Mohamad Aljashi

Researchers

Post Graduate Studies & Research Council Meeting No. 4, 11/05/2025

Date of Acceptance

This study examines the legitimacy of Syria’s debt obligations to Russia and Iran within the framework of the Odious Debt Doctrine. It explores the legal basis for Syria’s non-recognition of these debts, emphasizing that they were primarily used to finance military operations and political repression rather than benefiting the Syrian population. The research applies international legal principles, including Ex Injuria Jus Non Oritur and the International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility (2001), to argue that Russia and Iran, as direct participants in the Syrian conflict, cannot legally claim debt repayment.

The study further proposes mechanisms for debt cancellation, including the establishment of a UN-supervised arbitration tribunal, the initiation of war reparation claims at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and leveraging diplomatic and economic pressure to delegitimize these debts within the IMF and World Bank. By drawing comparisons with historical precedents, such as Iraq (2003), Ecuador (2008) and South Africa (post-apartheid), the research highlights potential pathways for Syria to repudiate its odious debt and seek accountability for war-related damages.

The findings underscore the necessity for Syria’s new government to adopt a formal stance rejecting these debts, pursue international legal remedies, and mobilize global support to ensure a just economic recovery free from illegitimate financial burdens.

Abstract