An unfortunate decision, but I suppose they have no choice if they want to attract foreign investment. I just hope this doesn’t result in Syrians being serfs to foreign interests as we see in subsaharan Africa.
I seriously doubt Syria would have no one interested in investing in them if they kept the socialist programs in place but got rid of things like torture and extrajudicial killings.
Somehow the world has no issue investing in China, Vietnam, Venezuela and other such countries. Sometimes the U.S. doesn’t trade with them, but that’s not the same thing.
Let’s accept this for what this is: another gift to the world’s oligarchs.
China and Vietnam have large private sectors with plenty of companies that attract foreign investment.
Venezuela does not. It had less than $1b in foreign direct investment in 2023. By comparison, Costa Rica had over $4b despite a smaller GDP and far smaller population than Venezuela.
Venezuela does not. It had less than $1b in foreign direct investment in 2023.
In 1991 Venezuela allowed many utilities to be privatized. This included their telephone and TV company, electrical grid, and many petroleum operations. In 2007, after billions of foreign direct investment was done, Venezuela appropriated and nationalized these industries again.
That’s a sure fire way to repel future foreign direct investment. The additional sanctions placed on Venezuela haven’t helped either.
The socialism they’re talking about here is a USSR-style central planned economy, just to make that clear. That sort of environment is absolutely hostile to foreign investment for many reasons, not the least of which is the corruption that will take decades to fully erase, if such a thing is even possible. For a demonstration of what that means today look at Egypt, which isn’t socialist but has many of the same problems due to the military’s encroachment on the market. The problem is that it’s impossible to compete with a state that doesn’t want to let you compete, so you’re at the mercy of the government in a way that tends to repel foreign investment.
Bashar already went on to a neoliberal course and privatized many businesses and removed many social securities that his father Hafiz granted.
The social contract in Syria under Hafiz was working on the basis of “If you keep your mouth shut, the government will ensure your everyday needs.” Under Bashar it was “We will fuck you economically and you keep your mouth shut, because we torture and kill you otherwise.” So there was only negatives, and a lack of things for people to lose, which is the basis of revolutions.
For an demonstration of what that means today look at Egypt, which isn’t socialist but has many of the same problems due to the military’s encroachment on the market
being stuck in the same country as sisi is purgatory
Well, if I were in Syrian leadership I don’t think I’d hold up those countries as examples to emulate… I’d maybe have picked Norway instead, or even 70s-era Portugal.
https://archive.is/mOdEn
An unfortunate decision, but I suppose they have no choice if they want to attract foreign investment. I just hope this doesn’t result in Syrians being serfs to foreign interests as we see in subsaharan Africa.
I seriously doubt Syria would have no one interested in investing in them if they kept the socialist programs in place but got rid of things like torture and extrajudicial killings.
Somehow the world has no issue investing in China, Vietnam, Venezuela and other such countries. Sometimes the U.S. doesn’t trade with them, but that’s not the same thing.
Let’s accept this for what this is: another gift to the world’s oligarchs.
China and Vietnam have large private sectors with plenty of companies that attract foreign investment.
Venezuela does not. It had less than $1b in foreign direct investment in 2023. By comparison, Costa Rica had over $4b despite a smaller GDP and far smaller population than Venezuela.
In 1991 Venezuela allowed many utilities to be privatized. This included their telephone and TV company, electrical grid, and many petroleum operations. In 2007, after billions of foreign direct investment was done, Venezuela appropriated and nationalized these industries again.
That’s a sure fire way to repel future foreign direct investment. The additional sanctions placed on Venezuela haven’t helped either.
The socialism they’re talking about here is a USSR-style central planned economy, just to make that clear. That sort of environment is absolutely hostile to foreign investment for many reasons, not the least of which is the corruption that will take decades to fully erase, if such a thing is even possible. For a demonstration of what that means today look at Egypt, which isn’t socialist but has many of the same problems due to the military’s encroachment on the market. The problem is that it’s impossible to compete with a state that doesn’t want to let you compete, so you’re at the mercy of the government in a way that tends to repel foreign investment.
Bashar already went on to a neoliberal course and privatized many businesses and removed many social securities that his father Hafiz granted.
The social contract in Syria under Hafiz was working on the basis of “If you keep your mouth shut, the government will ensure your everyday needs.” Under Bashar it was “We will fuck you economically and you keep your mouth shut, because we torture and kill you otherwise.” So there was only negatives, and a lack of things for people to lose, which is the basis of revolutions.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Syria#1990s–2000s:_Liberalization_and_privatization
being stuck in the same country as sisi is purgatory
Thankfully I managed to get away (sort of) but yeah, that was not a fun time.
Well, if I were in Syrian leadership I don’t think I’d hold up those countries as examples to emulate… I’d maybe have picked Norway instead, or even 70s-era Portugal.
Edit: or Tanzania, which may be a better fit.