In Damascus, US envoy inks $7 billion energy deal, calls for Israel-Syria peace pact
The agreement was sealed at the presidential palace in Damascus in the presence of interim leader Ahmed al-Sharaa and US ambassador Thomas Barrack. It aims to generate 5,000 megawatts.
Syrian Energy Minister Mohammad al-Bashir called it a "historic moment" and a "turning point" for the country's shattered infrastructure.
The consortium is led by Qatar 's UCC Concession Investments and includes Turkey 's Kalyon GES Enerji Yatirimlari and Cengiz Enerji, along with Power International USA.
Syria's 14-year civil war wrecked its power grid, leaving people with up to 20 hours of daily blackouts.
The project includes four gas-powered plants in central and eastern Syria and a 1,000-megawatt solar farm in the south. Bashir said the plants would use US and European technology.
Barrack said US President Donald Trump had lifted sanctions on Syria unconditionally and pledged ongoing support.
Trump, he said, offered Syria his "unceasing commitment" to turn borders "into a tapestry of commerce and cooperation".
UCC chief executive Ramez al-Khayyat said the deal would create more than 50,000 direct and 250,000 indirect jobs.
Last week, Turkish Energy Minister Alparslan Bayraktar said his country would begin supplying Syria with two billion cubic metres of gas a year – enough to generate 1,300 megawatts.
Syria has ramped up efforts to lure investment after the United States and European Union said they would lift sanctions.
In March, Qatar began funding gas supplies to Syria via Jordan to help ease power shortages.
US suggests Syria-Israel non-aggression deal
While in Damascus, Barrack, called for a non-aggression agreement between Syria and Israel in remarks to Saudi channel Al Arabiya on Thursday.
Syria and Israel have technically been at war since 1948, with Israel taking the Golan Heights from Syria in 1967.
Since the ouster in December of former president Bashar al-Assad, Israel has carried out hundreds of air strikes and multiple incursions into Syria.
Barrack said the conflict between the two countries was a "solvable problem".
To him, Syria and Israel could "start with just a non-aggression agreement, talk about boundaries and borders" to build a new relationship with its neighbour.
On May 8, Sharaa said in France that Syria was holding "indirect talks through mediators" with Israel to "try to contain the situation so it does not reach the point where it escapes the control of both sides".
US ambassador's residence inaugurated
Barrack, who is also ambassador to Turkey, inaugurated the US ambassador's residence in the Syrian capital with Syrian Foreign Minister Assaad al-Shaibani, state media outlet SANA reported.
AFP photographers saw the US flag raised at the ambassador's residence, just a few hundred metres (yards) from the US embassy in the Abu Rummaneh neighbourhood, under tight security.
"Tom understands there is great potential in working with Syria to stop Radicalism, improve Relations, and secure Peace in the Middle East," Trump said, according to a post on the State Department's X.
The US embassy in Syria was closed after Assad's repression of a peaceful uprising that began in 2011, which degenerated into civil war.
Washington has not formally reopened its embassy in Damascus, but Barrack's visit and the raising of the flag were a significant signal of warming relations between the two countries.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
LeMonde
18 minutes ago
- LeMonde
EU-US trade deal: A bittersweet compromise for the EU
The palpable relief among European officials following the announcement of the trade agreement reached on Sunday, July 27, by Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen spoke volumes about the ordeal the US president had imposed on the European Union (EU). Fearing a 30% tariff on goods exported to the United States starting August 1, Europe was satisfied to escape with a 15% rate. Finalized in Turnberry, Scotland, at one of the luxury golf resorts owned by the billionaire, the agreement at this stage remains silent on the specific list of exemptions that the Commission negotiated for the most sensitive sectors. Trump highlighted the EU's commitment to purchase $750 billion worth of energy and make an additional $600 billion in investments in the US. The outcome of the talks, with its ambiguities, leaves a bitter aftertaste. Given the size of its market (450 million consumers) and its status as the US's second-largest supplier of goods, Europe seemed at first to have stronger leverage than Japan in seeking a rate lower than 15%. The changing benchmarks set by negotiators illustrated their setbacks. At the end of June, the EU aimed for less than 10%. By mid-July, the bloc thought it was on the verge of securing 10%, the rate negotiated by the United Kingdom, the US's third-largest trading partner. The uneven compromise advocated by the Commission underscored how difficult it was for the 27 member states to assert themselves against a former ally who not only seeks to impose its own rules on the rest of the world, but is pursuing a political agenda to weaken the EU. Urged by France to take a tougher stance in the final stretch, with the adoption of a package of retaliatory measures worth €93 billion that would have taken effect on August 7 if trade talks failed, the president of the European Commission was, not without reason, focused on maintaining European unity in the face of the temptation for each country to go its own way. Deeply involved in transatlantic trade, Germany – and even more so Italy – were not ready for confrontation. The need to secure US support in Ukraine and America's contribution to European defense also weighed heavily in the decision. Presented as the lesser evil, the 15% tariff followed previous increases imposed by Trump on steel and aluminum (50%), as well as on automobiles and auto parts (25%). These measures are bound to affect the competitiveness of the companies involved and drive prices higher. In exchange, von der Leyen and the business world are clinging to the hope of stabilizing the economic environment. In reality, they have no such guarantee. Unpredictable and abrupt, Trump has broken with all the rules of international trade. Three days after the summit between China and the EU – which ended in a dialogue of the deaf and highlighted Brussels' inability to obtain even a minimal rebalancing of trade – the handshake between Trump and von der Leyen epitomized the current balance of power: In the emerging new world order taking shape, contrary to the values it defends, Europe is not breaking ranks, but its current purely defensive approach offers no protection against future power plays.
Euronews
41 minutes ago
- Euronews
How much has monthly rent in European city centres changed since 2020?
As rent prices across the bloc keep climbing, the biggest jump in costs over the past five years was detected in Southern and Eastern Europe. This is according to a recent Deutsche Bank report, which scrutinised 67 cities worldwide and 28 in Europe. According to Eurostat, house prices increased by 27.3% between the first quarters of 2020 and 2025, while rents rose by 12.5% from June 2020 to June 2025. But this report indicates that rent increases in city centres were significantly greater than this average. So, as of 2025, which European cities have the most expensive rents? Where are rents the most affordable? And which cities have seen the largest increases since 2020? Athens is the cheapest, London the most expensive In 2025, the monthly rent for a three-bedroom flat in the centre of 28 cities in Europe ranges from €1,080 in Athens to €5,088 (or £4,278) in London. European cities can be grouped into three categories based on rent levels: After London, the most expensive places to rent in Europe are Zurich, Geneva, and Amsterdam, all above €3,800. Swiss cities are the priciest, with rents over €4,250. Dublin, Luxembourg, Paris, Copenhagen, and Munich also have high rents, all above €3,000. These cities are major financial, political, or international centres, driving strong demand for housing. Several well-developed cities have mid-range rents between €2,000 and €3,000. Milan, Edinburgh, and Lisbon are on the higher end of this range. Madrid, Stockholm, Berlin, Frankfurt, and Barcelona are a bit more affordable, with average rents around €2,500. Birmingham, Brussels, Vienna, and Prague are closer to €2,100. These cities offer relatively lower living costs compared to the top tier. Only five European cities have average rents below €2,000. In addition to the lowest, Athens, they include Budapest (€1,225), Istanbul (€1,614), Warsaw (€1,881), and Helsinki (€1,928). These figures show that Western and Northern Europe have the highest rents. Strong economies, high living standards, and housing shortages are key factors in these cities. Southern and Central Europe have more mixed rent levels, while Eastern and Southeastern Europe remain the most affordable. When non-European countries are included in the report, New York stands out as an outlier with average rents of €7,676 ($8,388), while Cairo is the cheapest at just €377. Average salaries in the city centres of Dubai and Sydney exceed €4,000. This makes them more expensive than most European cities. Rents in Toronto, Seoul, Tokyo, Moscow, and Shanghai fall into the mid-range at around €2,500. Rents for a one-bedroom apartment in the centre Rent for a one-bedroom dwelling mostly follows the same pattern as three-bedroom. However, some cities change places in the ranking. The price ratios are also different. Still, London (€2,732 or £2,297) remains the most expensive in Europe, while Athens (€595) is the cheapest. In general, one-bedroom apartments cost about half as much as three-bedroom ones. This share rises to 64% in Oslo and 62% in San Francisco, but drops to 37% in Seoul. That's why San Francisco surpasses London in one-bedroom rent prices globally. Where rents increased the most The report shows figures in US dollars, but we converted them to euros for a fairer comparison. Changes may differ when viewed in local currencies. Between 2020 and 2025, monthly rent for a three-bedroom apartment in city centres across Europe increased by between 3% in Helsinki and 206% in Istanbul. In general, Southern and Eastern Europe experienced the strongest rent increases. Lisbon (81%), Prague (73%), and Edinburgh (71%) followed Istanbul, each with rises of over 70%. Rents also rose significantly in Spain—by 65% in Barcelona and 59% in Madrid. Athens and Warsaw were the other two European cities that saw just over 50% increases. Rent changes vary by apartment size For a one-bedroom apartment in the city centre, the highest and lowest rent increases across Europe between 2020 and 2025 were still seen in Istanbul (191%) and Helsinki (18%). The increase in Helsinki was higher compared to that for a three-bedroom flat (3%). In some cities, the rent increase was higher for three-bedroom apartments—such as Istanbul (15 percentage points more), Prague (23 pp), and Amsterdam (10 pp). Other cities saw greater increases for one-bedroom flats, including Milan (20 pp) and Warsaw (10 pp). 'Big cities, bigger housing costs' shows how housing prices can vary significantly within a country. For example, housing in London is 50% more expensive than the UK average. Income levels matter when discussing rent affordability. 'Europe's cities ranked by rent-to-salary ratio' article compares average incomes with rental costs.
Euronews
an hour ago
- Euronews
The Baltics scored a key European victory on energy security that can inspire others
Recent crises have highlighted the critical role that energy plays in our economies and societies. From Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East to blackouts in Chile and Spain, we have been repeatedly reminded of the need to ensure the security and reliability of our energy supplies, which can never be taken for granted. In this context, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania took a bold step forward this year to strengthen their energy security, which deserves widespread attention. For 65 years, the electricity systems of the three Baltic states operated fully within the Russian and Belarusian system, which Russia controls. Yet earlier this year, following extensive preparations, they switched away from this system and connected to the continental European grid instead. This is a clear and concrete example of what it means to take the hard but necessary actions to strengthen energy security, especially in an era of heightened geopolitical tensions. The change was not only a significant technical success but also a political victory for the entire European Union. Synchronising the electricity systems of the Baltic states with the rest of Europe helps to ensure the reliability of power supply for homes, businesses, hospitals and schools. It bolsters national and economic security. And it marks an important step towards closer integration with the EU's internal energy market – something Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania have been working towards since their independence from the Soviet Union in 1990. Strategic steps towards independence Before this reorientation, Russia retained sole control over a critical parameter of the Baltics' electricity systems: frequency. This meant it had the capacity to influence how the power systems in the Baltic states operated, making them vulnerable to Russia's weaponisation of energy. The Baltics long recognised this as a potential threat. In 2007, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania signalled their political will to desynchronise from the Russian system, and in 2018, they highlighted their intention to join the continental European system by the end of 2025. In the years that followed, the Baltic states took strategic steps towards greater energy independence from Russia, with a continued focus on their power systems. They approved and implemented key investments in infrastructure, including electricity connections to Poland, Finland and Sweden and among the Baltic states themselves. More than 40 projects were carried out in relation to the synchronisation project alone – including the installation of new and reconstructed power lines, substations, synchronous condensers and additional storage capacity. As a result, when Russia went on a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in early 2022, the Baltic states were able to move swiftly – immediately ending electricity imports from Russia, which met between 10% and 25% of the Baltic states' total electricity demand on average. Then, on 9 February 2025, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania disconnected from Russia's power system and synchronised with Europe's through Poland – meeting this longstanding objective ahead of schedule and without incidents. Baltic states can serve as inspiration to others Reconfiguring an electricity system is a major undertaking, and this success was the result of many ingredients. Engineering was just one of them. Strong political will and long-term vision ensured direction and continuity across different governments. Meanwhile, cooperation – both among the sprawling network of power system stakeholders and regionally – also proved essential. Poland was pivotal in providing the necessary infrastructure and political support. The European Union also contributed significantly – financing 75% of the synchronisation investment costs. This strong example of regional cooperation can serve as a model to follow in other parts of the world that are looking to better integrate their electricity systems and markets, including Southeast Asia and more. Today, the Baltics are formulating new goals to deepen their energy security. This includes a push, together with Poland, to ensure the protection and resilience of critical energy infrastructure, which has recently come under threat. A new flagship framework for accomplishing this, based on four priorities – prevention, detection, response and repair – could ultimately serve as a blueprint for safeguarding critical energy infrastructure across the European Union and beyond. The successful and timely implementation of this new model will also require political and financial support from the European Union. We live in a complex and dangerous world today, with a wide range of serious energy security challenges – from geopolitical tensions to cyberattacks and extreme weather. In this context, it is vital to anticipate and prepare for adverse events before they happen. Through smart policymaking, courage and collaboration, the Baltic states are demonstrating what this looks like – and can serve as an inspiration to many countries around the world. Fatih Birol is Executive Director of International Energy Agency (IEA), Kaspars Melnis is Minister for Climate and Energy of Latvia, Andres Sutt is Minister of Energy and the Environment of Estonia, and Žygimantas Vaičiūnas is Energy Minister of Lithuania.
