Recent remarks by Hikmat al-Hijri, a Druze spiritual leader in Sweida, have drawn criticism from prominent Syrian Druze figures in the occupied Golan Heights. They said his comments amounted to “an affront to the core of the Druze monotheistic faith.”
Al-Hijri said Druze were “co-religionists with the State of Israel” and “an integral part of the State of Israel.” His critics said the remarks had “no historical, moral or national basis” and called for the highest Druze authorities to take a position.
After Israel occupied the Syrian Golan Heights in the June 1967 war, Syrian residents remained in Majdal Shams, Masada, Buq’ata and Ein Qiniyye. The predominantly Druze population numbers about 23,000.
The religious authority in the four villages in the northern Golan issued a statement Monday rejecting comments al-Hijri made in a video late last week. Three prominent figures from Majdal Shams also told Asharq Al-Awsat they opposed his stance and expressed concern over Sweida’s future and Syria’s unity.
Writer and journalist Hassan Shams, a Majdal Shams resident, rejected what he described as al-Hijri’s separatist project, saying it had “no historical, moral, logical or national basis” and was harmful to Syria and the Druze community’s future.
Shams said al-Hijri had “gone far beyond what is permissible” and encroached on the essence of the Druze faith. He dismissed the claim that Druze were an integral part of Israel as “fabrication and delirium ... a sign of bankruptcy and a cry for help,” saying there was no indication that Israelis had promised him anything.
Following the July 2025 violence in Sweida, which killed hundreds of fighters from local Druze factions, army and security personnel, and civilians, al-Hijri and his affiliated National Guard took control of large parts of the province. He called for self-determination for its residents and sought to establish what he calls a “State of Bashan” with Israeli support.
Shams condemned the violence and said anyone involved in the “massacres” should be held accountable, but argued that it could not justify distorting the region’s history or gambling with its present and future.
He called on the highest Druze spiritual and secular authorities to publicly disavow al-Hijri.
Shams said the most al-Hijri could obtain was the tripartite Amman agreement announced in September 2025, which he rejected at the time but would now “be forced to accept.” He questioned whether the Druze leader could play a role in the next phase, saying he could not be trusted.
Sweida, he added, needed “an uprising of dignity” and an end to what he described as a dark chapter in its history.
Dr. Nizar Ayoub, a Majdal Shams researcher specializing in international law, human rights and transitional justice, accused al-Hijri of backing himself into a corner by imposing his approach on the province and suppressing opposition to it.
“Al-Hijri’s statements flattering Israel and appealing to its government have no basis in reality or law,” Ayoub told Asharq Al-Awsat. “Neither Sweida, Daraa nor the occupied Golan will under any circumstances become part of Israel, because it is an occupying power.”
Ayoub argued that Israel was using such rhetoric in talks with the transitional authorities in Damascus to press for security understandings in southern Syria and secure the best possible terms, but would abandon al-Hijri if its interests changed.
He characterized Israel’s policy toward Arab Druze, including those in the occupied Golan, as one of exploitation and said it had long pursued a divide-and-rule approach.
Ayoub described the proposed “State of Bashan” as “an absolute illusion,” arguing that the international community and Arab states supported Syria’s unity and opposed its division into separate entities.
He said there was broad agreement among Syrians, including residents of Sweida, on the country’s unity, territorial integrity and sovereignty over all its territory, including the occupied Golan. Given that international consensus, Ayoub described al-Hijri’s ambitions as “a dream that cannot be realized under any circumstances.”
‘An aberration that must be stopped’
Syrian writer and researcher Dr. Thaer Kanj Abu Saleh, also from Majdal Shams, similarly rejected al-Hijri’s position.
“The latest statements reflect glaring ignorance of history and faith,” Abu Saleh told Asharq Al-Awsat. He noted that al-Hijri appeared to regard Druze identity as something he could shape to serve his interests, adding: “We condemn his words and consider him an aberration that the people of Jabal al-Arab must put an end to as quickly as possible.”
“We have lived under occupation for nearly 60 years, and we know Israel, its policies and what it is planning,” Abu Saleh remarked. He argued that Israel was seeking to use the Druze issue in Syria to keep the country weak and prevent its recovery.
Abu Saleh continued that al-Hijri had “lost his compass,” did not know where he was taking Sweida’s residents “under threat of arms,” and had become unable to retreat.
He also said the authorities in Damascus “bear primary responsibility for what the situation in Sweida has become” and should devise solutions to resolve the crisis.
