An interview with Sarah Leah Whitson
In early December,
I conducted a telephone interview with Sarah Leah Whitson, the director
of the Middle East and North Africa Division of Human Rights Watch
(HRW), on the Syrian crisis. HRW monitors and highlights human rights
abuses worldwide, and has been documenting the plight of refugees since
the outbreak of violence in Syria in March 2011.
In this interview, Whitson talks about how the international
community, and particularly neighboring countries where “the streets…are
littered with child beggars,” are coping with the refugee crisis.
Whitson also discusses the plight of Syria’s minorities—including
Armenians—whose very existence in the country is under threat. “We know
that the Armenian community in Iraq was completely destroyed,” she said.
“It’s not clear how much longer the Armenian community in Aleppo can
withstand or can survive.”
The interview also covers the makeup of the opposition groups; the
spillover into neighboring countries; the urgency of referring Syria’s
case to the International Criminal Court (ICC); and HRW’s work in Syria.
* * *
Nanore Barsoumian—In September, HRW reported that there are
around 2 million Syrian refugees—an average of about 5,000 people
leaving Syria daily—and over 4 million internally displaced people.
There are also reports of severe food shortages. How are neighboring
countries and international organizations coping with the refugee
situation?
Sarah Leah Whitson—I think there are a couple of ways you can
look at it. I think the first way we have to look at it, particularly
from the perspective of Lebanon, most of all, but also Jordan and
Turkey, and even Egypt, is that their governments have been tremendously
hospitable and generous and accepting of many refugees—two million, as
they have. Time and again, countries in this region are shouldering the
burden of wars, and this is just the latest example of that. On the
other hand, they are tremendously under-resourced. They don’t have the
resources to provide for the health, housing, education, and employment
needs of this refugee population—much less for psychological trauma and
resettlement assistance. And while some money is coming in from UNHCR
[United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees], it’s just not enough.
You can see the streets of Beirut are littered with child beggars from
Syria.
N.B.—A report by HRW stated how China and Russia have been reluctant in providing financial assistance to UNHCR for these efforts.
S.L.W.—That is true, but even the countries that are purported
to support refugees have not paid up their full quota, their full share
and their commitment to the UNHCR, which remains underfunded.
N.B.—What are we looking at in the long term with the refugee situation?
S.L.W.—It’s a disaster. This is one of the largest
humanitarian refugee disasters of this decade. We don’t see it getting
better. We don’t see the war in Syria wrapping up, and as long as the
war doesn’t wrap up, as long as there continues to be fighting on the
scale that we’ve seen so far this year, we expect the refugee flows to
continue. What I do expect, however, is that the neighboring countries
are going to make it harder and harder for refugees to enter their own
countries. And we’re going to have more and more internally displaced
people who can’t get out.
N.B.—What’s the situation like now for minorities in Syria?
We’ve seen pictures of churches being burned, schools and schoolchildren
being targeted, civilians executed and used as human shields. I know
HRW reported on what recently happened in the regions of Sadad and
Latakia.
S.L.W.—I think that one of the worst aspects of the Syrian
civil war—and now it is clearly a civil war—is the extent to which it
has taken on a sectarian dimension. Long ago [it stopped being] about
democracy and freedom in Syria. Sadly it has been distorted into a
sectarian conflict, primarily pinning Sunnis against Shias, Sunnis
against Alawis inside Syria, but also against the minority communities
in Syria, particularly the Christian and Armenian minorities, who
because of their identification with the Assad government, have in some
cases been targeted by opposition groups.
And they’ve been targeted by opposition groups—by extremist
opposition groups, the jihadist opposition groups—because they are
Christian and simply because they are minorities. It’s obviously a great
tragedy for the Armenians in Syria, particularly in Aleppo, which has
been one of the last Armenian holdouts in the Middle East. We know that
the Armenian community in Iraq was completely destroyed. It’s not clear
how much longer the Armenian community in Aleppo can withstand or can
survive—not just because it’s caught up in the war in Syria but also
because the Armenian community is finding itself targeted and the
subject of kidnappings or robberies.
N.B.—Do you find that it’s important to highlight the
minoritieswhitson separately in this conflict? How is their plight
different than that of the majority of Syrians?
S.L.W.—Obviously, we at the Human Rights Watch will examine
and document the abuses against any group in the country that is being
particularly targeted. And so, for example, in Saudi Arabia, we focus on
the targeting of the Shia community. In Iran, we focus on the targeting
of the Sunni community. Wherever minorities are being targeted because
of their minority status, because of their different religion,
nationality, national origin, or ethnic origin, it’s something we
highlight. The reality in Syria is that many minority groups are being
targeted, and one of them is the Armenian minority group…because of the
war situation, but also because of their status as Christian.
N.B.—Minorities also fear that the alternative to Assad could
be a despotic or fervently Islamic government that would introduce
policies restricting their freedoms, in terms of religious practices,
education, lifestyle. These are real concerns that can’t be easily
dismissed. Could you talk about this, about what the future could hold,
and also about the groups that are fighting in the opposition?
S.L.W.—Certainly the Syrian opposition is now sadly dominated
by extremist Islamist groups, who are completely intolerant of religious
freedom, of basic rights, of free expression and free association, and
so forth. Many minority groups that fear the domination of Islamist
extremists in any future Syrian government are right to be extremely
concerned about the impact that will have on their own status as
minorities, on their own religious freedom, and cultural autonomy inside
Syria.
I think they have sadly had a bad taste of what these Islamist
extremist groups in Syria portend. In Aleppo and other opposition-held
areas, we’re currently documenting how, for example, Islamist opposition
groups are forcing women to veil, and putting restrictions on their
freedom of movement. I think women have the greatest concerns about what
Islamist extremist rule might look like.
That being said, I wouldn’t so easily categorize all of the
opposition as Islamist extremist, and that the only choice is either
Bashar al Assad and his criminal barbaric regime or Islamist
extremists and their criminal barbaric practices. Certainly, the Syrian
opposition still has a variety of elements in it. They might be weak,
they might not have a lot of power, but it would be our hope that a
future Syrian government will reflect the diversity of Syrian society
and will protect the rights of all minorities. But I would avoid seeing
it as an either-or.
N.B.—There have been reports about the many fighters from abroad. What are you seeing in Syria?
S.L.W.—Without a doubt there is a significant presence of
foreign fighters inside Syria. There are countless videos and statements
and information that make that clear. But I don’t think anybody really
knows what percentage of the fighters in Syria are foreign
fighters. The estimates I’ve seen put them at less than 10 percent. So
while it’s extremely disturbing that people are fighting in Syria with
agendas that have nothing to do with democracy and freedom in Syria, I
think that the reality is that this remains an overwhelmingly Syrian war
made up of Syrian fighters on all sides.
N.B.—In the beginning of the war, there were many Syrians
involved who wanted democracy and who were fighting for democracy. At
some point, that was all hijacked. What were your observations?
S.L.W.—That’s obviously true. I think it’s very hard to say
that what we’re seeing in Syria now has to do with democracy and
freedom. I think that sadly the war has evolved far, far beyond that.
And what we now see is a civil war in the country that has pitted the
Sunni population against the Alawi/Shia-affiliated government. It is as
much about a Syrian civil war as it is a Sunni-Shia competition inside
Syria—a competition between Saudis and Iran that’s being played out on
the backs of Syrians, as well as a showdown between Russia and the
United States also being played out on the backs of Syrians. Tragically,
the ways in which intervention has happened in Syria (both intervention
in support of the government and intervention against the government)
has amplified those divisions and morphed it far away from what it was
initially about.
N.B.—Do you see a threat of a spillover into neighboring countries, like Lebanon?
S.L.W.—The spillover is already happening: the fighting in
Tripoli, Lebanon, over the past month; the continued attacks on Alawi
businessmen in Syria; the recent bombing of the Iranian embassy in
Beirut. This is all a spillover. The spillover is happening now, and
Lebanon as a result right now is in an extremely volatile state. The
Saudi government just a few weeks ago recalled all of its citizens from
Lebanon, saying it’s too insecure for them there.
N.B.—Human Rights Watch has urged the UN Security Council to
refer the situation in Syria to the International Criminal Court (ICC)
to strip the sides of the feeling of impunity. How effective can that
step be in deterring the targeting of civilians?
S.L.W.—I think it can be quite powerful, because ultimately no
military commander is going to make that decision to target civilians
if he knows that he is going to be awaiting trial. I think the idea is
that you create a disincentive for commanders to follow orders that are
crimes against humanity. We’re not even talking about the hard cases,
where it’s hard to tell; we’re talking about the easy cases, like
dropping cluster bombs on civilian areas or launching cruise missiles on
civilian areas… The breadth of criminal prosecution can be a powerful
one. I don’t think that threat has come into play in any meaningful way
because an ICC referral has not yet taken play, but I think the prospect
of going the way of [Slobodan] Milosevic and going the way of [Sudan’s
Omar al-] Bashir even as an international outlaw can have a very strong
deterrent effect.
N.B.— How has Human Rights Watch’s approach to the conflict evolved over the past two years?
S.L.W.—Well, it evolved from being an investigation on the
attacks on unarmed protesters—that is how the Syrian uprising started
over two and a half years ago—to being a documentation about civil war,
in which the government has committed unbelievable abuses, unbelievable
crimes, against its civilian population, but which now also involves
various opposition groups carrying out terrible abuses, as well.
The challenge in this situation, when we document abuses by both
sides or all sides…is how that can be used as a cover, and I think the
emphasis—what we have to remind everyone—is that the vast proportion of
the crimes, of the violations of international humanitarian laws, are
being committed by the Syrian government, a party that is most capable
of avoiding these abuses. Whatever weapons the opposition has, whatever
abuses the opposition is committing, the vast majority of those killed
in Syria—the number that puts us over 100,000 today—falls clearly on the
lap of the Syrian government.
N.B.—Could you talk a little about the weapons being used and where they’re coming from?
S.L.W.—Well, the weapons providers to the Syrian government
are no secret; this is publicly available information. It includes
Russia and it includes Iran. It also includes a few Eastern European
governments as well. Those providing arms to the opposition groups are
also not making a secret of the arms they’re providing, including Saudi
Arabia and Qatar, as well as now, of course, the U.S. and France, with
the U.K. providing non-lethal material support to the various
oppositions.
N.B.—How does HRW get its information? Do you have people on the ground there?
S.L.W.—We have researchers who have been going in and out of
Syria for the past two and a half years, both undercover and with
government authorization on various trips.
N.B.—It has been reported that some of the pictures coming out
of Syria have been manufactured, manipulated, and Photoshopped. Have
you found that to be true?
S.L.W.—We don’t really focus on fraudulent evidence. We focus
on real evidence—evidence that we gather ourselves from investigations
on the ground. This involves not only talking to eyewitnesses and
victims, but looking at physical evidence, such as the remnants of
weapons that indicate that they’re incendiary weapons, that indicate
that they’re cluster munitions, that indicate that they’re chemical
weapons. For example, Human Rights Watch was able to document the Syrian
government’s deployment of chemical weapons in two suburbs outside of
Damascus by using satellite imagery to show the trajectory of the
rockets with the chemical weapons…from government bases. We were able to
gather evidence of the chemicals that were used through medical
facilities, and on-the-ground samples that were made available. In
certain cases we also use, look at, examine, and verify video evidence
where it exists. Some video evidence is, I’m sure, liable to being
manipulated and falsified, but…we have multiple means to verify its
authenticity. And we never rely on the evidence of others. We always
have our own evidence, our own direct evidence that we ourselves have gathered.
Thursday, January 2, 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment