we also faced multiple fronts—but none were Arab states. Not a single Arab country closed its embassy or withdrew its diplomats. On the contrary, many were helping us intercept Iranian missiles. That tells you something has changed,” he said. He added, “This move wasn’t random. The arrest of Palestinian Islamic Jihad leaders happened the same week as several other developments—this is part of an American pressure strategy.”
Israel’s cautious response and regional recalibration
A senior source in Syria’s Defense Ministry told The Media Line that Israel’s strategy over the past decade has focused on “preventing Iranian entrenchment” and “neutralizing threats from Hezbollah.” These goals have prompted hundreds of airstrikes on Iranian-linked targets inside Syria.
Although Israeli officials have not publicly responded to al-Sharaa’s remarks, the source said Tel Aviv was closely monitoring developments in Damascus, particularly in light of shifting power dynamics following the fall of Syria’s previous regime. This could open a new, though politically sensitive, diplomatic channel.
Boms also pointed to signs of change within Syrian armed factions, particularly in the northwest of the country, where formerly hard-line leaders are showing signs of recalibration.
“I’m part of a group, including people who’ve spoken with al-Jolani, that believes there’s an opportunity for progress in Syria—if we play our cards right, Bom explained. “There are certainly pragmatic elements around al-Jolani, and I believe he himself has shown a willingness to pursue a new path.”
Boms said the changes in rhetoric are being accompanied by a broader desire for national recovery. “I’ve met educated, serious Syrians who want a better future—one that includes stability and improved relations. They recognize that Syria has real, objective problems. Conflict is subjective and can be resolved. If these new statements of Al Jolani indicate genuine will, I’m pleased.”
Civil society voices and people-to-people diplomacy
While some political actors in Syria welcomed the president’s openness to regional peace efforts, others voiced skepticism. Critics argue that any normalization effort must be based on a genuine public mandate and accompanied by meaningful domestic political reforms.
Opposition figures see normalization as a potential tool to gain international support for reconstruction. Still, they stress it must not come at the cost of justice for past abuses, accountability during any transition, or the rights of refugees.
Reflecting on the evolution of people-to-people ties, Boms said he has been in contact with Syrians for years. “I’ve been speaking with Syrians for 15 years and have hosted many in my own home. These relationships are critical. Between 1948 and the Syrian civil war, very few Syrians ever visited Israel. But in the last decade, I’ve hosted far more than that,” he said.
“We’ve treated over 5,000 Syrians in Israeli hospitals. Thousands more have been engaged through Operation Good Neighbor. And now, we’re working together in civil society initiatives and other forms of collaboration,” he added.
Potential benefits and deep challenges
For Damascus, normalization could help end regional and international isolation, attract foreign investment, accelerate reconstruction, and create an opening for a US-backed political breakthrough. For Israel, it could reduce Iranian influence along its northern border, secure a lasting ceasefire in the Golan Heights, unlock access to regional markets that include Syria, and help integrate Syria into a US-supported regional security and economic framework.
Looking ahead, Boms cautioned that such a process will require patience and clarity. “Normalization should take time. It’s about trust-building. Right now, we don’t fully understand where the new Syrian leadership stands, how much power they have, or even whether they’ll remain in place. But the fact that discussions are taking place is significant,” he said. “In fact, I’ve been working with Syrian colleagues to begin drafting potential frameworks. There have been conversations over the past few months about how to build trust, improve communication, and foster relationships between Syrians and Israelis.”
Despite promising signals, several major obstacles remain. Chief among them is the status of the occupied Golan Heights, which Syria insists on reclaiming. The continued presence of Iranian forces in Syria is viewed by Israel as an existential threat. Public opinion in both Syria and the broader Arab world is divided on normalization, especially in light of stalled progress on the Palestinian issue. In addition, both Russia and Iran—longtime allies of Damascus—may resist normalization, seeing it as a threat to their regional influence.
Boms also linked growing pragmatism to the consequences of prolonged conflict in the region. “Many in Lebanon, and certainly in Syria, understand that when radicals are allowed to run things, the result is bloodshed—a war that denies people progress, prosperity, and development. Some of the emerging pragmatism comes from this realization,” he said.
He added that this shift in tone could also be seen in the rhetoric of figures like al-Jolani, the once hard-line leader in Syria’s northwest. “Al-Jolani speaks in pragmatic, nationalistic terms—not humanitarian ones. He’s speaking as a Syrian, but he’s also under the influence of multiple actors: Turkish and Qatari interests weigh heavily,” Boms said.
A long road toward sustainable peace
Syria’s new leadership appears intent on repositioning the country diplomatically. While sovereignty and territorial integrity remain nonnegotiable, President al-Sharaa’s rhetoric signals an openness to dialogue—provided Syria’s core national interests are protected.
If this approach evolves into a concrete strategy, it could mark a turning point in Arab-Israeli relations, with Damascus—once a stronghold of anti-Israel resistance—entering a broader regional realignment.
Boms compared past peace deals with current approaches. “Jordan and Egypt signed peace agreements—but they didn’t build peace among the people. That’s a major difference. In contrast, the UAE and Morocco approached it differently. I believe in people-to-people work because it creates long-term foundations, and with Syria we should aim for the same long-term process,” said Boms.
He stressed that the normalization process should not be politicized. “This isn’t about Netanyahu making a statement back. It’s not about headlines. It’s about gradual collaboration. Israelis already know Syrians better than most people think, and we have a foundation to build from,” he added.
Whether this transformation takes hold will depend on regional power balances, the clarity of Syria’s political strategy, and the role of the United States as a credible mediator.
Boms concluded by describing the broader vision behind the current diplomatic momentum. “But there are Israelis and Syrians who understand that this is a chance to change the reality—to weaken the ‘axis of resistance’ and build what I call an ‘axis of renaissance.’ This means connecting with pragmatic partners in the region: Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Jordan, and others. Israel and the US have a role to play in that,” Boms said.
Even early indications of normalization could shake up the diplomatic landscape, redrawing the map of Middle Eastern alliances. While the path forward remains uncertain, Syria’s cautious overture reflects an understanding of shifting regional dynamics and a desire to redefine its foreign policy without compromising national principles.
