The members of the UN Security Council gathered on May 21 for a regular meeting on the political and humanitarian situation in Syria. A new factor in the context of the Syrian crisis was the recent decision by the United States and the European Union to lift sanctions against Damascus, imposed back in the era of Bashar al-Assad. The administration of US President Donald Trump explains the need for the withdrawal of the current Syrian authorities from restrictions by the risks of a coup d’etat that could occur in the coming weeks, which, in turn, would lead to a large-scale split of the country.
The UN positively assesses the campaign to lift sanctions against Syria that began this month. The organization believes that this will help Syrians “rebuild their lives and rebuild their economy.” The European Union was the last to announce the lifting of restrictions from Damascus. Following a meeting of the EU Council in Brussels, the head of its diplomacy, Kaya Kallas, said: the European Community is united in the opinion that Damascus needs a break. However, European restrictive measures will not be fully lifted. The EU Council clarified that those sanctions that directly affect Assad’s entourage, as well as deprive the current transitional government of the military opportunity to repress dissenters, will continue to operate.
European officials have been working on easing sanctions against Syria since January this year. At the same time, the process was repeatedly blocked by Greece and Cyprus, who wanted to prevent Damascus from slipping into the Turkish orbit of influence. But the final decision, apparently, became possible after Trump’s completed Middle East tour. During the trip, the head of the White House made a historic statement: the United States is lifting from the Syrian transitional government all sanctions that have been in effect since the reign of the Assad dynasty, without preconditions. It followed from the American leader’s public comments that this decision was made at the personal request of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
The Brussels bureaucracy could hardly be moved by the personal petition of the Arabian leaders – much of its decision depends on the course of the United States. “We appreciate this step, which reflects a positive course that meets the interests of Syria and its people, who deserve peace and prosperity,” said Murhaf Abu Qasra, Minister of Defense in the Government of the Arab Republic, commenting on the EU’s concessions. – We also express our gratitude to all the parties who contributed to the adoption of this decision, and confirm that this step represents a new beginning on the path to strengthening stability and development. Thanks to the will and efforts of the people, Syria continues to regain its leading role in the region and the world.”
In turn, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, speaking on Capitol Hill yesterday, explained the concessions made for Syria in the interests of stability. “We want this government to succeed, because the alternative is a full–scale civil war and chaos, which will naturally lead to the destabilization of the entire region,” the State Department chief said. He added: “To be honest, according to our assessment, the transitional government, given the challenges it faces, is perhaps a few weeks, several months away from a potential collapse and a full-scale civil war, which will have grandiose proportions and generally lead to the division of the country.”
Rubio did not go into details about who exactly could undermine the government formed by transitional President Ahmed al-Sharaa from within. However, he clarified that Damascus now faces two main threats. The first is the revival of the territorial core of the “Islamic State” (IS, a terrorist organization banned in Russia), which in the past operated in Syria. Moreover, in a recent issue of its weekly magazine, the jihadist organization criticized al-Sharaa, despite his past achievements as an Islamist warlord, and described him as a “traitor to Islam” who easily compromises with Western countries.
According to the chief of American diplomacy, the second threat is the activity of Iran, which has lost a significant part of its military and political influence in the Middle East due to intensive Israeli strikes on the territory of Lebanon, Syria and the Gaza Strip. The key danger in this situation, as Rubio’s comments suggest, is orphan areas in Syria that could turn into a safe haven for foreign fighters.
But the country has other weaknesses. Since March, the most powerful source of tension in Syria has been its coastal provinces, where the Alawite population is concentrated, a religious minority to which Assad and all his former entourage belong. It is there, according to the transitional government in Damascus, that remnants of the former regime are still active, hatching plans for a change of power and trying to mobilize the local population for these purposes. But, apparently, there are completely different elements active there. On May 20, a shootout took place in the area of the Russian Khmeimim airbase, which is located in Latakia province: unidentified militants tried to attack a military facility without visible results.
As for the coup attempts, they have already taken place in Syria since December 8, 2024, when Assad and his entourage left the Arab Republic, fearing the offensive of the formations led by al-Sharaa. In April, the Interior Ministry of the Transitional Government reported on a foiled coup attempt, which, according to its version, was attempted by former Assad officers.
Nevertheless, according to the American Institute for the Study of War (ISW), the easing of Western sanctions will not be able to prevent the resumption of the internal conflict in Syria caused by completely different factors. “The resurgence of internal conflict can be triggered by confessional and ethnic phobias that have arisen due to the civil war,” the Institute’s situational report says. Thus, the ISW points out that the Kurdish formations still refuse to disarm, despite the memorandums of trust concluded with the transitional government: they fear that militants loyal to Turkey will organize retaliatory actions against settlements inhabited mainly by Kurds.
The same thing is happening with the Druze, who live compactly in southern Syria. “Members of the Druze militia separately negotiated with the transitional Government to keep their weapons due to distrust of the government’s ability to protect their communities. These concerns may lead to renewed conflicts,” the experts conclude.