Syria’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ibrahim Al-Alabi, said that the Security Council’s confirmation of the need to respect the 1974 ceasefire agreement with Israel was an unprecedented step. In an interview with Al Jazeera on Sunday, he explained that this position reflected the effectiveness of Syrian policy, which is based on isolating Israel and mobilizing international support against it rather than on military confrontation. Damascus, he said, was pursuing this course because it saw it as an effective way to respond to Israeli violations.
Al-Alabi noted that this was the first time the Security Council had publicly announced this position following closed consultations. In his view, it reflected agreement among the five permanent members on Syria’s sovereignty over its territories where Israel carries out incursions and arrests. He recalled that the United Nations had stated that some such actions could constitute war crimes.
The diplomat stressed that Damascus was avoiding military confrontation with Israel and focusing instead on a policy of recovery and reconstruction that was beginning to bear fruit. Syria continues to mobilize the international community against Israel, whose prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, recently refused to recognize the 1974 agreement. Al-Alabi recalled that ambassadors from 45 countries sided with Damascus when Netanyahu decided to cross the Syrian border; these positions resulted from the efforts of the Foreign Ministry and other government bodies.
He said these efforts coincided with US talks and mediation aimed at reaching a security agreement between Syria and Israel. At the same time, Damascus was not ignoring the rights of Syrians in areas entered by the occupying army. According to him, such actions were political and legal tools for countering Israeli violations, which the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights described several days ago as possible war crimes. Syria’s efforts were already putting pressure on Israel: its ambassador to the UN said at a meeting that he had found himself at a “Syrian session” because of Damascus’s extensive diplomatic mobilization.
Al-Alabi believes that Israel is facing growing pressure because it has no grounds to justify its presence in a region that Israel’s UN ambassador called small, expressing surprise at the world’s interest in it. Syria is committed to international law, agreements and UN Security Council resolutions, whereas Israel, he said, ignores all of them. This gives Damascus stronger negotiating leverage and helps it preserve its sovereignty while avoiding military confrontation during the recovery phase. The region wants a stable Syria, which serves the interests of the entire world; this was demonstrated by the historic visit of the UN secretary-general and several European foreign ministers to Damascus. Syria’s Foreign Ministry welcomed the Security Council’s reaffirmation of the need to respect the 1974 agreement, made after discussions on Israel’s continuing incursions into southern Syria.
News Comments
What is the 1974 Disengagement Agreement between Syria and Israel, and what role do the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) play in ensuring compliance with it on the Golan Heights? — This is the Disengagement of Forces Agreement between Israel and Syria, signed on May 31, 1974, after the Yom Kippur War. It established a ceasefire, created a buffer zone—the area of separation—on the Golan Heights, and established zones limiting weapons and troop deployments, known as Alpha and Bravo. To monitor compliance, the UN Security Council established UNDOF through Resolution 350. UNDOF patrols the area of separation, ensures that it contains no military forces, verifies restrictions on weapons, maintains contact with both sides and reports violations to the Security Council. Its mandate is renewed every six months. The agreement is not a peace treaty, but for a long time it provided relative stability along the border.
Which areas in southern Syria—for example, Quneitra and Daraa—border the Golan Heights, and why are they considered especially sensitive in Syrian-Israeli relations? — Quneitra Governorate directly borders the Golan Heights, including the city of Quneitra, which lies near the ceasefire line and was partially destroyed in 1974. Daraa Governorate is farther south and borders Jordan, while also being close to the Golan Heights and Damascus. These areas are sensitive because they form a strategic corridor toward Damascus and the Israeli border. Any presence of forces hostile to Israel—Iranian forces, Hezbollah or Syrian troops—is viewed by Israel as a threat. In addition, the areas saw fighting during the civil war and were controlled by rebel groups, while Israel has repeatedly carried out strikes there. Quneitra and Daraa therefore remain areas of heightened attention in Syrian-Israeli relations.
Which UN Security Council resolutions concern the status of the Golan Heights and the Syrian-Israeli conflict? — The key resolutions are: Resolution 242 (1967), which established the “land for peace” principle and called for the withdrawal of forces from occupied territories; Resolution 338 (1973), calling for a ceasefire and negotiations; Resolution 350 (1974), which established UNDOF and approved the Disengagement Agreement; and Resolution 497 (1981), which declared Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights null and void and without international legal effect. Also important are the resolutions extending UNDOF’s mandate and Resolution 2334 (2016) on the illegality of settlements, although it primarily concerns the Palestinian territories. Resolutions 242 and 338 remain the basis for resolving the Syrian-Israeli conflict.
Full version: Syria’s UN envoy to Al Jazeera: Security Council decision on the need to respect the 1974 agreement sets a precedent