PNN – The Arab political affairs researcher cited the dispute over the creation of a corridor from the occupied territories to the province of “Sweida” in southern Syria as the reason for the failure of Tel Aviv and Damascus to reach a security agreement, and considered the ambiguity of the US position on Syria to be a cause of concern for Ankara and Damascus and an increase in the risk of a conflict of interests between the Israeli regime and Türkiye.
According to the report of Pakistan News Network, Mahmoud Alloush, a researcher on Arab political affairs, wrote in an article published on the Al Jazeera television network website: Syria and Israel were expected to sign a US-brokered security agreement on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly this month.
Reuters reported that negotiations on the agreement collapsed at the last minute due to the re-emergence of Israel’s demand for a “humanitarian corridor” (from the occupied territories) to the southern Syrian province of Sweida, although US envoy Tom Barak later denied the collapse of the agreement in an interview with Al Jazeera.
Read more:
The most important point of disagreement between Tel Aviv and Damascus in the security agreement
Regardless of the reasons that still prevent the agreement from being concluded, it is clear that obstacles remain. Despite Syria’s initial agreement to Israel’s demands to demilitarize the area south of Damascus, the fate of the areas occupied by Israel after the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, in particular the strategic heights of Jabal al-Sheikh, remains uncertain.
The idea of creating an Israeli “humanitarian corridor” to Sweida and supporting the Druze undermines the principle of Syrian sovereignty and solidifies Israel’s long-term interference in relations between the Druze and Damascus. The proposal to create a humanitarian corridor appears to aim to ensure continued Israeli influence in the Sweida province even after the security agreement with Syria is signed and to strengthen the foundations of the Druze autonomy project in the future.
Syria’s opposition to the request to establish a humanitarian corridor is not only due to its contradiction with the principle of Syrian sovereignty and the risk of creating a special political and administrative system for the Israeli-backed province of Sweida, but also because it opens the door to the risk of creating sectarian and ethnic structures in Syria at the cost of destroying the country’s political unity.
Furthermore, these requests and plans are not acceptable to a large segment of Syrians who seek to preserve Syria’s unity.
Although Israel’s ambitions in southern Syria pose a threat to the country’s unity, they also represent a clear contradiction between Israel’s and Turkey’s visions for Syria’s future, as, unlike Tel Aviv, the Turkish government sees Syria as a unified and unified state.