International sanctions placed on a conflict-affected State limit the ability of aid agencies to support civilians. In Syria, sanctions have had a profound impact on funding for humanitarian aid for forcibly displaced people.

International sanctions have become a key tool used by the United Nations Security Council, and occasionally by single States, to achieve various goals. The Security Council may impose sanctions to uphold international peace and security, and combat terrorism. States may impose sanctions to hold governments, individuals and entities accountable in countries grappling with armed conflicts and severe violations of international humanitarian and human rights law.

Crucially, any system of international sanctions, whether enacted by a State or the Security Council, must adhere to the principles of protecting civilian populations and vulnerable groups from the ravages of armed conflict. Equally importantly, these sanctions should not impede operations to fund humanitarian aid for forcibly displaced people.

The situation in Syria, where UNHCR estimates that 6.8 million people are internally displaced, serves as a case study on the profound impact of sanctions on funding for humanitarian aid. This case study demonstrates that sanctions imposed to protect the rights of the civilian population may have the opposite effect by hindering the ability of humanitarian agencies to deliver. Indeed, humanitarian organisations face numerous obstacles in funding aid and field operations to assist internally displaced persons in Syria.

Sanctions imposed on Syria since 2011

The United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union and other countries have all imposed sanctions on the Syrian government, government officials and related entities in response to war crimes and human rights violations committed since 2011. The stated purpose of these sanctions is to stop the Syrian government from using violence against its people and to push for necessary political reforms.

Both the US and the EU applied targeted sanctions, including asset freezes and entry bans, to Syrian individuals and entities involved in human rights violations against civilians. In 2011, the EU banned the trade of goods with Syria that could be used to oppress the civilian population and imposed an embargo on the Syrian oil sector.[i] This embargo has significantly affected the Syrian economy because oil exports to the EU accounted for about 20% of Syria’s GDP before the civil war.

The US also placed an embargo on the Syrian oil sector in 2011. Moreover, the US prohibited the export of goods and services from US territories or businesses or by individuals from the US to Syria. This particular measure has had a significant impact on the Syrian population as it led to an increase in the prices of essential goods and medical products.

Canada, Australia, and Switzerland imposed economic and financial sanctions on Syria in 2011 and 2012.

In 2012, the EU enforced further sanctions on Syria’s energy, arms supplies, mining and financial sectors. In addition, the EU prohibited trade in luxury goods and certain commercial products with Syria. At the same time, the EU strengthened restrictions imposed on Syria in the areas of armaments, law enforcement and telecommunications monitoring.[ii]

In 2012, the US introduced a special law called the Syria Human Rights Accountability Act to address human rights violations in Syria. This law imposes penalties on the transfer of goods or technologies to Syria that could be used to commit human rights violations.

Finally, in 2019, the US implemented the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, which imposed stricter sanctions on Syria, making it more difficult to fund humanitarian work in the region. Article 302 of the Caesar Act allows for humanitarian exemptions. Specifically, the article grants the Syrian president the power to waive sanctions for NGOs that provide humanitarian assistance in Syria. However, this has created several issues. Firstly, banks, insurers, logistics companies and aid suppliers often reject dealings with humanitarian NGOs, fearing that doing so may breach US or international sanctions and lead to their own sanctions.[iii] A second consequence of the act is financial institutions cutting ties with humanitarian actors and other organisations working in Syria through a process known as ‘de-risking’.[iv]

The impact of international sanctions on humanitarian aid funding

Aid workers interviewed for a report by Human Rights Watch stated that sanctions continue to hinder the ability of the humanitarian community to address the extensive needs in Syria. One major challenge is the bureaucratic hurdles, which are often confusing, time-consuming and costly. Banks, exporters and aid agencies must navigate these obstacles to comply with sanctions. While some humanitarian exceptions exist as permanent exemptions (meaning humanitarian organisations do not need approval to benefit from them), others require humanitarian organisations to apply for permission. In this complex sanctions environment, the application process often delays or obstructs rapid emergency response and adds to the cost and complexity of providing assistance.[v]

The broad and unclear nature of sanctions, along with the many legal frameworks and humanitarian exemptions, means sanctions can have a ‘chilling effect’. Private parties and financial institutions often avoid engaging with Syrian individuals or entities, even in sectors not covered by sanctions. Funders are requiring aid organisations to base their activities on risk assessments rather than needs assessments, which threatens their ability to provide aid to those most in need. Furthermore, the approach of financial institutions to minimising risk has made it difficult for aid groups to transfer money, run programmes or pay local staff and suppliers, even for activities not affected by sanctions.

The Security Council’s implementation of counterterrorism measures has also affected humanitarian operations in areas controlled by organised armed groups. These measures, prohibit the provision of funds, assets and economic resources, directly or indirectly, to specified terrorist groups. They consist of a series of Security Council resolutions on counterterrorism, financial sanctions imposed by member States on designated terrorist groups and additional restrictions imposed by donor countries in their funding agreements with humanitarian organisations.

As a result, humanitarian groups, banks and businesses must adhere to measures set by various States and entities. This often leads to overcompliance for fear of unintentionally violating the restrictions. If aid organisations and their staff are found to be in violation of sanctions or counterterrorism measures, they may face fines or prosecution and they may even lose their funding.[vi]

Funding challenges after the 2023 earthquakes

Humanitarian aid funding for displaced people in Syria suffered a considerable setback after the earthquakes on 6 February 2023. The earthquakes led to the deaths of over 4,000 Syrians in opposition-controlled areas in northwestern Syria and close to 400 in government-controlled areas. Vital infrastructure was destroyed, with buildings collapsing in the war-affected areas, including the governorates of Aleppo, Hama, Idlib and Latakia. Thousands of people were left homeless.

After the earthquakes, there were major challenges in sending money into Syria due to the existing sanctions. This affected humanitarian organisations trying to address emergency needs, as well as individuals outside Syria attempting to organise donation drives or send money to their affected families. One aid worker said, “We are trying to send emergency funding to our offices in Syria, but the process is slow due to the abundance of documents and paperwork required”.[vii]

Recommendations

International humanitarian law and other applicable legislation during armed conflict emphasises the importance of providing humanitarian aid to conflict victims, including internally displaced people. Such legislation underlines that access to humanitarian aid is a guaranteed right for all people in emergency situations that deprive them of the basic necessities of life. Their right to receive humanitarian assistance must be assured.

International sanctions imposed on individuals and government entities have a significant effect on countries in the grip of armed conflicts. In Syria, the sanctions imposed by many individual States have severely hampered the ability to fund and deliver humanitarian aid to the millions of displaced people. The already challenging humanitarian funding situation is exacerbated by the international sanctions imposed on individuals and non-governmental entities in Syria under the umbrella of combating terrorism.

Two recommendations can be made to galvanise the funding of humanitarian aid for forcibly displaced people. First, international sanctions should not be imposed excessively without considering the impact on displaced people in countries experiencing armed conflicts. This is especially significant in the case of Syria, where prolonged armed conflict, coupled with a devastating earthquake, has compounded the population’s suffering. Second, the international mechanism for delivering humanitarian aid in Syria should include ongoing exemptions for grants and funding for humanitarian organisations provided by donor countries. This is critical because international sanctions often make States hesitant to fund aid programmes due to the fear of being penalised by individual States and the Security Council.

 

Abdullah Ali Abbou
Professor of Public International Law, University of Duhok, Iraq
abdullah.abbou@uod.ac

 

[i] HFW (2011) ‘Syria Sanctions: EU Follows US Ban on Oil Imports, and Expands List of Designated Persons’ www.hfw.com/insights/syria-sanctions-eu-follows-us-ban

[ii] Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (2013) ‘EU arms embargo on Syria’ bit.ly/eu-arms-embargo-syria

[iii] The full text of the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act of 2019 (in Arabic) bit.ly/syria-civil-protection-act

[iv] The Washington Institute for Near East Policy (2023) ‘How the Caesar Act Restricts Normalisation with Syria’ bit.ly/caesar-act

[v] Human Rights Watch (2023) ‘Questions and Answers: How Sanctions Affect the Humanitarian Response in Syria’ bit.ly/sanctions-humanitarian-response-syria

[vi] The sanctions imposed by the Security Council against individuals and non-state entities are referred to as ‘smart’ or directed/targeted sanctions. The Security Council has issued numerous resolutions regarding the prosecution of terrorist groups and associated individuals and entities, imposing three kinds of sanctions: asset freeze, travel ban and arms embargo. These sanctions have been applied to the terrorist organisation Islamic State (ISIS) and its affiliated groups in other countries, especially Syria and Iraq, under Security Council Resolution 2170 of 2014. For more, see Dr. Abdullah Ali Abbou’s paper (in Arabic), ‘Security Council Sanctions against Individuals and Non-State Entities’, published in the Al-Rafidain Journal of Law, College of Law, University of Mosul, Volume 15, Issue 55, 2012, pp. 187–235 www.iasj.net/iasj/article/71139

[vii] bit.ly/sanctions-humanitarian-response-syria

 

READ THE FULL ISSUE