Fleeing Syria for their lives

A series of photographs were published in Aljazeera by Brian Sokol for UNHCR where the photographs show the most important object that these refugees fled with, on a day the numbers of refugees touched one million. These photographs portrays the personal stories of 13 refugees and their families which illustrates the extent to how Syrians have suffered; imagine these 13 stories turned into a million, the consequences are catastrophic. Yet none of the pictures contain any violence, weapons, blood or injury, just people with their memories, hopes and dreams. It's these ordinary everyday people who are being affected.

Hisham, 37, and his family fled Syria early in 2012, paying a smuggler $1,100 to take them across the border. The most important thing Hisham was able to bring with him is the photograph of his wife that he holds here. "This is important," he says, "because she gave me this photo back home before we were married, during the time when we were dating. It always brings me great memories and reminds me of my happiest time back home in Syria."

Yusuf and his family fled their home several months before this photograph was taken. The most important thing he was able to bring from Syria is the mobile phone that he holds in this photograph. "With this, I'm able to call my father. We're close enough to Syria here that I can catch signal from the Syrian towers sometimes." The phone also holds photographs of family members who are still in Syria, which he is able to keep with him at all times.

Neda, approximately 100 years old (age between 90 and 107 according to family members), fled from her home last December when the apartments surrounding hers were destroyed. Crossing the border into Iraq was a very difficult process for her, and the journey on foot lasted the better part of a day. The most important thing she was able to bring with her is the ring that she displays here. When she was ten years old, her mother gave it to her from her death bed, saying, "Keep this ring and remember me."

Mohammed, 70, and his family fled Syria when their family home in Damascus was destroyed by a bomb. They escaped in the back of a truck after covering themselves with plastic sheeting. The most important thing Mohammed was able to bring with him is the cane that he holds in this photograph. He says that without it, he wouldn't have been able to make the two-hour crossing on foot to the Iraqi border.

Abdul and his family fled from their apartment in Syria after his wife was shot in the street during cross-fire between armed groups. The most important thing he was able to bring from Syria are the keys to his home that he holds in this photograph. Though he doesn't know whether the family's apartment is still standing, he dreams every day of returning home.

Abdullah, 43, the imam of the only mosque in the refugee camp he lives in in Iraq, fled with his family after being warned that armed groups were searching for him. The most important thing Abdullah was able to bring with him is the Koran that he holds in this photograph. As an imam, he says religion is the most important aspect of his life.

Tamara's home in Syria was partially destroyed in September, and the family decided their best chance of safety was to reach the Syrian-Turkish border. "When we left our house, we felt the sky was raining bullets," Tamara recalled. "We were moving from one shelter to another in order to protect ourselves." The most important thing that she was able to bring with her is her diploma. With it she will be able to continue her education in Turkey.

Ahmed, 82, and his wife Fatima, 67, fled from their home in August 2012 after their neighbour was killed for asking soldiers why they had executed his son. The most important thing Ahmed was able to bring with him from Syria is his wife. "She's the best woman that I've met in my life," he says. "Even if I were to go back 55 years, I would choose you again."

Marwa, 8, and her family arrived in a refugee camp in Iraq by foot. She says she wept as she made the journey through the cold, over a rough trail, as her mother carried her and her baby brother. She is now attending school and says that she finally feels safe. The most important thing she was able to bring with her when she left are the bracelets she displays in this photograph.

Iman, 25, decided to flee with her son and daughter when she heard accounts of sexual harassment against women in her home city in Syria. The most important thing Iman was able to bring with her is the Koran that she holds here. She says religion is the most important aspect of her life, and that the Koran gives her a sense of protection. "As long as I have it with me, I'm connected to God," she says.

Amina, 9, lives with her family in an uninsulated, partially constructed home in Iraq. About 30 people share the cold, drafty space. The most important thing Amina was able to bring with her are the jeans that she holds in this photograph. She has only worn the jeans three times, all in Syria - twice to wedding parties, and once when she went to visit her grandfather.

Salma, 24, and her family were forced to flee their home last summer. Confined to a wheelchair and blind in both eyes, she says she was terrified by what was happening around her. Salma says the only important thing that she brought with her "is my soul, nothing more - nothing material". When asked about her wheelchair, she seemed surprised, saying that she considers it an extension of her body, not an object.

Abdulaziz, 37, fled his home in Syria the night his neighbors were killed. The next day he used the majority of his savings to hire a truck to flee with his wife and his two sons. The most important thing that he was able to bring with him is the instrument he holds here. It is called a buzuq and he says that "playing it fills me with a sense of nostalgia and reminds me of my homeland".


* The above names used for the people in the photographs, are not their real names.

Anti-imperialism

I was 15 when Britain and USA invaded Iraq in 2003. That was the first time I experienced anger at western governments for imposing their power onto other counties. One million people protested in London to voice their anger at such an invasion yet despite the numbers that protested, Tony Blair continued with invading Iraq and occupying the country for years. I was sceptical that weapons of mass destruction existed at the time yet I was naive to western interests in the region.

I've not read much about life in Iraq under Saddam Hussein though I often heard how much of a brutal dictator he was, that there are many who are glad to see him go though not under the circumstances surrounding his departure. I often wonder now whether Iraq would be experiencing an uprising this year, like that of Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Libya, Syria and Yemen if it weren't invaded. If Iraq hadn't been invaded, would more people be protesting in the streets of Syria?

These past few years, I learnt more and more about western colonialism and imperialism. I never fully realised the impact that western countries had on the world. Western countries never had pure intentions but rather they saw the world through hungry eyes.

There was always competition between leading countries (Britain being of course one of them) to be the 'leading superpower', always striving to be bigger and stronger. It doesn't matter which country was stepped on, was trodden on and robbed, along the way, as long as you belong to a leading superpower, all is well. I first noticed (like many do) whilst studying WW1 and 2 during history class. The British at least, were very patriotic and during the world wars there was a lot of British nationalism going around (maybe its purely a result of the the British propaganda); a lot stronger than it is nowadays I feel. There was always a sense of "We are big and mighty in this world" in classes which appears to have produced a fairly small set of ignorant and racist people within society, along the likes of the EDL (English Defence League).

The Balfour Declaration is often overlooked during history lessons even though it was formed around WW1 - a period of time in history which was studied for weeks. Not once was it ever mentioned, despite its effects it caused on the world. The Balfour Declaration was a letter sent from the British Foreign Secretary, Arthur James Balfour to Walter Rothschild in 1917 allowing Palestine to become a national home for the Jewish people. Bear in mind that this took place prior to WW2 before the massacre of Jews in Europe. The letter stated:

"His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palesine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

The British government at the time hoped that the declaration would rally Jewish opinion to the side of the Allied powers against the central powers during WW1 as well as hope that the settlement in Palestine with a pro-British Jewish population would help protect British interests in ensuring a vital communication in Egypt along the Suez Canal along to India (a colony of Britain at the time). The Balfour Declaration was endorsed and approved by the League of Nations in 1922. In 1939 the British altered its policy in a White Paper stating a limit to immigration numbers; a policy that was very much condemned by Zionists as to them it appeared that the British favoured Arabs. The White Paper recommended that only a further 75,000 would be allowed to immigrate by 1944 after which no further immigration would be allowed unless the Palestinian Arabs consented. Due to the consequent events of WW2, this was overlooked and the state of Israel was formed in 1948. Immigration to Israel is continuing, where there are many illegal settlements taking place. Israel constantly violates international laws yet without any repercussions to their actions. I will at some point dedicate a post to Israel and Palestine in the future, since it's a central issue to all Arabs across the area, though I won't in the foreseeable future as I want to concentrate my time presently on events in Syria.

I've mentioned the Iraq war, though I would also need to mention the war on Afghanistan, which would further highlight my point. The USA (under Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan administrations) funded armed mujahideen in Afghanistan to fight the Soviet Union during the 1990s only for it to backfire against them in the form of the 9/11 bombings and the Taliban in present day Afghanistan . What lead the Al-Qaeda attacks against western countries (USA, London, Spain, Turkey...) was a form of protest against western desire for imperialism and colonialism. In Al-Qaeda's eyes, Saudi Arabia was occupied by America and were also annoyed by the occupation of Palestine. Remove your presence from every Muslim country and stop interfering in Middle Eastern countries' affairs was and still is Al-Qaeda's demand. Many people see the west's meddling in foreign affairs as the root of all Middle Eastern problems.

More recently I came to learn of how USA overthrew Mossadeq, the Prime Minister of Iran between 1951 and 1953. Mossadeq was democratically elected into power by the Iranian people though in August 1953 at the request of British M16, he was removed from power by a coup. Britain had grown increasingly distressed over Mossadeq's policies and were particularly annoyed over the loss of control of the Iranian oil industry, which resulted in asking America for assistance. Despite initially not complying to British interests, eventually America took up the issue for fears that Mossadeq was, or would become, dependent on the pro-Soviet Tudeh Party at a time of expanding Soviet influence. As a result, the United States and Britain began to publicly denounce  Mossadeq's policies for Iran as harmful to the country. Of course Mossadeq was aware of Britain's issues; he declared Britain as an enemy in October 1952 and subsequently cut all diplomatic ties. Though it appears that it was at this point that British intelligence officials suggested to American intelligence that the prime minister should be ousted. He was succeeded by Fazlollah Zahedi. Mossadeq was imprisoned for three years and subsequently was placed under house arrest until his death.

It's evident from looking through recent history how much power western countries have over the rest of the world. I hope by mentioning the above examples highlights that of course there will be a considerable amount of effort by western countries to meddle in other countries including Syria.

Syria is in a pivotal area of the region. It shares a border with Isreal, Lebanon, Turkey, Iraq and Jordan. It's allied to Hamas, Hizbollah as well as Iran, which pretty much makes Syria despised by U.S and Israel. It's one of the few countries in the area which isn't a U.S. puppet. The release of U.S. cables over the last year reveals that under the Bush administration (up until 2010) funded opposition groups in Syria, hoping that it could bring about change in the country to produce a more compliant Syria.

The main point I wanted to highlight is that despite international interferences in Syria, the current events in Syria are more as a consequence of the Syrian people. Bashar al-Assad whilst in his reign felt that by the only thing that mattered to his supporters was the anti-western stance. Of course Syrians despise the American government and all other western governments though if he really cared about the country and the Syrian people, reforms would have come about on their own from national dialogue that should have already been implemented, not as a result of protests to stop further protests only so he could stay in power. If he didn't genuinely believe that there were true protests, why did he offer concessions to appease those protesters, such as the end of emergency laws, the citizenship of Kurds and amnesties releasing some political detainees? Nobody would offer concessions to criminals, so he was aware that there are genuine protests. If he really does care about the people, why is he trying hard to suppress protests that didn't initially call for him to leave but to reform?

Bashar al-Assad is playing on the conspiracy in order to keep his supporters, because that is the only credible factor he has to keep them supporting him. The possibility of a large scale conspiracy against Syria is small. Let me put it this way. If this is a conspiracy, then wouldn't it have occurred sooner? The American government has been funding some opposition groups for 6 years though what has it achieved? Ask Syrians if they've heard of Bayada TV (the TV channel that opened by an opposition group in Syria, that was funded by the US) and you will get an overwhelming 'no' response. So much for money well spent. The regime does vary who it wants to blame for the conspiracy, ranging from Israel to Saudi to Salafis. I yet to see any evidence behind these claims. For a country so infamous for its intelligence services, you would expect mountains of information in regards to these so-called terrorists and then be able to catch them.

This topic would naturally lead to the issue of foreign intervention in Syria, which is on every Syrian's mind. You're either for or against it. There are increasing calls within Syria for foreign intervention, more along the line of a military intervention or a No-Fly Zone. Only a couple of days ago was there an article suggesting that a military intervention could be in Syria within weeks. If I did support foreign military intervention, I would say now is not the time for it. Though at the moment, I do not support one. I do not support western countries. at whatever time, to come in to rid Assad since I blame western governments for all the bad in the region. I would want us Syrians and us Arabs to fix our own problems, because otherwise more problems would stem out if the western world intervened. At the end of the day, it's not my call, but it's up to those protesting on the streets all over the country, who are being shot at, who are being tortured, who are experiencing the death of loved ones. It's not one person's decision but a collective decision by all those taking part. I feel that eventually, violence is needed to overcome the violence we see. I don't feel that peaceful protests are enough to overthrow the regime, however opposed I am to the use of violence.

Colonialism, imperialism and capitalism are indeed problems in this world and has affected the Middle East as a whole for many years. However, the actual events of Syria in these past 8 months are not to due to conspiracies but because of Syrians wishes for a free future without Assad and his gang. Human rights abuses are undoubtedly occurring in Syria against the people by the regime, with mounting evidence to support it; no one can refute that.