Syria
World Foreign Policy Foreign Policy with Robert Inlakesh Government Politics Robert Inlakesh Top News

What Does Syria’s Normalization With The UAE Mean For Israel?

Last month, Syrian President, Bashar Al-Assad, made his first visit to an Arab country since the beginning of the Syrian war in 2011, leading to debate on what this could mean for the future of the region.

Bashar al-Assad travelled to Abu Dhabi, in the United Arab Emirates, reportedly meeting with Emirati Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Zayed al-Nahyan and Emirati Prime Minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum. According to sources quoted by Axios news, the visit completely took Washington aback, with US President Joe Biden only finding out from the media after Assad arrived in the UAE.

The recent normalization in ties between the UAE and Syria has led to much speculation on whether the Syrian government is planning to move towards “peace talks” with Israel. This allegation has come up due to Abu Dhabi’s closeness with Tel Aviv. This theory has been spread around since it was reported that the only two leaders briefed, on President Assad’s UAE visit, were those of Israel and Egypt.

Although there has been no official re-establishment of ties between Syria and Arab nations, outside of the UAE, Egypt has been signaling its intention to formally normalize relations. In February, Egypt’s Foreign Minister, Sameh Shoukry, urged the UN to end the stalemate in Syria and restore Syrian control over all its territories. Jordan, another key regional player, also began the process to normalizing ties with Syria. King Abdullah II made his first known telephone call to Bashar al-Assad, since the beginning of the Syrian war, back in October, 2021. Last month, Jordan also agreed to bring electricity to Lebanon through Syria, which they had to receive a special sanctions waver in order to do.

There a few layers to the Damascus-Abu Dhabi rapprochement. The first is what the Emirati side sees in such a relationship. It is clear now that Syria, as a key regional player, is not going to face regime change and is closely tied to both Russia and Iran. Damascus is also seeking to do deals with China in the long-term and is currently hosting/facilitating anti-Israeli and anti-US forces in Syria.

The United Arab Emirates is trying hard to be a leading power in the region and wants to have as much leverage as possible, wherever it can get it. Whatever it can do to benefit Syria, economically, or perhaps politically, through paving the way to a reintroduction of Damascus into the Arab league, it may prove useful in the future for the UAE. It is possible that the UAE and its close ally Israel also seek to achieve a win over a weaker Damascus, attempting to force it into peace talks with Tel Aviv. But is this likely? In our view, not at all.

The UAE, although an ally of Israel, is also an ally of Iran. In fact, Abu Dhabi is one of Iran’s top import partners. If anything came out of the recent Houthi drone strikes from Yemen, into the UAE, earlier this year, it was that Tehran is crucial to Emirati security. As much as Abu Dhabi depends upon the United States and Israel, it plays a constant balancing act between its ally Iran and the pro-US axis regionally.

Iran has openly praised Syria’s normalization of ties with the UAE, this means that they are closely watching the situation and as a regional power will have their final say on the issue. As a condition for Syria ever normalizing ties with Israel, it would be forced to rid the country of pro-Iran, and Iranian backed militias and/or parties. In addition to this, it is unlikely that Syria would be able to continue facilitating the training, protection, hosting, and arming of the Palestinian resistance factions as it does today.

Iran wants a strong Syria, but would not sit by idly as the Syrian government attempted to normalize ties with Israel, and it is clear that Tehran’s power in Damascus is much greater than that of Abu Dhabi. The policy makers surrounding Syrian President Bashar al-Assad are also not showing any sign of wishing to normalize ties with Israel, nor is Assad himself. Whilst this point may not be convincing enough on its own, the history between Israel and Syria supports the theory that a weak Syria — as it currently is — will not go near the negotiating table with Israel.

Whilst Egypt normalized ties with Israel in 1979, in exchange for the return of the Sinai Peninsula — which had been illegally occupied by Israel since 1967 — along with US aid and support, Syria has consistently asserted that a comprehensive peace deal is the only way to Damascus signing a “peace treaty”. A comprehensive peace deal means the Palestinians would also need to be granted an independent State. Whilst Syria did participate in the 1991 Madrid Conference peace talks, with Israeli officials engaging in dialogue with Syria’s former President Hafez al-Assad in the early 1990’s, nothing came of this.

After the liberation of South Lebanon from Israeli occupation in 2000, which eventually led to the 2006 Lebanon-Israel war, Syria was in an incredibly strong position over Israel and still chose not to negotiate for normalization. It was Syria that facilitated the weapons that were handed to Hezbollah and participated with training Lebanese forces who fought Israel, resulting in what is regarded as the first decisive Arab victory over the Israeli military in war.

Today, the only reason that there is the possibility of any normalization deals between more Arab regimes — Egypt not included — is due to the normalization deal that the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) signed with Israel. Arab regimes, which do not have land occupied by Israel, are not ideologically driven and were never engaged in direct war with Israel, and since the internationally recognised Palestinian representatives sold themselves out to Israel, they see no reason why they shouldn’t do the same. Yet for Syria, its land is occupied by Israel — the Golan Heights — and Israel is constantly attacking them and killing their people. Due to this reality, normalization is simply not tenable.

If Syria’s leadership normalized ties with Israel, they would lose all legitimacy with their people, and as Syria is currently suffering its worse ever economic crisis, this could mean huge trouble. Furthermore, it makes no sense whatsoever for Israel to give up the Golan Heights, this is the country’s lifeline when it comes to water resources and there is no way they would give that up for a symbolic victory. It is completely beyond all rational comprehension as to why one would believe that Bashar al-Assad would ever compromise on the Golan Heights — so this should not be given any legitimacy.

In all seriousness, the tightening of ties between the UAE and Syria benefits both countries in its own ways and may eventually give the Emiratis some influence in Damascus, but to facilitate normalizing ties with Israel is a far stretch of the imagination. What is more likely is that, in the event of tensions again escalating between Israel’s military and the Palestinians, Hamas may gain more political power. This could then lead to a renewal of ties between Syria and Hamas. Normalisation with Israel is the worst possible political move for the Syrian government right now. Pleasing the West would be the only benefit for Damascus, and Bashar al-Assad seems to be indicating through his rhetoric that his country is seeking approval from, and cooperation with, the East instead.

Robert Inlakesh
Robert Inlakesh
Robert Inlakesh is a documentary filmmaker, journalist, writer, Middle-East analyst & news correspondent for The Last American Vagabond.
https://twitter.com/falasteen47

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *