In a remarkable diplomatic development that could reshape the Middle East landscape, Syria’s new president Ahmed al-Sharaa has extended an unprecedented olive branch to Israel, describing the opportunity for peace as something that comes “only once every 100 years” while warning that the window for such historic dialogue may not remain open indefinitely.
The extraordinary message reached Israeli lawmakers on July 9, 2025, through Syrian activist Shadi Martini, who made a rare appearance at the Knesset in Jerusalem to address the inaugural conference of a new parliamentary lobby focused on advancing regional security arrangements. Speaking alongside Saudi journalist Abdulaziz Alkhamis, Martini delivered what many observers are calling the most significant diplomatic communication between Syria and Israel in decades.
The timing of this outreach is particularly significant, coming against the backdrop of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent visit to Washington and growing international optimism about potentially expanding the Abraham Accords normalization agreements that have already transformed relationships between Israel and several Arab nations. The lobby hosting this historic session was jointly founded by opposition MKs Ram Ben Barak, Gilad Kariv and Alon Schuster, representing a bipartisan effort to explore new diplomatic possibilities in the region.
Understanding the significance of this moment requires examining the complex journey that brought these former adversaries to this potential turning point. For over seven decades, Syria and Israel have remained in a technical state of war, with their relationship defined by territorial disputes, proxy conflicts, and deep-seated mistrust. The fact that a representative of Syria’s new government would choose to address Israeli lawmakers directly represents a fundamental shift in diplomatic approach that could have far-reaching implications for regional stability.
Martini, who fled Syria during the civil war in 2012 and has since become a prominent businessman and political activist, recounted his extraordinary meeting with President al-Sharaa approximately two weeks before his Knesset appearance. The encounter, which took place in Damascus’s presidential palace, lasted two hours and focused predominantly on the possibility of Syrian-Israeli relations. What makes this meeting even more remarkable is that Martini was accompanied by a priest and a rabbi, symbolizing the interfaith cooperation that could become a cornerstone of future diplomatic efforts.
The Syrian president’s message, as conveyed by Martini, carried both urgency and opportunity. Al-Sharaa’s observation that such chances come “only once every 100 years” reflects a sophisticated understanding of regional geopolitics and the rare alignment of circumstances that might enable a breakthrough. However, his warning that “the window will not always stay open” suggests that both sides must act decisively if they hope to capitalize on this moment.
To fully appreciate the complexity of this diplomatic opening, it’s essential to understand the sequence of events that created these conditions. Martini explicitly credited Israel’s military campaign against Hezbollah in 2023, including the elimination of the group’s leader Hassan Nasrallah, as the catalyst that enabled Syrian opposition forces to rapidly overthrow Bashar al-Assad’s government in December. This acknowledgment represents a stunning reversal of traditional Syrian positioning, with Martini stating that “for Syrians, we were very happy with what Israel did, we really appreciated it.”
However, the relationship between recent events and current diplomatic possibilities is nuanced and sometimes contradictory. While Syrian opposition groups may have welcomed Israel’s actions against Hezbollah, subsequent Israeli military activities within Syrian territory have created new tensions that complicate peace efforts. Martini expressed frustration with Israeli forces blocking Syrian farmers from accessing their land on the Syrian side of the Golan Heights, demanding that “Israel needs to explain what’s the end game here.”
This tension highlights one of the central challenges facing any potential Syrian-Israeli agreement: the question of territorial sovereignty and security arrangements. The Golan Heights, captured by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War and later annexed, remains a core issue for Syrian leadership. Any meaningful peace process will need to address these territorial concerns while ensuring Israel’s security needs are met.
The personal dimension of this diplomatic story adds another layer of complexity and hope. Martini candidly acknowledged that he was raised with strong “negative stereotypes” about Israelis, making his current role as a peace advocate all the more remarkable. His transformation began during Syria’s civil war when Israelis reached out to help him and his family, demonstrating the power of human connection to overcome decades of hostility. This personal evolution illustrates how individual relationships can sometimes pave the way for broader diplomatic breakthroughs.
Trust, as Martini observed, “is one big commodity that is lacking in the Middle East.” Building that trust will require sustained effort from both sides, along with recognition that each party has legitimate concerns and interests that must be addressed. The fact that al-Sharaa was willing to meet with representatives from multiple faiths and to have his message conveyed to Israeli lawmakers suggests a pragmatic approach to diplomacy that prioritizes practical outcomes over ideological purity.
The broader regional context cannot be ignored when evaluating these diplomatic developments. The success of the Abraham Accords in normalizing relations between Israel and several Arab nations has created a new template for Middle Eastern diplomacy, one that emphasizes economic cooperation and shared security interests over historical grievances. Syria’s apparent interest in following this model suggests that the Abraham Accords’ impact may extend far beyond their original signatories.
Saudi Arabia’s role in this regional realignment is particularly crucial, as evidenced by the presence of Saudi journalist Abdulaziz Alkhamis at the Knesset conference. Speaking from what he described as “the Saudi lens,” Alkhamis emphasized that Palestinian rights remain central to any comprehensive regional agreement. His message that “no state can expect to be impressed when our people next door are encaged and disenfranchised” reflects the continued importance of the Palestinian issue in Arab diplomatic calculations.
The Saudi position, as articulated by Alkhamis, presents both opportunities and challenges for Syrian-Israeli rapprochement. While Saudi Arabia appears open to normalization with Israel, such agreements must include “a credible and tangible path to Palestinian sovereignty.” This requirement could complicate Syrian diplomatic efforts, as any peace agreement with Israel would need to address not only bilateral Syrian-Israeli issues but also the broader Palestinian question.
Alkhamis’s vision of regional transformation is both ambitious and pragmatic, emphasizing shared interests in “energy transition, economic modernization, AI innovation, climate security, Red Sea security” over historical conflicts. His challenge to regional leaders to choose between clinging “to the 20th century, with its borders soaked in blood and ideologies stuck in time” or redrawing “the map — geopolitically, economically, morally” captures the fundamental choice facing Middle Eastern nations today.
The economic dimension of potential Syrian-Israeli normalization cannot be understated. Syria’s economy has been devastated by over a decade of civil war, making international investment and trade relationships crucial for reconstruction efforts. Israel’s technological expertise and economic dynamism could play a significant role in Syrian recovery, while Syria’s strategic location and natural resources could benefit Israeli economic interests. The success of similar economic cooperation between Israel and other Arab nations through the Abraham Accords provides a roadmap for how such partnerships might develop.
However, significant obstacles remain on the path to normalization. The ongoing conflict in Gaza, which Martini described as a “huge, huge tragedy, and a massacre,” continues to inflame regional tensions and complicate diplomatic efforts. Martini’s call for a ceasefire and the return of hostages reflects the reality that broader regional peace efforts cannot ignore the Palestinian situation. The fact that Israel and Saudi Arabia were reportedly close to signing a normalization deal before the October 7 attacks demonstrates how quickly regional dynamics can shift.
The humanitarian dimension of this diplomatic story deserves particular attention. Martini’s personal journey from a hospital director in Aleppo to a peace advocate in the United States illustrates the human cost of regional conflicts and the potential for individual transformation. His ability to move beyond the “negative stereotypes” of his youth and work toward reconciliation offers hope that broader populations can also overcome historical animosities.
The role of religious leaders in this process, symbolized by the priest and rabbi who accompanied Martini to meet President al-Sharaa, suggests that interfaith dialogue could become an important component of peace efforts. In a region where religious identity often intersects with political conflict, the involvement of religious leaders in diplomatic initiatives could help legitimize peace efforts among skeptical populations.
Looking forward, the success of any Syrian-Israeli diplomatic process will depend on several factors. First, both sides must demonstrate genuine commitment to addressing each other’s core concerns. For Syria, this means Israeli recognition of Syrian sovereignty and territorial integrity, while for Israel, it requires credible Syrian commitments to security and the prevention of hostile activities against Israeli targets.
Second, the international community, particularly the United States, will need to play a constructive role in facilitating dialogue and providing incentives for peace. The success of American-brokered agreements like the Abraham Accords suggests that sustained diplomatic engagement can produce results, but it requires patient, long-term commitment from all parties.
Third, public opinion in both countries will need to be prepared for the compromises that peace will inevitably require. This means addressing decades of mistrust and hostility through education, cultural exchange, and economic cooperation. The fact that Martini was able to overcome his own prejudices suggests that such transformation is possible, but it will require sustained effort and leadership from both sides.
The regional implications of successful Syrian-Israeli normalization extend far beyond the bilateral relationship. Such an agreement could accelerate broader Middle Eastern integration, potentially including Lebanon, Iraq, and other nations that have historically maintained hostile relationships with Israel. The economic benefits of regional cooperation could create powerful incentives for peace that transcend political and ideological divisions.
However, the path forward is not without risks. Extremist groups on both sides may attempt to sabotage peace efforts through violence or political opposition. The delicate balance between addressing legitimate security concerns and making the compromises necessary for peace will require skilled diplomacy and strong leadership from both Syrian and Israeli officials.
The involvement of other regional actors, including Iran and its proxies, adds another layer of complexity to any peace process. Iran’s historical support for anti-Israeli activities in Syria means that any normalization agreement would need to address Iranian influence and ensure that Syrian territory is not used as a platform for attacks against Israel.
As this diplomatic story continues to unfold, it represents both the promise and the challenges of Middle Eastern peacemaking. The willingness of Syrian leadership to engage with Israeli counterparts, even indirectly, suggests that pragmatic considerations may be gaining ground over ideological positions. However, the path from initial outreach to comprehensive peace agreement remains long and uncertain.
The success of this diplomatic initiative will ultimately depend on the ability of leaders on both sides to convince their populations that peace serves their interests better than continued conflict. This requires not only skilled diplomacy but also a fundamental shift in how both societies view their relationship with each other. The fact that such conversations are even taking place represents progress, but translating initial outreach into lasting peace will require sustained commitment from all parties involved.
The next months and years will be crucial in determining whether this diplomatic opening can overcome the obstacles that have prevented Syrian-Israeli peace for decades. The window of opportunity that President al-Sharaa described may indeed be rare, but whether it leads to lasting peace will depend on the courage and wisdom of leaders on both sides to seize this moment and work toward a future of cooperation rather than conflict.
Martini acknowledged that calls for peace with Israel remain controversial in Damascus. “But more Syrians now understand this is what Syria needs.”
According to Martini, Israeli lawmakers responded positively. “I felt they were genuinely listening,” he said. “And I hope that having a message come directly from Syria will help clarify things.”
About The Author
Discover more from Faith & Freedom News - FFN
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
