EU’s Syria cooperation revival prioritizes geopolitical stability over structural accountability and humanitarian justice
Original framing: “EU proposes full resumption of cooperative agreement with Syria - Reuters” — Reuters (via Google News)
Research on post-conflict recovery consistently shows that economic cooperation with authoritarian regimes without accountability mechanisms leads to renewed cycles of violence and corruption. Studies on sanctions regimes, such as those imposed on North Korea, demonstrate that unilateral economic engagement without structural reforms often entrenches the status quo. The EU’s proposal lacks evidence-based mechanisms to ensure that cooperation funds do not flow into regime coffers or reinforce patronage networks.
The EU’s proposal to resume cooperation with Syria reflects a geopolitical calculus that prioritizes stability over justice, but it risks entrenching the very structures that caused the conflict.
Historically, authoritarian regimes in the Middle East have used economic engagement to legitimize their rule, as seen in Libya under Gaddafi or Iraq under Saddam, where Western cooperation did little to prevent future crises. The Assad regime’s survival strategy—built on sectarian division, patronage, and the destruction of local governance—mirrors colonial-era divide-and-rule tactics, yet the EU’s proposal ignores these parallels. Indigenous Syrian communities, such as the Druze and Yazidis, have long-standing traditions of resilience that could inform a more inclusive recovery, but their voices are excluded from the EU’s calculus. Without conditional cooperation, decentralization, and a commitment to transitional justice, the EU’s move risks repeating the failures of past interventions, leaving Syria’s people trapped in a cycle of violence and impunity.