During a phone call with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani stressed the importance of completing the executive and technical procedures related to lifting sanctions on Syria. According to the Syrian Foreign Ministry, the two sides discussed bilateral relations, ways to develop them, and strengthening cooperation between Damascus and Washington, as well as a number of regional developments. Al-Shaibani expressed Syria’s appreciation for the U.S. steps toward lifting sanctions and emphasized the need to continue coordination so that these decisions produce tangible results for the economy and banking sector.
The Syrian Foreign Ministry said the two sides agreed on the importance of continuing to support Syria on stability and economic growth amid the “positive momentum” in bilateral relations. Damascus is focusing on completing the technical and executive aspects related to lifting the restrictions so that the economic and banking sectors can genuinely feel the effects of Washington’s policy shift. The banking sector is particularly important to Syria: the government seeks to strengthen foreign economic ties, support reconstruction, and attract investment while expanding its international contacts.
Al-Shaibani also insisted on continued coordination with Washington so that political steps on sanctions would have a practical and tangible impact on economic and banking activity. According to the Syrian Foreign Ministry’s statement, the talks addressed regional developments and Syria’s role in supporting stability in the political and economic spheres. The two sides also reaffirmed their commitment to continued consultations and coordination on matters of mutual interest.
The U.S. State Department, in a statement attributed to spokesperson Tommy Pigott, said Rubio discussed regional security issues and expanding cooperation between the United States and Syria with al-Shaibani. The U.S. secretary of state stressed the importance of further integrating all minorities in Syria and commended Damascus’s progress in cooperating with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
On September 9, the IAEA Board of Governors announced the conclusion of the decision concerning Syria’s noncompliance with its nuclear obligations under its safeguards agreement pursuant to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. This followed the fulfillment of relevant technical and legal requirements and came amid U.S.-Syrian talks on bilateral cooperation and regional developments. The negotiations are taking place as Damascus expands its foreign ties and hopes to gain economic and banking benefits from easing restrictions, support reconstruction, create broader conditions for trade and investment, and turn political steps on sanctions into practical results.
News Commentary
Which specific U.S. sanctions programs—such as the Caesar Act, OFAC sanctions, and export and investment restrictions—apply to Syria, and what technical conditions are required for their full repeal? — Several layers of U.S. sanctions apply to Syria: (1) the OFAC Syrian Sanctions Regulations (31 CFR Part 542), based on a series of executive orders (EO 13338, 13460, 13572, 13573, and 13582) and the IEEPA; these freeze regime assets and prohibit new investment, oil imports, U.S. exports, and financial transactions involving sanctioned persons; (2) the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act of 2019, incorporated into the FY2020 National Defense Authorization Act, which imposes sanctions on the Syrian government, the Central Bank, and foreign persons providing significant support to the regime; (3) export controls administered by the Bureau of Industry and Security under the EAR and by the State Department under ITAR, including an arms embargo and restrictions on dual-use goods, aviation, and oil and gas equipment; and (4) additional restrictions resulting from Syria’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism (SST) and from nonproliferation laws. Full repeal would technically require: presidential certification or a decision that Syria has changed its conduct, including ending support for terrorism, abandoning weapons of mass destruction and chemical weapons, ending attacks on civilians, and complying with U.N. resolutions; repeal of the Caesar Act by Congress, which would require legislative action rather than merely an executive order; revocation by the president of the relevant executive orders and termination of national emergencies; removal of individuals and organizations from OFAC’s SDN list and lifting of sectoral prohibitions; removal of Syria from the SST list by the secretary of state, requiring certification that Syria has not supported terrorism for six months and assurances regarding future conduct; cancellation of BIS and State Department export restrictions; and resolution of nuclear and chemical issues with the IAEA and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. Full repeal would require a combination of legislative, executive, and regulatory steps rather than a single act.
What did the IAEA Board of Governors’ decision regarding Syria’s noncompliance with its safeguards agreement under the NPT mean, and which nuclear facilities or obligations were involved? — In June 2011, the IAEA Board of Governors formally found Syria in noncompliance with its safeguards agreement with the IAEA (INFCIRC/407) under the NPT and referred the matter to the U.N. Security Council. The case concerned an undeclared nuclear facility at Deir ez-Zor, also known as Al-Kibar, which Israel destroyed in 2007. The IAEA concluded that it was a nuclear reactor that Syria was required to declare, provide design information for, and make available to inspectors. Syria denied that the facility was nuclear, describing it as a non-nuclear military site. The Board’s decision meant that Syria had violated its obligations under the safeguards agreement by failing to declare nuclear material and a facility and by failing to ensure verification and cooperation with the IAEA. The decision did not impose automatic sanctions but opened the way for consideration by the U.N. Security Council. The IAEA also called on Syria to sign and bring into force an Additional Protocol and resume cooperation.
Which banking restrictions—disconnection from SWIFT, a ban on correspondent banking relationships, or the blocking of Syrian Central Bank assets—are most critical for the Syrian economy, and why is lifting them considered a condition for recovery? — The most critical restrictions for the day-to-day economy are disconnection from SWIFT and the absence of correspondent banking relationships, particularly access to U.S. dollar clearing. SWIFT enables the transmission of payment messages; without it, banks cannot conduct international settlements. Correspondent relationships with foreign banks are necessary for trade, imports, remittances, and humanitarian operations. Their absence, compounded by the threat of U.S. secondary sanctions, deters even banks in third countries. Blocking the assets of the Central Bank of Syria freezes foreign-exchange reserves and limits monetary policy, but payment and correspondent-banking isolation is what paralyzes the private sector and foreign trade. Lifting these restrictions is considered a condition for recovery because without international banking channels Syria cannot pay for imports of food, medicine, and equipment, attract investment, obtain loans, or reintegrate into the global economy. This would require removal from OFAC sanctions lists, lifting bans on correspondent banking and blocking sanctions, and restoring access to SWIFT, which depends on the EU and Belgium, as well as a decision by SWIFT.
