« SYRIA PRESS REVIEW » #50

Al-Qaeda strikes in Aleppo

In reporting the Aleppo attacks, the international press has consecrated four times less space than usual. This can be interpreted in two ways: Either the public is getting weary of the rampant Iraqization of Syria or the press is baffled by the responsibility claims. The attacks of Aleppo were in fact first claimed by a spokesman for the Free Syrian Army, then condemned by another. Simultaneously, an American intelligence report attributed them to Al-Qaeda, a claim confirmed in a statement by Ayman al-Zawahiri, current leader of the organization.

Be that as it may, no media has bothered to rectify its previous articles pinning the responsibility for identical attacks in Damascus on the Al-Assad administration; certain newspapers have even picked up the accusations of the Syrian National Council which blames the Aleppo attacks on the Syrian government, without the slightest shred of evidence.

• Le Monde continues to display the beautiful photographs snapped by Mani, which always contain a pinch of sectarian fantasy. Thus, the photojournalist suggests that only Alawite bakeries in Homs are receiving flour supplies, not the Sunni population at large. This is obviously false. Supply problems are confined to the two areas of the city where the battles are raging, and these neighborhoods are in the hands of armed groups composed exclusively of Sunnis. But the rest of the city, predominantly Sunni, is fully stocked.

• The Sunday Express makes unflattering remarks about the Syrian President’s father-in-law which would tend to confirm that Asma Al Assad Bashar is being held captive.

• In The Independent, Robert Fisk recalls that the "good guys" that NATO placed in power in Kosovo and Libya have turned out to be far worse than the "bad guys" it ousted. It seems that in Syria the "good guys" are no better. The overthrow of Assad would probably lead to extensive sectarian killings.

• Daniel Byman of the Saban Center queries in the Washington Post whether it is possible to intervene in Syria without worsening the situation. Not according to him since the conflict is no longer limited to Syria, but would immediately involve Iran and Russia.

• In the New York Post, Amir Taheri notes that in the absence of a direct military intervention, it would still be possible to place a city like Zabadani under UN protection. The article was clearly written while the town was under the control of the Free Syrian Army. However, Taheri calls primarily for diplomatic action, which in this particular case would entail the lifting of the low-intensity military operations.

• The Weekly Standard, the neocon mouthpiece, focuses this week on Syria. Lee Smith scrutinizes anonymously hacked e-mails from the presidential palace. Other hacked documents are presented by Barack Ravid in Haaretz. They show that Iran and Syria have devised different mechanisms to circumvent the embargoes to which they are subjected. Furthermore Iran helped Syria to replenish its hydrocarbon supplies for one billion dollars worth.