Syria’s Path to Transition: Paris Summit Paves Way for Damascus‑SDF Talks While Israel Secures Buffer Zone in the South

PARIS — In a flurry of diplomatic activity anchored in Paris, global powers and regional actors announced breakthrough plans to address long-standing fragmentation in Syria. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot met with Mazloum Abdi, Commander-in-Chief of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), and Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shibani, with U.S. Special Envoy Tom Barrack also playing a central coordinating role. 

Mapping the Diplomacy: SDF and Syrian Government at the Negotiation Table 

During the July 25 meeting, France and the United States confirmed they would host a negotiation session in Paris between the SDF and Syrian Government. The talks are intended to implement the March 10 agreement signed by SDF Commander-in-Chief Mazloum Abdi and President Ahmad al-Sharaa, under Franco-American auspices. These negotiations aim to integrate institutions of the Democratic Autonomous Administration of the Region of North and East Syria (DAARNES) into Syria’s emerging political framework, for autonomy in local governance, protection under the constitution, and granting Kurds citizenship rights. 

In the conversation with Abdi, French officials reiterated their commitment to a negotiated, peaceful solution, one that includes North and East Syria in the transition and maintains territorial unity—a vision aligned with the eight-point peace plan France and its Western partners have advocated since March. 

However, a key sticking point remains that the SDF, backed by the U.S., maintains that disarmament is a red line amid rising sectarian tensions across the country, especially in the Druze-majority region of Suwayda. 

The Paris round of negotiations featured only Kurdish officials, with no mention of Syriac or Arab participation. Inclusivity has been questioned. Despite the March 10 agreement’s language referencing “Kurds and all other components,” the absence of Syriac and Arab representatives in the Paris delegation has sparked unease among key stakeholders in the northeast. The Syriac Union Party (SUP), a political force representing Syriac (Assyrians-Aramean- Chaldean), publicly criticized what it sees as a pattern of exclusion. 

Israel, Syria, and the Southern Buffer Zone 

On the same day, a parallel summit affirmed Israel’s strategic “red lines” regarding southern Syria—specifically in Quneitra, Daraa, and Suwayda provinces. Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer, Syria’s Mahalmi Foreign Minister al-Shaibani, and U.S. envoy Barrack reached an agreement to maintain a buffer zone, disarm local towns, and bar Syrian Government forces from Druze villages in Suwayda. The goal is to create security committees composed of local residents without heavy weapons, overseen by U.S. monitors. 

Suwayda’s two-phase plan includes, first, withdrawing government and tribal forces from Druze villages, verified by local factions; second, forming resident-led councils to manage local services and document violations. The deal also prevents Syrian-government-linked groups from entering the region but allows access for international humanitarian agencies. 

Israeli officials hailed the outcome as a major win, saying that Tel Aviv’s core demands were met and the Druze communities in southern Syria protected. Yet some Druze leaders—especially within the Israeli Druze community—criticized the arrangement, viewing it as Israeli overreach into their internal affairs. 

Between Unity and Fragmentation 

As Syria seeks a path toward national unity, the dual tracks emerging from Paris underscore major challenges: 

SDF Integration vs. Regional Autonomy 

Abdi and Kurdish officials insist that disarmament of the SDF is non-negotiable amid the threat of renewed sectarian violence—particularly following clashes in Suwayda and concerns over ISIS resurgence. 

Daramsuq (Damascus), represented by the Syrian government, affirms its right to unify Syria under state institutions and opposes any form of decentralization that falls short of sovereignty. Officials warned that preserving armed factions or demanding political accommodation for autonomy would undermine national cohesion. 

The absence of Syriac and Arab voices in critical talks not only risks alienating key constituencies but also calls into question the representative legitimacy of the negotiating bloc. If indigenous peoples begin to view the process as monopolized by one faction, the broader vision of a democratic and pluralistic governance structure could get dented. 

Southern Stabilization vs. Israeli Security Interests 

Israel’s demands have reshaped local security architecture in southern Syria. The disarming of Quneitra and Daraa and the establishment of local committees under U.S. oversight are intended to prevent Syrian regime influence and safeguard Druze towns. The agreement on Suwayda, in particular, reflects Israeli priorities alongside Western mediation. 

While the Paris summits offer glimmers of stabilization, Syria’s path remains converged through fragile trust: 

Suwayda violence has claimed over 1,200 lives and devastated local infrastructure. Despite a declared ceasefire, clashes between Druze fighters and Bedouin factions continue, with civil institutions like hospitals and schools deeply disrupted. 

Also read: Druze prince and notables from Suwayda issue urgent appeal to the international community 

Humanitarian conditions are dire, with repeated calls by the UN and EU for independent investigations and protection of civilian rights and minority groups—a task complicated by overlapping foreign interests and fragmented governance. 

If held, the upcoming Paris talks between the SDF and Syrian Government would mark the first direct high-level dialogue since March—but sharp divisions over arms control, identity, and governance remain. 

France and the U.S. frame these initiatives as essential to Syria’s peaceful political transition, yet whether Daramsuq (Damascus) and the Syrian Democratic Forces can reconcile their differences—and whether Israel’s security framework will hold—are questions that will define the post-Assad era.