ODIOUS DEBTS AND SYRIAN SITUATION

Abstract

This study examines the applicability of the doctrine of odious debts to the financial obligations arising between Syria and both Russia and Iran during the Syrian conflict, with the aim of assessing the extent to which these obligations conform to the criteria associated with this doctrine. The study is based on the theoretical framework developed by Alexander Sack.

Methodologically, the study adopts a descriptive-analytical approach with a comparative dimension through a review of relevant legal and economic literature, as well as an analysis of available data and reports concerning the financial obligations incurred during the Syrian conflict. The study also draws on a number of historical cases in which the doctrine of odious debt has been invoked.

Furthermore, the study provides an analysis of the potential economic implications of these obligations, focusing on their impact on macroeconomic indicators, the capacity to finance public services, and the requirements of economic recovery and reconstruction.

The findings suggest that a significant portion of the financial obligations associated with the conflict period may raise legal and economic questions regarding their consistency with certain criteria of the odious debt doctrine, particularly with respect to the use of borrowed funds and the circumstances under which these obligations were incurred, while taking into account the political, economic, and legal particularities that distinguish the Syrian case from many other comparative cases.