Trump Vowed to Ease Sanctions on Syria. How Quickly that Happens is Up for Debate

In this photo released by the Saudi Royal Palace, President Donald Trump, right, shakes hands with Syria's interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Wednesday, May 14, 2025. (Bandar Aljaloud/Saudi Royal Palace via AP)
In this photo released by the Saudi Royal Palace, President Donald Trump, right, shakes hands with Syria's interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Wednesday, May 14, 2025. (Bandar Aljaloud/Saudi Royal Palace via AP)
TT

Trump Vowed to Ease Sanctions on Syria. How Quickly that Happens is Up for Debate

In this photo released by the Saudi Royal Palace, President Donald Trump, right, shakes hands with Syria's interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Wednesday, May 14, 2025. (Bandar Aljaloud/Saudi Royal Palace via AP)
In this photo released by the Saudi Royal Palace, President Donald Trump, right, shakes hands with Syria's interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Wednesday, May 14, 2025. (Bandar Aljaloud/Saudi Royal Palace via AP)

Since President Donald Trump announced his intent to end a half-century of US sanctions on Syria, a debate has developed in his administration over how quickly and thoroughly that should happen.

At risk could be the future of a transitional government run by those who drove Syrian leader Bashar Assad from power late last year and hopes that it can stabilize the country after a devastating 13-year civil war that has left millions dead or displaced, the economy in ruins and thousands of foreign fighters still on Syrian soil.

US presidents have piled up penalties over the years on the autocratic family that previously controlled Syria, and those could be quickly lifted or waived through executive action. But Congress imposed some of the strictest measures and would have to permanently remove them.

Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa, the former opposition commander who led the overthrow, says he is working to build an inclusive government friendly to the West. Some Trump administration officials are pushing to lift or waive sanctions as fast as possible without demanding tough conditions first.

Others in the administration have proposed a phased approach, giving short-term waivers soon on some sanctions and then tying extensions or a wider executive order to Syria meeting conditions, which could substantially slow — or even permanently prevent — longer-term relief. That would impede the interim government’s ability to attract investment and rebuild Syria after the war, critics say.

“The Syria sanctions are a complex web of statutes, executive actions and United Nations Security Council resolutions that have to be unwound thoughtfully and cautiously,” White House National Security Council spokesman Max Bluestein said.

The administration is “currently analyzing the optimal way to do so” and would have an announcement soon, Bluestein said in a statement Thursday to The Associated Press.

A State Department proposal circulated among officials after Trump's pledge on his Middle East trip last week lays out sweeping conditions for future phases of relief or permanent lifting of sanctions, including dismantling Palestinian militant groups as a top demand, according to a senior US official familiar with the plan, who was not authorized to comment publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Additional proposals are circulating, including one shared this week that broadly emphasized taking all the action possible, as fast as possible, to help Syria rebuild, the official said.

A welcome US announcement in Syria People danced in the streets of Damascus after Trump announced in Saudi Arabia last week that he would “be ordering the cessation of sanctions against Syria in order to give them a chance at greatness.”

“We're taking them all off,” Trump said a day before meeting the country’s new leader. “Good luck, Syria. Show us something special.”

This week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio advocated for a hedged approach in testimony before US lawmakers.

Rubio pushed for sanctions relief to start quickly, saying Syria’s five-month-old transition government could be weeks from “collapse and a full-scale civil war of epic proportions.”

But asked what sanctions relief should look like overall, Rubio gave a one-word explanation: “Incremental.”

Washington has levied sanctions against Syria's former ruling family since 1979 over its support for Hezbollah and other Iranian-allied militant groups, its alleged chemical weapons program and its brutality against civilians as the Assad family fought to stay in power.

The sanctions include heavy penalties for outside companies or investors doing business there. Syria needs tens of billions of dollars in investment to restore its battered infrastructure and help the estimated 90% of the population living in poverty.

Syria’s interim leaders “didn’t pass their background check with the FBI,” Rubio acknowledged to lawmakers this week. The group that al-Sharaa led, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, was originally affiliated with al-Qaida, although it later renounced ties and took a more moderate tone. It is still listed by the US as a terrorist organization.

But al-Sharaa's government could be the best chance for rebuilding the country and avoiding a power vacuum that could allow for a resurgence of the ISIS group and other extremist groups.

“If we engage them, it may work out, it may not work out. If we do not engage them, it was guaranteed to not work out,” Rubio said.

Mouaz Moustafa, executive director of the US-based Syrian Emergency Task Force and an advocate who has been influential in helping shape past US policy on Syria, said he has been circulating a framework for a proposed executive order that would allow Trump to quickly remove many of the sanctions.

Trump’s move to lift the penalties is aimed at “preventing a failed state and ending perpetual violence,” but some in the administration are trying to “water down” the decision, Moustafa asserted.

Debate within the Trump administration

The initial document sent out last week by the State Department's policy and planning staff proposed a three-phase road map for sanctions relief, starting with short-term waivers. Progress toward additional relief and an outright lifting of penalties in future phases would be tied to tough conditions that generated pushback from some officials.

Removing “Palestinian terror groups” from Syria is first on the list of requirements to get to the second phase. Supporters of sanctions relief say the condition might be impossible, given the subjectivity of determining which groups meet that definition and at what point they can be declared removed.

Other conditions for moving to the second phase are for the new government to take custody of detention facilities housing ISIS fighters in northeast Syria and to carry out a recent deal with the US-backed, Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces — which manages the detention facilities — that includes the SDF being incorporated into the Syrian army.

To get to phase three, Syria would be required to join the Abraham Accords — normalized relations with Israel — and to prove that it had destroyed all of the previous government’s chemical weapons.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu previously pushed for the Trump administration not to lift sanctions on Syria. Israel has been suspicious of the new government, although Syrian officials have said publicly that they do not want a conflict with Israel.

Since Assad fell, Israel has launched hundreds of airstrikes and seized a UN-patrolled buffer zone in Syria.

Congressional sanctions on Syria will take much longer to lift

While some of the sanctions can be lifted by executive action, others face a more complex process.

The most difficult could be the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, a wide-reaching set of sanctions passed by Congress in 2019 in response to alleged war crimes by Assad’s government.

It specifically blocks reconstruction activities, and although it can be waived for 180 days by executive order, investors are likely to be wary of reconstruction projects when sanctions could be reinstated after six months.

In a meeting last week in Türkiye with Syria's foreign minister, Rubio and Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham explained that they supported Trump’s call to ease sanctions immediately but that permanent relief would require action by the Syrian government to meet conditions that the president laid out, according to other US officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

“We have a moment here to provide some capability to this new government that should be conditions-based,” Graham said this week. “And I don’t want that moment to pass.”



Rare Precedents for Lebanon-Israel Talks

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio (C), alongside US State Department Counselor Michael Needham (2L) and US Ambassador to Lebanon Michel Issa (2R), speaks during a meeting with Lebanon's Ambassador to the US Nada Hamadeh Moawad (out of frame) and Israeli Ambassador to the US Yechiel Leiter (out of frame) at the State Department in Washington, DC, on April 14, 2026. (AFP)
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio (C), alongside US State Department Counselor Michael Needham (2L) and US Ambassador to Lebanon Michel Issa (2R), speaks during a meeting with Lebanon's Ambassador to the US Nada Hamadeh Moawad (out of frame) and Israeli Ambassador to the US Yechiel Leiter (out of frame) at the State Department in Washington, DC, on April 14, 2026. (AFP)
TT

Rare Precedents for Lebanon-Israel Talks

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio (C), alongside US State Department Counselor Michael Needham (2L) and US Ambassador to Lebanon Michel Issa (2R), speaks during a meeting with Lebanon's Ambassador to the US Nada Hamadeh Moawad (out of frame) and Israeli Ambassador to the US Yechiel Leiter (out of frame) at the State Department in Washington, DC, on April 14, 2026. (AFP)
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio (C), alongside US State Department Counselor Michael Needham (2L) and US Ambassador to Lebanon Michel Issa (2R), speaks during a meeting with Lebanon's Ambassador to the US Nada Hamadeh Moawad (out of frame) and Israeli Ambassador to the US Yechiel Leiter (out of frame) at the State Department in Washington, DC, on April 14, 2026. (AFP)

There are few precedents for the direct talks between Lebanese and Israeli officials that began in Washington on Tuesday.

- 1949, Fragile armistice -

The first Arab-Israeli war began on May 15, 1948, the day after the declaration of the establishment of the State of Israel.

Five countries -- Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq -- had rejected a UN plan adopted in November 1947 to partition Palestine into Jewish and Arab states and went to war against the new state.

In 1949, Israel and neighboring countries signed armistice agreements, but they collapsed with the start of the 1967 Arab-Israeli War.

- 1983, Unimplemented agreement -

Israel invaded Lebanon on June 6, 1982, in an operation it dubbed "Peace for Galilee" that was initially aimed at expelling Palestinian fighters, but which resulted in a nearly 18-year Israeli occupation.

On May 17, 1983, Lebanon and Israel signed an agreement on the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon after four-and-a-half months of direct talks with US participation.

The deal was scrapped less than a year later, in March 1984, under pressure from Syria and its allies in Lebanon.

- 1991-93, Washington talks -

A series of bilateral negotiations between Israel and Syria, Lebanon, and a joint Jordanian-Palestinian delegation was launched in late 1991, following the Madrid conference on Middle East peace.

Ten rounds of bilateral talks were held in Washington over 20 months until 1993, but failed to produce results.

- 2022, Maritime border deal -

After years of US mediation, Lebanon and Israel reached an agreement on October 27, 2022, which demarcated their maritime border and set the terms for sharing offshore gas resources in the eastern Mediterranean.

There was no direct contact between the two sides, with the deal formalized through separate exchanges of letters with the United States.

- 2024, Fragile ceasefire -

A November 2024 ceasefire sought to end more than a year of fresh hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah, but Israeli forces kept up strikes in Lebanon, saying they aimed to prevent Hezbollah from rebuilding its capabilities.

In December 2025, civilian officials for the first time joined Lebanese and Israeli military representatives in ceasefire-monitoring meetings in southern Lebanon, led by the US and also involving France and the United Nations peacekeeping force.

The talks marked the first direct discussions between the two sides in decades.


What Does a ‘Blockade of the Blockade’ in the Strait of Hormuz Mean?

Ships and a boat in the Strait of Hormuz on April 12, 2026 (Reuters)
Ships and a boat in the Strait of Hormuz on April 12, 2026 (Reuters)
TT

What Does a ‘Blockade of the Blockade’ in the Strait of Hormuz Mean?

Ships and a boat in the Strait of Hormuz on April 12, 2026 (Reuters)
Ships and a boat in the Strait of Hormuz on April 12, 2026 (Reuters)

When Iran moved to close the Strait of Hormuz, it did not physically seal the waterway — for example, by fully mining it. Instead, it barred ships and oil tankers belonging to Gulf littoral states, as well as vessels from countries it considers adversaries, chiefly the United States and Israel, from transiting the strait.

At the same time, Tehran allowed its own tankers to pass, maintaining exports of about 1.5 million barrels per day to global markets.

In effect, Iran imposed a selective blockade on the Strait of Hormuz, closing it to much of the world while keeping it open for its own trade.

By contrast, US President Donald Trump’s proposal to impose a naval blockade on the strait and all Iranian ports would amount to a “blockade of the blockade.” Such a move would deny Iran access to the waterway altogether, halting both its oil and non-oil exports and dealing a severe blow to its economy.

Iran’s Gains and Losses

Oil prices surged after traffic through the strait was disrupted, rising from about $75–$80 a barrel before the February conflict to roughly $120–$126 at peak wartime levels.

With exports of around 1.5 million barrels per day, Iran is estimated to have earned an additional $60 million a day from higher prices. However, because about 90 percent of its crude is sold to China at discounted rates, the net additional gain is likely closer to $45 million a day.

These figures reflect incremental revenue. At an assumed average price of $100 a barrel, Iran’s total oil income would reach roughly $150 million a day, or about $4.5 billion a month, revenues that would be cut off under a full naval blockade.

Such a “blockade of the blockade” would likely push oil prices even higher. But its impact would extend beyond Iran. China, which buys the bulk of Iranian crude, would be among the most affected.

According to Pakistani diplomatic sources, Beijing played a key role in persuading Tehran at the last minute to accept a two-week truce announced on April 7 by Donald Trump. Some analysts believe that if China’s energy supplies are threatened, it could again press Iran to make concessions in talks with Washington aimed at ending the conflict.

Rerouting Shipping Traffic

Iran’s restrictions did more than limit access; they reshaped how ships moved through the strait.

Rather than formally altering internationally recognized shipping lanes, Iran imposed operational controls that effectively redirected maritime traffic. Vessels permitted to transit were steered toward routes closer to Iran’s coastline, particularly between Qeshm and Larak islands, instead of the traditional channels running between Abu Musa and the Greater and Lesser Tunb islands.

This shift created a de facto controlled corridor near Iranian shores without any formal declaration of new navigation routes.

In many cases, passage became contingent on prior coordination with Iranian authorities, permits, or even transit fees, marking a sharp departure from the previously unrestricted flow of traffic.

Iran has allowed “friendly” or neutral vessels to pass under certain conditions, while blocking those it deems hostile. It has also deployed drones, naval mines and fast attack craft to monitor and, when necessary, intercept ships that fail to comply.

The risks have forced many shipping companies to reroute vessels around the Cape of Good Hope or adopt longer, more secure paths, including routes closer to Iranian-controlled waters.

Before the conflict, roughly 130 to 150 ships transited the Strait of Hormuz each day. During the crisis, that number dropped sharply to about five vessels, or fewer, a day.


Baby Born in Tent on a Beirut Roadside Struggles to Survive, Her Family Displaced by War

Haifa Kenjo, who fled Israeli airstrikes on the southern suburbs of Beirut, holds her 15-day-old daughter Shiman inside the tent she uses as a shelter and where she gave birth to her in Beirut, Sunday, April 12, 2026. (AP Photo/Emilio Morenatti)
Haifa Kenjo, who fled Israeli airstrikes on the southern suburbs of Beirut, holds her 15-day-old daughter Shiman inside the tent she uses as a shelter and where she gave birth to her in Beirut, Sunday, April 12, 2026. (AP Photo/Emilio Morenatti)
TT

Baby Born in Tent on a Beirut Roadside Struggles to Survive, Her Family Displaced by War

Haifa Kenjo, who fled Israeli airstrikes on the southern suburbs of Beirut, holds her 15-day-old daughter Shiman inside the tent she uses as a shelter and where she gave birth to her in Beirut, Sunday, April 12, 2026. (AP Photo/Emilio Morenatti)
Haifa Kenjo, who fled Israeli airstrikes on the southern suburbs of Beirut, holds her 15-day-old daughter Shiman inside the tent she uses as a shelter and where she gave birth to her in Beirut, Sunday, April 12, 2026. (AP Photo/Emilio Morenatti)

All that newborn Shiman knows of the world is a flimsy tent along Beirut’s waterfront — the stench of mildewed blankets, stings of swarming insects and screams of Israeli warplanes striking the Lebanese capital.

As of Monday, she was 16 days old after being born here in the mud, said her mother, Haifa Kenjo.

Kenjo, 34, was nine months pregnant when Israeli attacks on Beirut’s southern suburbs of Dahiyeh sent her, her husband and their 2-year-old son, Khalid, running for their lives in sandals and pajamas. They had no time to bring anything as explosions shook the house, they said — not clothes, not cash.

They took refuge in a donated tent near downtown Beirut and secured the tarp with rocks as the wind threatened to rip it from the ground.

Of the more than 1 million people uprooted in Lebanon by this latest war between Israel and the Iran-backed Hezbollah, 13,500 are pregnant and more than 1,500 are expected to deliver in the next month, the United Nations’ sexual and reproductive health agency said this week, warning that many struggle to access adequate maternal care.

When life had been normal, Kenjo pictured giving birth at Beirut's main public hospital, where she delivered Khalid. She is originally from Syria, and although she has spent almost half her life in the Lebanese capital and married a Lebanese man, she must pay to access the country’s public hospitals, where Lebanese mothers can give birth for free.

When her water broke and she went into labor on March 28, she called an ambulance and her husband scraped together the $40 admission fee. But the $500 they needed to deliver Shiman at the hospital was buried in the ruins of their home, razed the week before in an Israeli airstrike.

They returned to the tent, called a midwife and prayed.

Umm Ali, the midwife, said she did her best, but the tent was filthy. The rain seeped inside. They washed tiny Shiman with bottled water.

Kenjo had no milk in her breasts to give her child. Infant formula costs more than her husband makes in a day installing water tanks.

She knows her baby is hungry. Volunteers passing out food in the displacement camp gave her just enough formula for the next few days.

Shiman doesn’t cry like a normal infant. She coughs. Her skin is cold and clammy, pockmarked with insect bites.

“She is so precious,” Kenjo said, stroking her baby girl. “But for her we have nothing. We have less than zero.”