عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Arab World

Syrian Workers Protest Against Russian Operator at Tartus Port

The Russian aircraft carrier Kuznetsov in the Syrian port of Tartus (EPA)
The Russian aircraft carrier Kuznetsov in the Syrian port of Tartus (EPA)
TT
20
TT

Syrian Workers Protest Against Russian Operator at Tartus Port

The Russian aircraft carrier Kuznetsov in the Syrian port of Tartus (EPA)
The Russian aircraft carrier Kuznetsov in the Syrian port of Tartus (EPA)

Syrian workers at the Tartus port accused the operating Russian company of violating their contract, saying they refused to receive their wages due to lack of “receipts” for workers' salaries since the company took over the port.

The 2,500 workers complained that the Russian operator had breached the contracts, adding that many have had several issues with their agreements for over three months.

Al-Watan newspaper reported that a number of workers accused the company of reducing the value of the meal they were offered from SYP700 to SYP100, and even deprived some of the workers of it.
The daily indicated that since the beginning of the month, the situation at the financial bureau has been chaotic due to the slow payment of salaries.

Head of the port workers’ union, Fouad Harba, accused the Russian company of not committing to "the full terms of the contract."

The investment contracts signed by the Syrian regime with the Russian side were concluded with Russian companies and not with government agencies.

The Syrian People’s Assembly approved the draft law that includes leasing Tartus Port to Stroytransgaz for 49 years through the local Sada company.

The Russian company managing the port did not meet the terms of the contract, as it has not yet paid insurance dues to the Social Security (Taaminat), and deducted the amount due to the Real Estate Bank (REB).

However, since it started operating the port, it has not transferred those dues to the Bank and sources indicated that the problem of the workers is that they get paid from the Russian company, while their contracts are signed with Sada.

The contract signed with the Russian company does not require paying the wages of all workers, knowing that the average salary at the port with incentives and bonuses does not exceed SYP75,000.

The Russian company had tried to reduce the salary by granting SYP40,000 pounds, but the workers protested at the port about three months ago.

Most Viewed

 
Arab World

How Did Iraq Survive ‘Existential Threat More Dangerous than ISIS’?

Iraqi sheikhs participate in a solidarity demonstration with Iran on a road leading to the Green Zone, where the US Embassy is located in Baghdad (AP). 
Iraqi sheikhs participate in a solidarity demonstration with Iran on a road leading to the Green Zone, where the US Embassy is located in Baghdad (AP). 
TT
20
TT

How Did Iraq Survive ‘Existential Threat More Dangerous than ISIS’?

Iraqi sheikhs participate in a solidarity demonstration with Iran on a road leading to the Green Zone, where the US Embassy is located in Baghdad (AP). 
Iraqi sheikhs participate in a solidarity demonstration with Iran on a road leading to the Green Zone, where the US Embassy is located in Baghdad (AP). 

Diplomatic sources in Baghdad revealed to Asharq Al-Awsat that Iraqi authorities were deeply concerned about sliding into the Israeli-Iranian war, which they considered “an existential threat to Iraq even more dangerous than that posed by ISIS when it overran a third of the country’s territory.”

The sources explained that “ISIS was a foreign body that inevitably had to be expelled by the Iraqi entity, especially given the international and regional support Baghdad enjoyed in confronting it... but the war (with Israel) threatened Iraq’s unity.”

They described this “existential threat” as follows:

-When the war broke out, Baghdad received messages from Israel, conveyed via Azerbaijan and other channels, stating that Israel would carry out “harsh and painful” strikes in response to any attacks launched against it from Iraqi territory. The messages held the Iraqi authorities responsible for any such attacks originating from their soil.

-Washington shifted from the language of prior advice to direct warnings, highlighting the grave consequences that could result from any attacks carried out by Iran-aligned factions.

-Iraqi authorities feared what they described as a “disaster scenario”: that Iraqi factions would launch attacks on Israel, prompting Israel to retaliate with a wave of assassinations similar to those it conducted against Hezbollah leaders in Lebanon or Iranian generals and scientists at the start of the war.

-The sources noted that delivering painful blows to these factions would inevitably inflame the Shiite street, potentially pushing the religious authority to take a strong stance. At that point, the crisis could take on the character of a Shiite confrontation with Israel.

-This scenario raised fears that other Iraqi components would then blame the Shiite component for dragging Iraq into a war that could have been avoided. In such circumstances, the divergence in choices between the Shiite and Sunni communities could resurface, reviving the threat to Iraq’s unity.

-Another risk was the possibility that the Kurds would declare that the Iraqi government was acting as if it only represented one component, and that the country was exhausted by wars, prompting the Kurdish region to prefer distancing itself from Baghdad to avoid being drawn into unwanted conflicts.

-Mohammed Shia Al Sudani’s government acted with a mix of firmness and prudence. It informed the factions it would not tolerate any attempt to drag the country into a conflict threatening its unity, while on the other hand keeping its channels open with regional and international powers, especially the US.

-Iraqi authorities also benefited from the position of Iranian authorities, who did not encourage the factions to engage in the war but instead urged them to remain calm. Some observers believed that Iran did not want to risk its relations with Iraq after losing Syria.

-Another significant factor was the factions’ realization that the war exceeded their capabilities, especially in light of what Hezbollah faced in Lebanon and the Israeli penetrations inside Iran itself, which demonstrated that Israel possessed precise intelligence on hostile organizations and was able to reach its targets thanks to its technological superiority and these infiltrations.

-The sources indicated that despite all the pressure and efforts, “rogue groups” tried to prepare three attacks, but the authorities succeeded in thwarting them before they were carried out.

The sources estimated that Iran suffered a deep wound because Israel moved the battle onto Iranian soil and encouraged the US to target its nuclear facilities. They did not rule out another round of fighting “if Iran does not make the necessary concessions on the nuclear issue.”