The Syrian Oil: Time for New Approach?

US - Russian Struggle Opens Opportunity for 'War lords'

US forces conduct training with the "Syrian Democratic Forces" in Hasaka countryside on September 7 (EPA)
US forces conduct training with the "Syrian Democratic Forces" in Hasaka countryside on September 7 (EPA)
TT

The Syrian Oil: Time for New Approach?

US forces conduct training with the "Syrian Democratic Forces" in Hasaka countryside on September 7 (EPA)
US forces conduct training with the "Syrian Democratic Forces" in Hasaka countryside on September 7 (EPA)

With the war in Syria now in its twelfth year and with the US-Russian conflict still ongoing to control the oil sector and its potential, local belligerents and regional opponents have found in oil a rare point of consensus to cooperate and pick clean the country’s wealth and revenues.

Oil production from fields and facilities mainly located in north-eastern Syria was about 400,000 barrels per day prior to the conflict. After the eruption of the conflict in 2011, various warring forces, including opposition factions and ISIS, successively seized control of much of this invaluable oil wealth. Western sanctions placed on the oil sector have caused foreign oil companies to leave the country.

The Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a US-backed coalition, currently controls one-quarter of Syria’s territory, including the area east of the Euphrates. This means that the SDF now dominates 90 percent of the oil and over 50 percent of the gas fields, as well as the infrastructure owned by foreign companies, according to legitimate contracts signed with the Damascus government, including Gulfsands Petroleum, Total, and Shell. Oil wells and facilities were cordoned off and “protected” by the US-led coalition forces and SDF.

On the other hand, Damascus announced that the oil sector’s losses since the beginning of the crisis amounted to USD 91.5 billion. Oil Minister Bassam Tohme revealed that the daily oil production is 89,000 barrels, mainly in Kurdish-controlled areas. Tohme describes this oil as being “stolen” from the Syrian people.

International Conflict

After the Russian military intervention in late 2015, Damascus signed contracts with Russian companies to invest in the oil and gas sectors in Syria and its territorial waters. It also contracted with Evro Polis, the Yevgeny Prigozhin-linked company financing Wagner mercenaries, to protect oil and gas facilities and liberate them from ISIS in exchange for 25 percent of their proceeds. This included Evro Polis taking control of Suncor’s large Ebla gas development near Palmyra – an operation that led to many casualties.

This agreement was the cover under which the Wagner paramilitary group operated. Wagner was estimated to have as many as 2,500 men in Syria in 2018. They participated in the fighting in Syria or took part in training and preparation camps in Russia. Some of them have been relocated to Libya and now to Ukraine.

In reality, the agreement between Evro Polis and Damascus only covered areas under Damascus control. In early 2018, Wagner mercenaries launched an assault on the Conoco gas plant in the eastern Euphrates, a position of the SDF, but they were hammered by US artillery and airstrikes that killed about 200 mercenaries.

In late 2019, former US President Donald Trump made a shock announcement that American troops would withdraw from the area around Syria’s border with Turkiye, east of the Euphrates, giving Turkiye the green light to invade northern Syria and putting the SDF, Washington’s allies, under new pressure. On October 6, 2019, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, together with some US and European officials, persuaded President Trump to keep 900 members of the US military there to protect the oil. Trump later said that "a small number of soldiers will remain in the areas that contain oil," stressing that "we have ensured the security and protection of oil."

In July 2020, Washington announced that SDF Commander Mazloum Abdi informed the Trump administration of the signing of an agreement with the American company Delta Crescent Energy to invest in oil after obtaining a waiver from the Treasury Department from the sanctions placed on Syria. Then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the deal was intended to "modernize oil.”

The situation embarrassed the US Department of Defense which issued conflicting statements. It initially stated that "Syrian oil is for the Syrian people and we remain committed to the unity and territorial integrity of Syria.” It further emphasized that “the US government does not own, control, or manage the oil resources in Syria. The populations in areas liberated from ISIS make their own decisions on local governance.” Former US Defense Secretary Mark Esper announced that "we are now taking measures to strengthen our position in Deir el-Zour to deny ISIS access to the oil fields.” The Pentagon confirmed sending troops and armored vehicles to protect oil fields.

The US-Russian conflict is still ongoing. An opposition leader said that high-ranking Russian officers had repeatedly informed the SDF leaders to allow Russian companies that signed contracts with Damascus to work in the oil fields east of the Euphrates, but the Kurdish officials responded that this required the approval of the US allies that co-control the oil fields.

A stand-off has ensued, with undesirable consequences.

Illegal but all Too Comfortable

The ongoing Russian-US conflict has been aggravated as a result of the war in Ukraine and the stagnation of the military situation in Syria, especially with the absence of a prospect for a political solution while economic and humanitarian needs of the Syrian people escalate. This means that oil has emerged as a factor of tacit cooperation between illegitimate Syrian and foreign belligerents to share the revenues of about 89,000 barrels per day.

According to expert estimates, the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES) receives around USD 16 per barrel and a further USD 15 goes to the Syrian government. The remaining amount, which could amount up to USD 50 per barrel, is ‘lost’ and ends up in the hands of these war profiteers. The AANES uses part of the production locally, while the mediators and the war profiteers transport another part to government areas (constituting two-thirds of Syria’s territory) for refining or keeping. It is well reported that oil is also smuggled into Iraqi Kurdistan, either for local use or for smuggling into Turkiye. Oil is sold at very low prices and the fields and surrounding environment now suffer considerable damage.

Officials talk about networks operating in the shadows to smuggle oil and its derivatives between the east of the Euphrates, controlled by the SDF whose linchpin is the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG), and the Euphrates Shield areas or other enclaves controlled by the Syrian opposition factions and the Turkish army. It is noteworthy that the military forces in these two regions are involved in daily fighting, strikes, and raids, and exchange accusations of disloyalty, treason, and terrorism.

The same applies to the path crossed by oil tanks from the eastern Euphrates to oil refineries in the areas controlled by the Syrian government. The latter accuses the dominant forces in the east of the country of being traitors and agents of the American occupation. In the same vein, an informed source said that officials in the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) advised leaders of the SDF to coordinate with Damascus regarding the sale of oil internally and regionally.

The cooperation between the belligerents extends beyond the borders. Reports indicate that oil is smuggled into Iraqi Kurdistan and some Turkish regions, with the involvement of mediators and individuals close to the decision-makers there, although political and military differences are ongoing between the decision-makers in Qamishli and Erbil. In this regard, an informed Western official said, "most likely, the decision-makers in these areas are not in a hurry to reach a political solution that would impede the flow of money into their pockets. It is most likely that the war profiteers in the local areas of influence and the neighboring countries do not want the war to end.”

An Alternative Approach -

When President Joe Biden assumed office, his administration announced sanction exemptions that allowed some targeted investments, (although this excluded the oil industry), in Eastern Euphrates. However, it decided not to extend the sanction waiver granted to Delta Crescent Energy for many reasons, mainly the objection of foreign companies holding sovereignty rights in the oil fields. For instance, Gulfsands Petroleum (“Gulfsands”) signed a contract with Damascus in 2003 to invest in and develop Block 26 east of the Euphrates. According to its 2021 annual report, unauthorized production from Block 26 since early 2017 has reached about 20,000 barrels per day, meaning that around 35 million barrels have been produced from the block since then.

Meanwhile, London-based Gulfsands is calling for a "win-win" humanitarian initiative that would enable it and other international oil companies to regain control of their assets. Rather than flow to the sanctioned entities and other unauthorized intermediaries , the Gulfsands initiative would see revenues from oil sales transferred to a UN-controlled fund. John Bell, the managing director of Gulfsands, said a new approach was needed to alleviate the enormous suffering in Syria. He added, "Syria needs billions of dollars that can only be generated with oil and gas,” and described the plans as "a gain for the Kurds, Damascus, and the Syrian people." He also posited that a share of oil proceeds would go to a UN-controlled humanitarian account whose payments are fully in line with the international sanctions placed on Syria.

That might seem simple, but analysts have linked the initiative with the Oil-for-Food program enforced in Iraq before the US invasion in 2003. Bell acknowledges that lessons need to be learned from that ill-fated program as he proposes the initiative to the international stakeholders. This is a particularly timely initiative as discussions continue regarding the extension of providing international aid across borders, including the amendment to include the financing of early recovery projects and other humanitarian and health affairs.



Who Benefits from the Damascus Bombings at Such a Sensitive Time?

Syrian security personnel inspect a burned vehicle near the Four Seasons Hotel after two explosions rocked the area earlier while Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa was meeting French President Emmanuel Macron at the presidential palace, in Damascus, Syria, Tuesday, July 7, 2026. (AP)
Syrian security personnel inspect a burned vehicle near the Four Seasons Hotel after two explosions rocked the area earlier while Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa was meeting French President Emmanuel Macron at the presidential palace, in Damascus, Syria, Tuesday, July 7, 2026. (AP)
TT

Who Benefits from the Damascus Bombings at Such a Sensitive Time?

Syrian security personnel inspect a burned vehicle near the Four Seasons Hotel after two explosions rocked the area earlier while Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa was meeting French President Emmanuel Macron at the presidential palace, in Damascus, Syria, Tuesday, July 7, 2026. (AP)
Syrian security personnel inspect a burned vehicle near the Four Seasons Hotel after two explosions rocked the area earlier while Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa was meeting French President Emmanuel Macron at the presidential palace, in Damascus, Syria, Tuesday, July 7, 2026. (AP)

Two successive explosions struck one of Syria’s most sensitive locations at a particularly delicate moment for the country’s authorities, occurring about 10 kilometers (6 miles) from where French President Emmanuel Macron was staying during his visit to Damascus.

Sources close to the Syrian government told Asharq Al-Awsat that several parties could stand to benefit from the attack, foremost among them remnants of the former regime and those opposed to the growing French-Syrian rapprochement.

Other sources monitoring the security situation, however, said initial indications point more toward ISIS, which remains Syria’s foremost security challenge.

At least 18 people were injured, including the assistant tourism minister and four police officers, in twin explosions near the Ministry of Tourism, close to the Four Seasons Hotel Damascus, where Macron was staying.

The attack came less than a week after a bombing at a lawyers’ cafe near the Palace of Justice that killed 10 civilians and wounded about 20 others.

Security expert Abdullah Al-Najjar told Asharq Al-Awsat that the bombings bore the hallmarks of remnants of the former regime seeking to derail the transitional justice process, “which will certainly reach them.”

The attack also aims to portray Syria as unsafe. He said the improvised explosive devices were crude and indiscriminate, targeting civilians and security personnel alike. Their purpose was to create the impression of weak security control rather than expose a genuine collapse in security.

Syria's Interior Minister Anas Khattab (C) inspects an area near the Four Seasons Hotel following two blasts in Damascus on July 7, 2026. (AFP)

He noted that any criminal could plant a crude explosive device in a trash container and another in a parked vehicle, like what happened in Tuesday’s attack.

Former diplomat and political analyst Bassam Barabandi told Asharq Al-Awsat that whenever Syria shows “serious signs” of recovery, forces threatened by the country’s improving fortunes respond.

In his view, the interests of remnants of the former regime converge with those of ISIS, Hezbollah, Iran, and Israel.

Barabandi noted that many individuals who served under the former regime remain embedded throughout Syrian society, while state institutions are still being rebuilt and newly recruited security personnel have yet to acquire the experience needed to fully maintain security.

The scale of the bombings suggests either individuals or small groups seeking revenge, or an organization capable of mounting larger operations whose objective is not widespread destruction in a country already devastated by war, but rather to spread instability across Syria, he remarked.

Barabandi also stressed that international support for stabilizing Syria remains strong and is likely to translate into greater assistance for rebuilding the country’s security institutions.

Major investments are unlikely to be affected because they are driven largely by political considerations, although local economies and small businesses are expected to bear the brunt of the impact, he added.

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, left, and French President Emmanuel Macron arrive for an agreement signing ceremony in Damascus, Syria, Tuesday, July 7, 2026. (AP)

Sources close to the government told Asharq Al-Awsat that crude explosive devices of this kind often evade explosives detection and are intended more for political messaging than military effect.

They added that preliminary assessments point more toward remnants of the former regime than ISIS, whose attacks typically target security personnel, soldiers, and those it considers apostates. ISIS operations also tend to inflict far greater casualties, unless the group has radically changed its tactics.

Security expert Diaa Qaddour described such assessments as speculative because so many parties could benefit from bombings at such a sensitive moment for Syria.

Nevertheless, he said it was impossible to ignore that ISIS remains “the largest and most prominent security challenge in Syria.”

Qaddour told Asharq Al-Awsat that Tuesday’s coordinated bombing resembled an attack in Damascus’ Bab Sharqi district in May near a Defense Ministry building that killed a soldier and wounded several civilians. ISIS claimed responsibility for that attack.

He stressed that the greater danger lies not only in the existence of an experienced ISIS cell operating in the heart of the capital and one of its most sensitive districts, but also in its ability to strike whenever it chooses despite extensive counterterrorism efforts by the Interior Ministry.

The recent rise in attacks has tarnished the image of the relative stability Syria had enjoyed in recent months, precisely the outcome sought by those behind the bombings, Qaddour said.

He urged the Interior Ministry and intelligence services to undertake a thorough review of their approach to security threats and develop a comprehensive strategy to eliminate or at least contain them.


What to Know About China’s Rare Ballistic Missile Test and Why It Raises Concerns

 In this photo released by Xinhua News Agency, a long-range ballistic missile bursts out of the sea during a test launched from a Chinese nuclear-powered submarines in the South Pacific on Monday, July 6, 2026. (Li Xiangchao/Xinhua via AP)
In this photo released by Xinhua News Agency, a long-range ballistic missile bursts out of the sea during a test launched from a Chinese nuclear-powered submarines in the South Pacific on Monday, July 6, 2026. (Li Xiangchao/Xinhua via AP)
TT

What to Know About China’s Rare Ballistic Missile Test and Why It Raises Concerns

 In this photo released by Xinhua News Agency, a long-range ballistic missile bursts out of the sea during a test launched from a Chinese nuclear-powered submarines in the South Pacific on Monday, July 6, 2026. (Li Xiangchao/Xinhua via AP)
In this photo released by Xinhua News Agency, a long-range ballistic missile bursts out of the sea during a test launched from a Chinese nuclear-powered submarines in the South Pacific on Monday, July 6, 2026. (Li Xiangchao/Xinhua via AP)

China's navy test-launched a long-range ballistic missile Monday from a nuclear-powered submarine — a move that experts said showed Beijing's increasing skill and capability as part of its nuclear deterrence strategy.

The move also drew protests from the US, as well as countries in Asia and the Pacific. It was the second time China had fired a ballistic missile into international waters in recent years.

While it gave some countries in the region prior notice, some said it was not enough notice, and experts say the launch exacerbates tensions around increasing militarization in Asia.

Here's what we know, and what we don't, about the missile launch.

Experts think it could be a JL-2 or a JL-3 ballistic missile

China announced the missile test publicly on Monday only after the launch, saying that it was fired into the Pacific Ocean. In a brief statement, the official Xinhua News Agency said the launch was part of routine annual training, complied with international law and practice, and was not directed against any country or target. It didn't provide details about the type of missile.

The missile was carrying a dummy warhead, not a nuclear one. The act of launching in international waters was rare, although the US has also done so with its own missile testing.

Xinhua published a photo of the missile on Tuesday without additional details. Experts say it could be either a JL-2 or a JL-3, both submarine-launched ballistic missiles, though most said the available imagery was not clear enough to tell.

The state-owned tabloid Global Times said it was “most likely” a JL-3 missile with a range exceeding 10,000 kilometers (6,200 miles). The JL-2 has a shorter range.

The New Zealand government said the missile was launched into treaty waters in the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone, violating the intention of the agreement.

The zone was established by the 1986 Treaty of Rarotonga, which prohibits nuclear weapons throughout the region. China ratified the protocols in 1987, pledging not to test nuclear weapons within the zone or threaten to use them against signatories with territory in the region.

Australia, Japan, and other countries protest While China has told other countries to “avoid over-interpretation” in response to the criticism, experts say the concerns from other countries have some basis.

Much of the concern is a result of lack of clear information, said Drew Thompson, a senior fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore. “China’s military modernization and buildup have occurred without concurrent increases in openness and transparency, resulting in uncertainty about China’s intentions.”

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said that China did not provide enough notice to the government.

“There is no doubt that this is a provocative act by China which does destabilize the region,” he told reporters Tuesday while in Honiara, in the Solomon Islands.

“This was a test of a nuclear-capable intercontinental ballistic missile fired from a nuclear-powered submarine. That is of real concern because what we need is less nuclear weapons, certainly not more. And the fact that this test took place yesterday with very little notice is of real concern,” Albanese added.

New Zealand had said the same Monday, with Foreign Minister Winston Peters calling it “unwelcome and concerning.”

Solomon Islands Prime Minister Matthew Wale, also speaking to reporters in Honiara Tuesday, said that “China is a good friend of Solomon Islands, but this is not something a friend does. This is not ... good in our region.”

“We don’t want to see any more countries — China, America, anybody — we don’t want anybody testing their ICBMs in the Pacific Islands region. Be our friend, but don’t threaten us,” Wale added.

Test comes amid increasing militarization in Asia

China's leader Xi Jinping has made modernization of the People's Liberation Army a top priority in his rule.

China already has the largest standing army in the world and the world's largest navy. While its nuclear arsenal lags that of the US and Russia, it has been actively expanding its stock of nuclear warheads. It has also actively been developing new longer-range missiles and advanced drones.

China’s defense budget, which is projected to be at $270 billion in 2026, has grown at roughly 7% for the past four years, and hovers below 2% of its gross domestic product. However, independent analysis suggests the real spending could be much higher. For example, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates the overall figure for 2024 at $313.7 billion.

Much of the security worries about whether or not China's military would get involved in a war centers on Taiwan, the self-ruled island that China claims as its own and for which it has not ruled out the use of force to bring it under its control.

China also regularly sends warplanes and navy ships in the waters around the island in what it says are military exercises.

In response to China's expanding military and activity, countries in the region have increased their own defense spending, including Japan which is breaking with its long-held cap of 1% of GDP to double the budget to 2%.

Meanwhile, the Philippines agreed to allow the US to expand its military presence in the country by adding access to four more bases.

“The Chinese launch exacerbates already deeply strained relations between Beijing and Tokyo. Since (Prime Minister Sanae) Takaichi’s comments last year suggesting that Japan would engage in a conflict over Taiwan, China has tightened export controls on Japan and accused it of embracing a ‘new time of militarism,’” said Emma Chanlett-Avery, director of Political-Security Affairs at the Asia Society Policy Institute.


Lebanon’s South Takes a Breath as Families Return to Shattered Homes and Lives

This picture shows the destruction in the southern Lebanese village of Froun on June 30, 2026. (AFP)
This picture shows the destruction in the southern Lebanese village of Froun on June 30, 2026. (AFP)
TT

Lebanon’s South Takes a Breath as Families Return to Shattered Homes and Lives

This picture shows the destruction in the southern Lebanese village of Froun on June 30, 2026. (AFP)
This picture shows the destruction in the southern Lebanese village of Froun on June 30, 2026. (AFP)

On a beachfront in the coastal city of Tyre, war has finally abated just enough for children to play in the waves and families to gather under parasols as life slowly returns to southern Lebanon. But away from the shore, people coming home after months of exile are having to adapt to harsh new realities: the threat of conflict between Israel and Iran-backed Hezbollah flaring up again and the challenge of rebuilding from the destruction Israeli bombs have wreaked on their hometowns.

"People are coming back to Tyre to rebuild, to work — all the restaurants are open again," said local resident Ali Skaiky, wet from a swim in the sea and holding a rubber lilo.

"We still hear strikes and fighting at night, but it's far away. There's destruction beyond imagination, but we hope everything will stay calm."

Skaiky is among some 400,000 people who have returned to southern Lebanon in the weeks since a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. The truce has not halted fighting, but it has lowered the ‌intensity.

Returnees are cleaning ‌debris from damaged homes, reopening businesses and trying to rebuild the routines the war ‌shattered. Yet ⁠for many, normality ⁠now means keeping a suitcase packed, following the news obsessively and never straying too far from home.

For Fadlallah Qassim, 42, returning home meant confronting the destruction the war had left behind, including a hit on his house.

"We returned to find the whole house caved in with rubble, and all the furniture ruined," he said. "I cleaned up, fixed it, and brought some basic things for the house, now my wife, children and I all live in one room."

In the nearby village of Srifa, where entire neighborhoods were damaged, Suzan Fakih, 55, said the hardest part of returning was realizing home no longer felt like home.

"The moment you arrive, it doesn't ⁠feel like your village anymore," she said. "Everything is black and grey. It hurts your soul. ‌You look around and think, 'This can't be the village I've lived in all ‌my life.'"

'YOU PACK YOUR BAGS AND RUN'

Srifa lies in the deep south of Lebanon, close to where Israeli troops occupy a strip ‌of territory and launch regular attacks on what the Israeli army says are Hezbollah targets. In areas nearby, Israel has ‌demolished almost entire villages.

Fakih said people remain haunted by the possibility they could be forced to flee again.

"I can't remember a time in my life when I wasn't living with a bag packed, ready to leave. A few quiet years pass, then you pack your bags and run again," she said.

The ongoing hostilities and levels of destruction have left 600,000 more people internally displaced, according to Lebanon's social ‌affairs ministry. Many families whose homes were destroyed are still living in schools or in the rented homes they fled to during the conflict.

Lebanon has suffered the deadliest spillover ⁠of the regional war triggered ⁠by the US-Israeli strikes on Iran in February.

The conflict spread to Lebanon on March 2, when Hezbollah fired on Israel in support of Tehran, triggering an Israeli air and ground campaign. More than 4,300 people have been killed in Lebanon, according to the country's health ministry.

RENTING BACKUP HOMES

Some 20 miles (32 km) farther north, Mohammad Sweid and other residents who recently returned to the Bekaa Valley town of Sohmor, said they live with the same uncertainty.

Sweid still pays rent for the house he and his family fled to during the war, keeping it as a backup home if they need to leave again.

"If something happens again, we may not find another place," the 31-year-old manual worker said.

In the Lebanese capital Beirut, whose Hezbollah-controlled southern suburb of Dahiyeh has been battered by Israel at intervals over the last two years for being home to Hezbollah's leadership, residents are also cautiously trying to rebuild their lives.

Moussa Ghamloush, 68, has been repairing his bomb-damaged home and reopening his restaurant, which was completely destroyed in a separate strike, but says his permanent home will always be Dahieh.

"We're not the kind of people who leave. Our roots are here. We stayed, and if there's a third war, we'll stay again."