September 25 Shockwave: Israel and Syria Ready to Sign First Security Agreement in Decades

By: Ariella Haviv

In a development that would have been unthinkable only months ago, Israel and Syria appear to be edging toward a limited security arrangement under American auspices, with the signing reportedly scheduled for September 25, one day after Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa makes his inaugural address before the United Nations General Assembly in New York.

According to Independent Arabia, a Saudi-owned outlet citing “senior Syrian sources,” the agreement is not a comprehensive peace treaty but a carefully tailored security framework aimed at de-escalating tensions between Jerusalem and Damascus. As Israel National News (INN) noted in its coverage on Friday, the reports mark the most substantive indication in more than a quarter of a century that direct Israeli-Syrian dialogue may be moving toward tangible results.

The prospective deal, if confirmed, would not constitute a final peace settlement. Instead, it would focus on security mechanisms designed to reduce the risk of escalation in the volatile southern Syrian theater. Observers recall that the last substantive engagement between Israel and Syria took place during negotiations in the 1990s, which ultimately collapsed over territorial disputes surrounding the Golan Heights.

As the INN report emphasized, the absence of a full peace agreement “in the near future” underscores the fragile nature of the current contacts. Still, the fact that Damascus itself has reportedly acknowledged discussions with Israel represents a major diplomatic milestone, breaking with decades of categorical denial of any dialogue.

The United States has been central in brokering the talks. Sky News Arabia reported that the White House is pushing to convene a trilateral meeting next month between President al-Sharaa, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and President Donald Trump.

The recent appointment of a new Syrian envoy to the UN, reportedly vested with special negotiation authority, is widely interpreted as part of this process. INN highlighted the unusual timing, noting that it signals a calculated effort by Damascus to demonstrate openness to international engagement while retaining leverage in negotiations with Jerusalem.

American mediation has focused on stabilizing southern Syria, where Israel has long expressed concern about the entrenchment of Iranian forces and Hezbollah units. The U.S. has reportedly urged both sides to commit to principles of de-escalation, border stability, and regional non-interference.

Adding further weight to the reports, Sky News Arabia disclosed that progress was achieved this week during meetings in Paris between Israel’s Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer and Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shibani.

According to Syrian state media, the discussions revolved around:

De-escalation along the border and preventing inadvertent clashes.

Adherence to non-interference in Syria’s domestic affairs.

Strengthening regional stability through diplomatic confidence-building measures.

Monitoring ceasefire arrangements in sensitive areas such as the Druze Mountain.

Renewal of the 1974 disengagement agreement, which has governed the separation of Israeli and Syrian forces since the aftermath of the Yom Kippur War.

For its part, the INN report stressed that one of the most contentious issues remains Israel’s insistence on maintaining a military presence at strategic sites in Syrian territory. These include the radar station on the Syrian Hermon and positions such as Tel al-Hara in the Quneitra province, locations that provide Israel with critical surveillance capacity against both Syrian and Iranian activity.

What makes this episode particularly noteworthy is the acknowledgment by Syrian media itself. According to the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA), al-Shibani indeed met with an Israeli delegation in Paris. While the report did not specify that Dermer led the delegation, the fact that Damascus chose to confirm direct contact with Israel is unprecedented in more than 25 years, as the INN report pointed out.

This shift in tone may reflect Syria’s calculation that regional realities—its war-ravaged economy, reliance on Russian and Iranian support, and desire for broader rehabilitation into the Arab fold—require a more pragmatic stance. In that sense, even limited coordination with Israel under U.S. sponsorship could be leveraged as part of a broader diplomatic comeback strategy.

The implications of a September 25 signing are considerable. For Israel, securing a framework that diminishes Syrian hostility, even without full normalization, could free resources currently dedicated to monitoring the Syrian front and provide greater maneuverability in confronting Iran and Hezbollah.

For Syria, the calculus is different but equally pressing. Damascus faces crippling economic collapse and deepening isolation. By signaling willingness to engage, even at the level of a limited security pact, President al-Sharaa may hope to secure Western goodwill and potentially ease sanctions.

As the INN report observed, the deal could also serve to limit Iran’s freedom of movement in Syria — a development that Jerusalem would see as a major strategic victory, and which Washington may quietly encourage as part of its own regional balancing.

Despite the cautious optimism, substantial obstacles remain. Syria continues to publicly affirm its refusal to cede claims to the Golan Heights, annexed by Israel in 1981. For Israel, meanwhile, the demand to preserve IDF positions in strategic Syrian sites may prove unacceptable to Damascus.

Moreover, domestic politics on both sides complicate the picture. Netanyahu faces ongoing challenges within Israel’s fractured political environment, where any gesture toward Syria could be seized upon by critics as a concession. On the Syrian side, al-Sharaa must balance the optics of engaging Israel with the need to maintain credibility among a population steeped in decades of anti-Israel rhetoric.

The INN report cautioned readers not to overstate the likelihood of a breakthrough, noting that both sides may find short-term tactical advantages in allowing speculation to swirl without committing to irreversible concessions.

Regardless of whether the agreement is ultimately signed on September 25, the very fact of open acknowledgment of talks between Syria and Israel is historic. For more than two decades, such contacts have been shrouded in secrecy or denied outright. That Damascus has now admitted to a meeting with Israeli officials suggests a recalibration in its strategic communications.

As the report at Israel National News emphasized, even an incremental accord on border security, ceasefire monitoring, and de-escalation measures would constitute the most significant diplomatic development between Israel and Syria in a generation.

The presence of American sponsorship, the timing around the UN General Assembly, and the direct acknowledgment by Syrian state media all suggest that this initiative carries greater weight than previous rumors of backchannel contacts.

The reports of a forthcoming security agreement between Israel and Syria underscore the fluidity of Middle Eastern diplomacy in the wake of October 7 and shifting U.S. regional engagement. Whether September 25 produces a signed accord or merely another in a long line of near-misses, the trajectory is clear: Jerusalem and Damascus are testing the possibility of structured engagement after decades of hostility.

For Israel, the strategic imperative is to secure its northern border, limit Iranian influence, and preserve critical surveillance outposts. For Syria, the incentive is economic relief, international rehabilitation, and the chance to diversify its regional partnerships.

As Israel National News has consistently reported, the stakes are high but the path uncertain. What transpires in New York in late September could mark the tentative beginning of a new security paradigm — or simply another fleeting diplomatic overture in the long and bitter history of Israeli-Syrian relations.