Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa speaks during a joint news conference with French President Emmanuel Macron after a meeting at the Elysee Palace in Paris, France, May 7, 2025 [Stephanie Lecocq/Pool via Reuters]
| Published May 8, 2025
Interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa says Syria holding indirect talks with Israel ‘through mediators’.
Syria’s interim President, Ahmed al-Sharaa, confirmed on May 7, 2025, that his government is engaged in indirect negotiations with Israel, facilitated through mediators. These discussions aim to de-escalate tensions following a series of Israeli airstrikes near Damascus, including one perilously close to the presidential palace. Al-Sharaa condemned these “random interventions” and emphasized the necessity of preventing the situation from spiraling out of control .
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has reportedly been instrumental in brokering these backchannel talks, focusing on security and intelligence cooperation rather than military matters. This initiative follows al-Sharaa’s mid-April visit to the UAE and seeks to build confidence between the two nations, which lack formal diplomatic relations .
Al-Sharaa’s remarks came during his first European visit since assuming power in January, following the ousting of former President Bashar al-Assad. In Paris, he met with French President Emmanuel Macron, who expressed willingness to advocate for the gradual lifting of European Union sanctions on Syria, contingent upon the country’s progress in ensuring stability and protecting minorities .
Despite these diplomatic efforts, significant challenges persist. Israel justifies its airstrikes as measures to protect its Druze community, while Syria accuses Israel of undermining its sovereignty. The Golan Heights remains a contentious issue, with Syria seeking its return and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state as preconditions for peace .
While these indirect talks represent a cautious step toward dialogue, the path to lasting peace remains fraught with complexities and uncertainties.
Here are some pros and cons related to the indirect talks between Syria and Israel, as discussed:
Pros
-
Reduced Tensions: Indirect talks could help de-escalate the current tensions, particularly following Israeli airstrikes near Damascus. This might prevent further military action and reduce the risk of conflict.
-
Diplomatic Engagement: This marks the first time in years that Syria and Israel are engaging in discussions, even if indirectly. Diplomatic engagement can pave the way for future peace talks and cooperation.
-
UAE Mediation: The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has played a key role in facilitating these talks. As a neutral party, the UAE can provide a platform for dialogue and reduce the animosity between the two countries.
-
International Pressure: France and other European nations are showing willingness to support Syria’s stability, potentially leading to the gradual lifting of sanctions. This could open up more international aid and improve Syria’s economic situation.
-
Focus on Security, Not Military Conflict: The talks are reportedly focused on security and intelligence cooperation rather than military issues, which might reduce the chances of further escalation and military confrontation.
Cons
-
Limited Scope: The talks are indirect, meaning they are not happening face-to-face, which could limit the effectiveness of the negotiations. Direct communication is often essential for resolving sensitive issues.
-
Israel’s Military Actions: Israel justifies its airstrikes as necessary for protecting its Druze community, but this continues to undermine Syria’s sovereignty. This approach can hinder trust-building and make long-term peace challenging.
-
Golan Heights Dispute: The return of the Golan Heights is a key issue for Syria. Israel’s refusal to return the territory could continue to be a major obstacle in the peace process, and this issue remains unresolved despite indirect talks.
-
Complicated Domestic Politics: Syria’s internal political situation is complex, especially following the ousting of Bashar al-Assad. There may be internal opposition or distrust of these diplomatic initiatives, which could derail efforts for lasting peace.
-
External Influences: While the UAE’s role in mediating is positive, it also raises concerns about the influence of outside parties. The interests of other nations in the region, like Iran and Turkey, might complicate any potential agreements between Syria and Israel.
Conclusion
the indirect talks between Syria and Israel, facilitated by the UAE, represent a cautiously optimistic step toward de-escalating tensions in the region. While these discussions offer the potential for reducing military conflict and improving security cooperation, they face significant hurdles, including unresolved territorial disputes like the Golan Heights and the challenges of rebuilding trust between the two nations.
Although indirect communication is a limitation, the involvement of neutral mediators and the willingness of international players like France to support Syria’s stability could provide a foundation for further diplomatic engagement. However, the path to lasting peace remains complex and uncertain, as external influences and internal political dynamics could disrupt progress.
Ultimately, these talks could be a first step toward a broader dialogue, but the road ahead is fraught with challenges, and sustained efforts from all parties involved will be necessary to achieve lasting peace and stability in the region.
SOURCES: AL JAZEERA – Syria’s al-Sharaa confirms indirect talks with Israel amid soaring tensions
MANILA BULLETIN – Syria’s leader says his country is holding indirect talks with Israel to avert an escalation
CNN – Syrian president says his government is holding indirect talks with Israel
Be the first to comment