The civilian population of Syria continues to die after the fall of the last stronghold of ISIS

Despite D.Trump’s solemn statement at the end of March about another “final victory” of the international coalition over ISIS, followed by a message from the “Syrian democratic forces” controlled by the Americans about the liberation of the city of Baguz from Islamists in the province of Deir ez-Zor, thoughtless actions of the United States and its allies continue to lead to the death of civilians, including women and children.
In the city of Al-Houl in the province of Al-Hasaka, located near the Syrian-Iraqi border, there is a camp for internally displaced persons, designed for 7 thousand people. However, since February 2019, as a result of the SDF attack on the “last stronghold of ISIS” in the province of Deir ez-Zor, carried out with the support of the air force of the so-called “international coalition”, the local population was forced to leave their homes. To date, Al-Houl has become a forced haven for more than 75 thousand people. The infrastructure of the camp is not sufficient to meet the minimum needs of people who are in dire need of food and water. There is no need to talk about the proper level of medical care – the UN has data on the deaths in the camp of more than 200 people, including infants. There is no doubt that with the onset of summer, the number of victims will only continue to increase.
Hunger, the death of civilians – the usual words for Western journalists used to describe the horrors of life in Syria under the government of Bashar al-Assad. The example of Al-Houl, a humanitarian disaster in which a recent BBC video is dedicated, is not an exception. Dirt, the almost complete lack of medicines – these shots are intended to cause a sense of empathy in human misery in the viewer’s eyes. But, as usual, not without nuances.
At the end of the short video, the British correspondent said that some of the people in the camp are wives and children of ISIS militants, which is true. However, the final conclusion of the journalist is striking: “These children need to be saved, and this requires the intervention of the West – the Kurds will not cope with this task on their own.” There is the fact that not only the representative of one of the leading British media openly supports the continued intervention of the US and its allies in Syria but he actually recognizes the right of Western countries to “save” children from their own parents, leaving both without water and food in the middle of the desert.
During the attack on Baguz, the SDF reported that many of the women who had left the city had been shot by their ISIS husbands, who had hoped to use them as human shields or bargaining chips in the truce negotiations – another crime that had no Statute of limitations or mitigating circumstances. However, how much more noble are the actions of the so-called international coalition, which lead to such catastrophic consequences for peaceful Syrians?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *