![](https://worldnewsradar.id/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/BANNER-RENT-300X47-COLUMN-1.png"){kind=small}
Amid shifting dynamics in the Middle East, Israel has expressed interest in establishing diplomatic relations with two of its historic adversaries—Syria and Lebanon. However, the possibility of peace remains tightly bound to one uncompromising stance: the Golan Heights will not be part of any negotiations. Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar emphasized this position during a recent press briefing, highlighting that while Israel welcomes dialogue and normalization, it will not compromise on what it sees as critical national security interests.
I. Israel’s Renewed Push for Regional Normalization
1. Leveraging Regional Instability for Diplomatic Gains
Israel’s outreach comes in the wake of a 12-day conflict with Iran and over a year of unrest involving Lebanon and Gaza. According to Israeli officials, Iran’s recent military setbacks create a unique opening to deepen regional alliances. Saar stated that with Iran on the defensive, now is the time for countries like Syria and Lebanon to consider normalization with Israel—similar to the deals reached with the UAE, Bahrain, and Morocco in 2020.
2. Historical Shifts in Arab-Israeli Relations
The normalization agreements of 2020 marked the first such breakthroughs since peace treaties with Jordan in 1994 and Egypt in 1979. However, these moves remain controversial across the Arab world, where support for Palestine continues to shape public opinion. Despite that, Israeli leaders hope to expand the circle of peace, particularly among neighboring states, while maintaining what they deem essential territorial and security protections.
II. The Golan Heights: A Sticking Point in Negotiations
1. Israel’s Firm Position on Sovereignty
Foreign Minister Saar was unequivocal in his remarks: “The Golan will remain part of the State of Israel.” Israel captured the strategic plateau during the 1967 Six-Day War and formally annexed it in 1981. While this move has not gained widespread international recognition, former U.S. President Donald Trump acknowledged Israeli sovereignty over the area during his term, a gesture that strengthened Israel’s position.
2. Syria’s Rejection of Golan Concessions
From Damascus, a senior Syrian official responded firmly, asserting that Syria will never relinquish the Golan Heights. Calling the region an inseparable part of Syrian territory, the official insisted that normalization efforts must follow the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative framework, rather than proceed through separate negotiations. Syria’s Foreign Ministry has yet to issue a formal statement on the matter.
III. The 2002 Arab Peace Initiative and Its Enduring Influence
1. Preconditions for Normalization
The Arab Peace Initiative, proposed over two decades ago, laid out a comprehensive plan: full normalization with Israel in return for withdrawal from all occupied territories, including the Golan Heights, Gaza, and the West Bank. It also calls for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital—an outcome Israel strongly opposes.
2. The Palestinian Question in Regional Diplomacy
Saudi Arabia, a key regional player, has consistently stated that diplomatic recognition of Israel hinges on the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state. This position has echoed throughout the Arab world and continues to be a major barrier to broader normalization. Israeli leadership, however, sees this condition as problematic. Saar argued that recognizing a Palestinian state would endanger Israeli national security and is therefore not a viable precondition for peace.
IV. Secret Talks and Shifting Alliances
1. Direct Engagement Between Israel and Syria
Despite public hostilities, behind-the-scenes efforts are underway. Reports from May indicate that Israeli and Syrian officials held direct meetings aimed at easing tensions along their shared border. This quiet diplomacy marks a rare moment of potential cooperation between two nations that have remained at odds for decades.
2. U.S. Role in Facilitating Dialogue
Also in May, former President Trump reportedly met with Syria’s interim president in Saudi Arabia. During this unexpected encounter, Trump encouraged Syria to move forward with normalization and made a surprising announcement that the United States would lift all sanctions on the transitional government. The move is seen as part of a broader U.S. strategy to stabilize the region and bring former enemies into diplomatic alignment with Israel.
V. Security Versus Sovereignty: The Core Debate
1. Israel’s View on Territorial Integrity
From Israel’s perspective, retaining control of the Golan Heights is non-negotiable due to its strategic military importance. The elevated terrain provides critical surveillance capabilities and acts as a buffer against hostilities from Syria and other regional actors. As such, Israel sees any proposal involving the return of the Golan as a direct threat to its security.
2. Syria’s Emphasis on National Borders
Conversely, for Syria, reclaiming the Golan Heights is not just a matter of pride, but of national sovereignty. Syrian officials argue that any normalization process that excludes discussions on the Golan undermines the legitimacy of peace talks. This territorial dispute remains a major roadblock that must be addressed if meaningful dialogue is to proceed.
Conclusion
Israel’s interest in extending peace to Syria and Lebanon reflects a strategic shift in regional diplomacy. While the country is open to expanding normalization, it remains firm in its refusal to negotiate over the Golan Heights—a position that continues to be a major point of contention. As quiet talks progress and regional actors like the U.S. and Saudi Arabia become more involved, the possibility of formal ties with long-time adversaries may inch closer. However, without consensus on key issues like Palestinian statehood and territorial sovereignty, the path to lasting peace remains complex and uncertain.
