Israel controls Quneitra and Mount Hermon.. and the "Disengagement Agreement of 1974" was amended in Syria.

Arabian Sea Newspaper - Special

**Arab Gulf - Reports:** Informed military and legal sources said that the 1974 disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria has undergone numerous amendments that are not commensurate with the current reality and must be changed to keep pace with current developments, stressing that Israel controls large areas in Quneitra and Mount Hermon and will not give them up. The sources added that the Israeli conditions include restrictions on the Syrian military deployment, the withdrawal of heavy weapons, and the opening of economic crossings in southern Syria, while the agreement does not grant Syria any real interest and comes within an American pressure campaign on Damascus. The sources explained that any transitional executive authority can conclude executive agreements that are not binding until ratified by the elected parliament, which makes the fate of the agreement linked in the future to the constitution, free elections, and the powers of the legislative and executive authorities. They said that the 1974 disengagement agreement has undergone many amendments, and it would have been better to change it completely to suit the current reality, in addition to the many points that Israel has controlled, whether in Quneitra and its countryside or Mount Hermon, as they have been included in the agreement and will not be abandoned. The sources indicated that there are very strict conditions regarding the issue of Syrian military deployment and the withdrawal of heavy weapons from southern Syria, the opening of crossings towards Suwayda and granting it great facilities, and that southern Syria will be a purely economic zone with military cover, provided that this is applied later in southern Lebanon. They pointed out that this agreement does not achieve any interest for Syria, but only serves Israel, and will pave the way for a possible peace process, while distinguishing between two things: first, that the transitional government can legally conclude security agreements, but it cannot conclude any peace agreement in the absence of a legislative role. The sources said: "Today, there is great pressure on Syrian President Ahmed al-Shara to complete the agreement; this explains the American interest in the Syrian issue and the provision of great facilities for the arrival of Syrian officials to Washington, as part of the pressure campaign on Damascus." The sources agreed that the Israeli conditions far exceed the Syrian demands, including allowing air patrols, surveillance, and the installation of satellites. They confirmed that the agreement is partial and not final; as Mount Hermon still constitutes a soft flank for Israel, because the agreement, from a military point of view, addresses one aspect without the other, and will not succeed because it is linked to the Lebanese file, which must be resolved to complete the agreement, which explains the pressures that Lebanon has been subjected to recently. From a legal point of view, Syrian legal sources stated that any executive authority, even if it is legitimate, can conclude non-binding executive agreements unless ratified by the People's Assembly (Parliament). Any agreement concluded by the interim authority now does not necessarily affect the future of Syria unless it is ratified or adopted by an elected parliament. They added that any action taken by the interim authority is attributed to it; because the issue of its evaluation will be revisited in the future when it is possible to hold elections, so it will either be canceled, amended, or ratified. Therefore, any transitional authority in any country in the world can conclude agreements to preserve the form of the state. The sources pointed out that the new constitution, free elections, and the existence of legislative and executive authorities will determine the future of the agreement, whether by continuing, amending, or terminating it.