After the Syrian Interim Government ended the Syrian Democratic Forces’ (SDF) ambitions in the north, removing what it described as the greatest threat to Syria since the fall of Bashar al-Assad, attention has shifted to the south. There, cleric Hikmat al-Hijri has emerged as a major obstacle to Syrian unity.
The key question now is: can the government eliminate this challenge, especially given claims that it operates under direct Israeli patronage? The situation is far more complex than it appears.
For Israel, reaching a stable agreement with the Syrian government is strategically better than relying on local militias that lack domestic legitimacy and depend on Israeli funding and protection. For figures like Hikmat al-Hijri, Israel appears to be the only external support. However, Jordan firmly opposes the creation of any sectarian entity along its border and insists on Syria’s territorial integrity, maintaining that its official dealings are only with Damascus.
“Syria’s future rests on unity: Israel may seek deals, but Jordan demands Damascus’ sovereignty, militias have no role.”
Omar Almuqdad
Reports suggest Israel may be close to signing a security agreement with the Syrian government. At the same time, it appears to have distanced itself from al-Hijri, limiting its position to statements calling on Damascus to ensure the protection of the Druze community. Israel has previously indicated it does not support the creation of a Druze separatist entity in southern Syria, but rather seeks security guarantees along its northern border.
If an understanding can be reached on the status of the Syrian Golan Heights, occupied by Israel since 1967, such an agreement could potentially expand into a broader peace arrangement. This would place responsibility for the matter fully in the hands of the Syrian government.
Israel’s long-standing preference for a weak Syria now seems at odds with current U.S. policy. Washington appears to favor a strong, centralized Syrian state capable of maintaining stability and serving as a strategic partner. The White House increasingly views reliance on militias as a burden and a strategic risk, capable of creating more instability than security.
Where Is the South Headed?
Southern Syria may follow a path similar to that of the SDF in the north, with some differences. A security agreement between Damascus and Tel Aviv could mark the end of Hikmat al-Hijri’s separatist ambitions.
“Southern Syria could mirror the north: a Damascus-Tel Aviv deal may end Hikmat al-Hijri’s separatist ambitions.”
Omar Almuqdad
Geography limits the feasibility of a separatist project in the south, and the predominantly Druze province lacks sufficient economic resources to sustain itself independently. In addition, there is no clear international backing for such a move. Local dissatisfaction is also growing, with some within the Druze community warning that al-Hijri’s approach could lead the region into uncertainty.
With broad international support for stabilizing Syria under a unified government, attempts to create separatist entities appear unrealistic. Such projects would challenge both national and international consensus and reflect a misreading of the current political climate.
