Syria's Condemnation of Israeli Incursions: Legal Arguments, Regional Backlash, and the Fate of the 1974 Disengagement Agreement

Damascus's Legal Case Against the Incursions

Syria’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates has grounded its condemnation in a clear set of legal arguments. Officials assert that Israeli ground incursions and artillery shelling in Quneitra and Daraa constitute:

• A violation of the 1974 Disengagement of Forces Agreement, which created a demilitarized buffer zone monitored by the UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) .
• A breach of UN Security Council resolutions and the UN Charter, including Article 2(4), which prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity of any member state .
• An act of aggression that terrorizes civilians and undermines Syria's territorial integrity, prompting calls on the UN and the international community to intervene .

Syria has pointed to specific incidents as evidence, including the killing of a young man in a house strike in Turnejeh (northern Quneitra countryside) and the harassment of residents during Israeli incursions . The Foreign Ministry has described these as “flagrant violations” that are part of a systematic escalation .

Regional Condemnations

The operations have drawn swift condemnation from key regional actors:

Arab Parliament — On November 30, 2025, the Arab Parliament condemned the Israeli attacks “in the strongest terms,” stating they constitute a flagrant violation of Syria's sovereignty, a clear breach of international law and the UN Charter, and a serious threat to regional security and stability .

Saudi Arabia — The Saudi Foreign Ministry has issued multiple condemnations. On August 26, 2025, it denounced Israel's ongoing incursions as a “flagrant violation” of Syria's sovereignty and international law . On March 21, 2026, Saudi Arabia condemned Israeli strikes on Syrian army camps as “aggression” and called on the international community to intervene . Saudi Arabia, along with Qatar and Kuwait, also condemned Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s tour of occupied Syrian territory as a “blatant violation” .

Qatar — Qatar has joined Saudi Arabia in condemning Israeli shelling and incursions in southern Syria, rejecting any calls for the division or separation of Syrian territory . Qatari state media (QNA) has also reported on Israeli detention operations in Daraa and Quneitra .

Other states — Turkey and Kuwait have similarly condemned the operations, with Turkey calling Israeli strikes “a dangerous escalation” that must be stopped .

Broader Context: Israeli Operations Since the Fall of Assad's Government

Following the collapse of the Assad regime, Israel invaded the buffer zone and has since carried out sustained military operations across southern Syria .

Scale of violations

According to the Sijil Centre, a Syrian research and monitoring organization, Israeli forces carried out at least 1,672 violations inside Syrian territory between August 2025 and May 2026. March 2026 marked a peak with more than 321 military operations, including ground raids, airstrikes, artillery shelling, and infrastructure work .

Ground incursions and checkpoints

On June 26–29, 2026, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported six ground incursions into Daraa and Quneitra, involving home raids, temporary checkpoints, and the questioning of residents . Israeli forces established vehicle-search checkpoints in both governorates on May 31, 2026, stopping and searching civilians before withdrawing . Similar operations have been described as a pattern of intelligence-gathering intended to build a population registry .

Civilian detentions

Israeli forces have arbitrarily detained numerous Syrian civilians since December 2024:

• On June 7, 2026, five civilians including two minors were abducted during incursions in Quneitra .
• On April 11, 2026, three Syrians were detained during raids in Kudna (Quneitra) and Daraa .
• Human Rights Watch documented that since Assad's fall, Israeli forces have “arbitrarily detained Syrian civilians and transferred them into Israel,” where they are held without charge and incommunicado . Families of dozens of missing civilians continue to demand information about their relatives .
• Former detainees from Quneitra have described being interrogated about Iran, Hezbollah, and local social networks, with some transferred to a facility prisoners refer to as “Israel's Guantanamo” .

Quneitra province official Mohammed al-Saeed stated in May 2026 that the Israeli army had kidnapped more than 50 people from the region .

Ongoing Negotiations over the 1974 Disengagement Agreement

Since mid-2025, the US has facilitated indirect talks between Israeli and Syrian officials to address border security and the status of the 1974 Disengagement Agreement .

Key developments

Paris talks (January 2026) — Senior Israeli and Syrian officials resumed high-level security talks in Paris for the fifth round, mediated by the US. The two sides agreed to establish a “dedicated communication cell” for intelligence exchange and military de-escalation coordination .

Syria's negotiating position — In April 2026, Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa stated he is open to “long-term negotiations” on the Golan Heights, but only if Israel first agrees to withdraw troops from the buffer zone captured since December 2024. Damascus is seeking a new security agreement that guarantees Israel's withdrawal to the 1974 disengagement lines as part of a phased approach .

UNDOF mandate renewal — The UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF), established by the 1974 agreement, has its mandate renewed by the Security Council every six months. The June 2026 renewal was a key diplomatic juncture for both sides .

Status of the 1974 agreement

The 1974 Agreement on Disengagement between Israel and Syria, signed on May 31, 1974, ended the Yom Kippur War and created a ceasefire line, a demilitarized buffer zone, and a UN monitoring force . However, following the fall of the Assad regime, Israel declared the agreement void “until order is restored in Syria” . The agreement is widely regarded as collapsed in practice due to Israel's unilateral invasion of the buffer zone and its refusal to withdraw. Both sides continue to reference it as the baseline legal framework for any future security arrangement, but the gap between their positions remains wide .