Aleppo, Syria, has lately been the focus of much world attention,
with some people even hearing in it the first rumblings of WW3. It is not
really possible to sort out the wheat from the chaff in the torrents of
information and opinions pouring daily through every conceivable communication
channel, without asking the locals for their insights.
Dr. Nabil Antaki is one of the brave hearts that chose to remain
in Aleppo despite the tragic
loss of his brother, killed by 'rebels', to care for the war-wounded,
mostly without charging a fee. He is also a member of a small, homegrown
Christian charity - ‘Aleppo’s Blue Marists’- which provides housing, food,
educational and recreational activities to Syrians of all denominations who are
displaced within their own country. He was therefore uniquely placed to walk me
through the maze and shed light on what is really going on in Aleppo.
1- Nabil, first of all, I’d like to thank you for taking time out
of your busy schedule to speak to me about the situation in Syria. I am
going to start right off the bat with the burning topic of the day. There is
much talk these days among world leaders about the need to impose a no-fly zone
over Aleppo. What do you think of that idea?
I disagree with it. A no-fly zone would mainly benefit armed
groups such as Daech [ISIS] and Al-Nosra, and leave the city and its
inhabitants exposed to their attacks.
2- Humanitarian organizations, however, insist that such a flying
ban is needed to bring relief to beleaguered civilians. Is it not your opinion?
What do you think, in this regard, of reports by Amnesty International and
Doctors Without Borders, describing Aleppo’s devastation, allegedly caused by
the Syrian Army barrel bombing?
My issue with Doctors Without Borders [Médecins Sans Frontières -
MSF] is that their reports are biased. They only report on the suffering in one
part of town, the part held by rebels, never in the part under government
control. Large hospitals in the western part of Aleppo were destroyed by
terrorists, yet never mentioned by Doctors Without Borders. For example, in
December 2013, the destruction of
Al-Kindi hospital by shelling, then arson, at the hands of Al-Nusra Front,
never made headlines in the corporate media. The focus is on the destruction of
hospitals allegedly located in the rebel zone and whose numbers fluctuate
according to the needs of the propaganda
war, or which
only exist in MSF's imagination. Likewise, casualties among civilians
living in the western
district of Aleppo have never interested those NGOs.
But first, let me explain for the benefit of your readers…Aleppo
is divided into two parts. The eastern part with 250,000 inhabitants at most,
is in the hands of ‘rebels’/ terrorist
armed groups, who keep them hostage,
while the western part with 1.5 to 2 million ihabitants, is under the control
of the Syrian state.
In western Aleppo, we are bombarded
daily by the 'rebels' and many hospitals have been destroyed, burned down
or damaged by them without anybody mentioning it. To understand the situation,
one also has to know that Doctors Without Borders is a totally misguided NGO
that sided as of 2011 with armed groups the likes of Al-Nosra. Several of these
large NGOs like Doctors Without Borders or the White Helmets are sponsored
and financed by EU governments. They illegally enter Syria and then only go
to areas where the ‘rebels’ have embedded themselves. Meanwhile, you have more
than 8 million Syrians who have fled towards areas under the Assad government’s
control -- because Syrians in their vast majority remained attached to
their government and regrouped in provinces under its protection -- and
they are attacked
by those 'rebels' daily without receiving any attention, as I said. It is
therefore important to stress that by acting on Syrian soil without the
agreement of the government and in total violation of Syrian sovereignty,
Doctors without Borders are, in the eyes of the Syrian people, complicit in the
terror committed by those armed groups.
However, things are happily starting to change -- perhaps under
the pressure of public opinion? For a fortnight or so, those same journalists
who had so far only interviewed ‘rebel’ sources such as MSF or the SOHR [the
Syrian Observatory for Human Rights] - have been flooding me with phone calls.
Could they be trying to distance themselves from the disinformation of the
past?
Now, regarding the so-called ‘barrel bombs’ -- which, by the way,
are nothing more and nothing less than cheaper,
more rudimentary bombs -- I am not in a position to assert that bombs fired
by the Syrian army at ‘rebel’ positions in eastern Aleppo have never
inadvertently hit a hospital, but even if they have, it was certainly not
intentional. After all, we are in a war situation. The US and allies have
themselves often missed their targets and caused ‘collateral’ damage, even with
their supposedly highly sophisticated, ‘precision’ weapons, haven’t they?
3- Why, in your opinion, do the Western media tend to believe
sources that you deem unreliable?
Journalists who speak to locals always focus on the humanitarian
aspects and shun the rest. Nevertheless, we have been trying to get the truth
out. In all my writings, I make clear that we are constantly bombarded
by rebel armed groups with mortars, rockets
and gas cylinders
filled with explosives and nails.
Ever since 2011, Syrians have known that what was taking place on
their soil was not a
revolution to bring more democracy and respect for human rights, or less
corruption. They knew from the start that the ‘Arab Spring’ was another name
for Condoleezza Rice’s ‘Constructive Chaos’ or for the Bush Administration’s
‘New Middle East,’ and that the so-called ‘Spring’ was a misnomer that would
either lead to the destruction of Syria, or to its falling under an Islamic
State’s rule. Unfortunately, these two projects may well be on the way to
succeeding.
Now, to return to your specific question about why Western media
coverage is so unbalanced, one reason is that journalists tend to rely heavily
on a single source of information, the London-based Syrian Observatory for
Human Rights -- actually a one-man show. Despite its credible name, it is
in fact a disinformation outlet financed by the Muslim Brotherhood.
To give you another example, the ‘White Helmets’ -- which the
Western press portrays as selfless rescuers of civilians, worthy of a Nobel
Prize nomination -- well, they are certainly
no angels. They are actually affiliated
to Al-Nosra, which, I remind you, is another name for Al-Qaeda, and this is
amply documented. Many of their ‘rescue’ operations are staged
affairs meant to manipulate
public opinion into endorsing a given agenda, be it a bombing campaign,
troops on the ground, additional waves of refugees or
a no-fly zone.
Think of it, why don’t they ever ‘rescue’ civilians in the western
part of Aleppo, by far the most populated? Their exclusive presence in the
‘rebel’-held, much smaller eastern part of town, is yet more proof of their
cooperation with Al-Nosra.
4- Why aren’t local Christians more vocal? Wouldn’t their
testimonials contribute to a better understanding
of their situation and, more generally, that of Syrians?
You are right when you say that we generally tend to put the
emphasis on the experiential aspect of our tragedy, and refrain from being too
analytical. We do this for several reasons:
First, to have a chance to be heard. Western public opinion has
been so misinformed that political statements which go against the grain of
conventional thinking will simply not be heard, understood or taken into
account. So, we use the suffering of Aleppans and Syrians as an entry point,
and then work our way up to deliver the message that the armed ‘rebel’ groups
are the ones responsible for that suffering.
How many Western good friends have I not lost in the early days of
the events in Syria because I was trying to speak the truth! Their reaction was
invariably: ‘You guys in the Middle-East, see conspiracies everywhere’! So I
adjusted my methodology -- I no longer speak of a plot or preordained plan but
instead, I lay out the facts. I describe the devastation, the deaths, the pain,
and then I throw a comment in the mix that all of this did not originate
‘spontaneously’ or grow organically; and this kind of talk gets accepted.
Second, it is a credibility thing, because Christians have often
been accused of unconditional support of Assad in return for his protection.
And Assad, conversely, of protecting Christians to remain in power. This, of
course, is ludicrous. Christians used to represent 8% of the total population,
much less now that they have been driven out of their homeland and mainly into
neighboring Lebanon. How could they possibly affect Assad’s popularity ratings
in any meaningful way? As a matter of fact, large numbers of Sunni Muslims are
behind Assad and, conversely, not all Christians are big fans of him. The truth
of the matter is that the Syrian state was and is still a secular state
protecting all faiths and minorities. But if the world didn’t want to hear it,
would it have made a difference if Christians had engaged in blaming and
shaming?
Last but not least, people are afraid for their lives and are
therefore reluctant to get too political and designate culprits for their
misfortunes. Those who chose to remain are trying to get on with their lives as
best they can, and they pray that God may inspire world leaders to desist from
their evil plans.
But keeping a low profile does not mean that we have to remain
idle. As a matter of fact, I’ve sent an joint appeal to Pope Francis in May
2015, together with Aleppo’s Marist Brothers, imploring him to use his moral
authority and undeniable prestige to bring pressure to bear on world leaders,
so that they would stop arming and financing armed groups, fight ISIS in a
meaningful way and stem the influx of terrorists through Syria’s northern
border with Turkey. We told him we trusted that he, alone, could do
something to stop the destruction of our beautiful country, stop the killings
of hundreds of thousands of human beings and allow Syrian Christians to remain
in or return to their homeland.
