Introduction, Decision Analysis:
The General Authority for Ports and Customs issued a decision on February 6, 2026, aimed at regulating shipping and transport through land border crossings and seaports.
The decision stipulates key provisions, including:
- Commercial trucks are not permitted to enter land and sea ports for loading or unloading without a valid receipt issued by the Goods Transport Office of the Ministry of Transport.
- Non-Syrian trucks are prohibited from entering Syrian territory (except in transit cases escorted by customs officials between ports).
- The transfer of goods between foreign and Syrian trucks is permitted only within customs yards (the “back-to-back” or “taboon” system) according to established procedures.
- All transactions are free of charge, with the exception of official fees. An electronic link is provided for submitting complaints to combat bribery and corruption.
The decision aims to strengthen security and customs control, combat smuggling and endemic corruption, and support the national transport sector during a sensitive transitional phase that requires restructuring the administrative and economic apparatus.
However, the decision sparked mixed reactions, particularly from neighboring countries like Jordan, where it was described as “surprising” and led to truck congestion and disruption of trade through the Jaber-Nassib border crossing.
Economic Theories Related to the Decision:
The decision can be interpreted through several key economic theories:
- Protectionism: The decision reflects clear protectionist elements by shielding the Syrian transport sector from foreign competition.
According to David Ricardo’s theory of comparative advantage, protectionism may be temporarily justified to support emerging industries or those affected by conflict, as in the case of Syria, which has suffered from the destruction of its infrastructure.
However, the theory warns of increased costs and inefficiencies if it continues for an extended period. - Trade Facilitation Theory: As developed by the World Trade Organization (WTO), this theory focuses on reducing non-tariff barriers to promote trade flows.
- This decision constitutes a non-tariff barrier (NTB) due to the mandatory transshipment requirement, which could slow regional trade. Some studies also indicate that reducing waiting times at border crossings increases economic growth by up to 1% for each day of reduction.
Regulatory economics, which is based on a model of correcting market failures (such as smuggling and corruption), as in George Stigler’s theory, aims to regulate the market in the interest of the state, but this must be balanced with the costs of compliance to avoid hindering economic activity.
These theories highlight the tension between domestic protectionism and regional integration, especially in a transitional economy that relies on foreign trade for reconstruction. Key challenges:
The decision faces several challenges:
- The limited capacity of customs yards to handle the volume of goods being transferred, leading to truck congestion and delivery delays, as occurred at the Jaber-Nassib border crossing.
- High logistical costs (transportation, insurance, storage), which may be reflected in commodity prices in an already inflationary market.
- Regional tensions, as the decision was described as “sudden” by Jordan, leading to partial halts and congestion of Jordanian and Gulf trucks, with calls for swift communication and coordination.
- The limited operational capacity of Syrian trucks may not be sufficient to meet the increased demand.
- The lack of precise quantitative data on the immediate impact is a concern, despite the fact that the volume of Jordanian-Syrian trade reached approximately $214 million in 2025 (with a significant increase in Jordanian exports). Advantages and Disadvantages:
The advantages include:
- Supporting the national transport sector and increasing demand for Syrian trucks, which will boost employment and local revenues.
- Strengthening control over smuggling and corruption through centralized regulation and complaint mechanisms.
- Improving border security (excluding transit).
- Building a more independent and sovereign economy during a transitional phase.
The disadvantages of the decision include:
Increased logistical costs, which may raise import prices and affect purchasing power.
Slowing down trade flows, which will hinder reconstruction in an import-dependent economy.
Threatening regional relations, especially with Jordan, which relies on the Nassib border crossing for exports (which increased significantly in 2025).
Potential inefficiencies if not supported by structural improvements reflect the risks of excessive protectionism. The Syrian Future Movement’s recommendations for addressing these challenges:
To ensure the success of the decision and minimize its negative impacts, the Syrian Future Movement recommends the following:
- Implementing a 3-6 month transition period to adapt the sector, including staff training and improvements to customs yards.
- Establishing urgent bilateral coordination committees with neighboring countries (especially Jordan) to ensure smooth flow, as requested by the Jordanian side.
- Investing in logistical infrastructure, such as expanding yards and implementing digital technologies for customs procedures.
- Conducting periodic economic impact studies (every 3 months) to amend the decision based on real data, while supporting Syrian trucks with soft loans and training.
- Considering temporary exceptions for sensitive or emergency goods to avoid congestion and spoilage.
We emphasize that these recommendations ensure a balance between regulation and economic growth, and we invite Syrian experts to contribute their perspectives on this matter.
Conclusion:
The decision of the General Authority for Ports and Customs represents a bold step towards regulating the transport sector in Syria, based on the principles of protectionism and economic regulation to enhance sovereignty and efficiency.
However, its success requires addressing logistical and regional challenges through practical recommendations, such as transitional periods and bilateral coordination.
In the context of state reconstruction, this decision serves as a model for transitional economic policies, provided it is supported by ongoing field studies and updates based on actual impacts. Further research is suggested to assess the long-term effects, contributing to the formulation of more comprehensive and sustainable policies for the new Syrian phase.
