Follow us on social

google cta
Senate votes to lift crippling sanctions on Syria

Senate votes to lift crippling sanctions on Syria

Questions remain about whether the repeal is 'clean'—and whether the House will follow suit

Reporting | Washington Politics
google cta
google cta

The Senate has voted to repeal the Caesar sanctions, which have imposed harsh restrictions on the Syrian economy since 2020, in a move welcomed by many lawmakers and experts on Syria.

The decision was buried in the Senate's annual defense policy bill, which passed in a 77-20 vote late Thursday. The news marks a major step forward for Syria, which has struggled to rebuild as sanctions continue to scare off needed investment despite President Donald Trump's stated desire to remove them.

Notably, the provision was not included in the House's version of the defense policy bill, meaning that it risks being removed in conference due to continued opposition to a clean repeal from many members of the House. Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.), who has supported lifting sanctions on Syria since the fall of the Assad regime in December 2024, called for a full lifting of sanctions.

"These very severe sanctions were imposed on a regime which, thankfully, no longer exists," Wilson wrote on X. "Syria's success now depends on FULL and TOTAL repeal."

As RS reported earlier this week, the repeal came through a compromise between Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.). While Graham initially pushed to maintain the sanctions in order to pressure Syria's new government, he agreed after negotiations to a more modest proposal, which immediately removes the sanctions but requires the president to report to Congress about Syria's progress on various issues related to human rights and terrorism.

A Democratic congressional aide told RS that the Senate's repeal, while not fully "clean," amounted to a compromise that everyone involved can "live with." The staffer pointed to the fact that the law includes no "snapback" provision and would only indicate that it is the "sense of Congress" that sanctions should be reimposed if the Syrian government fails to make progress on human rights benchmarks.

The aide acknowledged that the provision, even if accepted by the House, may not be enough to encourage investors to take the risk of contributing to Syrian reconstruction, which is expected to cost as much as $400 billion. "There will still be a significant amount of hesitation because the word Caesar is still in there," the person said.

Sanctions continue to strangle the Syrian economy despite President Donald Trump's efforts to remove them, as RS reported in an essay earlier this week following this reporter's trip to Syria.

If the House joins the Senate in repealing Caesar, it will represent a major step toward encouraging investment. But, as Aaron Zelin of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy noted on X, some other sanctions still remain in place, including the designation of Syria's government as a state sponsor of terror.

Trump has the authority to repeal this designation unilaterally and is eventually expected to do so. But he has so far only ordered the State Department to review Syria's status as a sponsor of terrorism.

Syrian Finance Minister Mohammed Yisr Barnieh celebrated the Senate vote Friday and thanked Syrian diplomats for helping to make the argument for repeal. “This is a clear message to those who doubt Syria’s future that, with God’s help, Syria is [moving] toward stability, flourishing, and development,” Barnieh wrote on Facebook.


Top image credit: Destroyed buildings in the Jobar neighborhood of Damascus, Syria. (Connor Echols/Responsible Statecraft)
google cta
Reporting | Washington Politics
United Nations
Monitors at the United Nations General Assembly hall display the results of a vote on a resolution condemning the annexation of parts of Ukraine by Russia, amid Russia's invasion of Ukraine, at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City, New York, U.S., October 12, 2022. REUTERS/David 'Dee' Delgado||

We're burying the rules based order. But what's next?

Global Crises

In a Davos speech widely praised for its intellectual rigor and willingness to confront established truths, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney finally laid the fiction of the “rules-based international order” to rest.

The “rules-based order” — or RBIO — was never a neutral description of the post-World War II system of international law and multilateral institutions. Rather, it was a discourse born out of insecurity over the West’s decline and unwillingness to share power. Aimed at preserving the power structures of the past by shaping the norms and standards of the future, the RBIO was invariably something that needed to be “defended” against those who were accused of opposing it, rather than an inclusive system that governed relations between all states.

keep readingShow less
china trump
President Donald Trump announces the creation of a critical minerals reserve during an event in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, DC on Monday, February 2, 2026. Trump announced the creation of “Project Vault,” a rare earth stockpile to lower reliance on China for rare earths and other resources. Photo by Bonnie Cash/Pool/Sipa USA

Trump vs. his China hawks

Asia-Pacific

In the year since President Donald Trump returned to the White House, China hawks have started to panic. Leading lights on U.S. policy toward Beijing now warn that Trump is “barreling toward a bad bargain” with the Chinese Communist Party. Matthew Pottinger, a key architect of Trump’s China policy in his first term, argues that the president has put Beijing in a “sweet spot” through his “baffling” policy decisions.

Even some congressional Republicans have criticized Trump’s approach, particularly following his decision in December to allow the sale of powerful Nvidia AI chips to China. “The CCP will use these highly advanced chips to strengthen its military capabilities and totalitarian surveillance,” argued Rep. John Moolenaar (R-Mich.), who chairs the influential Select Committee on Competition with China.

keep readingShow less
Is America still considered part of the 'Americas'?
Top image credit: bluestork/shutterstock.com

Is America still considered part of the 'Americas'?

Latin America

On January 7, the White House announced its plans to withdraw from 66 international bodies whose work it had deemed inconsistent with U.S. national interests.

While many of these organizations were international in nature, three of them were specific to the Americas — the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research, the Pan American Institute of Geography and History, and the U.N.’s Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. The decision came on the heels of the Dominican Republic postponing the X Summit of the Americas last year following disagreements over who would be invited and ensuing boycotts.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.