Fourteen years after a war that devastated most of Syria’s infrastructure, the path to economic recovery remains riddled with obstacles. Restoring the economy isn’t just about lifting sanctions, although that’s essential. It also involves reviving critical sectors such as oil, gas, banking, investment, and reconstruction. But a deeper, more complex challenge looms: the emergence of four economically independent zones, each with its own financial system, trade policies, and even currency.
This fragmented economic landscape poses a serious threat to Syria’s long-term recovery and presents a critical test for any transitional administration. What’s needed is a bold political will and structural reforms that address internal divisions, paving the way for inclusive agreements and comprehensive national consensus.
Hope in Agreements
Dr. Ziad Ayoub Arbash, an economist and academic, describes Syria’s current situation as one of economic fragmentation, both geographically and sectorally. Without integrating the various components of economic activity across social and environmental dimensions, he warns, it will be impossible to achieve meaningful recovery. Trade, investment, and labour flows between regions remain weak, even though areas like eastern Syria hold key strategic resources, oil, gas, and wheat among them. Meanwhile, other regions struggle not only with scarcity, but also with challenges in securing foreign currency and importing essential goods due to sanctions.
In the sixth issue of +963 magazine, Arbash expressed hope in the recent agreements signed with the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and with representatives in the south of the country. These deals, he says, could serve as the foundation for a national compact, one that includes both a social contract (guaranteeing citizenship and equal rights) and an economic framework (that ensures a shared national identity and equitable wealth distribution). He emphasized the importance of restructuring Syria’s trade relations with neighbouring countries to allow formal economic exchange through official border crossings.
Read also: Sanctions and Infrastructure Gaps Continue to Hinder Consistent Service Delivery
According to Arbash, the continuation of such economic fragmentation undermines the concept of an “incorporated nation”, a united society that embraces its diversity within a decentralized framework. For Syria, he argues, development must be a central pillar in overcoming division and resisting attempts at partition disguised as local autonomy, which often contradict the logic of a unified national economy.
Key Challenges
Dr. Ahmad Al-Aboud, professor at the University of Portsmouth’s School of Economics and Finance, describes the existence of independently operating economic zones in Syria as an alarming trend. It leads to the formation of separate financial systems, disparate currencies, and inconsistent economic policies, all of which disrupt legal and commercial frameworks. The lack of investor confidence, coupled with political instability and absence of economic unity, greatly hinders Syria’s recovery potential.
In his interview with +963 Al-Aboud pointed to the sanctions and decaying infrastructure, including shortages in water and electricity, as primary obstacles. He noted a severe contraction in both industry and agriculture, alongside an almost complete lack of domestic or foreign investment to support growth. The Syrian currency’s declining purchasing power and the outdated banking sector add further complications.
Across all regions of Syria, the economy faces similar structural problems: infrastructure destruction, the erosion of the middle class, widening inequality, the spread of smuggling and illicit economic activity, and the displacement of millions, both inside and outside the country. These factors have drained Syria of a significant portion of its human capital and skilled workforce.
Rad also:Local Agreements: A Pathway to Rebuilding the Syrian State
Positive and Negative Outlooks
Speaking on potential solutions, Arbash stresses the need for rapid and coordinated policy action. Economic recovery requires full alignment between ministries of economy, trade, industry, finance, and agriculture, as well as customs and investment authorities. He advocates for an urgent economic plan anchored in a long-term vision, where the public sector plays a central role in revitalizing production and administration. He warns against the illusion that free-market mechanisms alone can lift the country out of crisis.
Arbash also raises a critical question: how can economic governance succeed when large segments of administrative personnel have been dismissed, and essential services, such as education and healthcare, are desperately needed, especially with displaced families returning? He also calls for activating neglected public assets, such as unused government buildings and vacant land, to address urgent housing needs. At the same time, he highlights the importance of supporting the most vulnerable communities, enhancing purchasing power, and ensuring a basic standard of living for all Syrians.
He underscores the need for an inclusive institutional mindset, backed by regulatory frameworks, transparent policies, and open participation in drafting and monitoring economic plans. This, he argues, is what will mobilize local energy and attract both domestic and foreign investment. “A revitalized Syrian economy,” he concludes, “is the key to preventing future cycles of violence and securing long-term regional stability.”
Meanwhile, Dr. Al-Aboud expects Syria’s economic trajectory to follow a mixed path in the coming period, some sectors may witness modest improvements, while others continue to decline. He attributes this to Syria’s fragile political situation and the state’s limited capacity to develop a unified economic and political vision capable of attracting vital foreign investment.
