Security contacts between Israel and Syria have returned to the forefront after a suspension lasting nearly two months, under direct U.S. sponsorship and amid pressure exerted by U.S. President Donald Trump to push the process forward.
Despite the “positive” atmosphere surrounding this week’s round of talks in Paris, Israeli assessments indicate that deep gaps still prevent the conclusion of a comprehensive security agreement, in a track where security intersects with politics and with more complex regional files.
In an exclusive interview with Alhurra, Akram Hasson, the Druze lawmaker in the governing coalition and a close associate of the foreign minister, outlined Israel’s position on the contacts with Damascus, identifying three issues he described as decisive for any progress.
Hasson said that reaching an agreement with Syria is “possible in only one case.” It is conditional on “the Syrian presidency’s acceptance of security clauses that are extremely important to Israel,” foremost among them the establishment of a demilitarized southern zone free of any Syrian security presence. He added that Israel “defends this area itself,” arguing that recent experience constitutes “the clearest proof” of the dangers posed by the current situation on the ground.
Hasson stressed that Israel will not withdraw from the areas it took control of in December 2024. He said that “this is not about political promises, but about real threats,” citing the presence of groups he described as “takfiri,” alongside elements linked to Hamas operating with support from Iran and Hezbollah—against Israel and against Syria’s stability at the same time.
Asked why Israel insists on remaining in these areas, Hasson said the Syrian government is “incapable of doing anything,” pointing to developments in several Syrian cities, from Aleppo to Homs and the coast. He added that Israel views its presence as a factor preventing the entrenchment of Iran-backed actors.
He further said that Damascus, “if its intentions are sincere,” must understand that this presence aims to prevent chaos, not to entrench an occupation.
The second file Hasson addressed was Iran’s role. He said Iran is “trying to eliminate Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa,” not only to destabilize the government but also to sow chaos and later accuse Israel of responsibility.
He argued that Tehran continues to support Hezbollah and Hamas-linked groups inside Syria, and seeks to use extremist organizations to achieve its objectives, adding that Israel will confront this role “in coordination with the United States.”
The third issue concerned the humanitarian and security situation in Sweida province. Hasson said the Syrian government has “failed, collapsed, and committed abuses against the Druze and minorities,” arguing that what is happening there reflects a loss of confidence in Damascus’s ability to protect its citizens. He said Sweida is under an effective siege, with water and electricity cut off and aid blocked, accusing Syrian authorities of “misleading” claims on the matter.
Hasson defended the idea of a humanitarian corridor for the Druze of Sweida, stressing that the goal is “to help our brothers and families in Jabal al-Druze and deliver aid that is not reaching them.” He denied that the move is linked to occupation projects or expansionist slogans, saying that “protecting minorities and combating terrorism and extremism are part of Israel’s approach in southern Syria.”
In parallel, the website Epoch reported that Israel and Syria have resumed their security talks in Paris after a roughly two-month pause, in an attempt to advance a security agreement between the two sides as part of a U.S.-mediated track that began months ago. According to senior political sources, the resumption of negotiations came under direct pressure from President Donald Trump, who views a security agreement as a preliminary step toward possible normalization and as a pillar of his Middle East peace plan.
The report said the talks were held in what was described as a positive atmosphere, with agreement to continue them, despite acknowledgment that gaps between the two sides remain deep. The Israeli delegation was led by the prime minister’s military secretary and nominee for Mossad chief Roman Gofman, Israel’s ambassador to Washington Yechiel Leiter, and acting National Security Council head Gil Reich. On the Syrian side, Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani and intelligence chief Hussein al-Salama participated. Representatives of President Trump were also present, including Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, in addition to the U.S. ambassador to Turkey and Syria envoy Thomas Barrack.
The United States issued a joint statement on behalf of Israel and Syria announcing understandings related to a mutual commitment to pursue security arrangements and sustainable stability, along with agreement to establish a real-time intelligence cooperation mechanism between the two countries.
Political sources told the site that this mechanism resembles a “hotline” aimed at direct coordination, preventing friction and miscalculation, and addressing disputes that may arise, including those linked to bloody incidents in Druze areas of Sweida. The report also noted agreement to open a parallel track of civilian talks covering energy, health, and agriculture, alongside U.S. momentum for an initiative related to selling Israeli gas to Syria.
At the same time, the report noted that Israeli security sources confirmed no understanding had been reached on updating the 1974 Disengagement of Forces Agreement, and that Israel’s red lines remain intact and non-negotiable. These include no withdrawal from the shoulder of Mount Hermon, from the Golan Heights, or from the buffer zone established after the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime. The report added that the Syrian side insists any security agreement must include a full Israeli withdrawal to the lines in place in December 2024.
In a statement issued by the office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—of which Alhurra received a copy—it was announced that the political track of dialogue between Israel and Syria has been renewed after a period of suspension, with U.S. support and sponsorship.
Taken together, these developments reflect a cautious trajectory that is fundamentally about managing tensions rather than pursuing a comprehensive settlement. On the one hand, the technical understandings and proposed mechanisms point to a desire to prevent friction and miscalculation along the border, and to manage crises rather than slide into open confrontation. On the other hand, this approach collides with a set of heavy, unresolved files related to on-the-ground presence, sources of regional threats, and the status of minorities in southern Syria.
This equation reveals a clear gap between political ambitions for a regional breakthrough and security calculations that make any concession fraught with risk. As each side holds fast to its core demands, the contacts appear closer to a framework for managing disagreement and postponing an explosion than to a security agreement that would redraw the rules of engagement between the two sides in the foreseeable future.
