Historical Background:
To understand the gravity of the current moment, it is essential to revisit the foundational framework of bilateral relations.
The economic partnership between Syria and the European Economic Community (the precursor to the European Union) began in the 1970s with the signing of the Cooperation Agreement in 1977, which entered into force on November 1, 1978.
This agreement, signed in Brussels on January 18, 1977, represented the cornerstone of the first institutional framework. It eliminated customs duties on most Syrian industrial exports to Europe and established the foundations for economic and technical cooperation and the transfer of expertise.
During that period, the volume of trade exceeded eight billion dollars in 2010, reflecting the depth of economic integration in which Syria was a part.
The ambition then evolved into a broader partnership agreement, negotiated in 2004, which aimed to establish a free trade area. However, it stalled at the ratification stage due to political complexities.
Then came the decisive turning point in 2011, when the European Union froze agreements and began imposing harsh economic sanctions, ranging from asset freezes to oil and financial embargoes, culminating in the closure of most European embassies in Damascus. This resulted in a period of stagnation that lasted for more than a decade.
The Repositioning Phase (2024–2026):
The fall of the former regime in December 2024 marked a historic turning point that reshaped the region. After years of stagnation, progress began to accelerate:
On May 20, 2025, EU foreign ministers agreed on a political decision to lift all economic sanctions against Syria.
On May 28, 2025, this political decision was followed by legal measures. The Council removed 24 entities from its asset freeze list, including the Central Bank of Syria and companies in the oil, cotton, and telecommunications sectors. This removed a major obstacle to investment flows, although sanctions with a “security background” remained in place for a temporary period.
This dynamic culminated on January 9, 2026, when European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa visited Damascus, announcing a “new chapter” in relations based on three pillars: a political partnership that promotes a peaceful transition, economic and trade cooperation, and substantial financial support.
In a historic statement, von der Leyen described the phase, saying:
“More than a year ago, decades of fear, silence, and state violence finally began to give way to hope, opportunity, and the possibility of renewal.”
The announcement was accompanied by a €620 million (approximately $722 million) financial support package for 2026 and 2027, encompassing humanitarian aid, early recovery support, and bilateral cooperation.
Perhaps the most recent and pivotal step came in April 2026, when the European Commission proposed a full resumption of the 1978 Cooperation Agreement, reactivating it as if it were still in effect. This proposal extended beyond imports and oil to include lifting the embargo on imports of crude oil, gold, precious metals, and diamonds, thus enabling Syria to return to the European market as a major economic player.
On May 11, 2026, the first high-level political dialogue between the two sides was held in Brussels, paving the way for a broader and more comprehensive partnership agreement that aims to overcome the legacy of the past.
Analysis of Mutual Interests:
From a Syrian national perspective, reopening relations with the European Union represents a genuine economic boost, concentrated in three main dimensions:
- The Economic Development Dimension: Resuming the agreement allows for the elimination of customs duties on most Syrian industrial imports, which will gradually revitalize national exports.
Simultaneously, the €620 million package, while modest compared to the scale of the destruction, constitutes a first step to support recovery in the health, education, and infrastructure sectors. However, it should be noted that the old agreement (1978) no longer covers a modern economy that relies on digitalization and artificial intelligence, which necessitates considering newer and broader frameworks. - The geopolitical dimension: European normalization breaks the political isolation that has plagued Damascus for more than a decade.
The participation of the Syrian transitional authorities in the ninth Brussels Conference in March 2025, for the first time, constituted a significant international political recognition. Furthermore, the political dialogue scheduled for May 2026 will serve as a platform for redefining the relationship from a position of equality, not merely one of dependency. - The energy and services dimension: Lifting the embargo on oil and gold imports opens the door for Syria to benefit from its geographical location as a vital energy corridor, especially given the ongoing crisis in the Strait of Hormuz. This restores the importance of energy routes through Syrian ports. Additionally, lifting sanctions on the Central Bank and the financial sector allows for the restructuring of the banking system and the resumption of dealings with international financial institutions.
For its part, Europe’s actions are not solely driven by humanitarian concerns, but also by deep-seated geostrategic interests, centered on three pillars:
Managing the refugee crisis: Our observations indicate that Europe hosts approximately one million Syrian refugees, nearly half of whom are in Germany.
In March 2026, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz announced a clear plan aimed at returning up to 80% of Syrian refugees in Germany to their country within three years. This statement reflects mounting political and public pressure within Europe, pushing Brussels to create a safe and stable environment in Syria as a prerequisite for such returns.
It is also worth noting that the Syrian Future Movement adopted a clear vision from the outset, stating that “the 2026 UN resolution represents a historic opportunity to end the fragmentation of aid efforts,” while emphasizing that the solution begins within Syria, not from abroad.
European National Security: The greatest security threat to Europe today is the instability in Syria, which serves as a breeding ground for extremist organizations. Intelligence estimates indicate that between 15,000 and 20,000 individuals, including members of or influenced by ISIS, remain active within Syria. Worryingly, the organization’s operations have not ceased; it carried out 77 attacks in March 2026 alone. Furthermore, the mass escape of detainees from the al-Hol camp in January 2026 posed a serious security alert to the entire world.
The European Union views cooperation with Damascus as an urgent security necessity to prevent the resurgence of ISIS or other similar organizations.
Regional Integration and Energy Transit: Europe has come to realize that Syria, with its geographical location as a link between Asia, Europe, and the Middle East, is a vital gateway for transit, trade, and energy projects, especially after the repercussions of the war in Ukraine on European energy security.
Strengthening cooperation with Damascus means stabilizing the entire Eastern Mediterranean region, which directly contributes to long-term European security.
Obstacles and Challenges:
Despite the momentum of optimism, the new trajectory of relations faces three-dimensional challenges that Syrian decision-makers must consider intelligently:
First: The legal and financial challenge, related to the nature of the sanctions relief, which has taken the form of “suspension” or “lifting of measures” while the legal framework remains in place. This legal situation creates hesitation among European banks and financial institutions, which fear US sanctions or a renewed freeze should the political process falter. In other words, the lifting of sanctions remains contingent on fulfilling political conditions, not an outright cancellation.
Second: The internal security challenge. Despite improvements, Syria still faces field and security challenges that hinder the return of European investments.
European Commissioner for Migration Magnus Brunner acknowledged in an interview with the German Press Agency on January 31, 2026, that “Syria has not yet reached a stage where it can be considered sufficiently stable to carry out large-scale deportations,” and this also applies to the investment climate. The absence of a future security framework could take years and may become a European pretext for procrastination.
Third: Political Difficulties. The European Union has explicitly stated that it will link full normalization of relations to “tangible progress in a comprehensive political transition, respect for human rights and minorities, and the building of a state based on institutions.”
These conditions, while partially legitimate, could be used as leverage to achieve other objectives, such as altering economic policies to align with the European model or imposing specific agendas on entirely sovereign internal matters.
The Dangers of Conditioning Cooperation:
Firm reservations must be expressed regarding the European approach, which tends to “condition” any aid or partnership.
Past experiences have proven that reconstruction and political transition are solely in the hands of the Syrian people and their sincere national leadership.
Exploiting Syria’s need for aid to push through predetermined political reforms dictated by Brussels is an attack on national sovereignty.
Therefore, Syrian diplomacy must adopt a policy of “cautious engagement” with European institutions, where cooperation is based on mutual respect and declared interests, without aid becoming a tool for political blackmail.
We in the Syrian Future Movement see this as a historic opportunity that must be seized, provided that Syrian sovereign decisions remain free from external dictates.
A National Vision for the Future:
- In conclusion, Syria today stands before a rare strategic opportunity to rebuild a balanced relationship with the world’s largest trading bloc. Three key areas must be emphasized:
- Updating the legal framework of the relationship. The 1978 agreement, which belongs to a different era, is insufficient. A comprehensive partnership agreement must be developed, encompassing digital, energy, and security cooperation, and reflecting Syria’s new aspirations.
Linking access to European markets to facilitating Syrian products, not the other way around. - The new agreement should serve as a platform to boost national exports and protect emerging local industries.
Leveraging the political dialogue scheduled for May 11, 2026, to present a clear and comprehensive Syrian vision for political transition and reconstruction, one that is fully Syrian-owned and developed with Syrian input, and which enjoys genuine and unconditional European openness.
In conclusion, it is high time for Europe to view Syria as an equal partner with a rich cultural heritage and deep geopolitical significance, not as a country in need of guardianship or dictates.
Conversely, the new Syrian leadership bears the responsibility of convincing the international community of its ability to build a state of institutions and the rule of law—a state that protects the rights of all Syrians and secures a future for generations to come.
Only then will the Syrian-European relationship transform from a source of pressure and crises into a model of fruitful partnership that benefits both sides of the Mediterranean.
