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.



What Will the Next Leader of the UN Need to Get the Job Done in an Increasingly Complex World?

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres receives a standing ovation after speaking during the 81st United Nations General Assembly at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, on September 22, 2026. (Photo by ANGELA WEISS / AFP)
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres receives a standing ovation after speaking during the 81st United Nations General Assembly at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, on September 22, 2026. (Photo by ANGELA WEISS / AFP)
TT

What Will the Next Leader of the UN Need to Get the Job Done in an Increasingly Complex World?

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres receives a standing ovation after speaking during the 81st United Nations General Assembly at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, on September 22, 2026. (Photo by ANGELA WEISS / AFP)
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres receives a standing ovation after speaking during the 81st United Nations General Assembly at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, on September 22, 2026. (Photo by ANGELA WEISS / AFP)

On Jan. 1, the next United Nations secretary-general will take over an aging organization still controlled by World War II powers. What will the world need from that person?

Once a major player in solving conflicts and crises around the world, the 81-year-old institution has been sidelined from the top table in trying to end the wars in Iran, Ukraine and Gaza. And its precarious financial situation — caused mainly by the billions of dollars the United States owes — has forced major cuts to its humanitarian and development programs where it has remained a key player.

The annual global gathering of world leaders at the United Nations that ended last week shed some light on what the next UN chief needs to focus on and pursue.

In his farewell address to the General Assembly, outgoing Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told global leaders, “The world does not need a weaker United Nations.”

“It needs a UN strong enough to face the world as it is," he said, “and determined enough to build the world as it should.”

But is that even possible?

Much talk of a shared future with the UN at the center

After 10 years at the helm of the United Nations, Guterres said he is strongly convinced that its greatest power is to build a tomorrow that works for everyone. As he put it, “Our shared future will be forged by whether humanity can govern power wisely.”

Guterres then issued challenges to the United Nations that will be led by his successor, the 193 countries in the General Assembly “and humanity itself."

Will you “uphold the law before impunity becomes normalized?” Will you “end wars before they consume generations?” Will you tackle inequality “before societies fracture?” Will you accelerate climate action “before tipping points are crossed?” Will you govern artificial intelligence “before it governs us?" Guterres asked.

For the next secretary-general — the selection process is ongoing — the top priority will be reconfiguring the United Nations to reflect the 21st century rather than the post-World War II era when it was established.

The new UN chief “will have the most monumental task that the UN has faced in decades because you have a UN that’s going through this critical reform process that it has not gone through for a long time,” said Kizito Byenkya, the Open Society Institute’s advocacy director.

The UN's financial crisis has led to budget cuts and efforts to consolidate programs and agencies, and eliminate hundreds of mandates ordering the UN Secretariat to take a wide variety of actions and deliver reports, many that never get read. That's just to name a few.

At the same time, Byenkya told The Associated Press, “You have huge pressure on all sides for the new secretary-general to act like a general and really play a central role in mediation for world conflicts.” He cited the late secretary-general Kofi Annan, who became directly involved in some conflicts and was a skilled mediator and negotiator.

“If you look at the conflicts we've been facing in the last few years, let's say from Gaza to Sudan to Ukraine and more, you often have to ask yourself: Where has the role of the United Nations been with all of these?,” he said. “In the time of Kofi Annan, he was center to all.”

Reform sounds good but is a lot harder than one might think

During high-level week, leader after leader spoke of the need for reform. But when it comes to taking action, serious and sometimes impossible differences emerge, especially when it comes to reforming the Security Council, the UN’s most powerful body and still controlled by the World War II victors.

All UN member nations want to see the council reflect the 21st century world, but there are huge national differences on how it should be expanded. That has stymied progress for decades.

The five permanent members — the US, Russia, China, Britain and France — hold veto power, which gives them ultimate control. Africa, home to 1.5 billion people, has no permanent seat. Neither does Latin America. Neither do the collection of island nations whose existence is threatened by climate change.

“Security Council reform is not a favor to Africa,” Ghana’s President John Mahama told world leaders last week. “It is an imperative for the legitimacy, credibility, and survival of the United Nations.”

Mahama also raised perhaps the most difficult problem that will confront the next UN chief: the world’s “intense fragmentation, deepening inequality and eroded trust in our multilateral system.”

“We must address the alarming breakdown of global order today,” he said, pointing to “the dangerous drift toward unilateralism."

Mahama lauded the UN Charter, whose opening words say the organization was founded to prevent a repetition of the 20th century’s two world wars. That, he said, “must reign supreme over the cynical doctrine that `might makes right.’”


Thousands of Young Sailors Adjust to Iran War Aboard USS George Washington

Night Aircraft Handling Officer Breana Royston and AE1 Andrew Schmucker coordinate aircraft positioning aboard the USS George Washington in the Arabian Sea, September 13, 2026 (Reuters)
Night Aircraft Handling Officer Breana Royston and AE1 Andrew Schmucker coordinate aircraft positioning aboard the USS George Washington in the Arabian Sea, September 13, 2026 (Reuters)
TT

Thousands of Young Sailors Adjust to Iran War Aboard USS George Washington

Night Aircraft Handling Officer Breana Royston and AE1 Andrew Schmucker coordinate aircraft positioning aboard the USS George Washington in the Arabian Sea, September 13, 2026 (Reuters)
Night Aircraft Handling Officer Breana Royston and AE1 Andrew Schmucker coordinate aircraft positioning aboard the USS George Washington in the Arabian Sea, September 13, 2026 (Reuters)

An emergency alert blares from a loudspeaker, and Damon Dennard and other sailors on the deck of the aircraft carrier USS George Washington are scrambling. Dennard, 23, is readying bombs for loading onto aircraft as his crewmates race to their positions.

“It has been eventful,” said Dennard, an aviation ordnanceman airman apprentice. Once the alert ends, he takes a breath, sits on one of the bombs and jokes that he probably expected an easier deployment.

“It’s crazy, but at the end of the day, it’s work. That’s all.”

Dennard was one of dozens of sailors Reuters spoke with in September on a rare visit to a US warship that is central to the Iran war.

The visit began at a particularly tense moment, just three days after the US military blew up five Iranian oil tankers in retaliation for Iran targeting a US Navy warship.

The George Washington’s mission near the Strait of Hormuz which has no defined end-date came as a surprise to the crew, who were deployed from Japan at the end of August to relieve another carrier.

The aircraft carrier is effectively a floating city of around 5,000 personnel, each with their own mission, from Majesta Ochoa, who operates a cash register, to Lieutenant Commander Brody Samaha, a “shooter” who helps oversee the launch of aircraft from the carrier’s catapults.
But there is a sense of synchronization as the sailors go about their jobs, crew say.

The aircraft carrier is effectively a floating city of around 5,000 personnel, each with their own mission, from Majesta Ochoa, who operates a cash register, to Brody Samaha, a “shooter” who helps oversee the launch of aircraft from the carrier’s catapults.

“It’s a dance, with lots of people checking each other,” Samaha said, before adding that the flight deck is also a “very dangerous place to be. It’s very unforgiving.”

Ouija Board

Breana Royston, the night aircraft handling officer, or ‘NACHO,’ has a unique perspective over the dangerous maneuvering on the flight deck.

Her job is to supervise aircraft movement, including bringing fighter jets up to the flight deck and back down to the hangar bay via massive elevators.

To do that, she uses what’s known in Navy parlance as a “ouija board” — a real-time model of the deck, with miniature aircraft all lined up in their current positions. It looks a little like a strategy board game.

“We’ve been on our toes the last week, maneuvering and everything — with everything that's going on,” Royston said, adding it’s been “kind of crazy, really busy.”

“It’s nerve-wracking, but it’s fun,” she said.

The Iranian government has repeatedly condemned US military actions in the Strait of Hormuz. On September 25, the Iranian foreign minister said the insecurity prevailing in the strait was the “direct result of the aggressive actions of the United States and the Israeli regime.”

The war began in February with joint strikes on Iranian targets by the US and Israel. US President Donald Trump has said many times the conflict would soon be over, but it persisted for longer than initially expected.

In August, in response to reports of deteriorating conditions, low morale and suicide attempts on the Lincoln, US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said the accounts “misrepresented” the reality, praising sailors who endure austere conditions.

Extended Deployments Pose Strain on Crew

Still, extended deployments can pose enormous strain on crews’ mental health, particularly in wartime, and are a challenge for any navy. Sailors must maintain a state of alert and readiness, heightened in the case of the George Washington due to the threat of drone and missile attack from Iran.

“Morale is really important to us,” said Rear Admiral Jeffrey Heames, the commander of Carrier Strike Group 5.

Heames talked about ensuring the ability of the crew to contact home and receive mail.

“Some of those things affect how sailors hold up out in this kind of environment,” Heames said. “They are huge focus areas for me.”

Reuters spoke with Seaman Deandre Cook as he checked in with his wife back home on a video call. She was holding one of their young daughters on her hip.

It was hard being away from his family, Cook said, but added: “The distance makes the relationship stronger.”

Growing Up

As jets thundered off the carrier’s deck above them, hundreds of members of the George Washington’s crew gathered for a ceremony to mark the 25th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks — an event many of them were too young to remember.

Al Qaeda’s attacks on New York and Washington propelled the US into two decades of war that sent troops to Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and elsewhere. Many supporters of Trump had hoped Middle East wars were a thing of the past.

After a sailor sang the national anthem, the chaplain on board, Ben Garrett, delivered a prayer as the assembled crew bowed their heads.

“Help us honor those who have gone before us,” Garrett said.

Garrett later told Reuters that many of the crew members are still learning the basics of growing up, including skills like patience, managing relationships and career expectations.

“A huge percentage of this ship are between the ages of 19 and 24 years old,” said Garrett, a Roman Catholic priest. “So they’re trying to figure out being an adult while they’re out here.”
Sometimes sailors enlist to get away from a small town or a situation back home, Garrett added.

Lieutenant Commander Brian Lasley said there were more people on the George Washington than back in his hometown of Fredericktown, Missouri, whose population was 4,429 in the 2020 census.

Camren Pollard, 24, an interior communications electrician third class, said he joined the Navy on a spur-of-the-moment decision after seeing older coworkers unhappy in his previous job. “I wanted to change things in my life,” he said.

“My mom freaked out more than anything. My little brother thought it was kind of cool.” For Pollard, however, “I don’t think about it a whole lot. It’s work for me.”


US-led Troops Exit Iraq: What's Next for Pro-Iran Groups?

A giant Iraqi flag hangs off the reconstructed 12th century "Hadba" leaning minaret at the historic Great Mosque of al-Nuri in the old city of Mosul on September 29, 2026 as Iraq marks the withdrawal of the US-led anti-ISIS coalition forces from the country.  (Photo by Zaid AL-OBEIDI / AFP)
A giant Iraqi flag hangs off the reconstructed 12th century "Hadba" leaning minaret at the historic Great Mosque of al-Nuri in the old city of Mosul on September 29, 2026 as Iraq marks the withdrawal of the US-led anti-ISIS coalition forces from the country. (Photo by Zaid AL-OBEIDI / AFP)
TT

US-led Troops Exit Iraq: What's Next for Pro-Iran Groups?

A giant Iraqi flag hangs off the reconstructed 12th century "Hadba" leaning minaret at the historic Great Mosque of al-Nuri in the old city of Mosul on September 29, 2026 as Iraq marks the withdrawal of the US-led anti-ISIS coalition forces from the country.  (Photo by Zaid AL-OBEIDI / AFP)
A giant Iraqi flag hangs off the reconstructed 12th century "Hadba" leaning minaret at the historic Great Mosque of al-Nuri in the old city of Mosul on September 29, 2026 as Iraq marks the withdrawal of the US-led anti-ISIS coalition forces from the country. (Photo by Zaid AL-OBEIDI / AFP)

With the US-led anti-extremist coalition leaving Iraq, Baghdad faces mounting pressure to rein in Tehran-backed armed groups, a difficult task in a country long caught between its allies, the US and Iran.

Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi, who assumed power earlier this year with the United States' blessing, has pledged that after the coalition exits on Wednesday, pro-Iran groups would hand over their weapons to the state.

But the issue has proven far more complicated than simple announcements, said AFP.

Iraq has long been a proxy battleground for the US and Iran, with each interfering in major political decisions and government formation.

The ongoing Middle East war, during which Iran-backed groups in Iraq targeted US facilities there and around the region hundreds of times, has deepened Iraq's entanglement.

- 'Tricky' -

Several senior Iraqi officials told AFP that Iran will not accept that the factions hand over their weapons, especially amid the regional war, and its officials have clearly relayed the message.

"If there's a deal between the US and Iran, I think that this whole issue becomes very easy to deal with," Iraqi political analyst Sajad Jiyad said.

But Jiyad said "Iran has been very clear that while there is a conflict going on, they cannot give up their strategic capabilities", including the Iraqi groups and "their ability to attack US interests in Iraq and the region".

It is, however, a "tricky situation", because Iran doesn't want an "unstable Iraq", he added.

"Iran's agenda is to reach a deal with the US, so that these groups will naturally reduce their visibility and activity," without giving up capabilities.

The factions also want assurances that the US won't target them before they consider surrendering their weapons.

But if no progress is forthcoming in terms of disarming these groups, then "the US is not going to make a longer-term commitment of not targeting them", he said.

It will continue on its usual paths: diplomatic and economic pressure through sanctions, and occasional strikes.

- 'Liability' -

The US-led coalition deployed to Iraq and Syria in 2014 to fight the ISIS group, which seized large swathes of both countries and committed atrocities.

Both the coalition and Tehran-backed groups fought ISIS, their common enemy.

After ISIS's defeat in Iraq in 2017, those groups demanded the withdrawal of US troops and began targeting them with drones and missiles, triggering US retaliatory strikes that killed several of their commanders over the years.

US pressure on successive Iraqi governments to disarm the factions mounted, especially after they intervened in support of Palestinians during the Gaza war in 2023, and later backed Tehran in the Middle East war.

Political analyst Jiyad said little should be expected after the coalition's pullout.

"We are not going to get disarmament... but there has to be some sort of progress and some plan," he said.

"What is probably going to happen is the process begins" towards a solution, but it will require time and "trust-building measures".

The Tehran-backed groups feel the government is unable to protect them from the US, and the government sees them as a "liability," he added.

- No plan -

While some groups said they would disarm, other powerful factions refuse to do so.

But the government "does not even have a plan" for how it is going to disarm them, a diplomatic source in Baghdad said.

Two senior politicians told AFP that Zaidi, a newcomer to politics, had repeatedly said he was ready to "confront" the groups if they don't disarm.

For weeks, tensions grew until an unannounced truce was reached, with the intervention of senior politicians who are now hoping to work out a deal.

An Iraqi official said that "the issue needs time to reassure the factions, and prevent any confrontation between Iraqi forces and the armed groups".

Kazem al-Fartoussi, spokesperson for the Kataeb Sayyid al-Shuhada armed group, said the factions don't want a confrontation with the state because "there will be no winners".

But "our weapons are precious, so we have said these weapons are in exchange for sovereignty," including the withdrawal of foreign troops and an end to American political and economic interference.

Fartoussi said the factions are in talks with the government about "regulating" their weapons, as well as their relationship with the state, but he doesn't trust the US.

For the Americans and Israelis, their objective is "nothing other than eliminating the factions, not the weapons," Fartoussi said.

If the issue is the factions' "existence", then "we reject any discussion".