US balances support and sanctions for Syria’s new Julani-led government

The US is holding the stick of sanctions while also offering support to the new Damascus government led by former al-Qaeda leader Abu Mohammad al-Julani (Ahmed al-Sharaa).

Tom Barrack, the US Ambassador to Turkey and Special Envoy for Syria, who has emerged as one of the biggest supporters of the Julani administration, has made another in a series of statements.

Barrack told al-Sharaa to reconsider his policies and adopt a “more inclusive” approach following last week’s clashes in Suwayda, which raised the possibility of a new sectarian war. Otherwise, he said, al-Sharaa would risk losing international support and facing the country’s fragmentation.

Speaking to Reuters in Beirut, where he was visiting to discuss the disarmament of Hezbollah, the envoy said that in private talks with Julani, he advised him to reconsider elements of the pre-war army structure, reduce “Islamist indoctrination,” and accept regional security assistance.

Barrack: Sharaa risks losing the momentum that brought him to power if he doesn’t make changes

Barrack argued that without rapid change, al-Sharaa risks losing the momentum that brought him to power.

Barrack said, “Sharaa should say: ‘I will adapt quickly, because if I do not, I will lose the universal momentum that is behind me.'”

The envoy also said that Julani could “mature as a president and say, ‘The right thing for me is not to pursue my own agenda, which has not been very effective.'”

Barrack also said the new government should consider being “faster and more inclusive” in integrating minorities into the power structure, but he denied reports that HTS-affiliated security forces were responsible for violations against Druze civilians.

According to the American diplomat, there is still no alternative to the current administration

Barrack suggested that ISIS militants may have disguised themselves in government uniforms and that videos posted on social media were unreliable as they could be easily manipulated. He claimed, “Syrian soldiers did not enter the city. These atrocities are not being committed by Syrian regime forces. They are not even in the city because they agreed with Israel that they would not enter.”

Arguing that the risks in Syria are dangerously high and that there is no “succession plan” or viable alternative to the country’s new government, Barrack said, “There is no Plan B for this Syrian regime. If this Syrian regime fails, someone is trying to provoke its failure. To what end? There is no successor.”

When asked if Syria could follow the terrible scenarios of Libya and Afghanistan, he replied, “Yes, and even worse.”

The Julani government has not been hostile to Israel from the outset

Barrack confirmed that the US does not support Israel’s airstrikes on Syria, saying the attacks increase the “confusion” in Syria.

Barrack said his message to Israel is to engage in dialogue to address its concerns about Syria’s new leaders, and that the US could play the role of an “honest broker” to help resolve any concerns.

He said that the Julani government has stated from the beginning that it is not an enemy of Israel and could normalize relations when the time is right.

The special envoy claimed that the US does not dictate what Syria’s political structure should be, saying it demands nothing but stability, unity, justice, and inclusivity.

Barrack said, “If they establish a federalist government, that is their decision. And the answer to the problem is that everyone may now need to adapt.”

Lifting the Caesar Act in Congress will be made conditional

On Tuesday, the US House Financial Services Committee passed a bill introduced by New York Republican Congressman Mike Lawler that would allow President Donald Trump to permanently lift significant sanctions on Syria within two years, provided the new government meets a series of conditions, including the release of political prisoners arrested by the deposed former leader Bashar al-Assad.

Trump had already lifted many sanctions on Syria. However, many members of Congress from both parties are skeptical of Trump’s embrace of the new Syrian leader so quickly.

In this context, Lawler’s proposal to impose conditions on the remaining US sanctions has led to an unprecedented alliance between “conservatives” and “progressives” who prefer the complete removal of sanctions.

In another example of bipartisan cooperation, two centrist Democratic lawmakers, Brad Sherman of California and Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey, helped Republicans advance the Lawler plan. Florida Representative Byron Donalds, who is close to Trump, voted “no” along with all other Democrats.

Lawler told Semafor, “The goal here is very clear: to ensure that this government can really establish itself and succeed. For that, of course, economic cooperation and the easing of sanctions need to begin.”

Nevertheless, the Representative added that he “thinks it would be foolish to lift all sanctions immediately without a truly stable situation on the ground,” pointing to the possibility of a “coup or the collapse of this newly established government.”

Lawler said he has been “in contact with members of the White House” about his legislation.

A 2-year transition period for the complete removal of sanctions

Donalds told Semafor, “I understand what Mike is trying to do, but I don’t think we should get ahead of the White House. A lot has changed on the ground; let’s give the president some time.”

Under current law, Trump has the authority to waive the remaining US sanctions on Syria under a law known as the Caesar Act every 180 days.

Lawler’s bill gives the new administration two years to certify that the new Syrian government has met the specified conditions before sanctions can be lifted completely.

Members of Congress who advocate for the complete removal of sanctions rather than Lawler’s solution include conservative Representative Joe Wilson, who called on the committee to “reconsider the measure,” and Representative Maxine Waters of California, the top Democrat on the Financial Services Committee.

Wilson said he supported an amendment proposed by Waters to Lawler’s bill on Tuesday, which was rejected.

Regarding Waters’ proposal, Wilson said, “Yes, she is right. It is very gratifying that the president has indicated he wants to give Syria a chance. The way to do that is to lift the sanctions completely so that the business community knows it can invest.”

Some Democrats were undecided before the vote. Greg Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told Semafor it was a “delicate situation.”

“If you lift all the sanctions at once, you know what that means. At the same time, you want to make sure that progress is being made. Maybe when I get out, I can tell you exactly what I think,” Meeks said, ultimately voting against the bill.

Amendment for “reasonable steps to protect religious and ethnic minorities”

The president cannot permanently lift the sanctions imposed by the Caesar Act unless Congress repeals the law (or allows it to expire in 2029).

Lawler acknowledged that “the administration’s position will be vital” to securing enough support in the House and Senate.

On the other hand, he expressed concerns about lifting sanctions following the events in Suwayda last week, where sectarian violence led to the death of a US citizen.

Lawler voted yes after accepting an amendment that added a new condition for lifting sanctions: “reasonable steps to protect religious and ethnic minorities.”

As the Trump administration tries to include Syria in the Abraham Accords, Lawler expressed optimism that his proposal could be a useful tool in this regard.

In May, the president had promised the new Syrian president that sanctions would be eased if Damascus agreed to normalize relations with Tel Aviv.

“This can be used as a tool to help normalize economic ties with the Israelis in practice,” Lawler said.