Syria is reportedly in secret negotiations with Israel, with the aim of joining the Abraham Accords, according to multiple media reports and sources familiar with the matter. The talks—mediated by Arab and international actors—signal a potential breakthrough in the region’s political landscape. Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa is said to have approved a preliminary agreement, a dramatic shift in policy that could reshape Damascus’ long-standing posture toward Israel.
Described by analysts as a “diplomatic earthquake,” the development has generated widespread discussion across political and public forums. If confirmed, it would mark a historic departure from Syria’s entrenched opposition to normalization with Israel and its broader position in the Arab-Israeli conflict.
The Abraham Accords
The Abraham Accords were launched in 2020, when the United Arab Emirates and the Kingdom of Bahrain normalized relations with Israel under the sponsorship of the United States. The agreements broke with decades of Arab boycott policies. Sudan and Morocco later joined the process, establishing a framework for regional cooperation rooted in diplomacy, security, and economic ties rather than solely hinging on the resolution of the Palestinian issue.
Syria, for its part, has long maintained a hostile stance toward Israel, shaped by decades of war, proxy confrontations in Lebanon and Palestine, and more recently, indirect clashes during the Syrian civil war. Since 2011, Israel has regularly targeted Iranian and proxy militia positions inside Syria.
While Syrian officials have at times sent signals suggesting an interest in de-escalation, normalization with Israel has until now remained politically untouchable.
Leaked framework for normalization
The Media Line has obtained details from sources describing a tentative agreement approved by al-Sharaa, who is increasingly seen as a rising figure in Syria’s evolving political structure.
According to these sources, al-Sharaa has expressed readiness to adopt the core tenets of the Abraham Accords: mutual recognition of sovereignty, full diplomatic relations, an end to hostilities, and collaboration across economic, cultural, and security sectors.
Al-Sharaa reportedly defended the initiative as a response to “accelerating regional developments” and “a desire to break out of isolation and open up to a new era of peace and development.”
Leaked documents reviewed by The Media Line outline the proposed framework, which includes the following elements
1. Mutual recognition of sovereignty, including Israel’s, under international law
2. Establishment of formal diplomatic relations, with ambassadorial exchanges and embassies in each capital
3. A formal end to hostilities, and a commitment to resolve disputes through dialogue
4. Economic cooperation focused on technology, energy, and agriculture
5. Security coordination against shared threats, particularly terrorism and extremism
6. Direct civilian flight routes to facilitate tourism and mobility
7. Grassroots and cultural exchanges to encourage coexistence and mutual understanding
8. Support for regional peace initiatives without political conditions on local actors
9. Promotion of interfaith dialogue among Judaism, Christianity, and Islam
10. Commitment to international law and the United Nations Charter as the basis of foreign relations
Broader strategic context
Syrian analyst Mustafa Zahran told The Media Line that the move cannot be seen in isolation from regional and international trends.
“With the partial US retreat from the region and the rise of regional powers like Turkey and Iran—alongside mounting economic challenges facing most Arab countries—many regimes are reassessing their strategies and looking for new avenues for influence and partnership,” Zahran said.
Economic analyst Abdul Rahman Mahmoud noted that the shift coincides with Israel’s effort to broaden its diplomatic reach in the Arab and Islamic world, particularly in light of improving ties with Saudi Arabia and Turkey.
Mahmoud added that Syria—struggling under international sanctions and a crisis of internal legitimacy—may view this diplomatic overture as a means of reasserting relevance and improving conditions at home.
Public reaction in Syria divided
Public reaction in Syria has been divided. Some citizens, writing on social media, expressed cautious support, calling it “a first step out of the tunnel” and making “rapid strides toward stability.”
Others have been more critical. Opposition figures and political analysts accused the Syrian government of offering “a free concession” to Israel, and of using the talks to distract from unresolved domestic problems, including human rights abuses and stalled reconstruction efforts.
What are the strategic implications?
Observers believe that al-Sharaa’s endorsement of the Abraham Accords represents more than a rhetorical shift. It could reflect a reorientation in Syrian strategy, one that would close one of the last remaining Arab fronts against normalization with Israel.
Such a move could grant Israel a strategic advantage while positioning Syria to secure political and economic support. It may also signal the widening of regional peacebuilding efforts to include actors beyond the Gulf, expanding the Abraham Accords into a broader platform for development and conflict resolution.
Whether driven by external incentives or internal priorities, Syria’s engagement with the accords appears to place the country on a new diplomatic path. The implications for the Palestinian issue and the regional order remain uncertain.
Although still in its early stages, Syria’s possible entry into the Abraham Accords is likely to require sustained diplomacy, international guarantees, and engagement from multiple stakeholders.
The Golan Heights and Syrian sovereignty
Reports in Israeli media suggest al-Sharaa has expressed openness to discussing the future of the Golan Heights, a region occupied by Israel since 1967 and formally annexed in 1981—a move not recognized by most of the international community.
Syrian government officials confirmed to The Media Line that discussions concerning the future of the Golan are ongoing, with sources suggesting there could be “some kind of agreement” on the horizon.
At the same time, Syrian officials remain wary. President al-Sharaa has warned that any attempt by Israel to divide Syrian territory would be a “red line” in future negotiations.
Differing views from the Syrian public
The Syrian public appears torn between pragmatism and principle.
Hassan al-Qassem, a merchant from Idlib, told The Media Line that peace with Israel might be essential to rebuilding Syria and achieving lasting stability—provided that Syrian sovereignty is restored and the occupied territories are returned.
“I see it as a necessary step,” he said.
But not all agree. Hind Ahmad, a Syrian journalist, rejected any form of rapprochement, calling it a betrayal of both Syrian sacrifices and the Palestinian cause.
She told The Media Line that “normalization cannot happen without Israel’s full withdrawal from the occupied territories.”
A third group of Syrians appears cautiously open to the process but skeptical of Israeli motives. They support the idea of peace and improved stability but worry that normalization could come at the expense of Syrian rights—especially in the Golan Heights, where Israeli settlement activity continues.