Syrias

Last week, Israel attacked Syrian territory yet again. Israeli forces shelled a hilltop near Beit Jinn in the western Damascus countryside, while soldiers raided a village in Quneitra province.

The attacks came just days after Israeli fighter jets struck the Abu al-Duhur military base in northern Syria, inflicting significant damage. Israel said the strike was intended to prevent a possible Turkish military deployment there, although both Damascus and Ankara disputed these claims. The Israeli attacks have persisted despite Syrian efforts to de-escalate through diplomacy, and criticism from Washington of the Abu al-Duhur strike.

While avoiding confrontation, the government of Ahmed al-Sharaa continues to insist that Israel withdraw from Syrian territory it has occupied and that Damascus must remain free to rebuild its armed forces and cooperate with the partners of its choosing.

All this reveals more than Syria’s military weakness. It suggests that the new Syrian leadership believes sovereignty can be recovered by rebuilding state capacity first. This strategy, however, carries potential risks: Israel may continue to encroach on Syrian sovereignty while taking advantage of Syrian restraint; and the Syrian government may eventually begin to lose the trust of Syrians and the wider Arab public, among whom Israel is overwhelmingly viewed as a threat.

Syria’s weakness is real. In late 2024, after the army of former President Bashar al-Assad collapsed, Israel struck strategic military assets across the country. The new government then had to begin assembling a national security architecture from dysfunctional institutions and a patchwork of armed groups.

For now, a Syrian military response capable of altering Israel’s behaviour is difficult to imagine.

Instead, al-Sharaa has placed economic recovery and international legitimacy at the top of his priorities. His government has focused on rebuilding state institutions, restructuring the security sector, restoring energy supplies, improving foreign relations and reconnecting Syria to the international economy. But rebuilding Syria is an enormous challenge.

The World Bank estimates that reconstructing Syria’s damaged physical assets will cost about $216bn. A state facing needs on that scale cannot restore its authority through military institutions alone. It needs revenue, electricity, functioning administration, banking access, investment and external relationships.

Al-Sharaa has achieved significant progress on the international front. Washington dismantled the broad Syria sanctions programme in 2025, while the European Union lifted its economic sanctions, although targeted and security-related measures remain. On August 24, Washington also removed Syria from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list, eliminating another key obstacle to financial normalisation and investment.

For Damascus, these steps expand the resources with which the state can govern; they are not simply an economic dividend of avoiding war.

This also makes the dispute with Israel more consequential. Syria’s reconstruction strategy now depends heavily on precisely the international access that years of isolation denied it. A major military escalation with Israel could undermine investor confidence, complicate Syria’s reintegration into international banking and weaken the diplomatic support on which its recovery depends.

It could also expose Damascus to renewed political pressure by Washington and the EU, even if this does not automatically translate into the reimposition of broad sanctions.

The dilemma is therefore becoming sharper: Restraint helps Damascus preserve the international environment it needs to rebuild the state, but it also gives Israel room to constrain the very military and strategic capacity Syria is trying to reconstruct.

Israel has security concerns about the new Syrian government, whose leadership emerged from an armed Islamist movement, and it is increasingly alarmed by Turkiye’s military relationship with Damascus. But Israeli demands have extended well beyond preventing hostile forces from approaching its border.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called for the demilitarisation of Syria’s Quneitra, Deraa and Suwayda provinces. His government has also opposed the deployment of forces belonging to Syria’s new army south of Damascus and has sought to restrict the scope of Damascus’s military cooperation with Turkiye.

Israel clearly wants to limit the rebuilding of Syria’s military capacity. It sees such interference through the prism of preventive security. Damascus sees the same issue through the prism of sovereignty: A state that cannot decide where its army deploys or with whom it trains has not fully recovered strategic autonomy.

This is one of the central risks of al-Sharaa’s strategy. Syria is avoiding an unwinnable confrontation partly to rebuild the capacities of state power, while those same capacities are increasingly becoming objects of Israeli pressure.

There are limits to what restraint can achieve. Syria has the backing of other Arab states, while the United States and EU have supported the reconstruction of a functioning Syrian state as part of their approach to regional stability. Damascus has also repeatedly expressed interest in reaching a security agreement with Israel.

And yet, none of this has stopped Israeli military action.

The other risk concerns Syrian public opinion. Appearing indefinitely unable to respond to Israeli attacks could eventually damage al-Sharaa’s public standing and the legitimacy of his government.

A large survey by the Arab Center Washington DC conducted in 2025 found that 74 percent of Syrians opposed recognising Israel, 70 percent rejected an agreement that did not include the return of the Golan Heights, and 88 percent believed Israel threatened Syria’s security and stability. At the same time, 61 percent said the current government’s foreign policy reflected the views of the Syrian people.

The findings are important precisely because they complicate the picture. The survey predates the latest confrontations and does not tell us whether Syrians favour military retaliation. It establishes political red lines, not a public demand for war.

Wider Arab polling points in the same direction. Across the countries surveyed in the 2025 Arab Opinion Index, opposition to recognising Israel remained overwhelming.

That said, Syria under the al-Assads also generally avoided confrontation with Israel while retaining a reputation for belonging to the regional “resistance” camp. The old model combined avoidance of direct war with alliances and armed networks that gave Damascus regional leverage.

Al-Sharaa’s government appears to be making a different bet, focusing on consolidated institutions, economic recovery, international access and a rebuilt national military.

This does not replace territorial sovereignty. It is an attempt to rebuild the means of exercising it.

The bet will become harder to defend, both at home and abroad, if restored state capacity does not eventually give Syria greater control over its territory, its security choices and its foreign relations.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

UN watchdog says Syria ‘failed to report nuclear material, facilities and activities’ under Bashar al-Assad’s rule.

The United Nations nuclear watchdog has confirmed that Syria tried to construct a nuclear reactor in the eastern province of Deir Az Zor under ousted former President Bashar al-Assad.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in a confidential report seen by news agencies on Tuesday, said it visited several sites in Syria in August and carried out verification work.

Based on observations at the Deir Az Zor site, the agency said it confirms “that the cooling infrastructure which has now been uncovered is consistent with that of a nuclear reactor”. The agency said it would continue to monitor the activities at the site “as the excavation work progresses”.

Syria was believed to have operated an extensive undeclared nuclear programme under al-Assad that included a nuclear reactor built by North Korea in Deir Az Zor.

The site only became public knowledge after Israel launched air strikes in 2007 that destroyed the facility. Syria later levelled the site and never responded fully to the IAEA’s questions about it.

Israel is believed to have its own undeclared atomic weapons programme that makes it the only country in the Middle East with nuclear bombs. Israel neither confirms nor denies having atomic weapons.

Following al-Assad’s removal in early December 2024, the new government agreed to give IAEA inspectors access to suspected former nuclear sites.

The agency took samples at the site in 2024 and reported last year that they contained uranium particles.

In its Tuesday report, the IAEA said it was also able to “establish that the former Syrian authorities had failed to report nuclear material, facilities and activities”.

Besides the nuclear reactor under construction at Deir Az Zor, the IAEA listed a fuel fabrication plant, where the nuclear fuel for the reactor was manufactured, and a location where the nuclear fuel, as well as uranium scrap and waste, were stored.

During the visit to Syria, IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi and a team of senior inspectors also visited a previously undeclared site.

The new Syrian administration notified the agency of the site’s existence in a July 17 letter and invited the IAEA “to cooperate with the Syrian authorities in the inspection and verification of the site and of any nuclear material to be potentially found”.

The IAEA said in its report that this new site contained “natural uranium metal in the form of fuel rods with cladding”.

The agency verified the material and confirmed “the presence of around 73 tonnes of natural uranium metal”. The agency reported that “all of this nuclear material is currently subject to Agency containment and surveillance measures”.

The new Syrian authorities have also expressed an interest in developing a civilian nuclear energy programme and said any nuclear material found in the country would remain in Syria’s custody under international safeguards.

Kurdish leader appointed to the role days after the dissolution of the force he commanded.

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa has appointed Mazloum Abdi, leader of the now-dissolved Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), as a presidential advisor.

Al-Sharaa issued Decree No 164, appointing Abdi as “as an advisor to the Presidency of the Republic” on Thursday, the Syrian state news agency Sana reported.

The move comes three days after Abdi announced the dissolution of the SDF and the completion of its integration with the Syrian military.

Abdi is the most senior of several Kurdish figures appointed to state posts. Another commander was made assistant defence minister for the eastern region earlier this year.

The advisory role is a lesser position than one offered in January, when al-Sharaa proposed making Abdi deputy defence minister and nominating him as governor of Hasakah province, in order to restore state control over the SDF-controlled provincial capital.

Al-Sharaa and Abdi first agreed to fold the SDF into the central government in March 2025. That deal made little progress before its year-end deadline, spurring state forces to battle into the northeast in January, taking the cities of Raqqa and Deir Az Zor from the SDF.

A ceasefire that ended the fighting placed Raqqa, Deir Az Zor and Hasakah under central government control and committed the SDF to join the defence and interior ministries under a 14-point plan.

One Kurdish-led force has yet to be absorbed. The YPJ, the SDF’s women’s units, asked to join the defence ministry but were told the army’s structure has no units for women.

Alongside the military track, al-Sharaa issued a decree in January recognising Kurdish as a national language and restoring citizenship to Syria Kurds, the first formal recognition of Kurdish rights since Syria’s independence in 1946.

The SDF was the largest force still outside the army, and its dissolution leaves Damascus with formal authority over almost all Syrian territory. Reunifying the country has been al-Sharaa’s central promise since former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad was overthrown in December 2024.

Syria has been in talks on the fate of Khmeimim and Tartous bases, which Russia used to support ousted Assad regime.

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa have held discussions, including on the fate of Russia’s military bases in the Middle Eastern country.

During a telephone call on Wednesday, Putin affirmed Moscow’s support for Syria’s territorial integrity and reiterated Russia’s rejection of Israeli attacks and violations of Syrian sovereignty, reports Syrian news agency SANA.

The Kremlin stressed that the discussion also concerned deepening political dialogue and cooperation in trade, among other areas.

The talks were aimed at further development of bilateral relations and strengthened cooperation, SANA noted.

However, the status of the Khmeimim airbase and Tartous naval base, which are highly strategic for Russia, remains the key topic between Damascus and Moscow.

The Kremlin said that Russia-Syria relations will continue through continued contact “at various levels” and that “both sides underscored the importance of the Memorandum of Understanding On the Reorganisation of the Khmeimim Air Base and the Tartus Material-Technical Support Point, signed on August 9”.

Syria announced earlier this month that a deal had been agreed after 18 months of negotiations that will see Khmeimim and Tartous turned into “joint training and capacity-building centres”, with Syria to take control of civilian facilities at both bases.

Russia backed former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad throughout Syria’s 13-year civil war, intervening militarily to keep him in power and expanding the Russian footprint at the Khmeimim air base and Tartous naval base on the Mediterranean coast.

Since al-Sharaa led the ouster of the a;-Assad regime, Putin has worked to build relations with the new Syrian government and to secure the future of the bases, which are key to Russian efforts to maintain influence across the Middle East and Northern Africa.

The US move would be a major sanctions relief for Syria, aiming to boost post-war reconstruction.

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa hailed the United States’ removal of his country from the “state sponsors of terrorism” list, a major sanctions relief step for a country aiming to boost post-war reconstruction.

“Today, Syria shakes off a dark stain and tears away a painful chapter of its past to embark on a path of development, reconstruction and rebuilding,” al-Sharaa said in a speech.

Washington’s decision on Monday rescinded a decades-old designation that came with severe economic restrictions, marking another step in warming ties between the countries following the 2024 ouster of longtime Syrian ruler Bashar al-Assad.

Al-Sharaa expressed his “many thanks to the President of the United States of America, Donald Trump, and to all the friendly and supportive nations that stood by us”.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement that Monday’s move “will help foster additional investment in Syria to promote political and economic stability”.

But the Treasury stressed that its removal of restrictions on Syria “does not change Treasury’s posture with regards to countering global terrorism and our commitment to hold bad actors in Syria accountable”.

The US listed Syria as a “state sponsor of terrorism” in 1979, accusing the country, then under the rule of Hafez al-Assad, Bashar’s father, of supporting Palestinian fighter groups and other armed movements in neighbouring Lebanon.

Monday’s move gave Syria “a path to prosperity”, according to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The action “eliminates the final major barriers for private sector investment in Syria and promotes Syria’s economic recovery and reintegration into the global economy,” he said in a statement.

The World Bank estimates post-war reconstruction to cost more than $216bn.

Several countries welcomed the US move. Turkiye, a key backer of Syria’s new authorities, said the decision will “lend momentum to efforts to strengthen Syria’s ties with the international community and to establish lasting security and stability in the country”.

“At this stage, we call on the international community to unite its efforts toward the goal of a prosperous Syria and to fulfill its responsibilities to bring an end to aggressive actions that jeopardize this vision,” Ankara said.

Qatar and Jordan also welcomed the US decision, saying the move would support stability and recovery efforts in the country.

Qatar’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement that the step “supports the path of a political settlement in line with international legitimacy resolutions and the aspirations of the Syrian people”.

Jordan’s Foreign Ministry also welcomed the US decision, calling it “an important step” towards supporting Syria’s reconstruction, recovery and development.

Welcoming the move, Saudi Arabia wished Syria “further security, stability, and prosperity, and continued progress in its reconstruction and development efforts” in a way that would benefit the “aspirations of its people”.

Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said in a post on X that Ukraine had consistently supported Syria’s new government and people since the ouster of the Assad regime in their efforts to achieve recovery, peace and development.

In another sign of Syria’s growing international reintegration, Damascus also moved to expand its diplomatic outreach on Monday by launching an English-language social media account for its foreign media department.

Syrian Airlines will also begin operating regular direct flights from Damascus to Denmark’s capital, Copenhagen, and Austria’s capital, Vienna, on September 21, Syria’s civil aviation authority announced.

Omar al-Hosary, head of Syria’s General Authority of Civil Aviation and Air Transport, told the SANA news agency that the new routes are part of continuing efforts to expand the national carrier’s international network and strengthen air links between Syria and Europe.

Washington also rescinded designation of HTS, formerly led by Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, as a ‘terrorist’ organisation.

The United States has removed Syria from its list of “State Sponsors of Terrorism,” the US Treasury has announced.

A statement issued on Monday confirmed the revocation of a decades-old designation placed on the country during the rule of the ousted Assad regime.

The announcement confirms a decision initially revealed last month. It also revoked the designation of al-Nusrah Front – the group formerly led by the now-President Ahmed al-Sharaa, also known as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) – as a global “terrorist” organisation.

The move, first announced earlier this year pending a review by Congress, removes a critical impediment to investment in Syria, as the country seeks to reestablish itself in the international community and markets.

It represents a further vote of confidence in al-Sharaa, who has launched what many experts have described as a charm offensive aimed at Western powers, including meetings with President Donald Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron.

“Today’s action will help foster additional investment in Syria to promote political and economic stability,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement, adding that it is “in line with President Trump’s promise to deliver sanctions relief to Syria”.

Having lifted sanctions on Syria in June 2025, alongside the European Union, the US announced in July its decision to delist Syria from its “terror” list, citing efforts by al-Sharaa to unify the country.

HTS was once al-Qaeda’s official branch in Syria and was led by al-Sharaa. Under his leadership, the group removed former President Bashar al-Assad in December 2024 following a lightning offensive.

The ⁠designation of the state carried restrictions on US foreign ⁠assistance, defence exports, and ⁠financial transactions, so Syria’s removal from the list is already being celebrated in the country, particularly by financial officials.

The governor of Syria’s central bank, Safwat Raslan, said on X that this is “a historic step that restores the country to its natural place in the global economic system”. He added that the bank is “working to build a modern and reliable financial system”.

Syrian Finance Minister Mohammed Barnieh described Washington’s move as “a major and historic success for Syrian diplomacy”, according to the country’s official news agency SANA.

It “opens a major and long-awaited door to strengthening Syria’s integration into the global economic and financial system, attracting investment and modern technologies, and supporting development opportunities”, he said.

US envoy to Syria Tom Barrack, meanwhile, called the end of the designation a “decisive step in Syria’s remarkable journey from isolation to partnership, and from a source of terrorism to a committed partner in the global fight against it”.

A day after a suspected Israeli attack on the Abu al-Duhur airbase near Idlib, northwest Syria, US Ambassador to Turkiye Tom Barrack has suggested creating a “deconfliction mechanism” between Turkiye, Syria and Israel. Barrack called the original attack – which he, along with the Syrian government, blamed on Israel – an “unnecessary escalation”.

But despite the intervention from the US official, analysts believe the proposal may not be able to stop Israel, which has conducted regular attacks on Syria for years, and continues to occupy Syrian territory.

“It is difficult to have a deconfliction mechanism [when] only one party [is] causing conflict in the first place,” Samy Akil, a senior adviser with The Syria Report, told Al Jazeera.

Analysts and diplomatic sources say that Israel is the party holding back progress on talks and the easing of tensions with Syria, which is under a new government since the overthrow of former President Bashar al-Assad in December 2024. At the end of a more than decade-long war, Syria is now seeking better relations with the West.

“Israeli-Syrian talks are stagnating because the ball is in Israel’s court and they don’t see a need to prioritise talks with Damascus currently,” Akil said.

Turkiye and Israel trade verbal shots

Under the former al-Assad regime, Israel often attacked Iranian-aligned targets or interests in Syria – including the Iranian consulate in Damascus in April 2024 – but avoided directly attacking Syrian state targets.

That changed when al-Assad fled in the early hours of December 8, 2024. Israel attacked Syria’s military infrastructure around the country, aiming to cripple the new government’s military forces. It also threatened the post-Assad military with deploying forces south of Damascus.

And since the fall of al-Assad, Israel has also shifted focus from Iranian influence in Syria to Turkish influence in the country. The Turks backed a number of anti-Assad rebel groups, many Syrians in exile spent considerable time in Turkiye, and Ankara has sought to build strong ties with Damascus and Syria’s new President Ahmed al-Sharaa.

Analysts told Al Jazeera that Tuesday’s attack was in fact a message from Tel Aviv directed at the halls of power in Ankara.

On Tuesday evening, the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office issued a statement that seemed to confirm that suspicion, while it stopped short of claiming responsibility for the actual attack.

“Israel and Syria agreed to a status quo in security matters, which Syria was on the verge of breaching by permitting Turkish troops to deploy at an airbase near Aleppo,” the statement said.

“Israel repeatedly warned Syria that such a deployment would pose a threat to Israel’s security. Syria chose to ignore these warnings.”

Turkiye has slammed the Israeli account of events.

“The untenable allegations put forward by the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office are intended to legitimise Israel’s unlawful airstrikes targeting Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” the Republic of Turkiye’s Directorate of Communications said.

It also accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of pursuing “expansionist and destabilising policies in the region ahead of the elections in Israel”.

Israeli provocations in Syria

Enter US Ambassador Barrack and the idea of a deconfliction mechanism. This would act as a channel of communication between the concerned actors – Syria, Turkiye and Israel. It would be facilitated by the US, and would aim to prevent military escalations.

The strategy appears to be similar to what the US is trying to build in Lebanon between Beirut and Tel Aviv. That deal is aimed at stopping Israeli attacks on Lebanon, disarming Hezbollah, and convincing Israel to withdraw troops from southern Lebanon. However, experts say these processes have yet to show results, largely because of Israel’s military superiority and the Netanyahu government’s willingness to undermine negotiations through unilateral military actions.

For its part, the Syrian government has shown a strong willingness to find a solution with Israel, even if it has emphasised that it is not willing to agree to full normalisation.

That is despite the Israeli landgrab of Syrian territory in the Golan Heights and Jabal al-Sheikh in December 2024, and the continued deployment of checkpoints that harass and at times kidnap Syrian citizens.

Early on Wednesday morning, Israeli troops reportedly conducted a raid on Quneitra in southwestern Syria and abducted two people.

Analysts say that for any deconfliction mechanism to work, all parties must be committed to working towards the goal.

“In other words, at what point does a deconfliction mechanism provide added value when any sort of Syrian military buildup 300 kilometres [186 miles] away from Israeli borders is perceived as a threat?” Akil said, adding that Syria’s small Soviet-era air force would not “seriously pose a threat to Israel”.

Netanyahu’s re-election escalation

Galip Dalay, a senior research fellow at Chatham House, told Al Jazeera that for any mechanism to work, the US would need to apply pressure on Netanyahu’s government.

Dalay said Netanyahu, who is running for re-election in October, is likely looking for an escalation with either Lebanon or Syria – or in Palestine – after US President Donald Trump pressured Israel to back down in the war on Iran.

But earlier in August, Netanyahu explicitly rejected the Gaza disarmament plan announced by Trump, forcing it to be altered – and did not receive any public pushback from the US.

“If the US puts proper pressure on Israel, they would listen,” Dalay said. “We saw this with Iran. It was the US who made the decision, and even though Netanyahu didn’t like it, they had to go along with the decision.”

Dalay added: “The question is not only about if there is a need for a deconfliction mechanism in Syria; it is to what extent the US is willing to make it credible and functional, and if the US is willing to put pressure on Israel.”

Beirut, Lebanon – Not long after the fall of the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in December 2024, the new government was keen to hunt down members of the former regime.

Al-Assad and his brother fled the country hours before the capital Damascus fell to the advancing armed opposition, leaving many top officials and military commanders to fend for themselves.

Many of them reportedly fled and crossed to neighbouring Lebanon where some top officials were spotted openly in capital, Beirut.

Now the Syrian government is trying to get them extradited for war crimes committed during the uprising, which began in 2011.

“We are seeking to boost the international judicial cooperation to pursue members of the former regime and extradited to Syria to complete judicial procedures and process,” judge Mustafa al-Qassem, an aide to the Syrian justice minister, said in an interview with state television.

Former officials felt they were safe in Lebanon due to their close connections with Hezbollah or their network with figures in Lebanon’s military. Some had built connections in Lebanon over the years, including during Syria’s occupation of Lebanon, which ended in 2005.

But that’s no longer the case.

Adel Issa, a former major general in al-Assad’s Syrian Army, was arrested recently in Lebanon after staff at the Syrian embassy reportedly tipped off authorities after he came in to do paperwork. A top Lebanese prosecutor announced on Tuesday that Issa would be extradited to Syria to face trial due to alleged crimes he committed during his military service.

But there are other former al-Assad regime officials who are in Lebanon and whom Syrian authorities also want returned to face justice.

Last week, al-Assad, his brother Maher and his cousin Atef Najib were all sentenced to death by a Damascus court. Bashar and Maher al-Assad were sentenced in absentia because they are in exile in Moscow, where they fled after the regime fell.

Their presence in Russia likely protects them from extradition. But the case brings to attention important issues about remaining regime figures in Lebanon and their potential extradition to Syria.

Regime officials in Lebanon

On December 8, 2024, the five-decade reign of the al-Assad regime ended when Bashar left Damascus for Moscow. As rebels entered Damascus, al-Assad fled without telling many of his top officials who then had to sort out their own escapes.

Sources with knowledge of the whereabouts of former regime members said the top figures – such as the al-Assads or the former head of the National Security Bureau Ali Mamlouk – are in Moscow or the United Arab Emirates.

However, Jamil al-Hassan, the former head of the Air Force Intelligence Directorate, is thought to be in Lebanon. Last year, media reports suggested that Syria and France have called on Lebanon to arrest and extradite al-Hassan.

Aside from him, Bassam al-Hassan, a former Republican Guard commander who was in al-Assad’s inner circle, was tracked down to a Beirut apartment by a US broadcaster last year. He had been responsible for procuring weapons and liaising with Syria’s chemical weapons programme, which the regime used against its own people.

Hezbollah’s role

Syrian and European sources intimately familiar with the details said most former regime officials still in Lebanon are now in Tripoli’s Jabal Mohsen neighbourhood or in parts of the northern region of Akkar, which borders Syria. Estimates on the number of former regime officials in Lebanon are imprecise, experts said, because many have either moved to third countries, sometimes with false passports, or have been smuggled back into Syria.

One source familiar with the issue, speaking on background because he wasn’t authorised to share information publicly, said that in the early days after the fall of the regime, former government figures set up training camps in Lebanon’s Bekaa Valley. However, the source said, the camps have since been shut down by Hezbollah and the Lebanese army.

On August 4, Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem said his party was open to a meeting with Syria’s leadership. The group fought side by side with the al-Assad regime in Syria’s war and is, therefore, viewed negatively by many Syrians. But Hezbollah has said it has no desire for bad relations with Syria’s new government.

“Russia shelters the family and its fortunes while so far declining to fund a restoration [of the al-Assad regime], and Hezbollah, under disarmament pressure, needs calm with Damascus more than it needs a [battle on the] Syrian front,” Nanar Hawach, the International Crisis Group’s senior analyst on Syria, told Al Jazeera.

Syria has been under pressure from the United States to intervene in Lebanon against Hezbollah although experts believe Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa and his government are aware that such a move could lead to widespread regional unrest and undermine the domestic authority they are working to establish, including from figures still in Lebanon.

For years, Syria had a paternal relationship and view towards neighbouring Lebanon. The Syrian military entered Lebanon in 1976 when Bashar’s father, Hafez al-Assad, was in power and occupied large swaths of the country until 2005 when a popular uprising pushed Bashar al-Assad to withdraw his troops.

The younger al-Assad and Syria still exerted their influence in Lebanon via local allies, including Hezbollah, until the regime’s demise in 2024. Since then, Syria’s new government under al-Sharaa has indicated a willingness to have a more balanced and egalitarian relationship with Beirut.

To date, no Syrian regime figures accused of committing atrocities have been returned from Lebanon. That’s why, with extradition approved, Issa’s case could be so groundbreaking. While they have not yet faced trial, many former regime officials are either under foreign sanctions and/or worked in key regime roles that contributed to severe crimes against the Syrian people.

Earlier this year, Syrian authorities asked Lebanese security forces to hand over more than 200 senior officers who fled to Lebanon after the fall of Bashar al-Assad, according to a Reuters agency investigation that showed how the neighbouring country was a hub for insurgent plotting.

Lebanon’s parliament has passed a law to abolish capital punishment, making it the first country in the Middle East to do so. That has contributed to the controversy over the extradition process with Syria, which does apply the death penalty.

Wadih al-Asmar, cofounder and president of the Lebanese Centre for Human Rights, said a number of the Syrian officials in Lebanon would have committed crimes during the occupation period and, therefore, the Lebanese judiciary “has a duty and obligation” to prosecute some of these figures.

Al-Asmar said his organisation has received asylum requests from Syrians afraid to return to their country but none had been military figures connected to the former regime.

But other ex-regime officials, particularly those in Europe, could have those connections. And the landmark trial in Damascus last week that sentenced the al-Assad brothers and their cousin to death could be a concern for European and other states when extraditing wanted figures to Syria.

Experts said Beirut’s desire to have a positive relationship with Damascus will likely supersede human rights concerns related to the death penalty for former regime figures. Still, al-Asmar said: “Lebanon cannot, without violating international law and its own law, send back any person to a country where he can face the death penalty.”

He added: “It’s a very complicated situation, and I believe the only way out for the Lebanese government and the Syrian government with respect to the state of law is for Syria to abolish the death penalty.”