As The Middle East’s Balance Shifts, Syria And Hezbollah Test A New Relationship

A reported attempt to open a channel between Syria’s new government and Hezbollah has highlighted how sharply their relationship has changed since the fall of Bashar al-Assad.

Syrian intelligence and foreign ministry officials met Hezbollah representatives in Türkiye in September in an effort to reduce tensions between the former adversaries, according to Reuters.

Six sources told Reuters that the discussions covered security concerns, with Damascus seeking an end to arms smuggling through Syria and the dismantling of Hezbollah-linked cells, while assuring the group that Syria would not intervene militarily in Lebanon to disarm it. No final agreement was reached, Reuters reported.

Türkiye’s Directorate of Communications said claims that Syrian and Hezbollah officials met in Türkiye under the auspices of its intelligence service were “entirely unfounded”, and said the reported date, venue, content and contacts were fabricated and speculative. Reuters also reported that Syria’s official English-language government account on X denied that such a meeting had taken place. Hezbollah did not comment to Reuters.

What is not in dispute is the underlying change in the relationship. Hezbollah once fought alongside Assad’s forces in the Syrian war. Damascus is now led by a government that says only state institutions should control weapons and that Syria should pursue an independent regional policy.

What Happened In Türkiye?

The reported meeting took place in September after contacts between Syria and Hezbollah had been established through Türkiye about two months earlier. The talks were said to involve Syrian intelligence and foreign ministry officials and Hezbollah representatives, with Turkish security and intelligence agencies facilitating the contact.

The reported purpose was practical rather than ideological. Reuters said the discussions focused on reducing tensions and addressing mutual security concerns. A Syrian official told the agency that Damascus assured Hezbollah it would not send forces into Lebanon to disarm the group, while asking Hezbollah to help stop cross-border smuggling and dismantle remaining cells in southern Syria.

There was no final agreement, according to the sources. Reuters said it could not independently confirm where in Türkiye the reported meeting took place or whether there had been other meetings before or afterwards.

Why Talk Now?

The backdrop is the collapse of the relationship that existed under Assad.

Hezbollah sent fighters to Syria during the civil war to help Assad’s government, making the Syrian state an important part of the Iran-aligned regional network supporting the group. After Assad was ousted in late 2024, the new government in Damascus inherited a country in which Hezbollah’s former military role and access routes were no longer aligned with the state’s interests. Reuters says tensions subsequently rose, with Damascus accusing Hezbollah of transferring arms through Syria.

President Ahmad al-Sharaa has since laid out a different foreign-policy approach. In July, he said Syria was pursuing balanced relations with regional and international powers and criticised regional policies built around supporting armed groups outside state authority. He also said Syria wanted only state institutions to possess weapons.

At the same time, al-Sharaa has not ruled out dialogue with Hezbollah. In June, he said dialogue was the preferred way to deal with political and security crises, including with Lebanese parties with which Syria had deep disagreements. He specifically linked such dialogue to preventing another escalation in Lebanon.

The result is a relationship that has moved from military alliance to security management.

What Does Syria Want?

For Damascus, the central issue is sovereignty.

Al-Sharaa has said Syria supports the Lebanese state’s exclusive authority over weapons and has argued that decades of armed groups operating outside state institutions produced destabilising consequences. He has also said Syria has no intention of intervening militarily in Lebanon.

That position creates two priorities on the Hezbollah question. First, Damascus wants control over what happens on Syrian territory. Second, it wants to prevent Syria from again becoming a corridor for armed groups operating across borders.

The reported Reuters account suggests that this was reflected directly in the alleged talks. Syrian officials were said to have sought Hezbollah’s help in stopping arms smuggling and dismantling sleeper cells, particularly in southern Syria. The Hezbollah representatives did not directly accept those requests, Reuters reported, but pledged not to interfere in Syria’s affairs.

That is a markedly different relationship from the one Hezbollah had with the Assad government, where the group could operate with the backing of a state ally.

Why Do Arms Routes Matter?

The issue is not theoretical for Damascus. Syrian authorities have repeatedly reported weapons seizures and alleged Hezbollah-linked activity.

In July, Syria’s Interior Ministry said it had intercepted an advanced weapons shipment near the Syrian-Iraqi border that was intended to transit Syria before reaching Hezbollah in Lebanon. The ministry said the shipment included long-range missiles, guided anti-tank missiles and drones. Those were Syrian government allegations, and it said the investigation was continuing.

On Tuesday, Syrian intelligence and internal security forces announced the arrest of three people in Daraa whom they identified as members of a Hezbollah-linked cell. Authorities had intercepted a plan to prepare rocket-launch platforms for attacks aimed at destabilising the area. Hezbollah has denied having any presence or military activity in Syria, according to Reuters.

The following day, the Lebanese Army said it had seized about 245 kg of TNT, four explosive devices, detonators and associated material being smuggled from Syrian territory into Lebanon. The army did not attribute the shipment to Hezbollah.

These incidents do not establish that every weapons transfer from Syria is Hezbollah-linked. They do, however, show why border control and weapons movements have become central to Damascus’s security concerns.

What Does Hezbollah Want?

The available evidence on Hezbollah’s position comes primarily from the Reuters account, because the group did not publicly confirm the reported meeting.

A Lebanese security source with knowledge of the talks told Reuters that Hezbollah wanted to protect its “flank”, referring to the possibility of a Syrian military move against the group inside Lebanon. Reuters reported that Damascus’s assurance that it would not intervene militarily in Lebanon addressed that concern.

That concern reflects the wider change since Assad’s fall. Hezbollah can no longer assume that the government in Damascus will provide the same strategic environment it did during the Syrian war.

The group nevertheless has an interest in avoiding a new front on its northern or eastern flank. A stable relationship with Damascus would reduce the possibility that Syria becomes an additional source of pressure while allowing Hezbollah to focus on its position inside Lebanon.

That does not mean Syria and Hezbollah now share the same strategic objectives. The reported talks were about containing those differences rather than restoring their former alliance.

Where Does Lebanon Fit?

Lebanon is central because any change in Syria-Hezbollah relations affects the border and the balance of armed power inside Lebanon.

Al-Sharaa has said Syria supports the Lebanese state’s authority over weapons but does not intend to impose that position through military intervention. He has instead argued for political dialogue and Lebanese-led stability.

That position matters in the reported talks because the alleged Syrian assurance to Hezbollah would have removed one immediate concern for the group: a direct Syrian military campaign against it in Lebanon. In return, Damascus was seeking restraint from Hezbollah on Syrian territory. Reuters reported that both sides made progress on security issues but remained divided on important questions.

Türkiye has also been engaging Lebanon’s government. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan met Prime Minister Nawaf Salam in New York on September 22 and said Türkiye was working for lasting peace and stability in Lebanon. Erdoğan was accompanied by Türkiye’s intelligence chief, Ibrahim Kalin, among other senior officials.

That meeting does not establish a connection to the reported Syria-Hezbollah talks. It does, however, place Ankara’s Lebanon engagement alongside its parallel relationship with Damascus.

Why Is Türkiye Involved?

Türkiye has become an important external actor in post-Assad Syria and has publicly supported efforts to keep the country out of wider regional conflicts.

When Erdoğan met al-Sharaa in Ankara in July, Türkiye said the leaders discussed bilateral relations and regional developments. Erdoğan said keeping Syria out of regional conflicts was vital to its reconstruction and recovery.

Türkiye’s foreign minister, Hakan Fidan, also visited Damascus in September and met al-Sharaa and Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad Hassan al-Shaibani. The Turkish Foreign Ministry's record shows that Fidan also held a trilateral meeting with Syria’s foreign and interior ministers.

Reuters reported that three sources said Türkiye pushed for the alleged Syria-Hezbollah meeting because Ankara wanted a direct role in efforts to ease tensions. But Türkiye has explicitly rejected that account.

Where Does Iran Fit?

Iran matters because Hezbollah’s regional position was closely tied to Tehran during the Assad era.

Iran was not directly represented at the alleged September meeting. A Lebanese security source told the agency that Hezbollah attended with Tehran’s knowledge but that Iran was unhappy about being excluded. The source attributed the absence of a final agreement partly to that dispute. Reuters said Iran’s mission in Geneva did not immediately comment.

Syria’s own stated foreign-policy direction nevertheless provides useful context. Al-Sharaa has said Syria should not be forced to choose between Israeli policies and Iranian ambitions and has criticised regional policies based on armed groups operating outside state authority. He has described the new approach as one based on balanced and independent relations.

That makes a restoration of the old Syria-Iran-Hezbollah configuration difficult to reconcile with Damascus’s declared position.

What Changes Now?

The reported talks, if they took place, did not produce a final agreement. Türkiye and Syria deny the meeting itself, while Reuters says six sources described it as a face-to-face attempt to reduce tensions. The conflicting accounts mean the contact should not be treated as an established diplomatic breakthrough.

The more concrete evidence is on the ground. Damascus is asserting exclusive state control over weapons and territory. It has reported intercepting a weapons shipment it said was bound for Hezbollah and a Hezbollah-linked cell in Daraa. The Lebanese Army has also reported weapons and explosives being moved from Syrian territory into Lebanon.

That leaves both sides with a narrower relationship than the one that existed under Assad. Syria wants to prevent armed networks from operating through its territory and does not want another war spilling across its borders. Hezbollah has an interest in preventing Syria from becoming an additional military threat while preserving its position inside Lebanon.

Whether the two sides can turn that shared interest in avoiding direct confrontation into a workable security arrangement remains unresolved. For now, the shift is clear: Syria is no longer Hezbollah’s wartime ally in Damascus, and any new relationship has to be negotiated around state sovereignty, the Syrian-Lebanese border and control of weapons.