Analysts: US Must Pressure Israel to Achieve Peace in Syria

A day after a suspected Israeli attack on the Abu al-Duhur airbase near Idlib in northwestern Syria, US Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barrack proposed establishing a "conflict de-escalation mechanism" between Turkey, Syria, and Israel. Barrack called the attack—which he and the Syrian government attributed to Israel—an "unnecessary escalation."

However, despite the intervention from the US official, analysts argue that the proposal is unlikely to deter Israel, which has carried out frequent strikes on Syria for years and continues to occupy its territory.

"It is difficult to have a conflict de-escalation mechanism when only one side is causing the conflict in the first place," Samy Akil, senior adviser at The Syria Report, told Al Jazeera.

Analysts and diplomatic sources said Israel is the party obstructing negotiations and de-escalation with Syria, which has had a new government since President Bashar al-Assad was ousted in December 2024. After more than a decade of war, Syria is now seeking better relations with the West.

"Israel-Syria talks are stalled because the ball is in Israel's court and they do not see a need to prioritize dialogue with Damascus at this moment," Akil said.

Turkey and Israel Exchange Barbs

Under former President al-Assad, Israel frequently struck Iranian-linked targets or interests in Syria—including the Iranian consulate in Damascus in April 2024—but avoided directly attacking Syrian state targets.

That changed when al-Assad left power in the early hours of December 8, 2024. Israel struck Syrian military infrastructure across the country, aiming to paralyze the new government's military forces. Israel also threatened post-al-Assad forces if they deployed south of Damascus.

Since al-Assad's fall, Israel has also shifted its focus from Iran's influence in Syria to Turkey's influence there. Turkey backed several rebel groups against al-Assad, many exiled Syrians spent significant time in Turkey, and Ankara has sought to build close ties with Damascus and Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa.

Analysts told Al Jazeera that Tuesday's attack was effectively a message from Tel Aviv to the authorities in Ankara.

On Tuesday evening, the Israeli Prime Minister's Office issued a statement that seemed to confirm that suspicion, without claiming responsibility for the actual strike.

"Israel and Syria had agreed on a status quo on security matters, which Syria was about to violate by allowing Turkish troops to deploy at an airbase near Aleppo," the statement said. "Israel warned Syria repeatedly that such a deployment would threaten Israel's security. Syria chose to ignore these warnings."

Turkey strongly condemned Israel's interpretation.

"The baseless allegations made by the Israeli Prime Minister's Office aim to legitimize Israel's illegal airstrikes against Syria's sovereignty and territorial integrity," Turkey's Communications Directorate said.

Ankara also accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of pursuing "expansionist and destabilizing policies in the region ahead of elections in Israel."

Israel's Provocations in Syria

Ambassador Barrack floated the idea of a conflict de-escalation mechanism. It would act as a communication channel among the relevant parties—Syria, Turkey, and Israel. It would be mediated by the US, aiming to prevent military escalations.

The strategy appears similar to what the US is trying to build in Lebanon between Beirut and Tel Aviv. That deal aims to halt Israeli attacks on Lebanon, disarm Hezbollah, and persuade Israel to withdraw from southern Lebanon. However, experts say these processes have yet to yield results, largely due to Israel's military superiority and the Netanyahu government's willingness to undermine negotiations through unilateral military actions.

For its part, the Syrian government has shown strong readiness to find a solution with Israel, even while emphasizing it is not ready to agree to full normalization of ties.

That comes despite Israel's seizure of Syrian territory in the Golan Heights and Jabal al-Sheikh in December 2024, and its continued deployment of harassing checkpoints and occasional abductions of Syrian citizens.

In the early hours of Wednesday, Israeli soldiers were reported to have conducted a raid in Quneitra, southwestern Syria, and abducted two people.

Analysts argue that for any de-escalation mechanism to work, all parties must commit to the goal.

"In other words, what value would a de-escalation mechanism bring when any Syrian military buildup 300 kilometers from Israel's border is considered a threat?" Akil asked, noting that Syria's small Soviet-era air force would not "really pose a serious threat to Israel."

Netanyahu and Pre-Election Escalation

Galip Dalay, senior fellow at Chatham House, told Al Jazeera that for any mechanism to work, the US would need to pressure Netanyahu's government.

Dalay said Netanyahu, who is up for re-election in October, is likely seeking an escalation with Lebanon or Syria—or in Palestine—after US President Donald Trump pressured Israel to back down in its war with Iran.

However, in early August, Netanyahu publicly rejected Trump's plan to disarm Gaza, forcing a change—and received no public pushback from the US.

"If the US applies enough pressure on Israel, they will listen," Dalay said. "We saw this with Iran. The US is the decision-maker, and even if Netanyahu doesn't like it, they have to follow that decision."

Dalay added: "The question is not only whether a de-escalation mechanism in Syria is needed; it is how much the US is willing to make it credible and operational, and whether the US is ready to pressure Israel."