Shibani demands Israel retreat, rejects demilitarization, proving Syria seeks leverage—not peace or stability.
Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shibani issued an ultimatum on Friday, declaring that Syria will not sign any agreement with Israel unless Jerusalem withdraws to what he calls “the December 7 line”—the day before the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, when the IDF secured the Syrian side of Mount Hermon to prevent hostile forces from embedding directly along Israel’s border.
Shibani’s stance mirrors that of Syria’s new president Ahmed al-Sharaa, who revealed last week in a Washington Post interview that Damascus is engaged in direct negotiations with Israel. Yet his so-called “negotiation” comes with a predictable Arab-regime demand: unilateral Israeli concessions.
Al-Sharaa insisted that Israel must pull back from positions captured after rebel factions toppled Assad, framing it as a prerequisite for any final agreement. He went so far as to claim President Trump “supports our perspective,” suggesting that Washington supposedly favors a withdrawal—despite Israel’s clear security needs along one of its most sensitive strategic frontiers.
When asked about creating a demilitarized zone south of Damascus—a move that would prevent Iranian, Hezbollah, or rogue militia infiltration—al-Sharaa flatly rejected the idea. His reasoning was a revealing contradiction: although he admits such zones could be exploited to attack Israel, he still demands full Syrian control, refusing mechanisms that would reduce threats to Israeli civilians.
“At the end of the day, this is Syrian territory,” he declared, ignoring the fact that Damascus has repeatedly allowed Iranian forces, militias, and terror groups to operate freely on that same “Syrian territory” for decades.
Meanwhile, Israeli officials told Kan 11 that negotiations have stalled. Israel refuses to reward Syria’s new regime with strategic territory—particularly areas critical to the defense of the Galilee and the Golan Heights—without a comprehensive peace agreement, not a limited “security arrangement” that leaves Iran’s footprint untouched.
According to Israeli sources, only a true, full-scale peace treaty—not vague promises of “future agreements”—would even begin to justify discussions over territorial adjustments. And with Damascus publicly ruling out normalization, openly rejecting demilitarization, and demanding unilateral Israeli withdrawal, no such treaty is remotely in sight.
In September, al-Sharaa bragged that a security pact was “days away.” Months later, Syria continues to insist on maximum concessions from Israel while offering nothing that enhances Israeli security or stops regional terror proxies.
The bottom line:
Syria wants Israeli concessions without demilitarization, without normalization, and without renouncing the terror networks operating on its soil.
Israel, wisely, is not playing along.
