The EU’s Position Toward Syria: Step-by-Step, Not Step-for-Step

Interview: Stefan Schneck, Germany’s Special Envoy for Syria

Q: How have recent military and security developments in Syria shifted Germany’s policy?

A: It changed everything for us. Previously, we adhered to the EU’s “three no’s” policy: no lifting of sanctions, no normalization, and no reconstruction. This has now turned around. Syria has become of utmost importance for the EU, particularly regarding European stability and the humanitarian and regional challenges it poses. Given the risks involved, we decided it was time to engage. We made our first visit to Mr. Al-Sharaa on December 17, signaling rapid engagement. The shift in Germany’s attitude toward Syria has been dramatic.

Q: Within the EU, is Germany advocating to lift all outdated unilateral sectoral sanctions or pursuing a step-by-step approach?

A: This is a first step among many within a step-by-step approach, not a step-for-step approach linked to specific conditions as seen with the UN. It is about building consensus among 27 member states that will ultimately lead to unified policy. Discussions on lifting sanctions began with the first proposal presented by Germany in December. While the political decision has been made, implementing the suspension of sanctions will take weeks due to the legal frameworks that must be developed.

This process is not directly tied to conditions but reflects Europe’s readiness to engage, provided there is no negative regression. We also need to explain this shift to European parliamentarians and the public, particularly regarding engagement with the transitional government. However, lifting sanctions alone is insufficient. A broader improvement in the investment climate, including trust in governance, the rule of law, and an end to corruption, is essential.

Q: What does Germany expect from the Caretaker Government, and how long might this process take?

A: The Aqaba document outlines the need for an inclusive political process. This is not a condition imposed by the West but a recognition that stability and security can only be achieved through inclusiveness. This includes transitional justice, which is essential for human rights, internal peace, and economic development. A process of justice that avoids exclusion or revenge is vital for Syria’s future.

Q: Would Germany place geopolitical or security-related demands on the Caretaker Government, such as economic or social inclusiveness?

A: No, we oppose such linkages. It is crucial that this remains a Syrian-led process. Syrians must negotiate internally to define their interests. Positive developments—such as renationalizing Iranian-held assets—are encouraging, but we believe external demands should not dictate this process.

Q: What immediate and long-term impacts do you expect from suspending sanctions?

A: The suspension targets key areas like finance, transportation, and electricity. It aims to ease challenges directly involving the everyday life of Syrians, such as sending money to Syria, and encourage investments. However, improving Syria's economy requires more than lifting sanctions. An improved investment climate—addressing issues like freedom, security, and corruption—is also necessary. Concrete examples, such as small and medium-sized enterprises led by Syrians returning from abroad, demonstrate the potential for economic revival.

Q: Can you explain in layman’s terms what the easing of sanctions involves, particularly regarding the banking sector?

A: It involves suspending sanctions in various areas while extending humanitarian exemptions. The political decision has been made, but details are still being finalized. The intent is to allow financial transactions, making it easier for families to send money or for investments to occur. However, issues like overcompliance will remain challenges. This is not a complete solution, but a step in the right direction.

Q: Are there plans for targeted communication to clarify business opportunities in Syria under the new exemptions, given overcompliance and the time-bound nature of these suspensions?

A: Yes, communication and guidance are necessary, but challenges remain, such as reluctance from banks, general insecurity, and uncertainty about Syria’s political future. This will be a gradual process, requiring parallel progress in transitional justice, political development, and economic stability.

Q: How aligned is Germany’s foreign policy on Syria with its regional partners and the US, given examples like Iran, where EU efforts to ease sanctions failed without US buy-in?

A: It is essential to have the buy-in of all regional and international partners. The Aqaba process and recent meetings aim to ensure a coordinated approach. Developments on the ground have been rapid, and there is cautious optimism that key actors understand the need for stabilization and cooperation. However, the absence of any major partner could pose significant challenges.

Q: Do you foresee the German government increasing its humanitarian contribution to Syria, particularly for the refugee file? Would Germany consider funding companies like Siemens to rehabilitate power turbines in Deir Ali?

A: The Brussels conference will provide more clarity. Regarding Deir Ali, we have already engaged politically toward long-term reconstruction efforts. Siemens has assessed the situation and is prepared to begin work. Electricity generation and grid restoration are critical for stabilizing Damascus and Syria as a whole. While Germany typically provides grants, this may involve investment rather than donations, and a financing mechanism will be found.

Q: How does Germany view the current UN designation of HTS, and has it discussed a potential review with EU partners, especially given the US exemptions under its general license?

A: The designation of HTS is primarily a UN issue, decided by P5 members. Germany, as a non-P5 member, has limited influence. The US indeed has issued exemptions under its domestic legislation. In contrast, the EU implements UN decisions without unilateral exemptions.