Lebanon’s ongoing conflict involving the Israel-Hezbollah confrontation has prompted a surprising proposal from former U.S. President Donald Trump, who suggested that Syria might intervene militarily in Lebanon to help suppress Hezbollah. This idea has been met with firm rejection from the Syrian government, which denies any intention of entering the Lebanese conflict or engaging in new regional wars.

President Ahmed al-Sharaa, whose rebel coalition toppled the Assad regime in Syria in 2024, emphasized last week that any solution involving Syria would not entail war or a return to the era of Syrian dominance over Lebanon. Speaking on al-Mashhad TV, al-Sharaa stressed that his government opposes conflict, recalling Syria’s three-decade military presence in Lebanon as a fraught period.

The political landscape in Syria has shifted significantly since al-Sharaa’s coalition replaced Bashar al-Assad’s government. Under Assad, Syria was a close ally of Iran and its Lebanese proxy Hezbollah, facilitating the flow of arms to the militia and hosting Hezbollah fighters who supported Assad during Syria’s long civil war. With Assad’s ouster, Hezbollah lost a key regional ally, as the new government opposes Iran and its proxies, including Hezbollah. Syrian authorities have arrested individuals alleged to have Hezbollah ties, cracked down on cross-border smuggling, and accused Hezbollah-linked factions of planning attacks within Syria—a charge Hezbollah has denied.

Trump’s suggestion, voiced repeatedly over recent weeks and during the Group of Seven summit in France, aligns with his administration’s growing frustration over the protracted violence in Lebanon and Israel’s conflict with Hezbollah. He has proposed that Syrian forces might carry out a “more surgical” operation against Hezbollah to avoid broader casualties. The proposal also signals continued U.S. engagement with the al-Sharaa government, which has sought closer ties with Washington, earning sanctions relief and diplomatic recognition not previously afforded under Assad.

Regional analysts note that the U.S. likely views Syria and Lebanon as intertwined elements of its broader Levant strategy, with both governments politically reliant on American support. Lina Khatib, a Middle East expert at Chatham House in London, warned that Syrian intervention risks further destabilization in both Lebanon and Syria. Syrian troops re-entering Lebanon could reignite sectarian tensions, undermine Lebanese sovereignty, and provoke Hezbollah retaliation within Syria. For Syria, already grappling with post-conflict reconstruction and internal divisions, engaging in a new external military conflict carries significant risks.

Lebanon itself harbors deep sensitivities related to Syrian involvement. The Syrian military’s 29-year occupation, which ended in 2005, left a legacy of bitterness due to extensive human rights abuses and political interference. Many Lebanese fear that renewed Syrian military presence would repeat this troubled history and potentially expand influence in a way that could upset the delicate regional balance, including irritating Israel, which views Syrian-backed Turkey as a regional adversary.

Overall, the prospect of Syrian intervention in Lebanon remains highly contentious and unlikely to materialize amid ongoing geopolitical complexities and the competing interests of local and international actors.