6 Comments
User's avatar
Alfred Karam's avatar

It truly is disgusting in every sense what is happening to the Druze and Christians in Syria. Trump needs to get a whole lot tougher with these Islamist terrorists, and end their existence forever!

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Jul 29
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Alfred Karam's avatar

That’s an important and complex question.

Legally speaking, proving genocide requires demonstrating a specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, a threshold that is intentionally set very high under international law. As of now, it’s estimated that around 1,000 Palestinian Christians still reside in Gaza. Tragically, some of them have been killed in the conflict, including in a recent and widely reported incident involving the bombing of a church.

It is also true that the ongoing war between Hamas and Israel has ensnared countless innocent civilians, including Christians, Muslims, and others, in its deadly grip. I won’t wade into the broader political debate over who is right or wrong in this war. But context matters.

Unlike the situation in Syria, where extremist Islamist groups have deliberately targeted and massacred religious minorities such as the Druze, Christians, and Alawites with explicit intent, Israel’s actions, while devastating, do not fit that pattern. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), despite criticism, have publicly committed to minimizing civilian casualties and often issue warnings before strikes, efforts that are rarely acknowledged in many media reports.

What is frequently repeated in headlines, however, often without legal or factual nuance, is the accusation of “genocide.” Using that term without meeting its definition not only misrepresents the situation but also undermines the seriousness of actual genocides past and present.

Again, you asked an excellent question, thank you.

Expand full comment
Eldad Collins's avatar

Thank you Hussain for the very disturbing account of the Druze massacre. I can’t help but think that Israel hesitated in its intervention for the Druze because of “image” concerns, something they have been struggling with since the 7 October attack.

Expand full comment
Dvoralai's avatar

Israel’s intervention has been heavily criticised by people in the Trump administration and his “Syria expert” advisers who spend their time talking with anyone but the Druze.

Expand full comment
Charles Knapp's avatar

There was another report I saw that tied the attacks on the Druze to Shara’s negotiations with the Kurds. The new President apparently wants a centralized state where power flows from Damascus. When his negotiators tried to convince the Kurds to give up their arms, their response was in effect “why should we trust you when you can’t even get control over the much smaller Druze group who maintain their autonomy.” Supposedly, the government’s reply was to the effect of “wait a few days”, and the attacks on the Druze, first by the Bedouin then others, began.

But, with Israel’s intervention, the Syrian retreat and the imposition of a ceasefire, the Kurds called off their negotiations.

I suppose that agreeing to a more decentralized federal state framework is unacceptable as a matter of Syrian honor. If that proves to be the case, then Syria risks more chaos and bloodshed.

Expand full comment
Ash 1952's avatar

When you consider jolani is and always has been cia funded , armed . So it was upto USA to have laid down the law to jolani instead of making excuses on behalf of jolani and his murderous brigade .

Expand full comment