Follow Kritica on Google
Add Kritica to your favourite sources.
On 16 June 2026, during a press conference at the White House, the President USA Donald Trump has stated that he discussed with Syria the possibility of their involvement in containing Hezbollah, Hezbollah, the Lebanese political-military group supported by Iran, designated by the United States, Gulf countries, the United Kingdom and others as a “terrorist organisation”.“It's a smaller war, and Syria could help stabilise the northern border”(It is War smaller and Syria could help stabilise the northern border), Trump declared, as reported by CNN, as if it were a game of chess and not a hypothetical military offensive with incalculable geopolitical implications, but above all, with an undeniable human cost, which no one wants to pay.
The White House incumbent's words immediately raised concerns and questions about the increasingly complex relationship between Damson and the Land of Cedars, and on the balances in the entire region.
A failed empire attempt
How one can hypothesise that a fragile and impoverished country like Syria, emerging from fourteen years of war, needing to regenerate and rebuild, wanting to leave war behind, might instead undertake a new war against a neighbouring country, on behalf of others, is a difficult line of reasoning to comprehend.
The response from Damascus, in fact, was not long in coming. «The US president's statements are inaccurate and misleading. Syria is not part of any discussion regarding military operations in Lebanon. Syria will not act against Hezbollah. The relations between Damascus and the Lebanese Resistance are clear and are not subject to negotiation,» declared an official source from the Syrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, cited by the state news agency Sana.
The same statements were echoed by the pan-Arab media outlet al Mayadeen, considered close to the Hezbollah movement and the Axis of Resistance. During an interview with broadcaster al Mashaad, al Sharaa added that if it served the interests of both Lebanon and Syria, he would be available to sit at the negotiating table with Hezbollah, against whom he fought for years during the Syrian war that began in 2011, and whom a large part of Syrian civilians consider an enemy for its support of the regime. al-Assad. The authorities in Damascus do not appear to want to get involved and dragged into a new spiral of bloodshed, demonstrating that there are "no"s that can be said, even to someone like Trump, who was among the first to welcome them in their new role.
Israel, for its part, commented with a certain detachment; the Jerusalem Post reports the statements of a defence official from Tel Aviv, according to which “any pressure on Hezbollah is positive”. Trump subsequently rectified his statements, stating that “the United States is not asking Syria to go to war”, adding that “if Syria decided to act to protect its borders and contribute to regional security, it would be a welcome step”. One has to wonder if he would make the same statement regarding Israel's continued interference in southern Syria and the possibility of a decision by Damascus to respond or to act in self-defence.
Since 8 December 2024, following al-Assad's flight to Russia, Israel has significantly intensified its military operations in Syria, regularly striking targets linked to Iran, Hezbollah, and allied militias deployed along the corridor connecting Damascus to the Lebanese border. According to the’Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, Between December 2024 and June 2026, Israel carried out over 85 attacks in Syria, causing more than 230 deaths, largely among pro-Iranian fighters, but also civilians. Tel Aviv claims that “the operations aim to prevent the transfer of advanced weapons to Hezbollah,” while Damascus and Tehran accuse Tel Aviv of wanting to “prolong regional instability.”.
The story of a painful relationship
On regional instability, much has been said and much has been written. According to a common saying in the Near East, “Syria has the remote control for Lebanon: when it wants, it switches it on and creates chaos, but when it wants, it switches it off.” This is not a literary quote, but describe the complex relationship between the two countries, who before the divisions imposed by the Sykes-Picot agreements had good neighbourly relations and no rigid borders, being part of that geographical and cultural area called Bilad ash-Sham, the Countries of the Levant. The years between 1976 and 2005, which saw a massive Syrian military presence in Lebanon, under the command of the al-Assad dynasty, particularly damaged the ties between the two neighbours.
Unhappy years for the two peoples, who share the same language, practically identical customs and traditions, but who have found themselves in the roles of invaded and invaders, with a worsening of relations that is not easy to manage, especially along the border areas, where friendships, mixed marriages and blood ties have never been reflected in the dividing lines drawn with pencil and ruler by international decision-makers.
The attack that caused the death of Beirut's prime minister Rafiq Hariri in 2005, when a car bomb containing approximately 2,500 kg of TNT devastated the Ain al-Mreisseh seafront, was the last straw. In addition to Hariri, considered one of the most influential politicians of the time, twenty-one other people lost their lives. The protest by thousands of Lebanese, who initiated the so-called Cedar Revolution, led to the withdrawal of Syrian troops, as many leads regarding responsibility for the attack pointed directly to Damascus. An investigation by the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, established by the United Nations, concluded in 2020 that members of Hezbollah were involved in the operation, although without assigning direct responsibility to the leadership of the movement or the Syrian government. The Hariri affair still represents a reflection of the complex internal balances within Lebanese society today, but also of the unsaid truths that govern relations with Syria.
Today, as Lebanon mourns over 4,000 victims, 10,000 injured and over 400,000 displaced people, the population is calling for an end to hostilities and, in nearby Syria, over 40,000 civilians, particularly women and children, have found refuge. This is no small matter, considering that almost a million Syrians, in previous years, were themselves welcomed into Lebanon, albeit in precarious conditions. Human movements cannot be contained within the designs of political geography and forge different, unstoppable routes.
Today Syria is returning to its historical nature, a land of welcome, even though of the 14 million people forced into exile and displacement, only a little over one and a half million have returned to their homes, or to the rubble thereof. These flows from afar are perhaps imperceptible, they do not weigh on the balance of choices for the “others”, who decide and command new wars. The peoples of the region, who are Giovanni, with an average age just over 23 years old, are tired of paying with their lives for destructive decisions in which they are rarely involved.
They are those civilians who say “There is no place like home”The neighbour, before the house“, thereby emphasising the importance of having quiet, peaceful neighbours, because only then will one's own house be so too. The stability of all the countries in the Near East is a good that everyone aspires to, for generations, but which still seems to be a distant, unattainable goal.
© Kritica – Partial reproduction permitted (no more than half the article) by citing the source and including the link at the beginning.
PHOTO CREDITS: © Syrian Presidency/APA Images via ZUMA Press Wire via ANSA