Situation assessment

This week's news reflected a dual trajectory for Syria under the leadership of Ahmed al-Sharaa. A report addressed what is happening behind the scenes in negotiations between Syria and Israel, while al-Sharaa publicly affirmed that the Golan is Syrian land and demanded Israel's complete withdrawal, and said that Israel in its aberration is transgressing against Syria. In parallel, a report said Israel is redrawing the security landscape in southern Syria after the fall of the Assad regime. The Israeli army shelled with two artillery rounds the vicinity of al-Hamidiyah town in the Quneitra countryside, with no initial reports of casualties or damage. On the Lebanese and economic track, a high-level Syrian delegation was in Beirut to discuss investment and reconstruction, and a Syrian minister urged Lebanese companies to participate in a rehabilitation workshop worth USD 500 million. Al-Sharaa said in an MTV interview that the old legacy between Lebanon and Syria is difficult, and called for absolute frankness with peoples regarding Lebanese-Israeli negotiations, warning that exaggerated promises cause shocks.

Syria appears to be in a transitional phase combining two tracks: a diplomatic/negotiating track with Israel or regarding regional arrangements, and a limited military escalation in the south. Al-Sharaa's public statements on the Golan and complete withdrawal set the ceiling of sovereign demands, while the report on behind-the-scenes negotiations indicates an undisclosed channel or discussion. Israel, according to the report, is working to redraw the security landscape in southern Syria after Assad's fall, meaning the field is being used as a tool of pressure or a test for possible arrangements. The artillery shelling in Quneitra, though limited, confirms that the negotiating track is not insulated from developments on the ground. On the other hand, the Lebanese dimension appears as a central file: Syria seeks to attract investment and reconstruction through Lebanon, a high-level delegation visits Beirut, and a Syrian minister calls on Lebanese companies to participate in a USD 500 million rehabilitation workshop. Al-Sharaa's remarks on Lebanese-Israeli negotiations and the old legacy reflect the sensitivity of the relationship with Lebanon and an effort to manage expectations, in order to avoid political or popular shocks. The actors are the Syrian leadership, Israel, Lebanon, and Lebanese companies interested in reconstruction. The news does not show details of the Syrian-Israeli negotiation track or its conditions, which limits analysis to the available data.

The likely continuation of combining sovereign statements with engagement in negotiating channels, with limited Israeli operations in the south possibly remaining as a pressure factor. If negotiations continue, they could move toward interim security understandings or arrangements in the south, but the absence of details prevents assessing their terms. If Israeli strikes escalate or the redrawing of the security landscape expands, de-escalation efforts could suffer a setback. The Lebanese file is likely to see further economic and diplomatic movement, especially in investment and reconstruction, while popular expectations and public statements remain sensitive factors. As for Lebanese-Israeli negotiations, Damascus appears to be following them while calling for frankness, and their outcomes may affect the climate of Syrian-Lebanese relations.