The Syrian Arab Spring: Al-Sharaa Heading to Jerusalem — Not as a Conqueror, but to Recognize the Illegitimate Entity!

NYN | Articles 

By: Najah Mohammed Ali

Recent media reports indicate movement toward a comprehensive normalization agreement between Damascus and the Zionist entity, backed by Western and Arab capitals, and linked to the American–Saudi track. The proposed deal involves joint management of strategic regions such as the Golan Heights.

According to recent statements, the agreement includes conditions for joint efforts to halt resistance movements both within Syria and in Lebanon. It also aims to strengthen ties with parties historically opposed to the Axis of Resistance — a vision expressed by former U.S. President Donald Trump, who encouraged newly appointed President Ahmad Al-Sharaa to join the “Abraham Accords” and expel what he called “foreign terrorists” from Syria.

This development cannot be separated from the active role of Iran, Iraqi factions, and Hezbollah, who during the Syrian “Arab Spring” demonstrated strategic clarity and commitment in defending the Resistance Axis against attempts to turn Syria into a platform for normalization with the Zionist entity.

1. Responding to the “Arab Spring”: Defense Without Reward

When calls for regime change in Syria began, Iran and its allies were not their target. Instead, these calls were part of a broader project aimed at:

• Ending Palestinian resistance by dismantling Syria’s central state.

• Restructuring the region to serve the Greater Middle East project — centered around full, open normalization with the Zionist entity and under its control.

In contrast, Iran became the backbone of the resistance. It provided financial and military support to factions in Lebanon, Iraq, and Palestine, and deployed experts to Syria. This prompted the American administration and intelligence agencies to pressure Iran with sanctions, threats, and assassinations targeting its military scientists and leadership circles.

It’s no coincidence that threats to assassinate Ayatollah Khamenei emerged — not as idle threats, but as direct reactions to his unwavering stance in the liberation struggle.

2. Ahmad Al-Sharaa in Jaffa: The First Fruits of “Spring” Normalization

In a historic appearance during the Riyadh Summit (May 2025), Trump was seen gesturing toward Al-Sharaa with the “Abraham Accords” in the presence of Mohammed bin Salman. This signaled a green light for Syria’s step toward normalization with the Zionist entity.

This alignment became clearer in discussions of a “common enemy” for the Zionist regime and post-Assad Syria — namely, Iran — and in Israel’s use of Syrian airspace during its latest assault on Iran.

It was also evident in renewed plans for “religious tourism” exchanges between Syria and occupied Palestine. Though framed as religious, these trips are likely to serve as the groundwork for solidifying Israel’s foundational presence — a real test that could pave the way for full normalization in the future.

3. The Dangers of “Religious Tourism”

This type of exchange is far from innocent:

• It allows citizens to cross into occupied Golan territory under the guise of tourism, creating a backdoor for formal relations.

• It is promoted as “interfaith closeness,” but in reality lays the groundwork for economic and political normalization.

4. Iran and the Factions: Who Stood by Syria?

When the Syrian state’s voice dimmed amid war, Iran, Hezbollah, and Iraqi factions stood firm on the ground. They provided logistical, operational, and defensive support. They led battles against terrorist groups, despite internal and external pressures to destabilize Syria and open it up as a gateway to normalization.

Those who promoted “neutrality” were, knowingly or not, contributing to the regional infiltration project led by “Greater Israel.” Neutrality in Syria was not innocent — it was a form of practical complicity with the normalization agenda.

“Neutrality” and Complicity in the “Greater Israel” Project

It is neither exaggeration nor defamation to say that all who stood against the Syrian state — and supported the so-called “Syrian revolution,” regardless of motive — became part of a geopolitical project aiming to:

• Remove Syria from the Axis of Resistance.

• Transform it into a central piece in the map of the “New Middle East” — led by the Zionist project cloaked in American–Gulf garb.

From the outset, Syria was not an isolated battleground. It was a regional and international arena where slogans of “freedom” and “dignity” served as cover for a strategic campaign to break the Resistance Axis through the Syrian gateway.

Thus, opposition to Syria was not neutrality — it was participation (conscious or not) in the campaign to liquidate Palestine and the Resistance.

It is unsurprising that certain Iraqi and Lebanese factions aligned with this project under the slogan of “neutrality.” Though it appeared to be an effort to avoid conflict, it was, in essence, an abandonment of the central struggle. Some so-called “nationalist” slogans became tools for dismantling the frontlines — without a single bullet fired.

Does This Conflict with Iraq’s Anti-Normalization Law?

One might ask: How can Iraqi factions be accused of enabling regional penetration while having passed a law criminalizing normalization with Israel? Isn’t the very existence of this law proof of total rejection?

The simple answer: the law exists on paper, but has not been truly enforced — not in prosecutions, monitoring of political, security, economic, or even media ties.

Worse still, the law contains a dangerous loophole: the clause permitting “religious visits.”

The Threat of “Religious Tourism” with the Zionist Entity

This clause may seem secondary — even a spiritual bridge — but it is, in fact, a gateway for undeclared normalization, for several reasons:

1. Legitimizing entry into occupied territories: Officially permitting visits to religious sites in occupied lands constitutes de facto recognition of Zionist sovereignty — a blatant violation of principled opposition to occupation.

2. Creating direct communication channels: These trips provide the pretext for covert security and intelligence ties under the guise of protecting pilgrims or organizing logistics.

3. Altering public and religious consciousness: When it becomes “normal” for Iraqis to visit places under occupation, emotional and psychological normalization takes root, weakening the Palestinian narrative.

4. Whitewashing the occupation’s image among conservative groups: By facilitating pilgrim visits, the occupation markets itself as a “protector of religious tolerance” — a useful PR tool internationally.

5. Exploiting visits in Zionist propaganda: Every religious visit by Iraqis becomes propaganda material in Hebrew media, used to showcase supposed Arab and Muslim acceptance of the occupation.

Conclusion: A Law Without Spirit Cannot Protect a Nation

Having a law against normalization is not enough unless all loopholes — especially those disguised as cultural or religious — are closed. History shows that normalization rarely begins with public political agreements; it often slips in through symbolic, religious, or media channels, later becoming de facto policy.

The most dangerous betrayal of Palestine and the Resistance today is to ignore or justify these “soft” paths to normalization under the guise of patriotism or spirituality. The enemy no longer needs a signed treaty — silent complicity is enough.

Those who supported the “Golani revolution” against Damascus and justified the events in the name of reform were, knowingly or not, laying the groundwork for Syria’s transformation from a defensive front into a bridge for normalization.

By contrast, those who stood their ground in Damascus, Homs, Deir Ezzor, and Al-Bukamal were the true defenders of the last fortress against the “New Middle East” project — where Israel rules and Palestine is sacrificed.

Final Word: Palestine Looks to Those Who Stood by It

History is written by those with firm stances, not by those who drift.
“Who stood with us when all others vanished?” That was the Resistance’s question.
Now, in the Syrian context, the question reemerges:

Will Syria remain part of the Resistance Axis — or become a bridge to normalization?

Iran, Iraqi factions, and Hezbollah were never deterred by terrorism, sanctions, threats of execution, or targeted assassinations. They stood firm because they knew that the Palestinian cause — as the first line of confrontation — is not won by negotiations but defended with arms, decision, and sovereignty.

So will Damascus’s new direction be the tool that smuggles it into normalization — or the hammer that rebuilds the front against the central enemy?

Time holds the answer.

— Iraqi writer