By Shams Al-Din Matoun
The Syrian Transitional Government has announced the signing of several investment agreements in infrastructure sectors, including energy, roads, water, and communications. The deals, made in partnership with Turkish, Chinese, Qatari, and American companies, were described as a “cornerstone of reconstruction.” However, they have sparked considerable debate among Syrians, particularly amid a long-standing collapse in services and a deteriorating economy.
Engineer Muhammad Taqala voiced scepticism about whether the agreements would translate into tangible results, citing a history of unfulfilled promises.
Speaking to +963, Taqala stressed the need for robust oversight of implementation on the ground and called for transparency to avoid repeating the corruption that plagued the pre-collapse era under the ousted regime.
In the town of Saqba, in the rural outskirts of Damascus and once part of the besieged Eastern Ghouta, 37-year-old Ahmed Seif expressed a mix of caution and guarded hope.
Ahmed, who recently reopened his carpentry workshop after a two-month restoration, said: “We are the ones most deserving of these projects. Our homes, factories, and infrastructure were completely destroyed. Electricity is available for no more than two hours a day, and the sewage system needs full rehabilitation.”
Seif also voiced concern that investments might disproportionately favour areas with greater political or economic influence, leaving hard-hit regions behind. “Everything is spent on Damascus and its immediate suburbs,” he said. “What about areas in Damascus countryside, like Ghouta, Douma, and Harasta? If these projects are not balanced, neither people nor life will return.”
Home Reconstruction Is a Priority
In Homs Governorate, known among Syrians as the “capital of the revolution”, neighbourhoods such as Baba Amr and al-Khalidiya still bear the scars of siege and destruction.
Badr Muhammad emphasised that infrastructure cannot be measured solely by the number of kilometres paved, but rather by how well authorities understand and respond to the actual needs of the population.
Speaking to +963, Badr said that any project which does not originate from the will of residents to reclaim their city will remain alien, regardless of its financial or investment value.
“Baba Amr is alive, yet forgotten,” said Badr, who works with a local organisation focused on rehabilitating damaged buildings. “We hear about infrastructure projects in the city centre and along commercial streets, but the destroyed neighbourhoods remain unchanged.”
He stressed that the issue is not only about implementing projects, but about their quality and direction. “Foreign investment is important, but it is meaningless without a comprehensive national plan. Reconstruction must go beyond roads; it must rebuild community trust, involve the people, and prioritise the displaced,” he added.
Fayez al-Qazah, a 59-year-old displaced resident from Daraya in the Damascus countryside, currently lives in the town of al-Foua in Idlib. He carries a mix of hope and unease.
“I have been displaced from Daraya since 2013, and I still hope to return,” he said. “But only if there is a functioning health and education system. Returning is not simply about unlocking a door; it is about finding the essentials for a dignified life.”
He continued: “We heard about reconstruction, electricity, and water agreements. If the government begins to rebuild the devastated cities, that is a significant step. But my concern is that all these projects will focus only on Damascus. What about Daraya and Moadamiya? What share do these areas receive?”
“If there are no schools for my children, no hospitals or electricity, how are we expected to live? We want to return to live, not to die in the ruins,” he said.
Economic Controversy
In a related development, the government announced the signing of an investment agreement to establish power stations at an estimated cost of $7 billion. The announcement has triggered widespread debate among economists and Syrian affairs observers, with serious doubts raised over the deal’s feasibility and transparency amid the country’s dire economic conditions.
According to Energy Minister Mohammed al-Bashir, the new power plants will be built using modern European and American systems. However, the government has not disclosed the name of the implementing company or any details about its prior experience.
Syrian economic analyst Younis Karim described the initiative as a “massive future debt” that could burden the already strained Syrian economy. He argued that the $7 billion figure is “grossly exaggerated,” especially when compared to previous assessments, which estimated the cost of rehabilitating 14 destroyed power stations at only $4 billion.
Karim told +963 that government promises to restore electricity to ten hours a day within “a few weeks” have been made repeatedly in the past without materialising. He also criticised the government’s silence regarding the identity of the contractor and the selection process, which he said deepens public mistrust in the handling of such a critical national file.
Investment Laws
Jalal Shuaib views the Syrian Transitional Government’s signing of infrastructure development agreements as a positive step in principle. However, he believes the pace at which the deals were concluded reflects a degree of haste, particularly given the broad range of available offers and options.
Speaking to +963, Shuaib noted that the agreements remain, for now, merely ink on paper. He warned that certain companies, especially those with labour-focused models or foreign ties, could eventually dominate segments of the local economy, thereby threatening the independence of national economic decision-making.
Another concern, Shuaib explained, is that Syria’s investment laws have not been updated. Most date back to the year 2000, under the former regime. “It makes little sense to build a new phase on the foundation of outdated laws. 25 years later, the landscape has changed,” he said.
He emphasised that the absence of a functioning legislative authority is delaying the passage of new laws tailored to current realities. This delay, he said, hinders the ability to attract new investment, especially from domestic actors.
“I was working with an investor on acquiring land for a project,” he said. “But he was discouraged by the complex bureaucracy and lack of facilitation, and ultimately backed out.”
Shuaib underlined the importance of supporting local investment, which not only employs the national workforce but also reduces reliance on foreign actors and responds more accurately to regional needs. He pointed out that while the government has promised updates to investment legislation, implementation has yet to be seen.
Hopes on Hold
While these agreements may represent a serious step toward overcoming fragmentation and paving the way for displaced Syrians to return to their towns and cities, concerns remain. Chief among them is the fear that neglected rural areas will once again be sidelined in favour of major cities, and that reconstruction could become a tool for political consolidation rather than a genuine response to public need, much like what occurred in other post-conflict countries.
Despite those fears, many Syrians are cautiously awaiting tangible steps from the transitional government, moves that go beyond declarations and signed documents. The future of these agreements depends on the government’s commitment to implement them with fairness, balance, and integrity.
The road ahead is difficult, but the success of these projects could mark a turning point: a moment when displaced Syrians finally return to rebuild their lives, or, if promises fall short, continue their long wait in cold camps and makeshift shelters.
