The Economic Hit-Man Arrived to Syria

All of my op-eds are freely available, thanks to the generous support of readers like you. Nonetheless, independent journalism takes time, research, and resources. If you find value in this piece or others I’ve published, please consider sharing it or becoming a paid subscriber. Your support, whether big or small, truly matters and helps keep this work going.

Want to buy me a coffee (or two)? Just click [here].

As the world watches Donald Trump receive Julani in the White House, something significant happened in the shadows. Something way more structural than one photo-op. Kristalina Georgieva, the head of the IMF, also met with Julani. And if you understand what the IMF really is, that meeting tells you more about the future of Syria than any handshake in DC ever could.

Because the IMF is not just some nice, neutral development bank. Even Zbigniew Brzezinski, in The Grand Chessboard, openly frames these institutions as tools of American geopolitical power. They’re part of the architecture that keeps countries inside Washington’s orbit without ever needing tanks or invasions. You don’t conquer them; you indebt them. And once that happens, policy becomes negotiable.

Which brings us straight into what John Perkins describes in Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. And honestly, once you hear his mechanism, IMF-Julani starts to click.

Here’s the basic playbook: the economic hit man doesn’t arrive with threats. He arrives with promises. Loans, development, shiny new infrastructure. Power plants, highways, dams — the kind of stuff that looks like progress from the outside. But the money never really stays in the country. It cycles right back out to foreign corporations. What the country gets is debt. Massive, unpayable debt.

And once that debt becomes a problem, the creditors roll in with the “solutions.” The IMF steps forward like a helpful doctor saying: “We can stabilize your economy, but you’ll need to implement reforms.” And those reforms always point in one direction: privatize your services, open up your markets, devalue your currency, cut your social spending, sell your national assets. Basically, hand over your economic sovereignty in slow motion.

That’s how the trap works. You don’t need coups if you can rewrite a country’s entire economic policy through debt conditionality.

And for countries that push back? Perkins lays out the escalation ladder. First comes persuasion. If that fails, then come covert pressures. And if that still doesn’t work, history shows what comes next: instability, coups, military intervention dressed up as humanitarian concern. It’s the carrot, the stick, and the hammer.

Now, here’s the part nobody talks about: Syria wasn’t even a debt-ridden country before the war. In 2010, Syria’s foreign debt was about 7 billion dollars. The economy was roughly 55 to 60 billion. So debt was maybe 12 to 15 percent of GDP — extremely manageable. For comparison:

Lebanon was drowning in debt at around 150 percent of GDP.
Egypt had 33 billion in external debt.
Turkey was pushing over 290 billion.
Jordan had similar debt to Syria, but with a much smaller economy.

Syria wasn’t in the danger zone. It wasn’t vulnerable to IMF leverage. It wasn’t begging for bailouts. And that independence — that ability to say “no” — is exactly what the IMF system can’t work with.

So when you see Kristalina Georgieva meeting Julani, you’re watching the prelude to a future where Syria’s reconstruction is done on IMF terms. Which means Washington’s terms. Which means privatization, foreign ownership, strategic compliance, and permanent economic dependency baked right into the country’s recovery.

The war reshaped the map with bombs. The IMF reshapes it with contracts.

That’s the part the cameras never show. And that’s why this meeting matters more than the headlines about Trump and Julani. Because political theater lasts one day. Debt lasts generations.

—Kevork Almassian is a Syrian geopolitical analyst and the founder of Syriana Analysis.