Inside a Dark Pact: A timeline of events
By 
Aly McDevitt2025-09-24T18:54:00
Amid Syria’s descent into civil war, Lafarge’s quest to keep its $680 million cement plant running led to secret deals with terrorists—and ultimately, a historic U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) prosecution for aiding ISIS.
The path to the DOJ’s landmark prosecution of Paris-based Lafarge began benignly enough: In 2010, Lafarge built a cement plant in the Jalabiyeh region of Syria for $680 million—the same year the Arab Spring began in Tunisia. The plant, a subsidiary called Lafarge Cement Syria (LCS), operated at a loss much of the time, according to Holcim.
Related articles
-
In-depth reportInside a Dark Pact: Danger of their own making and a critical series of missteps
Paris-based cement maker Lafarge thought it was saving a plant—instead, it built a pipeline to the Islamic State of Syria.
-
In-depth reportInside a Dark Pact: Background and evolution of a scheme
Middlemen were used and invoices were falsified, but the trail remained. French cement maker Lafarge’s Syrian cement plant began as a business in a war zone, but it soon spiraled into a revenue-sharing agreement with ISIS that led to historic charges of financing terrorism.
-
In-depth reportInside a Dark Pact: Lafarge’s terrorist funding and compliance fallout in Syria
Compliance Week’s latest case study investigates French cement maker Lafargeʼs collapse into criminal conduct detailing how sidelining ethics and compliance can lead companies into dangerous territory. What began as “local concessions” ended in funding terrorism—and a historic legal and reputational disaster.
More from Case Studies
-
PremiumNavigating top risks in the insurance industry
Cyber threats, climate-related catastrophes, and disruptive technologies remain top risks reshaping the U.S. insurance industry. The question is how chief risk officers at the nation’s largest insurers are confronting them.
-
NewsChapter 4: Investigations into misconduct: What banks can do
Both JPMorgan Chase and Deutsche Bank retained their respective Jeffrey Epstein relationships for too long. Yet, there is a case to be made for why exiting a high-risk relationship too soon can become an inverse form of recklessness.
-
NewsChapter 3: Egregious failures: Customer due diligence and transaction monitoring
Why did JPMorgan Chase retain Jeffrey Epstein for more than a dozen years? How did the relationship persist despite glaring red flags? The “why” is straightforward; the “how” is more complicated.