Sweida, Syria — A prominent Bedouin commander from southern Syria has declared their intention to continue combatting Druze militias who they accuse of working with Israel and engaging in sectarian violence which has already resulted in hundreds of deaths and tens of thousands displaced civilians in Sweida province. This announcement came amid rising sectarian tensions which has already resulted in hundreds of civilian deaths as well as displacement on an unprecedented scale.
A commander, speaking under tribal customs and to Reuters under anonymity, told them his forces will not honor the ceasefire agreement reached between Damascus and regional mediators and Bedouin tribes. “Our fight isn’t over,” he insisted, and called for justice for imprisoned tribesmen while pressuring Druze leaders who collaborated with Israel until held accountable. In contrast to what Damascus and regional mediators may think otherwise, only government forces are bound by such an accord; not Bedouin tribes or bedouin tribes themselves. The Times noted
Rising Tensions and Allegations Fighting has escalated between Sunni Bedouin groups and Druze militias after an initially fragile truce was reached on July 15. Conflict initially escalated through disputes–including an attack at a checkpoint by Bedouin militia–and escalated rapidly into full-scale armed clashes, prompting government intervention through deployment of Syrian troops temporarily. The Times, Wikipedia and AP News all report violence between these parties since July 15.
Druze leaders accuse Bedouin fighters of brinkmanship and atrocities such as killings and arson. Their commander contends his campaign seeks to free detained tribesmen as well as avenge widespread abuses; in turn, recent Israeli airstrikes launched to protect Druze are seen by him as emboldening local factions allied with Tel Aviv. By this account, Euronews +15 reported these developments as occurring recently and without explanation by Israeli leaders (read Euronews +15 on Euronews +15 and Reuters +15).
At Least 321 Have Been Killed According to the Syrian Network for Human Rights, at least 321 people–civilians and combatants alike–have been killed, while thousands more are displaced or require emergency aid. Basic services have collapsed across affected areas with residents reporting severe shortages in food, water and medicine supplies.
Israel carried out targeted airstrikes against Syrian forces near Sweida and Damascus, drawing U.S. disapproval and accusations of overreach from Washington. Jerusalem claimed its actions were intended to defend Druze communities–some of whom are Israeli citizens–further intensifying conflict dynamics. The Guardian (UK), Reuters and New York Post all report such attacks with equal frequency.
Diplomatic Maneuvers
US Envoy Tom Barrack coordinated diplomatic moves that enabled a ceasefire agreement, with Turkey, Jordan and other regional players such as Saudi Arabia lending support. The ceasefire agreement allowed limited Syrian security force deployment for 48 hours in an attempt to restore public order; however it has failed to stop tribal hostilities. (Telegraph +3; Reuters+3
Damascus has called upon all factions to adhere to a ceasefire agreement and promised accountability and protection of all communities, but statements by Bedouin commanders reveal resentment from tribes that feel sidelined from political negotiations. Reuters
What Comes Next
Without firm commitment from Bedouin leaders like the commander, the ceasefire could collapse. Analysts warn that prolonged sectarian tension, compounded with external intervention, could further fracture Sweida–perhaps leading to demands for autonomy or local self-defense zones.
International mediators are currently making every effort to extend Syria’s ceasefire, restore humanitarian corridors and secure guarantees that minority communities like Druze, Bedouins and others are safe from both sectarian violence and external meddling.
As tension persists, civilian communities remain caught between two warring sides. Their survival ultimately hinges on whether or not international peace processes can evolve from fragile agreements into inclusive political agreements that address all factions–not just state actors.