As Iraq continues its efforts to diversify its oil export routes and reduce its reliance on the Strait of Hormuz, Syria has emerged as a strategic option for reviving the historic oil pipeline route.

The decision, supported by regional and international understandings, is based on several key factors that have given the Syrian route an advantage over the Jordanian alternative. These include engineering feasibility, transportation capacity, geographical positioning, and geopolitical considerations.

A central factor behind Iraq’s preference for the Syrian route is the existence of the historic Kirkuk-Baniyas oil pipeline, which dates back to the 1950s. The pipeline once connected Iraq’s oil fields with the port of Baniyas on Syria’s Mediterranean coast, providing a solid foundation for a potential rehabilitation project.

Despite the need for comprehensive reconstruction and modernization, the existence of an established pipeline infrastructure represents a major advantage in terms of cost and implementation timeline compared with building an entirely new route. The historic corridor reduces the need for lengthy initial studies and planning phases required for new projects, making rehabilitation a more practical and faster option.

By contrast, the proposed Basra-Aqaba pipeline project with Jordan has yet to reach the same level of structural readiness as the Syrian route. While the project has advanced through feasibility studies and planning stages, it lacks the historical infrastructure that can be restored and reused, meaning that construction costs and implementation timelines would be significantly higher.

Estimates indicate that rehabilitating the Haditha-Baniyas pipeline could allow the transportation of up to two million barrels of crude oil per day. Such a large design capacity would make the pipeline a vital export artery for Iraqi oil, strengthening Baghdad’s flexibility in global energy markets.

The strategic location of the Baniyas port on the Mediterranean coast provides Iraq with a direct and independent gateway to European and Mediterranean markets. This diversification would reduce Iraq’s dependence on the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway exposed to geopolitical tensions, while contributing to greater stability in global oil supplies.

The Iraqi-Syrian pipeline rehabilitation project has also attracted notable international attention, particularly from the United States. Washington views alternative export routes as strategically important in reducing vulnerabilities linked to the Strait of Hormuz, limiting excessive regional dependence on a single energy corridor, and supporting global energy security.

In practical terms, Iraq and Syria have signed several memoranda of understanding aimed at reviving the pipeline, with potential involvement from international energy companies. The combination of political coordination between Baghdad and Damascus and external interest could create conditions for advancing the project while expanding economic cooperation between the two countries.

Syria’s geographical position also gives Iraq a relatively shorter and more direct route to the Mediterranean compared with the route through Jordan. The shorter distance reduces construction and maintenance costs while improving the efficiency of oil transportation.

A shorter route also means faster delivery times to international markets, potentially improving the competitiveness of Iraqi crude exports. This economic advantage strengthens the long-term viability of the Syrian option.

Iraq’s move toward Syria as a key route for reviving its oil pipeline network reflects a broader strategic calculation aimed at protecting economic interests and strengthening geopolitical flexibility.

At the same time, the Basra-Aqaba pipeline project has faced persistent challenges, particularly the enormous financing requirements, which run into billions of dollars, as well as political debates and the need for long-term security and investment guarantees, including possible build-operate-transfer arrangements.

Although Jordan remains an important strategic partner, offering Iraq access to the Red Sea and helping meet part of Jordan’s energy needs, delays in securing international and regional financing have pushed Baghdad toward activating multiple export options rather than relying on a single project that has faced prolonged delays.

Current indications suggest that Iraq has not completely replaced the Jordan option with Syria. Instead, Baghdad appears to be pursuing a strategy of risk diversification and maintaining multiple pathways for its oil exports. The Basra-Aqaba pipeline remains a strategic option, but financing, security concerns, and decades-long planning challenges have prevented it from moving forward at the expected pace.

Meanwhile, the push to revive the Haditha-Baniyas pipeline through Syrian territory responds to an urgent need created by concerns over maritime security in the Gulf and potential disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz.

By leveraging existing infrastructure, securing substantial export capacity, gaining direct access to the Mediterranean, and benefiting from international support, Iraq seeks to strengthen its position as a major player in global energy markets while reducing vulnerabilities in its oil supply chain.

The decision is therefore not merely an economic calculation. It forms part of a wider strategy to enhance Iraq’s energy security, expand its regional options, and adapt to a rapidly changing global energy landscape.