On August 22, 2026, with the expiration of the 45-day constitutional deadline without congressional objection, the legal process for removing Syria from the US list of state sponsors of terrorism was completed, after nearly 47 years of its inclusion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The impact of this decision extends beyond the legal and economic spheres, reaching deeper levels related to Syrian national identity, its position in the international system, and its ability to overcome the legacy of decades of isolation and political classifications that obscured the country’s image as a civilization, a history, and a people, making it a hostage to a reductive stereotype.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This study examines the multifaceted dimensions of this strategic shift, beginning with the historical context of the designation, moving through the anticipated economic and legal repercussions, and culminating in the political and psychological ramifications at both the official and popular levels. It also offers a forward-looking perspective on the challenges and opportunities awaiting Syria in the post-designation phase, based on the vision of the Syrian Future Movement, which is founded on building a state of institutions and achieving regional and international integration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On December 29, 1979, the administration of US President Jimmy Carter placed Syria on the list of state sponsors of terrorism, a decision based on the Export Control Act of 1979.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The designation was supported by accusations of supporting Palestinian and Lebanese armed organizations and hosting leaders of groups designated as terrorist, along with later accusations of involvement in the attempted bombing of an Israeli airliner in 1986.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Over time, Syria became the longest-serving country on this designation, and the list became part of its international identity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This designation was not merely a political label; it entailed comprehensive legal and economic sanctions, including a ban on US aid, an arms embargo, restrictions on dual-use exports, and strict monitoring of financial transactions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In May 2004, a new layer of sanctions was added under the “Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act,” followed by measures under the US International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The 2011 Syrian uprising further intensified the isolation, culminating in the 2019 Caesar Act, which came into effect in 2020 and made dealing with Syria even more complex.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The key paradox to highlight is that relations between Damascus and Washington have not been consistently hostile throughout these decades.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The 1990s witnessed periods of cooperation and dialogue, meaning that the designation, which began as a political tool, has, over time, developed its own distinct character, sometimes separate from the nature of the bilateral relationship at different junctures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This reflects how, after decades, foreign policies become deeply ingrained in national identity, difficult to alter even if the underlying reasons for their creation change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The decision to remove the designation was the culmination of a series of developments on the ground, beginning with the fall of the Assad regime on December 8, 2024. This was followed by the new Syrian government’s engagement in an international coalition against terrorism and its formal accession to the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS in November 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This process culminated in President Ahmed al-Sharaa’s visit to Washington in November 2025, where he met with President Donald Trump, and then a meeting in Ankara on July 8, 2026, where the US president delivered an official letter informing him of his decision to notify Congress of his intention to remove the designation, thus triggering the 45-day constitutional deadline.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The US administration based its decision on three main justifications:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n Despite these justifications, the decision remains subject to conditions and exceptions, most notably the continuation of specific sanctions on individuals associated with the former regime, those accused of human rights violations and the Captagon trade, and entities linked to ISIS, al-Qaeda, Iran, and its proxies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As Jihad Makdissi, advisor on American affairs at the Syrian Foreign Ministry, pointed out, “Other restrictions remain subject to separate legal procedures and will not be automatically lifted as part of this process.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n The designation as a state sponsor of terrorism was more of a psychological and institutional obstacle than a legal one. It continued to deter international financial institutions and companies wishing to do business with Syria, even after the comprehensive sanctions were lifted in June 2015.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The executive director of the non-profit organization, the Syrian Center for the Defense of Freedoms, Moaz Mustafa, described the designation as a \u201ckiss of death\u201d for the Syrian economy, considering it \u201ca death knell for banking connections with Syria and for economic reconstruction.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The expected direct effects of the designation include:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n Support for the Reconstruction: Syria\u2019s reconstruction needs are estimated at around $216 billion, according to World Bank projections for 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Experts believe that removing the designation is a crucial step in overcoming obstacles to international financing for reconstruction, particularly through international financial institutions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Easing restrictions on the oil sector: International oil companies, such as Chevron and ConocoPhillips, had signed new exploration agreements with Syria for 2025 and 2026, but the designation added a layer of legal risk to these deals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The removal is expected to eliminate these risks, opening the door to broader investments in the energy sector.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, there is caution that \u201cthe designation of a state sponsor of terrorism has had legal and psychological consequences that extend far beyond the direct sanctions themselves.\u201d Furthermore, the message sent by the US president regarding the readiness of American companies to invest represents \u201ca significant shift in US rhetoric, offering for the first time a vision through which the American private sector can participate in rebuilding the Syrian economy, provided the necessary legal and political procedures are completed.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The impact of the upgrade extends beyond the economic sphere to deeper levels related to national identity and the relationship between Syrians, their country, and the world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Since 1979, Syrians have carried with them, wherever they went, a pre-existing political image of their homeland, where the name of Syria was always preceded by something else: terrorism here, resistance there, sanctions, wars, and alliances.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thus, Syrians lived between two contradictory images: an external image that portrayed their country as part of the problem of security and terrorism, and an internal image that suggested their isolation was proof of the correctness of their political stance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Analyst Natasha Hall, from Chatham House, indicated that the decision represents a “seismic” shift for Syria, considering it “one of the final obstacles to economic recovery.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, she also warned that “many in civil society are disappointed that the focus has not been more on inclusivity, accountability, and some of the other issues they have long fought for.” In this context, the decision to remove the name from the list can be seen as a first step towards liberating Syrians from the trap of classifications that have obscured their true identity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Removing the name from the list, while a legal procedure, opens the door for Syria to be seen outside the molds that have confined it for decades, and allows for the restoration of the country’s image as a civilization and a history, rather than a political stance or a security classification.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, this transformation is contingent upon the Syrian state’s ability to rebuild its relationship with its citizens first, and to present a model of governance based on transparency and accountability, thus ensuring a return to the policies of isolation and marginalization that have harmed the country’s interests for decades.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Despite the significant importance of the decision, Syria faces a number of challenges in the post-sanctions phase that will determine its ability to capitalize on this strategic shift:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Scenario One: Conditional Integration (Most Likely):<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this scenario, Syria manages to overcome the remaining administrative hurdles (publishing the decision in the Federal Register and completing the implementation procedures) and begins to attract limited investments, particularly from the Gulf States and Turkey. Relations with international financial institutions will continue to improve, albeit gradually, while specific sanctions remain in place against individuals and entities associated with the former regime, and some investors continue to harbor security concerns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Scenario Two: Accelerated Economic Recovery (Optimistic Scenario): The third scenario, the continuation of challenges (the pessimistic scenario):<\/p>\n\n\n\n If the government fails to address internal issues such as extreme poverty (with an estimated 15.6 million people in need of humanitarian assistance), displacement (with 5.8 million internally displaced persons and 3.6 million refugees outside the country), and the continued stalemate in the transitional justice process, the impact of the decision may remain limited, and international financial institutions and companies may continue to be reluctant to fully engage in the Syrian market.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The World Bank estimates the cost of reconstruction at $216 billion, a figure that reflects the scale of the challenge and confirms that the upgrade, while important, is only a first step on the long road to economic recovery.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Based on this vision, the Syrian Future Movement recommends the following:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n The removal of Syria from the list of state sponsors of terrorism, after nearly 47 years, represents a pivotal moment in the country’s modern history.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It not only removes a major legal and economic obstacle but also opens the way for Syria.<\/p>\n\n\n\n To be seen anew, free from the political classifications that have obscured its true image.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, this decision, it seems, is not the end of the road, but rather the beginning of a new phase that will test the Syrian state’s ability to translate this political momentum into tangible achievements on the ground, in the areas of the economy, institution-building, and transitional justice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Perhaps the real question is simpler than all the politics that created these lists: Can Syria become just a name?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Can Syrians regain their right to be seen before they are categorized?<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is the deeper challenge that awaits Syria in the post-lists era.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" the political and psychological implications of removing Syria from the terrorism designation and how it contributes to building a new identity.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":35,"featured_media":67210,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[179,4853],"tags":[4716],"class_list":["post-67212","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-political-office-en","category-research-and-studies-department-en","tag-studies"],"yoast_head":"\n\n
Third, the economic impact of the designation:<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Fourth, the political and psychological impact:<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Fifth, Future Scenarios and Challenges of the Next Phase:<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
If the government succeeds in completing the required economic and legal reforms, reassures international investors, and continues to receive US and Gulf support, Syria could witness an influx of investments and the actual start of the reconstruction process, especially in the energy and infrastructure sectors. This would positively impact living standards and political stability.<\/p>\n\n\n\nSixth, Recommendations:<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Conclusion:<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
References:<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n