Physical Address
Indirizzo: Via Mario Greco 60, Buttigliera Alta, 10090, Torino, Italy
In the aftermath of the Dec. 8 revolution, Syria found itself on the brink of a new and deeply volatile chapter. By July 11, as the central government struggled to consolidate its authority, the country was suddenly engulfed in a wave of violent unrest. Intercommunal clashes between Druze and Bedouin communities in the southern province of Suwayda escalated rapidly into a regional crisis, spurred by Israeli military intervention. In response to reported massacres of Bedouin civilians by Druze factions, tribal fighters from across Syria and neighboring countries mobilized in defense of their kin. Simultaneously, Druze communities in Lebanon, Jordan and Israel began organizing to support their relatives in Suwayda. Amid this surge of cross-border mobilization, Israeli airstrikes targeted Syrian government forces, not only in Suwayda but also in the capital, striking the General Staff headquarters and the vicinity of the Presidential Palace. These attacks, accompanied by direct threats from Tel Aviv, represented yet another violation of Syria’s sovereignty and served to destabilize an already fragile security environment further.
To divide a country
The conflict in southern Syria now poses a substantial threat to the country’s territorial integrity. Druze militias led by Hikmat al-Hijri have sought Israeli protection, a move that has intensified regional tensions and raised concerns in Damascus. Israeli airstrikes have weakened the Syrian government‘s ability to contain the crisis, limiting efforts to confront the Druze forces. At the same time, the government has been unable to prevent Arab tribal mobilizations toward Suwayda. The combined effect of external intervention and widespread domestic mobilization has severely constrained Damascus’ capacity to manage the conflict.
While instability escalated in Syria’s south, a new political rupture emerged in the north. The PKK’s Syrian branch, YPG, which had pledged on March 10, 2025, to integrate its armed “wing,” SDF, into the Damascus-led state structure, used the southern unrest as a pretext to withdraw from its commitments. No concrete steps have been taken to implement the eight-point agreement that was previously signed. On the contrary, YPG leaders now insist they will not disarm and argue that a decentralized model would serve Syria better than central rule. This shift not only undermines the country’s territorial integrity but also signals a clear disregard for the central government’s demands. Despite efforts by U.S. Special Envoy Tom Barrack to mediate, the YPG leadership continues to resist both disarmament and reintegration.
Despite mounting separatist pressures, the Syrian government has continued to prioritize a political resolution. With mediation efforts led by the U.S. and France, both the Israeli file and the PKK/YPG issue were placed on the negotiating table. However, the diplomatic track yielded no tangible outcomes, neither during talks in Damascus nor in follow-up meetings in Paris. Although Damascus remains rhetorically committed to political dialogue, Israel’s airstrikes on the capital prompted a shift in posture. On July 24, the Syrian government formally requested military support from Türkiye to enhance its defense capacity and combat terrorist organizations, particularly Daesh. Ankara had already declared on July 19 that it would be willing to respond favorably if such a request were made. This rapprochement between Ankara and Damascus serves not only as a direct response to Israel’s aggressive and destabilizing actions but also as a strategic signal to non-state armed actors, including Daesh and the PKK/YPG.
Washington’s mediation efforts
Barrack has attempted to curb Israel’s aggression to preserve Syria’s territorial integrity, but Washington’s influence remains limited. Israel’s July 16 airstrike on Damascus caught the Trump administration “off guard.” White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt admitted, “President Trump was caught off guard by Israel’s bombing of Syria … We were not told that Damascus would be targeted.” Her remarks reveal a lack of coordination between the U.S. and Israel and underline the limits of Washington’s diplomacy in Syria.
To contain the crisis, the U.S. facilitated a meeting in Paris on July 24 between Syrian Foreign Minister Assad Hasan Shaybani and Israeli Strategic Affairs Director Ron Dermer, with Barrack mediating the talks. Although no concrete outcome was achieved, Barrack emphasized that both sides had reaffirmed their commitment to continued dialogue and de-escalation. At the same time, the talks followed Israel’s recent strikes on Suwayda, and the agenda extended beyond those events. Israel is reportedly exploring the possibility of a broader security arrangement with Syria to safeguard its strategic interests and has shown willingness to engage under U.S. mediation. Roughly a month prior to the meeting, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar stated that Tel Aviv was open to normalizing relations with Syria and Lebanon, provided that Israeli control over the Golan Heights remained unchanged.
While Israel appears open to a comprehensive security agreement with Syria, developments on the ground suggest a preference for military leverage over diplomatic engagement. Having entrenched its presence in the Golan Heights, Israel has extended its control to Jabal al-Sheikh, positioning forces less than 20 kilometers (around 12.5 miles) from Damascus. This proximity leaves the Syrian capital exposed to immediate military threats. Israeli artillery units stationed on Jabal al-Sheikh are reportedly oriented toward Damascus, reinforcing perceptions of encirclement. In effect, the territory stretching from Quneitra to the outskirts of the capital remains under de facto Israeli control, reflecting the depth of Israel’s military penetration into southern Syria.
Suwayda has emerged as the latest front in Israel’s expanding occupation across southern Syria. In this province, Israel has not only asserted territorial dominance but also deepened its influence by cooperating with separatist Druze groups to reshape local demographics. These developments indicate that Israel intends to approach future negotiations with maximalist demands and is unlikely to withdraw from occupied areas unless those demands are fully met. The Paris talks, therefore, risk becoming a drawn-out process. If Israel fails to secure its objectives through diplomacy, it is likely to return to military escalation as a tool of coercion.
Syria’s balancing partner
Facing the dual burden of an incapacitated air force and an army still in the process of institutional recovery, the Syrian government remains militarily vulnerable in the face of Israeli expansionism. The growing perception in Damascus is that Israel’s actions are not merely tactical, but part of a broader strategy to generate instability across the region. In response, the Syrian leadership has placed increasing emphasis on building strategic partnerships, with Türkiye emerging as its most capable ally – due to its robust military posture, NATO credentials, and assertive presence in international diplomacy. The request for support from Ankara serves two primary objectives: pushing back against the PKK/YPG’s entrenchment along the Turkish border and confronting Israel’s escalating military pressure and territorial ambitions.
Destabilizing Syria’s territorial integrity risks triggering cross-border insecurity. Türkiye, concerned about spillover effects near its southern frontier, shares overlapping security interests with Damascus. Its presence acts as a deterrent against both separatist forces and regional destabilizers. While prioritizing diplomacy, Ankara does not rule out the use of force if regional stability is further threatened.
