Representatives of the Syrian government and Lebanese Hezbollah reportedly met secretly in Turkey in September 2026 to reduce tensions between the two sides, according to press reports published on Thursday, 1 October. The meeting was reportedly organized at the invitation of the Turkish security and intelligence services and was held in a positive atmosphere. None of the three parties, however, had publicly confirmed these discussions at the time of their disclosure.
Such a meeting would constitute an important development in relations between Damascus and Hezbollah since the fall of the Bashar al-Assad regime in December 2024. The Lebanese movement had been one of Assad’s main military allies for more than a decade, engaging thousands of fighters in Syria against armed groups opposed to the regime. On the contrary, the new Syrian authorities regard this presence as one of the legacy of the former power and have sought to reduce Hezbollah’s networks on their territory.
The aim of the discussions in Turkey would have been above all pragmatic: to prevent the tensions accumulated since the change of power in Damascus from degenerating into direct confrontation. Turkish mediation would be particularly significant, since Ankara has become one of the main regional actors with close relations with the new Syrian authorities.
Syria-Hezbollah meeting organized by Turkey
According to information published on Thursday, representatives of the Syrian government and Hezbollah participated in a direct meeting in Turkey during September. Discussions were reportedly organized at the initiative of the Turkish security and intelligence services.
The information available remains limited on the identity of the participants. No name of Syrian official or Hezbollah has been officially communicated. Nor has the exact location of the meeting in Turkey been made public.
The sources cited by the media nevertheless describe a meeting that would have been well conducted. Its objective was to reduce tensions between Damascus and the Lebanese movement, whose relations were deeply disrupted by the fall of Bashar al-Assad.
Direct discussion would in itself be a change. For months, the relationship between the new Syrian authorities and Hezbollah has been dominated by mistrust, accusations and security issues related to the border with Lebanon.
The fall of Assad upset the relationship with Hezbollah
During the Syrian civil war, Hezbollah directly engaged its fighters alongside the army of Bashar al-Assad. His intervention had played an important role in several strategic battles and in securing areas close to the Lebanese border.
The movement justified its intervention by the need to defend Syria against the jihadist groups and to protect Lebanon against their progression. On the contrary, his adversaries regarded his commitment as decisive military support to the Assad regime in the repression of the opposition.
This period left an important dispute with several components of the new Syrian power. Forces that had fought against the Assad regime were, after December 2024, at the heart of the new Syrian political and security order.
For Hezbollah, the fall of Assad was also a major strategic setback. For decades Syria was the main transit territory between Iran and Lebanon. Weapons, equipment and various supports for the Lebanese movement passed through Syrian territory.
The change of power in Damascus has therefore broken an essential element of this geographical continuity.
The Lebanese-Syrian border at the heart of tensions
Since the fall of Assad, the border between Lebanon and Syria has been one of the main subjects of tension. The new Syrian authorities have sought to strengthen their control over the crossings and roads used for smuggling.
These operations have sometimes led to clashes in border areas where family, commercial and political networks cross borders between the two countries. The issues of arms trafficking, smuggling and the movement of combatants have made relations particularly difficult.
For Damascus, regaining effective control of the border is a sovereign issue. For Hezbollah, the closure of the old transit routes represents a major transformation of its strategic environment.
A direct discussion between the two sides can therefore meet very concrete needs. These include avoiding clashes, clarifying rules around border crossings and preventing incidents that could lead to escalation.
However, the information published on the September meeting does not confirm exactly which cases have been dealt with.
Ankara as Ombudsman
Turkey’s choice to host the meeting would not be trivial. Ankara maintains close relations with the new Syrian authorities and has an important influence on the political and security balances that emerged after the fall of Assad.
Turkey also has channels for dialogue with various Lebanese and regional actors. Its intelligence services have played a regular role in sensitive negotiations, mediations or indirect exchanges between opposing parties.
In this case Ankara would have provided space for Syrian and Hezbollah representatives to meet directly without immediately giving a public or political dimension to the discussions.
The security of mediation is also notable. According to available information, the initiative came from the Turkish security and intelligence services rather than from a traditional diplomatic approach.
This might indicate that the first discussions focused on practical and security issues rather than full political normalization between Hezbollah and the new Syrian authorities.
This interpretation, however, remains to be confirmed in the absence of an official record.
Different interests but a need to avoid confrontation
Despite their historical antagonism, Damascus and Hezbollah now have a common interest in preventing border tensions from turning into open conflict.
The Syrian authorities must stabilize a territory marked by more than a decade of war and restore border control. Further confrontation with a Lebanese armed actor would complicate this objective.
Hezbollah is also in a situation that is profoundly different from that of Bashar al-Assad. The movement is facing Israeli military operations in Lebanon and pressures to disarm it. The opening of a new front with the Syrian authorities would considerably increase these difficulties.
Security discussions can therefore be possible without political reconciliation.
The Syrian government does not need to change its appreciation of the role played by Hezbollah during the civil war in seeking arrangements to stabilize the border. Hezbollah, for its part, can negotiate with Damascus without regaining its privileged relationship with the Assad regime.
The weapons issue remains particularly sensitive
The issue of arms and supply routes is one of the main challenges of the new relationship between Hezbollah and Syria.
Under Assad, Syria was an essential component of the axis linking Iran to Hezbollah. The border allowed the passage of materials and constituted a strategic depth for the movement.
The new Syrian authorities have sought to break with this configuration. Strengthening border control reduces Hezbollah’s ability to use former logistics routes.
This development comes at a time when Israel exerts strong military pressure on the movement in Lebanon. Control of the Syrian border is therefore of far greater importance than bilateral relations between Beirut and Damascus.
A possible security agreement between the Syrian government and Hezbollah could set rules to avoid confrontation, but it would not necessarily mean the restoration of the old transit routes.
There is no information available on the meeting in Turkey to suggest that such an agreement has been reached.
A first step rather than reconciliation
The positive character attributed to the meeting should therefore be interpreted with caution. A meeting that takes place without incident and allows for dialogue does not mean that disputes between the two parties are settled.
The weight of the Syrian war remains considerable. Hezbollah has fought for years against groups whose leaders or former members now belong to the new Syrian political and security environment.
Regional interests have also changed. Damascus seeks to consolidate its relations with new partners and rebuild its institutions, while Hezbollah lost with the fall of Assad an essential ally and a strategic path towards Iran.
The meeting reported in Turkey could, however, point to the shift from a phase of potential confrontation to an attempt to manage disputes. The fact that representatives of both sides agreed, according to available information, to meet around the same table would already be a development after almost two years of tense relations.
The next steps will determine whether the channel opened by the Turkish services remains limited to ad hoc security exchanges or leads to regular discussions. For the time being, neither Damascus nor Hezbollah nor Ankara have publicly confirmed the meeting nor detailed any commitments made in September.
