The possibility of peace between Israel and Syria, two nations long locked in a state of hostility, has resurfaced as a topic of analysis amid profound changes sweeping across the Middle East. While recent diplomatic breakthroughs with other Arab states have altered Israel’s external relationships, the path to normalization with Syria remains beset by formidable obstacles: entrenched enmity, ongoing violence, and the transformative influence of Iran and its proxies in Syria. An examination of the realities reveals why genuine Israeli-Syrian reconciliation remains elusive and clouded by regional security dynamics.
A History Shaped by Conflict
Since Israel’s establishment in 1948, Syria has been a consistent participant in wars and armed confrontations against Israel. The wars of 1948, 1967, and 1973 cemented the two nations as bitter adversaries, particularly following Israel’s capture of the strategically sensitive Golan Heights during the Six-Day War in 1967. For decades, the Golan served not only as a defensive buffer for Israel but as a focal point of Syria’s territorial claims and a precondition to even the consideration of normalization.
Throughout the latter half of the twentieth century, peace talks and diplomatic backchannels—from Madrid to Shepherdstown—yielded no breakthrough, with Syria’s demands for complete Israeli withdrawal from the Golan and Israel’s insistence on security guarantees proving irreconcilable. The stalemate was further entrenched by Syria’s refusal to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist, even as successive Israeli governments reiterated that lasting security could not be achieved through territorial compromise alone.
The Syrian Civil War and Iran’s Expanding Influence
The outbreak of civil war in Syria in 2011 fundamentally altered the region’s security equation. President Bashar al-Assad’s embattled regime increasingly depended on Iranian support to survive, inviting unprecedented entrenchment of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and terror affiliates like Hezbollah into Syrian territory. These groups have transformed southern and western Syria into operational bases, directly threatening Israel’s northern frontier.
Israel has responded with hundreds of defensive strikes targeting IRGC and Hezbollah positions, munitions convoys, and missile development sites within Syria. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF), under the leadership of Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir, has prioritized preventing Iranian expansion and the formation of a new front for attacks against Israeli civilians. Statements from Israeli security officials stress the necessity of denying Iran and its proxies a permanent foothold on Israel’s border, bolstered by the recognition by Israel’s closest ally, the United States under President Donald Trump, of the Golan Heights as sovereign Israeli territory.
Shifting Regional Dynamics and Rumors of Negotiation
The Abraham Accords of 2020 upended traditional patterns of Arab-Israeli engagement, as Israel signed normalization agreements with the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan. These accords showcased the possibility of pragmatic ties based on shared security and economic interests, echoing Israeli hopes that Syria too might, in time, seek accommodation.
In recent months, as Arab states have re-engaged diplomatically with the Assad regime in efforts to dilute Iranian influence, speculation has arisen regarding back-channel communications or potential Israeli-Syrian talks. However, no formal announcement or credible evidence points to active negotiations. Both Israeli and Syrian officials maintain publicly that core issues remain unresolved: the Golan Heights, Iranian military presence, and the legitimacy of the Syrian regime.
Barriers: Security Imperatives and Geopolitical Reality
For Israel, security is paramount. Years of rocket attacks, infiltration attempts, and the brutal October 7th massacre by Hamas in Gaza—the single deadliest antisemitic event since the Holocaust—demonstrate the risks of territorial concessions to militant groups. Israeli policy makers argue that relinquishing the Golan Heights would jeopardize more than strategic depth; it would leave northern communities exposed to aggression from well-armed terrorists directed by Iran.
Furthermore, Assad remains fundamentally dependent on Tehran, whose funding, military support, and terror franchise operations are essential for regime survival. Any movement toward peace with Israel could threaten Assad’s domestic standing, invite Iranian retaliation, and provoke attacks from Hezbollah and other proxies embedded in Syria. The regime’s track record of hosting, arming, and facilitating anti-Israel terror further undermines any trust required for meaningful negotiations.
The Broader Strategic Picture
Iran’s axis of resistance—branching through Baghdad, Damascus, and Beirut—seeks to encircle Israel with threats from Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, Shia militias in Syria and Iraq, and the Houthis in Yemen. Israeli defense doctrine views the slowing, deterring, and rolling back of this axis as existential imperatives. For Syria, aligning openly with Israel risks both internal instability and regional blowback from Iranian-aligned factions.
Other regional actors—including Egypt, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan—monitor developments warily. While several Arab states are wary of Iran’s regional ambitions and would prefer to see Syria drift from Tehran’s orbit, they have yet to condition rapprochement with Damascus on progress toward peace with Israel or a reduction of terror group activity.
Operational Facts on the Ground
Military operations underscore the daily dangers. The IDF regularly disrupts Iranian military logistics and pre-empts the consolidation of hostile infrastructure along the Golan. Israeli sources confirm that these missions have degraded Iranian ambitions, but the threat of escalation always looms, with occasional Syrian air defense responses threatening to widen the conflict.
Despite this, the Assad regime has largely refrained from direct confrontation, mindful of Israel’s overwhelming military superiority and the costs of open warfare. Both sides engage in calibrated brinkmanship, with neither seeking all-out hostilities even as localized violence persists.
Domestic Views and Prospects for Change
Within Israel, public sentiment is overwhelmingly skeptical about diplomatic overtures to the Assad regime, which is associated with decades of aggression, terror sponsorship, and complicity in atrocities. The memory of failed peace initiatives and the trauma of the October 7th massacre reinforce the view that Israel’s security must not be jeopardized by risky experiments in territorial compromise.
Inside Syria, civil war devastation and ongoing repression limit any realistic prospect of popular influence over state policy. While many Syrians yearn for stability and economic recovery, the regime’s priorities remain focused on survival and alliance maintenance, not bold diplomatic ventures.
Reflections and Outlook
The Abraham Accords proved that old hostilities are not immutable when shared interests and security guarantees are tangible. Yet, Syria remains far from this point. The persistent presence of Iranian-backed forces, the absence of any Syrian recognition of Israel, and credible threats by terror groups operating from Syrian soil all serve as barriers to peace.
Israel, meanwhile, continues to assert its preference for a peaceful northern border, but reserves the right to act in self-defense as dictated by the security environment. Israeli officials remain clear: until Syria expels Iranian forces, dismantles terror networks, and accepts the legitimacy of the Jewish state, diplomatic normalization will remain a distant aspiration rather than an imminent prospect.
In sum, while regional circumstances have created opportunities for new partnerships, the unique and dangerous realities on the Israeli-Syrian front ensure that peace is not, as some suggest, just beyond the corner. Instead, alertness, deterrence, and resolution continue to define Israel’s approach to its volatile northern neighbor.
