A well-known Syrian activist and filmmaker was slain on Monday while filming clashes in Homs. Bassel Al Shahade was a Fulbright Scholar studying at Syracuse University before leaving his studies in film to document his country’s revolution at the start of unrest in Syria last year. Shahade had been in Homs for two months training citizen journalists before his death.
Since the beginning of the Syrian uprising in March 2011, Jordan has become a haven for many activists, to the growing concern of the Jordanian government.
The country attracts many activists who fear reprisals by Hezbollah should they go to Lebanon, but who equally do not wish to connect with the Syrian National Council in Turkey, as they worry that it is too closely aligned to conservative religious movements.
Yet there is an undeniable sense that the activists in Jordan wish to stay under the radar despite their growing numbers: if their presence is felt too much, they fear that the Jordanian government will change its open-border policy, threatening the safety of not just the activists but the thousands of refugees who have also sought shelter there. For this reason, the names of all those interviewed for this article have been protected.
Activists are keenly aware that they are being watched by the Jordanian secret service. “They ask you to come in to see them regularly, for reasons related to your security” explained S, “so they’ll ask questions about whether you feel you’ve been followed or if you feel in danger, and this is clearly for your own protection. But then because they’ve got you there, they start with questions that help them, like who you’re associating with and why.”
Jordan is continuing to weather a growing anti-government movement which was sparked by the Arab Spring in 2011, and there are fears that allowing it to become a known centre for revolutionaries will both destabilise the country and compromise its tenuous diplomatic relations with Syria.
“It’s not easy to be active in public about Syria in Jordan,” says S. “If you talk to the media about Syria and say where you are, you will be questioned by the secret police and asked not to give away your location. If you want to protest, you need to tell the authorities in advance. There have been occasions when, during demonstrations in front of the Syrian embassy in Amman, protestors tried to enter the building, so the Jordanian secret police held them for a few days.”
Keeping in contact with those still in Syria and sharing this information with as many as possible forms the backbone of any activism for those now in Jordan. Still, “it’s not so easy for those inside Syria to talk to those who’ve escaped,” S continues, “because if they’re wanted by the security forces then their parents phones will be tapped. This is already the case for all international calls to and from Syria. When the security services want someone, they arrest a member of their family, so they obligate them to go and get them so they can arrest them.”
As such, the internet provides the primary lifeline between those who have fled Syria and those still inside. Even though most use routing software or browsers such as UltraSurf or Tor, there are still enormous risks. “Many people inside were arrested because the regime could hack their e-mails and profiles,” explains ‘S’, “which is why you have nicknames on Facebook and fake e-mails. Even on the ground, most activists use nicknames.”
Pro-revolution websites within Syria are automatically shut down, but information flourishes through those outside the country with connections to those still inside publishing websites that compile snippets of information from those inside, such as Syrian Revolution Digest. Facebook is the main social networking tool for sharing information, possibly because the structure of the site provides a degree of protection against hacking.
Even so, obtaining media to share is not without risks, even for citizen journalists. “If they [the Syrian police] find a video of a protest on your mobile phone for example, you’re probably dead,” says S.
New Start, a prominent pro-revolution radio station based in Jordan, hides its location even from the Jordanian authorities. “We talk about the human needs in Syria, focusing on areas like Homs, Damascus and Aleppo where there are many problems, plus broadcast the news,” explained “N”, who set up the station. “To do this, we make contact with Syrians inside and publish it online. We couldn’t do this inside Syria. We don’t have the internet access and it would be way too dangerous.”
New Start, which broadcasts via internet livestream, was recently contacted by the online provider that hosts the channel to inform them that the feed they use to broadcast had “experienced a series of attacks” against its host server.
The provider has claimed to be able to block the attacks and to be taking measures to ensure that this incident does not reoccur, but there are no guarantees for its security. When N and the other radio station workers contacted the provider to find out precisely where the attacks were coming from, they received no response.
The debate raging among the activists both within Syria and beyond is about how violence has become central to resistance on the ground, an element that looks to be the largest force shaping the direction of the country. Few activists seem willing to denounce the use of violence, which was initially employed exclusively to shield peaceful protests from being fired at by pro-Assed forces, but has now has become a pillar of the resistance strategies — some would argue justifiably.
Nonetheless, non-violent protest is continuing, although it carries heavy penalties: all protests expect to be fired on with live ammunition. Another activist, “B”, spoke of how one female protestor became famous almost overnight after standing in front of the parliament building holding a sign saying: “Stop killing, we want to build a home for all Syrians”. The use of the slogan has spread to become something of a meme, although now anyone seen displaying the sign showing it is arrested.
The suppression of any information linked to the uprising is total. “One of my best friends was constantly going out at night to graffiti the walls with pro-revolution graffiti,” said S, “he was arrested a month ago and we have no idea where he is.”
“Because of the way that we were raised and our culture, Syrian people reject the idea of outside intervention. Change has to come from within Syria,” insisted “H”, an activist who has now returned to Homs.
Whatever form this change comes in, it is clear that it will be fuelled through the lines of communication between those within Syria and those who have managed to escape successfully. It could be said that the greatest strength of the Assad regime has been its ability to censor media and communications, especially that which shows the atrocities it is now committing against its own people. As such, free speech and open communication are not just tools to expose this or to drive the uprising forward, they are in themselves revolutionary.
Ruth Michaelson is a freelance journalist based in Ramallah. She tweets at @_Ms_R
A citizen journalist has been sentenced to death in Syria, after giving a series of interviews to Al-Jazeera TV station. Mohammed Abdelmawla al-Hariri has been charged with “high treason and contacts with foreign parties” after giving the broadcaster an interview on the situation in his home town of Deraa. Hariri, who was arrested on 16 April shortly after giving an interview, has reportedly been subject to horrific torture after his arrest, resulting in partial paralysis. The Syrian government has accused the station of being part of a global plot to cause chaos in the country.
In a speech at Washington DC’s Holocaust Memorial Museum this week, Barack Obama this week announced US measures against technology companies aiding the Syrian and Iranian regimes in tracking and monitoring of members of the opposition. Here’s the introduction from the Executive Order signed this week, worth quoting at length:
I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, hereby determine that the commission of serious human rights abuses against the people of Iran and Syria by their governments, facilitated by computer and network disruption, monitoring, and tracking by those governments, and abetted by entities in Iran and Syria that are complicit in their governments’ malign use of technology for those purposes, threaten the national security and foreign policy of the United States. The Governments of Iran and Syria are endeavoring to rapidly upgrade their technological ability to conduct such activities. Cognizant of the vital importance of providing technology that enables the Iranian and Syrian people to freely communicate with each other and the outside world, as well as the preservation, to the extent possible, of global telecommunications supply chains for essential products and services to enable the free flow of information, the measures in this order are designed primarily to address the need to prevent entities located in whole or in part in Iran and Syria from facilitating or committing serious human rights abuses.
It’s another indicator of the fact that the online element is now an essential part of any conflict. Since Hillary Clinton’s speech on the web in January 2010, the US has positioned itself as the defender of the free internet against the censorious, snooping impulses of Iran, China et al.
Our friends at the Electronic Frontier Foundation in the United States have welcomed the White House move as ultimately “a good thing”, though with caveats. EFF say:
First, here’s what the order does accomplish:
It sanctions individuals and entities in Iran and Syria that are “complicit in their government’s malign use of technology” for the purposes of network disruption, monitoring, or tracking of individuals.
It aims to prevent entities (including companies) from facilitating or committing serious human rights abuses in Syria.
It bars the contribution or receipt of funds to any individual or entity named on the list contained within the order.
Notably, the order makes mention of companies that have “sold, leased or otherwise provided, directly or indirectly, goods, services or technology to Iran or Syria likely to be used to facilitate computer or network disruption, monitoring, or tracking that could assist in or enable serious human rights abuses by or on behalf of [the two countries’ governments]” (emphasis ours). This is notable because, when it was discovered that their products had made it to Syria and were being used by the regime to monitor network communications, executives of U.S. company BlueCoat denied knowledge of their products being in Syria.
Now, for what the order does not accomplish:
The order is solely focused on Syria and Iran, leaving out—most notably—Bahrain, where a protester was killed this weekend by police forces as well as, of course, other countries that engage in technology-related human rights violations. Bahraini human rights groups have documented the use of Trovicor technologies in surveillance there, leading to—in some cases—torture.
The order does not loosen existing restrictions by the Department of Commerce, whichbar the export of “good” technologies—including web hosting, Google Earth, and Java—to Syrians. At the Stockholm Internet Forum for Global Development last week, Syrian activist Mohammad Al Abdallah raised the Commerce restrictions as a consistent frustration amongst Syrian activists on the ground. While Treasury restrictions on Iran have been revised time and again, Commerce restrictions go unchanged.
Read the rest of Jillian C. York’s analysis here. Index very much supports EFF’s point on the lack of attention given to Bahrain.