The Massacre in Syria That Wasn’t

The Massacre in Syria That Wasn’t | The Interpreter.

Muddying the waters was the Assad regime tactic of choice from the very onset of the revolution, a trick Assad’s security apparatuses learned from their KGB and Stazi mentors. So, they lied from the beginning, they spoke about infiltrators and terrorists in order to justify their uber-violent crackdown that soon mushroomed into a full-fledged genocide. At first, only those segments of Syrian society already predisposed to fearing change, that is, the country’s confessional minorities and certain segments of the Sunni community that have long thrown their lot with the Assad regime, were willing to embrace the “salvific” lies.

Soon, however, the message began to reach an intended external audience as well, including segments of the international left, fascist movements, right-wing politicians and fundamentalist Christian groups, among others. But with this audience, the Russians must have thought, the Assads needed help, so into fray stepped in their officials and their propagandists with their vehement protestations against invented rebel atrocities (the massacre of Alawites at Adra), and their categorical denials of Assad’s all too real ones (the chemical weapons attack).

Heaven knows that rebel groups are not saints, and we are not only talking about Al-Qaeda affiliated ones, but all their combined abuses, including those of Al-Qaeda, pale in comparison to what Assad’s armies, and pro-Assad sectarian militias have done. Yet, enough lies have been told it seems for the international community to ignore facts, and its own lethargic response to the crisis, and begin equating the two sides. In a world that only cares about ideology what value can be derived from documenting facts?