October 04, 2016 "Information
Clearing House"
- "Alternet"
- On September 30,
demonstrators gathered in city
squares across the West for a "weekend
of action” to “stop the
bombs” raining down from Syrian
government and Russian warplanes
on rebel-held eastern Aleppo.
Thousands joined the protests,
holding signs that read "Topple
Assad" and declaring, "Enough
With Assad." Few
participants likely knew that
the actions were organized under
the auspices of an
opposition-funded public
relations company called the
Syria Campaign.
By partnering with local groups
like the Syrian civil defense
workers popularly known as the
White Helmets, and through a
vast network of connections in
media and centers of political
influence, The Syria Campaign
has played a crucial role in
disseminating images and stories
of the horrors visited this
month on eastern Aleppo. The
group is able to operate within
the halls of power in Washington
and has the power to mobilize
thousands of demonstrators into
the streets. Despite its
outsized role in shaping how the
West sees Syria’s civil war,
which is now in its sixth year
and entering one of its
grisliest phases, this outfit
remains virtually unknown to the
general public.
The Syria Campaign presents
itself as an impartial,
non-political voice for ordinary
Syrian citizens that is
dedicated to civilian
protection. “We see ourselves as
a solidarity organization,” The
Syria Campaign strategy director
James Sadri told me. “We’re not
being paid by anybody to pursue
a particular line. We feel like
we’ve done a really good job
about finding out who the
frontline activists, doctors,
humanitarians are and trying to
get their word out to the
international community.”
Yet behind the lofty rhetoric
about solidarity and the images
of heroic rescuers rushing in to
save lives is an agenda that
aligns closely with the forces
from Riyadh to
Washington clamoring for regime
change. Indeed, The Syria
Campaign has been
pushing for a no-fly zone in
Syria that would require at
least “70,000 American
servicemen” to enforce,
according to a Pentagon assessment,
along with the destruction of
government infrastructure and
military installations. There is
no record of a no-fly zone being
imposed without regime change
following —which seems to be
exactly what The Syria Campaign
and its partners want.
“For us to control all the
airspace in Syria would require
us to go to war against Syria
and Russia. That’s a pretty
fundamental decision that
certainly I’m not going to
make,” said Gen.
Joseph Dunford, the chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at a
hearing of the Senate Armed
Services Committee this month.
While the military brass in
Washington seems reluctant to
apply the full force of its
airpower to enforce a NFZ, The
Syria Campaign is capitalizing
on the outrage inspired by the
bombardment of rebel-held
eastern Aleppo this year to
intensify the drumbeat for
greater U.S. military
involvement.
The Syria Campaign has been
careful to cloak interventionism
in the liberal-friendly language
of human rights, casting Western
military action as “the best way
to support Syrian refugees,”
and packaging a
no-fly zone — along with
so-called safe zones and no
bombing zones, which would also
require Western military
enforcement — as a “way to
protect civilians and defeat
ISIS.”
Among The Syria Campaign’s most
prominent vehicles for promoting
military intervention is a
self-proclaimed "unarmed and
impartial" civil defense group
known as the White Helmets.
Footage of the White Helmets
saving civilians trapped in the
rubble of buildings bombed by
the Syrian government and its
Russian ally has become
ubiquitous in coverage of the
crisis. Having claimed to have
saved tens of thousands of
lives, the group has become a
leading resource for journalists
and human rights groups seeking
information inside the war
theater, from casualty figures
to details on the kind of bombs
that are falling.
But like The Syria Campaign, the
White Helmets are anything but
impartial. Indeed, the group was
founded in collaboration with
the United States Agency for
International Development
(USAID)’s Office of Transitional
Initiatives, an explicitly
political wing of the agency
that has funded efforts at
political subversion in
Cuba and
Venezuela. USAID is the
White Helmets’ principal funder,
committing at least $23
million to the group since
2013. This money was part of
$339.6 million
budgeted by USAID
for “supporting activities
that pursue a peaceful
transition to a democratic and
stable Syria" -- or establishing
a parallel governing structure
that could fill the power vacuum
once Bashar Al-Assad was
removed.
Thanks to an aggressive public
relations
push by The Syria Campaign,
the White Helmets have been
nominated for the Nobel Prize,
and have already been awarded
the “alternative Nobel” known as
the Right Livelihood Award.
(Previous winners include Amy
Goodman, Edward Snowden and
Israeli nuclear whistleblower
Mordechai Vanunu.) At the same
time, the White Helmets are
pushing for a NFZ in public
appearances and on a
website created by The Syria
Campaign.
The Syria Campaign has garnered
endorsements for the White
Helmets from a host of Hollywood
celebrities including Ben
Affleck, Alicia Keyes and Justin
Timberlake. And with fundraising
and
“outreach” performed by The
Syria Campaign, the White
Helmets have become the stars of
a slickly produced Netflix documentary
vehicle that has received
hype from media outlets
across the West.
But making the White Helmets
into an international sensation
is just one of a series of
successes The Syria Campaign has
achieved in its drive to oust
Syria's government.
Targeting the UN in Damascus
When an aid convoy organized by
the Syrian Arab Red Crescent
(SARC) and United Nations Office
for the Coordination of
Humanitarian Affairs came under
attack on its way to the
rebel-held countryside of West
Aleppo in Syria this September
18, the White Helmets
pinned blame squarely on the
Syrian and Russian governments.
In fact, a White Helmets member
was among the first civilians to
appear on camera at the
scene of the attack, declaring
in English that “the regime
helicopters targeted this place
with four barrel [bombs].” The
White Helmets also produced one
of the major pieces of evidence
Western journalists have relied
on to implicate Russia and the
Syrian government in the attack:
a
photograph supposedly
depicting the tail fragment of a
Russian-made OFAB 250-270
fragmentation bomb. (This
account remains unconfirmed by
both the UN and SARC, and no
evidence of barrel bombs has
been produced).
Ironically, the White Helmets
figured prominently in The Syria
Campaign’s push to undermine the
UN’s humanitarian work inside
Syria. For months, The Syria
Campaign has painted the UN as a
stooge of Bashar Al-Assad for
coordinating its aid deliveries
with the Syrian government, as
it has done with governments in
conflict zones around the world.
The Guardian's Kareem Shaheen
praised a 50-page report by
The Syria Campaign attacking the
UN’s work in Syria as "damning."
A subsequent Guardian' article
cited the report as part of
the inspiration for its own
“exclusive” investigation
slamming the UN’s coordination
with the Syrian government.
At a
website created by The Syria
Campaign to host the report,
visitors are greeted by a UN
logo drenched in blood.
The Syria Campaign has even
taken credit for forcing former
UN Resident Coordinator Yacoub
El-Hillo out of his job in
Damascus, a false claim it was
later
forced to retract. Among the
opposition groups that
promoted The Syria
Campaign’s anti-UN report was
Ahrar Al-Sham, a jihadist rebel
faction that has allied with Al
Qaeda in a mission to establish
an exclusively Islamic state
across Syria.
A Westerner who operates a
politically neutral humanitarian
NGO in Damascus offered me a
withering assessment of The
Syria Campaign’s attacks on the
UN. Speaking on condition of
anonymity because NGO workers
like them are generally
forbidden from speaking to the
media, and often face
repercussions if they do, the
source accused The Syria
Campaign of “dividing and
polarizing the humanitarian
community” along political lines
while forcing humanitarian
entities to “make decisions
based on potential media
repercussions instead of
focusing on actual needs on the
ground.”
The NGO executive went on to
accuse The Syria Campaign and
its partners in the opposition
of “progressively identifying
the humanitarian workers
operating from Damascus with one
party to the conflict,” limiting
their ability to negotiate
access to rebel-held territory.
“As a humanitarian worker
myself,” they explained, “I know
that this puts me and my teams
in great danger since it
legitimizes warring factions
treating you as an extension of
one party in the conflict.
“The thousands of Syrians that
signed up with the UN or
humanitarian organizations are
civilians,” they continued.
“They not only joined to get a
salary but in hopes of doing
something good for other
Syrians. This campaign [by The
Syria Campaign] is humiliating
all of them, labelling them as
supporters of one side and
making them lose hope in
becoming agents of positive
change in their own society.”
This September, days before the
aid convoy attack prompted the
UN to suspend much of its work
inside Syria, The Syria Campaign
spurred 73 aid organizations
operating in rebel-held
territory, including the White
Helmets, to suspend their
cooperation with the UN aid
program. As the Guardian noted in
its coverage, “The decision to
withdraw from the Whole of Syria
programme, in which
organisations share information
to help the delivery of aid,
means in practice the UN will
lose sight of what is happening
throughout the north of Syria
and in opposition-held areas of
the country, where the NGOs do
most of their work.”
Despite The Syria Campaign’s
influence on the international
media stage, details on the
outfit’s inner workings are
difficult to come by. The Syria
Campaign is registered in
England as a private company
called the Voices Project at an
address shared by 91
other companies. Aside from
Asfari, most of The Syria
Campaign’s donors are anonymous.
Looming over this opaque
operation are questions about
its connections to Avaaz,
a global public relations outfit
that played an instrumental role
in generating support for a
no-fly zone in Libya, and The
Syria Campaign’s founding by
Purpose, another PR firm spun
out of Avaaz. James Sadri
bristled when I asked about the
issue, dismissing it as a “crank
conspiracy” ginned up by Russian
state media and hardcore
Assadist elements.
However, a careful look at the
origins and operation of The
Syria Campaign raises doubts
about the outfit’s image as an
authentic voice for Syrian
civilians, and should invite
serious questions about the
agenda of its partner
organizations as well.
A creation of international PR
firms
Best known for its work on
liberal social issues with
well-funded progressive clients
like the ACLU and the police
reform group, Campaign Zero, the
New York- and London-based
public relations firm Purpose
promises to deliver creatively
executed campaigns that produce
either a “behavior change,”
“perception change,” “policy
change” or “infrastructure
change.” As the Syrian conflict
entered its third year, this
company was ready to effect a
regime change.
On Feb. 3, 2014, Anna Nolan, the
senior strategist at Purpose,
posted a job
listing. According to
Nolan’s listing, her firm was
seeking “two interns to join the
team at Purpose to help launch a
new movement for Syria.”
At around the same time, another
Purpose staffer named Ali Weiner
posted a job listing seeking a
paid intern for the PR firm’s
new Syrian Voices project.
“Together with Syrians in the
diaspora and NGO partners,”
Weiner wrote,
“Purpose is building a movement
that will amplify the voices of
moderate, non-violent Syrians
and mobilize people in the
Middle East and around the world
to call for specific changes in
the political and humanitarian
situation in the region.” She
explained that the staffer would
report “to a Strategist based
primarily in London, but will
work closely with the Purpose
teams in both London and New
York.”
On June 16, 2014, Purpose
founder Jeremy Heimans drafted
articles of association for The
Syria Campaign’s parent company.
Called the Voices
Project, Heimans registered
the company at 3 Bull Lane, St.
Ives Cambridgeshire, England. It
was one of 91 private limited
companies listed at
the address. Sadri would not
explain why The Syria Campaign
had chosen this location or why
it was registered as a private
company.
Along with Heimans, Purpose
Europe director Tim Dixon was
appointed to The Syria
Campaign’s board of directors.
So was John Jackson, a Purpose
strategist who previously
co-directed the Burma Campaign
U.K. that lobbied the EU for
sanctions against that country’s
ruling regime. (Jackson claimed
credit for The Syria
Campaign’s successful push to
remove Syrian president Bashar
Al-Assad’s re-election campaign
ads from Facebook.) Anna Nolan
became The Syria Campaign’s
project director, even as she remained
listed as the strategy
director at Purpose.
“Purpose is not involved in what
we do,” The Syria Campaign’s
Sadri told me. When pressed
about the presence of several
Purpose strategists on The Syria
Campaign’s board of directors
and staff, Sadri insisted,
“We’re not part of Purpose.
There’s no financial
relationship and we’re
independent.”
Sadri dismissed allegations
about The Syria Campaign’s
origins in Avaaz. “We have no
connection to Avaaz,” he stated,
blaming conspiratorial “Russia
Today stuff” for linking the two
public relations groups.
However, Purpose’s original job
listing for its Syrian Voices
project boasted that “Purpose
grew out of some of the most
impactful new models for social
change” including “the now 30
million strong action network
avaaz.org.” In fact, The Syria
Campaign’s founder, Purpose
co-founder Jeremy Heimans, was
also one of the original
founders of Avaaz. As he told Forbes,
“I co-founded Avaaz and [the
Australian activist group] Get
Up, which inspired the creation
of Purpose.”
New and improved no-fly zone
The Syria Campaign’s
defensiveness about ties to
Avaaz is understandable.
Back in 2011, Avaaz introduced a
public campaign for a no-fly
zone in
Libya and delivered a
petition with 1,202,940
signatures to the UN supporting
Western intervention. John
Hilary, the executive director
of War On Want, the U.K.’s
leading anti-poverty and
anti-war charity, warned at
the time, "Little do most of
these generally well-meaning
activists know, they are
strengthening the hands of those
western governments desperate to
reassert their interests in
north Africa… Clearly a no-fly
zone makes foreign intervention
sound rather
humanitarian—putting the
emphasis on stopping bombing,
even though it could well lead
to an escalation of violence.”
John Hilary’s dire warning was
fulfilled after the
NATO-enforced no-fly zone
prompted the ouster of former
President Moamar Qaddafi. Months
later, Qaddafi was sexually
assaulted and beaten to death in
the road by a mob of fanatics.
The Islamic State and an
assortment of militias filled
the void left in the Jamahiriya
government’s wake. The political
catastrophe should have been
serious enough to call future
interventions of this nature
into question. Yet Libya’s
legacy failed to deter Avaaz
from introducing a new campaign
for another
no-fly zone; this time in
Syria.
“To some a no-fly zone could
conjure up images of George W.
Bush’s foreign policy and
illegal Western interventions.
This is a different thing,”
Avaaz insisted in a communique
defending its support for a new
no-fly zone in Syria. Sadri
portrayed The Syria Campaign’s
support for a no-fly zone as the
product of a “deep listening
process” involving the polling
of Syrian civilians in
rebel-held territories and
refugees outside the country. He
claimed his outfit was a
“solidarity organization,” not a
public relations firm, and was
adamant that if and when a
no-fly zone is imposed over
Syrian skies, it would be
different than those seen in
past conflicts.
“There also seems to be a
critique of a no-fly zone which
is slapping on templates from
other conflicts and saying this
is what will happen in Syria,”
Sadri commented. He added, “I’m
just trying to encourage us away
from a simplistic debate.
There’s a kneejerk reaction to
Syria to say, ’It’s Iraq or it’s
Libya,’ but it’s not. It’s an
entirely different conflict.”
Funding a "credible transition"
For the petroleum mogul who
provided the funding that
launched the Syria Project, the
means of military intervention
justified an end in which he
could return to the country of
his birth and participate in its
economic life on his own terms.
Though The Syria Campaign claims
to “refuse funding from any
party to the conflict in Syria,”
it was founded and is sustained
with generous financial
assistance from one of the most
influential exile figures of the
opposition, Ayman Asfari, the
U.K.-based CEO of the British
oil and gas supply company
Petrofac Limited. Asfari is
worth $1.2 billion and owns
about one-fifth of the shares of
his company, which boasts 18,000
employees and
close to $7 billion in
annual revenues.
Through his Asfari Foundation,
he has contributed hundreds of
thousands of dollars to The
Syria Campaign and has secured a
seat for his wife, Sawsan, on
its board of directors. He has
also been a top financial and
political supporter of the
Syrian National Coalition, the
largest government-in-exile
group set up after the Syrian
revolt began. The group is
dead-set on removing Assad and
replacing him with one of its
own. Asfari’s support for
opposition forces was so
pronounced the Syrian government
filed a warrant for
his arrest, accusing him of
supporting “terrorism.”
In London, Asfari has been a
major donor to former British
Prime Minister David Cameron and
his Conservative Party. This
May, Cameron keynoted
a fundraiser for the Hands Up
for Syria Appeal, a charity
heavily supported by Asfari that
sponsors education for Syrian
children living in refugee
camps. The Prime Minister might
have seemed like an unusual
choice for the event given his
staunch resistance to
accepting unaccompanied Syrian
children who have fled to
Europe. However, Asfari has
generally supported Cameron’s
exclusionary policy.
Grilled about his position
during an episode of BBC’s Hardtalk,
Asfari explained, “I do not want
the country to be emptied. I
still have a dream that those
guys [refugees] will be able to
go back to their homes and they
will be able to play a
constructive role in putting
Syria back together.”
In Washington, Asfari is
regarded as an important liaison
to the Syrian opposition. He has
visited the White House eight
times since 2014, meeting with
officials like Philip Gordon,
the former Middle East
coordinator who was an early
advocate for arming the
insurgency in Syria. Since
leaving the administration,
however, Gordon has expressed
regret over having embraced a
policy of regime change. In a
lengthy September 2015 editorial
for Politico, Gordon slammed the
Obama administration's pursuit
of regime change, writing,
“There is now virtually no
chance that an opposition
military ‘victory’ will lead to
stable or peaceful governance in
Syria in the foreseeable future
and near certainty that pursuing
one will only lead to many more
years of vicious civil war.”
Asfari publicly chastised Gordon
days later on Hardtalk. “I have
written to [Gordon] an email
after I saw that article in
Politico and I told him I
respectfully disagree,” Asfari
remarked. “I think the idea that
we are going to have a
transition in Syria with Assad
in it for an indefinite period
is fanciful. Because at the end
of the day, what the people want
is a credible transition.”
For Asfari, a “credible”
post-war transition would
require much more than refugee
repatriation and the integration
of opposition forces into the
army: “Will you get the Syrian
diaspora, including people like
myself, to go back and invest in
the country?” he asked on
Hardtalk. “…If we do not achieve
any of these objectives, what’s
the point of having a free
Syria?”
The Independent has described Asfari
as one among of a pantheon of
"super rich" exiles poised to
rebuild a post-Assad Syria — and
to reap handsome contracts in
the process. To reach his goal
of returning to Syria in triumph
after the downfall of Assad’s
government, Asfari not only
provided the seed money for The
Syria Campaign, he has helped
sustain the group with hefty
donations.
Just this year, the Asfari
Foundation donated $180,000 to
the outfit, according to The
Syria Campaign’s media lead
Laila Kiki. Asfari is not The
Syria Campaign’s only donor,
however. According to Kiki, the
Rockefeller Brothers Fund also
contributed $120,000 to the
outfit’s $800,000 budget this
year. “The rest of the funds
come from donors who wish to
remain anonymous,” she
explained.
Shaping the message
Among The Syria Campaign’s main
priorities, for which it has
apparently budgeted a
substantial amount of resources,
is moving Western media in a
more interventionist direction.
When The Syria Campaign placed an
ad on its website seeking a
senior press officer upon its
launch in 2014, it emphasized
its need for “someone who can
land pieces in the U.S., U.K.
and European [media] markets in
the same week.” The company’s
ideal candidate would be able to
“maintain strong relationships
with print, broadcast, online
journalists, editors in order to
encourage them to see TSC as a
leading voice on Syria.”
Prioritizing PR experience over
political familiarity, The Syria
Campaign reassured applicants,
“You don’t need to be an expert
on Syria or speak Arabic.” After
all, the person would be working
in close coordination with an
unnamed “Syrian communications
officer who will support on
story gathering and
relationships inside Syria.”
Sadri acknowledged that The
Syria Campaign has been involved
in shopping editorials to major
publications. “There have been
op-eds in the past that we’ve
helped get published, written by
people on the ground. There’s a
lot of op-eds going out from
people inside Syria,” he told
me. But he would not say which
ones, who the authors were, or
if his company played any role
in their authorship.
One recent incident highlighted
The Syria Campaign’s skillful
handling of press relationships
from Aleppo to media markets
across the West. It was August
17, and a Syrian or Russian
warplane had just hit an
apartment building in rebel-held
eastern Aleppo. Sophie McNeill,
a Middle East correspondent for
the Australian Broadcasting
Corporation, received a
photo from the Syrian American
Medical Society, which maintains
a WhatsApp group networking
doctors inside rebel territory
with international media.
The photo showed a five-year-old
boy, Omran Daqneesh, who had
been extracted from the building
by members of the White Helmets
and hoisted into an ambulance,
where he was filmed by members
of the Aleppo Media Center. The
chilling image depicts a dazed
little boy, seated upright and
staring at nothing, his pudgy
cheeks caked in ash and blood.
“Video then emerged of Omran as
he sat blinking in the back of
that ambulance,” McNeill wrote without
explaining who provided her with
the video. She immediately
posted the footage on Twitter.
“Watch this video from Aleppo
tonight. And watch it again. And
remind yourself that with #Syria
#wecantsaywedidntknow,” McNeill declared.
Her post was retweeted over
17,000 times and the hashtag she
originated, which implied
international inaction against
the Syrian government made such
horrors possible, became a viral
sensation as well. (McNeill did
not respond to questions sent to
her publicly listed email.)
Hours later, the image of Omran
appeared on the front page of
dozens of international
newspapers, from the New York
Times to the Wall Street Journal
to the Times of London. CNN’s
Kate Bolduan, who had suggested during
Israel’s bombardment of the Gaza
Strip in 2014 that civilian
casualties were, in fact, human
shields, broke down in tears
during an extended segment
detailing the rescue of Omran.
Abu Sulaiman Al-Muhajir, the
Australian citizen serving as a
top leader and spokesman for Al
Qaeda’s Syrian offshoot, Jabhat
Fateh Al-Sham, took a special
interest in the boy. "I cannot
get conditioned to seeing
injured/murdered children,"
Al-Muhajir wrote on
Facebook. "Their innocent faces
should serve as a reminder of
our responsibility."
Seizing on the opportunity, The
Syria Campaign gathered quotes
from the photographer who
captured the iconic image,
Mahmoud Raslan, and furnished
them to an array of media
organizations. While many
outlets published Raslan’s
statements, Public
Radio International was
among the few that noted The
Syria Campaign’s role in serving
them up, referring to the outfit
as “a pro-opposition advocacy
group with a network of contacts
in Syria.”
On August 20, McNeill took
to Facebook with a call to
action: “Were you horrified by
the footage of little Omran?”
she asked her readers. “Can't
stop thinking about him? Well
don't just retweet, be outraged
for 24 hours and move on. Hear
what two great humanitarians for
Syria, Zaher Sahloul & James
Sadri, want you to do now.”
Sadri happened to be the
director of The Syria Campaign
and Sahloul was the Syrian
American Medical Society
director who partnered with
The Syria Campaign. In the
article McNeill wrote about
Omran's photo, which was linked
in her Facebook post, both
Sahloul and Sadri urged
Westerners to join their call
for a no-fly zone— a policy
McNeill tacitly endorsed.
(Sahloul was recently promoted by
the neoconservative columnist
Eli Lake for accusing Obama of
having "allowed a genocide in
Syria." This September, Sahloul joined
up with the Jewish United
Federation of Chicago, a leading
opponent of Palestine solidarity
organizing, to promote his
efforts.)
As the outrage inspired by the
image of Omran spread, New York
Times columnist Nicholas Kristof
(a friend and publisher of
Syria Campaign board member Lina
Sergie Attar) called for
“fir[ing] missiles from outside
Syria to crater [Syrian]
military runways to make them
unusable.” Meanhwile, on MSNBC's
Morning Joe, host Joe
Scarborough waved around the
photo of Omran and indignantly
declared, "The world will
look back. Save your
hand-wringing…you can still do
something right now. But
nothing’s been done.”
As breathless editorials and
cable news tirades denounced the
Obama administration's supposed
“inaction,” public pressure for
a larger-scale Western military
campaign was approaching an
unprecedented level.
Damage control for opposition
extremists
The day after Omran made
headlines, the left-wing British
news site the Canary publicized
another photograph that exposed
a grim reality behind the iconic
image.
Culled from the Facebook page of
Mahmoud Raslan, the activist
from the American-operated
Aleppo Media Center who took the
initial video of Omran, it
showed Raslan posing for a triumphant
selfie with a group of rebel
fighters. The armed men hailed
from the Nour Al-Din Al-Zenki
faction. At least two of the
commanders who appeared in the
photo with Raslan had recently
beheaded a boy they captured,
referring to him in video
footage as “child” while they
taunted and abused him. The boy
has been reported to
be a 12-year-old named Abdullah
Issa and may have been a member
of the Liwa Al-Quds
pro-government Palestinian
militia.
This was not the only time
Raslan had appeared with
Al-Zenki fighters or expressed
his sympathy. On August 2, he
posted a selfie to Facebook
depicting himself surrounded by
mostly adolescent Al-Zenki
fighters dressed in battle
fatigues. “With the suicide
fighters, from the land of
battles and butchery, from
Aleppo of the martyrs, we bring
you tidings of impending joy,
with God's permission,” Raslan
wrote. He sported a headband
matching those worn by the
“suicide fighters.”
Despite its unsavory tendencies
and extremist ideological
leanings, Al-Zenki was until
2015 a recipient of extensive
American funding, with at least
1000 of its fighters on the CIA
payroll. Charles Lister, a
senior fellow at the Middle East
Institute who has
said his research on the
Syrian opposition was “100%
funded by Western govts,” has branded Al-Zenki
as “moderate opposition
fighters.”
This August, after the video of
Al-Zenki members beheading the
adolescent boy appeared online,
Sam Heller, a fellow for the
Washington-based Century
Foundation,
argued for restoring the
rebel group’s CIA funding.
Describing Al-Zenki as “a
natural, if unpalatable,
partner,” Heller contended that
“if Washington insists on
keeping its hands perfectly
clean, there’s probably no
Syrian faction—in the
opposition, or on any side of
the war—that merits support.”
This September 24, Al-Zenki
formally joined
forces with the jihadist
Army of Conquest led by Al
Qaeda-established jihadist
group, Jabhat Fateh Al-Sham. For
its part, The Syria Campaign
coordinated the release of a
statement with Raslan explaining
away his obvious affinity with
Al-Zenki. Sophie McNeill, the
Australian Broadcasting Corp.
reporter who was among the first
to publish the famous Omran
photo, dutifully published
Raslan’s statement on
Twitter, acknowledging The Syria
Campaign as its source.
Curiously describing the
beheading victim as a
19-year-old and not the “child”
his beheaders claimed he was,
Raslan pleaded ignorance about
the Al-Zenki fighters’
backgrounds: “It was a busy day
with lots of different people
and groups on the streets. As a
war photographer I take lots of
photos with civilians and
fighters.”
Mahmoud Raslan may not have been
the most effective local
partner, but The Syria Campaign
could still count on the White
Helmets.
In Part II: How the U.S.-funded
White Helmets rescue civilians
from Syrian and Russian bombs
while lobbying for the U.S.
military to step up its own
bombing campaign.
Max
Blumenthal is a senior
editor of the
Grayzone
Project at AlterNet,
and the award-winning author
of
Goliath and Republican
Gomorrah. His
most recent book is The
51 Day War: Ruin and
Resistance in Gaza. Follow
him on Twitter at
@MaxBlumenthal.