Syria’s interim President Ahmed Ash‑Sharaa has officially confirmed for the first time that his government is engaged in indirect talks with Israel, seeking to reduce tensions in southern Syria following a series of cross-border airstrikes near the Golan Heights. The talks are being conducted via undisclosed international mediators.
The rare admission was made during a joint press conference in Paris, where Ash‑Sharaa stood alongside French President Emmanuel Macron. “These are not direct negotiations,” he said. “They are conducted through international partners with the aim of calming the situation and preventing escalation,” he added, referencing recent Israeli air attacks targeting Syrian infrastructure.
Syria’s state media amplified Ash‑Sharaa’s remarks, calling them a “strategic initiative” intended to preserve national security without formal normalization. The move marks the first time since the 1974 disengagement agreement that Syria has acknowledged any level of diplomatic communication with Israel.
According to a report by Kazakhstan’s national news agency Inform kz, Ash‑Sharaa explicitly stated that Israel’s recent attacks near Quneitra and southwestern Syria had prompted his administration to pursue indirect diplomatic pathways, leveraging trusted intermediaries to prevent further escalation.
Further supporting this, Russian Jewish News reported that officials in Tel Aviv and Abu Dhabi are aware of these backchannel communications. The report claims that the United Arab Emirates (UAE) is acting as a quiet intermediary, coordinating with both Damascus and Tel Aviv through intelligence and diplomatic mechanisms to facilitate stability near the Golan Heights.
However, Israel has issued a categorical denial. Speaking to Turkish state outlet Anadolu Agency, a senior Israeli official rejected the existence of any negotiations, stating: “There are no talks, direct or indirect, with Syria—or with Iran. These reports are baseless.” The Israeli spokesperson further criticized Syrian media for “disinformation and political theatrics” meant to distract from Iranian activity in the region.
Meanwhile, the Druze community—which resides on both the Israeli and Syrian sides of the Golan—has played a subtle but central role in facilitating these discussions. According to Russian Gazeta, Druze elders from Quneitra province and the Israeli-controlled Golan have served as informal go-betweens, raising civilian safety concerns with both sides amid ongoing hostilities.
The situation remains diplomatically sensitive. Syria’s leadership has carefully positioned the indirect talks with Israel as being strictly focused on border security and military de-escalation, deliberately rejecting any suggestion that these discussions represent the beginning of political normalization.
Officials in Damascus emphasize that their priority is to reduce cross-border violence and protect sovereignty in the face of repeated Israeli airstrikes. Analysts interpret this framing as a calculated maneuver by President Ahmed Ash‑Sharaa—an effort to resist Israel’s expanding military footprint while avoiding the ignition of a broader regional conflict. The approach also reflects Syria’s evolving strategy of balancing its long-standing military partnership with Iran against its desire to open limited diplomatic channels with Arab neighbors, particularly within the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC).
Ash‑Sharaa’s comments come in the wake of Syria’s official expression of support for Qatar following Iran’s missile strike on the US Al-Udeid Air Base earlier this month. While maintaining its strategic alliance with Tehran, Syria has simultaneously signaled a renewed interest in rebuilding ties with key Gulf states, according to Arab News.
The move is widely viewed as part of Damascus’ effort to rehabilitate its standing within the Arab world without compromising its resistance axis credentials. The reported involvement of the United Arab Emirates as a mediator in the Syria-Israel dialogue underscores this shift, pointing to a more pragmatic regional realignment in which Syria seeks both security relief and diplomatic reintegration.
Still, the outlook remains fragile. Israeli forces continue attacks across Syrian territory, primarily under the justification of countering Iranian influence. However, regional analysts and humanitarian observers note that these attacks frequently impact areas with little clear military value, exacerbating civilian death and displacement and hospitals, schools and other infrastructure damage.
For Syria, such actions underscore what it sees as Israel’s disregard for established international norms, further justifying the need for indirect negotiation through intermediaries rather than formal channels. Damascus contends that the absence of a direct diplomatic mechanism has allowed Israel to act with near impunity, destabilizing middle east with little accountability.
Despite Israel’s public denial, the convergence of reporting from Arab, Russian, and Jewish media points to a complex diplomatic effort unfolding discreetly. While Israeli leadership maintains a firm rhetorical stance, multiple independent accounts suggest that quiet conversations are indeed taking place—likely facilitated by third parties such as the UAE.
In this context, Israel’s repeated denials appear less as a statement of fact and more as a strategic move to maintain domestic political coherence and regional leverage, even as indirect talks offer a cautious path away from escalation.
