Israel strikes southern Syria, complicating already fragile negotiations

BeirutIsrael has killed thirteen people, including two children, and wounded dozens more in an operation carried out early this morning in southern Syria. The attack took place yesterday in Beit Jinn, a Druze village on the slopes of Mount Hermon, on the border between Syria and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, when an Israeli unit attempted to arrest three young men from the village. According to local sources, the soldiers were surrounded after some armed residents tried to prevent the arrest, prompting the unit to request air cover. Airstrikes and the use of drones facilitated their withdrawal but increased the number of casualties and forced the immediate displacement of families to areas considered safer. Israel claimed that the young men were part of a cell involved in recent attacks against civilians in the north of the country, but Damascus rejected this version and accused Israel of carrying out an unprovoked incursion, which it called a war crime. The new Syrian government has insisted that the area does not host Shiite militias or foreign groups, and has denounced Israel for taking advantage of the instability following the fall of Assad to expand its military reach beyond the 1974 demilitarized zone. Since the fall of Bashar al-Assad the rise to power of Ahmed al-SharaaSouthern Syria lives in a precarious balance. Although the government has regained administrative control over most of the country, regions like Quneitra and rural areas west of Damascus maintain an uneven state presence. The Druze communities, which adopted an ambivalent stance during the war, continue to organize their security through local self-defense networks created to fill institutional gaps.

In this scenario, Israeli incursions have become more frequent and deeper. Israel maintains that it wants to prevent the regrouping of actors linked to Iran, but in towns like Beit Jinn, residents insist that there are only armed farmers and shepherds protecting their land. In recent months, temporary Israeli positions inside Syria have been documented, along with small metal gates on rural roads and checkpoints on civilians—practices that Damascus and human rights organizations describe as arbitrary detentions or even kidnappings.

Fragile talks between Israel and Syria

The operation comes at a critical moment for diplomatic efforts. Since the summer, Israel and Syria have been holding discreet talks, mediated by Washington and Paris, to agree on a framework that reduces the risk of escalation and establishes clear rules on the Golan border. The White House considers it urgent to make progress before the situation on the ground becomes uncontrollable. Al Sharaa's recent visit to WashingtonThe first by a Syrian president in two decades, the attack sought to project the image of a leader willing to explore political avenues without relinquishing sovereignty, reiterating that Syria will not adhere to the Abraham Accords and that any agreement must begin with the Israeli withdrawal from the Sinai settlements. The Israeli position is perceived as less flexible. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's visit to military positions in Syrian territory was interpreted as a sign that his government is not considering reducing its presence. Those close to the president argue that a withdrawal would create a vacuum that could be exploited by hostile actors, at a time when the new Syrian regime has yet to demonstrate full control over the south. For the Druze community, scattered on both sides of Mount Hermon, the attack adds to the uncertainty, and the images of dead civilians in Beit Jinn threaten to inflame internal tensions that Damascus is trying to contain. In a country marking the first anniversary of the end of the Assad regime, the incursion serves as a reminder that the dynamics of war remain alive. Negotiations, at the same time, are in a precarious position: advancing them now would imply that Syria is giving ground while the bombing continues; halting them would confirm that military logic still prevails over diplomacy.