Lift sanctions to give Syria a chance of rebuilding

Syrians could be forgiven for disillusionment. Four months after the fall of Bashar al-Assad in December, following five decades of brutal dictatorship by his family, Syria’s economy lies in ruins and its politics is volatile. Just last month hundreds, perhaps more, died in sectarian violence.

Yet a poll conducted for The Economist in the days before and after the violence in March suggests that Syrians remain surprisingly upbeat. That presents an opportunity both for Ahmed al-Sharaa, the rebel who is now the interim president, and for Western countries keen to help Syria thrive. They must not waste it.

The results of our survey, a rare comprehensive public poll to be conducted in the country, paint a remarkably positive picture. A striking 70% of Syrians from across the country and across ethnic and religious groups say they are optimistic about the future. Some 80% feel freer than they did under Mr Assad. A similar share has a favourable view of Mr Sharaa. Two-thirds say security has improved despite the clashes.

Such numbers must be read with care in a traumatised country with little experience of free speech. But they suggest that, despite deep divisions, not least between the Sunni Muslim majority and the once-dominant Alawite minority, Syrians still trust Mr Sharaa to try to rebuild the country. Since becoming interim president in late January, he has taken some steps to live up to their expectations. Over the weekend he made good on a delayed promise to appoint an interim cabinet. It is dominated by Mr Sharaa’s acolytes and lacks a prime minister, but the leadership now includes members of minority groups, technocrats and a woman.

That is welcome. Particularly if the ministers are given real power to do their jobs, the new cabinet could assuage concerns about Mr Sharaa’s tendency to centralise power. Mr Sharaa should also use the supportive mood to complete his consolidation of Syria’s disparate armed groups to prevent new outbreaks of sectarian violence.

Yet the president’s main challenge remains reviving Syria’s wrecked economy. Our poll demonstrates the urgency of that task, with 58% of respondents saying the economy has either stagnated or declined since he took over from Mr Assad. Mr Sharaa has not paid most civil servants since he took control of Damascus in December. Cash is in short supply. If things do not improve soon, his popularity will be unlikely to last.

One big obstacle is that Western sanctions on Syria have not yet been lifted. Designed to isolate Mr Assad, they now hobble the new government’s attempts to reconnect Syria to the global economy. They prevent investment by foreign firms in reconstruction and limit Syria’s access to the global banking system, making it nearly impossible for the country to be paid for goods it exports. Syria has been forced to buy Russian oil carried on ships under American sanctions. Without enough foreign investment and export revenue, Mr Sharaa cannot begin to revive the country.

America and Europe have reasons to be wary of financing Mr Sharaa, given his past as a jihadist with roots in al-Qaeda. But they underestimate the dangers of inaction. As we have previously argued, their hesitation is wrong-headed. If Syria’s economy continues to languish, extremists and those with an interest in creating chaos will be the only beneficiaries, and violence will surely erupt again.

Relief could be offered in a way that lets sanctions snap back, should Mr Sharaa ever be tempted to turn Syria into a jihadist state. For now, though, Syrians seem to believe his protestations that he is planning no such thing. The West should lift sanctions and give long-suffering Syrians a fair shot at rebuilding their shattered society. ■