Asaad al-Shaibani, Minister of Foreign Affairs in the Syrian interim government, presented his vision for the near future, affirming that “2026 will be the year of development for Syria.” At the same time, he predicted the lifting of international sanctions on the country. The minister also directly linked the work of Syrian organizations in Washington to the process of reconstruction and rebuilding within Syria, a clear indication of an attempt to redirect the efforts of the diaspora toward serving national goals.
The High Cost
Economic development expert Dr. Ali al-Salman told +963 that it is impossible to grasp the scale of optimism in al-Shaibani’s statements regarding the lifting of sanctions without understanding the severe damage inflicted on the Syrian economy by these international measures, with the Caesar Act among the most stringent, in addition to European Union sanctions.
He added: “The sanctions led to an almost total paralysis of the Syrian economy, particularly in the energy and financial sectors, causing a severe shortage of fuel and electricity and a sharp rise in their prices. Oil production collapsed, depriving the government of its main source of hard currency. Moreover, financial isolation, the depreciation of the Syrian pound, the withdrawal of foreign banks, and the freezing of the Central Bank’s assets all contributed to a decline in foreign reserves from around 18.5 billion dollars to minimal amounts. Against this backdrop, Minister al-Shaibani’s statements about 2026 as the ‘year of development’ signal a preparatory phase aimed at consolidating security and political stability as a prelude to economic reconstruction and improved living conditions.”
Al-Salman further noted that al-Shaibani’s message is “a call to investors, a clear invitation to the private sector, both domestic and foreign, to start planning and taking initiative, with the promise of a more stable and secure investment environment within about a year. Yet, despite the importance of this optimism for morale, it faces enormous challenges on the ground, most notably securing the vast financial resources needed for reconstruction, especially in the heavily damaged infrastructure sectors such as energy, water, and education.”
Perhaps the most significant part of the minister’s remarks was his assertion that “there will be no sanctions on Syria” by that time. According to al-Salman, this statement “rests on Damascus’s reading of regional and international developments. The lifting of sanctions, as al-Shaibani hopes, would serve as a vital oxygen injection for the Syrian economy, enabling reintegration into the global financial system, facilitating foreign investment, and liberating vital sectors such as energy, transport, and banking. This, the minister believes, is the key to making 2026 the year of development.”
Read also: Syria in the Global Coalition: Partnership Against Terror or Political Containment?
Linking Washington-Based Organizations to Reconstruction
Political analyst Najm al-Abdullah told +963 that Minister al-Shaibani’s reference to connecting the work of Syrian organizations in Washington to the reconstruction of Syria reflects the transitional government’s desire to politicize the activities of non-governmental organizations and the Syrian diaspora. Through this approach, Damascus seeks to channel funding toward domestic development projects instead of what it perceives as “oppositional” or “non-productive” activities, making reconstruction a precondition for engagement with any external party interested in Syrian affairs. This places such organizations before two difficult choices: either engage in the rebuilding process under government terms or remain outside the circle of influence.
Al-Abdullah considers al-Shaibani’s statements a declaration of intent marking the beginning of a new phase characterized by economic development and the breaking of international isolation. Nevertheless, the issue of lifting sanctions remains contingent upon complex geopolitical factors, most notably the conditional stance of the United States and the European Union, which still demand political reforms yet to materialize. Despite the ongoing economic and political challenges, the government’s promise of “2026 as the year of development” stands as a roadmap for the coming phase and a test of its ability to turn optimism into tangible reality.
