Syria and the illusion of normalization with Israel: Lessons from the Palestinian experience

Since the Nakba of 1948, which resulted in the displacement of millions of Palestinians, Palestinians have embarked on an arduous journey filled with tears and blood, striving to prove their existence as a people with the right to self-determination, not merely refugees begging for international aid. With the birth of the contemporary Palestinian resistance movement in 1965, led by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the Palestinian people carried their hopes and weapons in an armed and political national struggle that brought their cause back to the forefront of global attention after desperate attempts to obliterate it. Thanks to unforgettable struggles and sacrifices wrought in blood, the PLO gained widespread Arab and international recognition of its legitimate representation of the Palestinians, becoming the "sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people." Since 1974, the PLO has entered a complex diplomatic maze, opening secret and public channels of communication with the West in search of a glimmer of hope that would restore some of the Palestinians' rights in a world that seemed largely biased toward Israel.

That same year, the Palestinian National Council met in Cairo and approved what became known as the "Ten-Point Program," which marked the beginning of the concession to the dream of a Palestinian state across all of historic Palestine. The program emphasized the establishment of a "national authority" on any liberated area. It was at this point that American diplomats, such as William Quandt, a member of the National Security Council, began to pressure for the opening of official channels with the PLO. However, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger remained adamant, and Washington concluded a memorandum of understanding with Israel affirming that it would not recognize the PLO or negotiate with it unless the organization recognized Israel's right to exist and accepted Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.

Then came the First Intifada in 1987, shaking the global conscience, proving that the Palestinian cause was still alive and kicking, and that the Palestinian people had not and would not die or be forgotten. The Intifada created a climate that seemed poised to advance the peace process, culminating in the Oslo Accords of 1993. However, thirty years after this agreement, the Palestinians found themselves prisoners of the illusion of a state that had never been born, an authority that had lost the foundations of its survival, and a reality of an occupation that had grown increasingly brutal and oppressive, while Israel adhered only to what served its ambitions, continuing to confiscate land and oppress people.

In Syria, the picture remained different, but equally tragic. The Syrian regime, which oppressed its own people and attempted to control Palestinian decision-making by marginalizing the PLO, maintained its declared hostility to Israel since 1970. It fought the 1973 war alongside Egypt to regain the land, but lost the Golan Heights, leaving the issue unresolved. For decades, the regime used the slogan of "resistance" to consolidate its rule, even if this resistance was mixed with hollow slogans and outbidding. Today, after a devastating civil war that changed the face of Syria, the new regime, which assumed power in late 2024, finds itself in a tragic situation. This regime is only a year old, but it faces a new catastrophe after Israel expanded its control over large areas of southern Syria, including areas that constitute the backbone of Syrian national security.

In search of a lifeline, the new Syrian regime rushed to gain international and Arab legitimacy at any cost. Gulf and Western capitals began to bless these steps after the so-called "rehabilitation" of the new president, who was suddenly presented to the world as a statesman seeking peace, after having been described until recently as a terrorist. Today, in a startling scene, data confirms that the new Damascus is moving rapidly toward signing a normalization agreement with Israel. Not along the lines of the Oslo Accords, which attempted to present at least a facade of peace, but rather toward full normalization of political, economic, and perhaps even security relations. Washington appears to be leading the efforts to include Syria in the so-called "Abraham Pact," a point confirmed by US Middle East envoy Steven Witkoff when he told CNBC: "The US administration hopes to achieve normalization with countries that no one would have imagined joining," adding, in words not devoid of allusion, "Big announcements are coming."

Of course, the new Syrian regime has its own conditions, according to reports. It wants official Israeli recognition of its government, a full withdrawal from the territories occupied by Israel after the fall of Bashar al-Assad's regime in December 2024, a comprehensive cessation of Israeli airstrikes, security arrangements in the south of the country, and explicit American guarantees and support. In return, media reports, including the newspaper Israel Hayom, do not rule out the possibility of Damascus agreeing to recognize Israel's permanent sovereignty over the occupied Golan Heights.

If the Oslo Accords were the bitter fruit of a long journey of struggle and hope, what is being concocted for Syria today appears to be born from the womb of defeat, without negotiating power, without popular or Arab support, and without any real cards. What makes matters even more tragic is that Israel, which emptied Oslo of its meaning for the benefit of its settlement and security projects, appears ready to repeat the game with Syria. Because normalization, in the Israeli mind, is not the end of the conflict, but rather the beginning of a new phase of consolidating hegemony and imposing facts on the ground.

Today, after the Palestinians have tasted the bitterness of an agreement without a state, an authority without sovereignty, and the gradual erosion of legitimacy, we must ask: What awaits Syria if it follows the same path? Will we see a regime transform from an adversary of Israel into a guardian of its interests on its southern border?

The Palestinian experience, with all its pain, clearly indicates that Syria's normalization with Israel would be a repetition of the catastrophe, not a way out of it. Israel has spared no means to thwart the Palestinians' aspirations for an independent state, and it will do nothing else with the Syrians. If the Palestinians have stood firm in the face of this path and paid a heavy price, the Syrian people are likely to pay a price no less bitter, or perhaps even greater, if they believe that normalization is a way out of their crisis, rather than the beginning of a new one.

The question every Syrian must ask in their heart before they speak is: What will Syria be like thirty years, or perhaps less, after a normalization agreement with Israel? Will the promised "peace" be just another illusion added to the long list of illusions in this stricken region?