Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2016

The Current Transcript for February 6, 2017

Host: Laura Lynch

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Listen to the full episode

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

In a system of justice where the accused, the family, the victim, and where the community at large is required to wait for years. It is very difficult at that point to do justice.

LAURA LYNCH: Justice delayed is justice denied, so the saying goes. Lawyer Lawrence Greenspon agrees. And even as his client Adam Picard, an accused murderer, walked away a free man after the charge against him was stayed. The Supreme Court of Canada has laid down the rules and now the courts are struggling to keep up to ensure a fair trial for all. This morning we'll look into the impact of the ruling across the country. And then..

SOUNDCLIP

One of the things that really attracts them to U of T, but also to Toronto and also to Canada is a culture that is diverse and that’s also inclusive.

LL: With all the continuing uncertainty over US President Trump's travel ban, students and academics are considering alternatives to US universities and the University of Toronto’s Ted Sargent says Canada features prominently on the list. He sees a surge in applications from Americans. But it's other foreign nationals who are now looking north of the border. And after that..

SOUNDCLIP

FILIPPO GRANDI: Look at these ruins, the ruins of this war. This is what the refugees from Syria that are now denied entry, this is what these refugees have fled from.

LL: It was even worse than what Filippo Grandi said he imagined. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees toured the city of Aleppo in Syria recently to see the damage caused by years of war. Now that the government is back in control of the entire city, there are enormous challenges yet to overcome. Rebuilding not just homes but entire lives. I'm Laura Lynch sitting in for Anna Maria Tremonti and this is The Current.

Back To Top »

Lawyers warn court delays are creating black hole in Canada's justice system

Guests: Daniel Brown, Antonietta Raviele

SOUNDCLIP

[Music: CBC News Theme]

ANCHOR 1: A Manitoba judge has thrown out the first criminal case that took too long to come to trial. It involves a man charged with sexual assault and uttering threats.

ANCHOR 2: [crosstalk] There was angry reaction in Ottawa today after a murder trial was halted earlier this week.

[Sound: protesters yelling]

REPORTER 1: Dozens of protesters here are furious that a judge has set accused killer Adam Picard free.

REPORTER 2: a former Olympic paddler who was accused of being part of a marijuana drug smuggling ring is sharing his side of the story after charges against him were stayed yesterday.

ANCHOR 3: CBC News has learned Alberta justice will attempt to overturn the stay of a first degree murder charge citing legal errors.

REPORTER 3: Justice Stephen Hillier ruled the constitutional rights of Lance Matthew Regan had been violated because of excessive delays getting to trial.

LAURA LYNCH: Well, clearly the wheels of justice in Canada can move painfully slowly. And court delays have been flagged as a problem time and time again. But if a decision last summer by the Supreme Court of Canada has its intended effect, that could be changing. The court's so-called Jordan decision has set some strict new deadlines on the justice system. Trials for less serious offenses must now be wrapped up within 18 months. More serious charges, including murder, have a 30 month deadline. The Jordan decision came out of the case of Barrett Richard Jordan, who was convicted of selling heroin and cocaine in British Columbia. But his case took more than four years to be resolved, 49 months to be precise. The Supreme Court decided that lengthy delay was a violation of his Charter rights. And it wrote the system has quote, “lost its way.” That decision has done more than just shed light on the chronic issue of cases dragging on in courts across the country, it has resulted in charges being stayed and cases thrown out in all sorts of cases, from impaired driving and drug trafficking to aggravated sexual assault and even murder. Adam Picard, a former soldier facing first degree murder charges, had his charges stayed in November, because the four yearlong proceedings had taken too long. This is his lawyer Lawrence Greenspon.

SOUNDCLIP

LAWRENCE GREENSPON: Last week we brought an application under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms section 11 (b), which guarantees everyone the rights to be tried within a reasonable time. This morning your Honour Justice Parfett ruled on that application and decided to stay the charges against that of Picard.

ADAM PICARD: I’m relieved that this is all over. And I would just like to get back to my life. And I am innocent of these charges.

LL: Adam Picard might have been relieved, but the parents of the man who was murdered were outraged.

SOUNDCLIP

ARMINE NAYEL: You know, the legal system, judges think they're gods. Lawyers think they're gods. And the ordinary person like ourselves are treated like garbage. We’re letting out people, and there's not only my son's accused murderer is going to be let out, there’s going to be lots of people let out. And the sad part is if you're found innocent in a court of law, that's one thing. If you're let out on technicalities, that's atrocious. This is not our society.

NICOLE NAYEL: From day one, all what I ask is justice and right now I haven't got justice. The accused killer, he's walking away the street and happy about it. And that's even worse for me. So what kind of message are we sending the Canadian out there? So they’re beating the system? Is that the way it should be? Like, I'm talking for everyone, because it's not only our case, it's going to be all over. Lot of people they’re going to walk the same path we're walking. And I don't want to see anybody go through what we're going through.

LL: That was Armine and Nicole Nayel in an interview on CBC's Ottawa Morning. Their son Fouad Nayel was killed. The man accused walked free because of court delays. The president of the Ontario Crown Attorneys Association has warned that thousands of charges are at risk of being tossed out by the courts. So how did we get here and what is it like to navigate through the justice system? I am joined now by two guests to answer those questions. Daniel Brown is a criminal defense lawyer and Toronto Region Director of the Criminal Lawyers Association. And Antonietta Raviele is a former Crown prosecutor who now practices privately in the areas of criminal defense and mental health law with the firm RV law in Toronto. Hello to both of you.

DANIEL BROWN: Hi, good morning.

ANTONIETTA RAVIELE: Good morning.

LL: Daniel Brown, I'm wondering what goes through your mind when you hear the parents of Fouad Nayel talk about how they feel and the fact that they think they've been denied justice.

DANIEL BROWN: Well, I think it's a sentiment shared by a lot of people. I mean, I'm a citizen of this country as well and I feel the same way about it. But we also have to remember that an accused person goes through just as much, if not even more anguish, waiting for their trial to come about, only to have it delayed repeatedly because the court system really can't accommodate all the cases that are in the system right now.

LL: Antonietta Raviele, what do all of the delays say about the state of our justice system?

ANTONIETTA RAVIELE: Well, [clears throat] excuse me, the delays say that there is a serious lack of resources that are being put into the system at any given time. As we know, this isn't the first time that a court decision has come down that has been so impactful with respect to delay. Askov happened sometime in the eighties.

LL: That was another Supreme Court ruling.

ANTONIETTA RAVIELE: That was another Supreme Court of Canada case. And that case resulted at the time in thousands of cases being stayed all at once, quite frankly. And there was another case that came after that called Moran, Supreme Court of Canada case, that took the time to bring a more nuanced approach to the issue. And now we have Jordan. And Jordan has imposed some very strict limits, which are great provided you have the resources to implement and to create a better system based on that case, which does not exist.

LL: OK. Daniel Brown, I think you agree with that, that the resources just aren't there.

DANIEL BROWN: It isn't just the resource issue, but certainly there's a lack of judges right now. We have many courtrooms that simply don't have enough judges to try the cases. That's one issue. But there's lots of other fundamental issues that have created this problem with delay now, even with crime being down. What we see are that more cases are going to trial and there's a lot of reasons behind that.

LL: What are they?

DANIEL BROWN: Well, I mean, if we look at one of the reasons, over the last ten years there's been a number of changes to legislation that have really disincentivized pleading guilty. We have mandatory minimum sentences now for more offenses than ever before, we have restrictions on parole eligibility and so more people are staying in jail longer, we have elimination of the types of sentences that allowed people to serve their sentences on house arrest, a number of these for nonviolent offenses like drug cases or fraud cases have been eliminated. And so the reality is that instead of resolving our cases, more cases are going to trial than ever before because there's no way to simply tailor an appropriate sentence for those who wish to plead guilty.

LL: Now, you're on the front lines and you've had a client whose trial was delayed last week. Tell me about that.

DANIEL BROWN: Yeah. We showed up for trial, it was a seven day trial, it was a serious sexual assault allegation. And when we got to court, there was so many more cases that were in jeopardy of being thrown out that even though our case had been scheduled for over a year, the judge said that ours wasn't in jeopardy of being thrown out yet. So we were going to be rescheduled. And that's a really frustrating thing for the victims’ families, the complainants in the case, for my client who had waited years to have his case heard, and the amount of time and preparation that goes into a trial is a little bit like studying for a really big exam only to find out that it was canceled at the last minute. It's a really frustrating process for everyone involved.

LL: And Ms. Raviele, you have experience in the crown prosecutor's office. Do you agree with the sentiment that the laws have shifted so that crown prosecutors are either unable or unwilling to make deals to clear the backlog?

ANTONIETTA RAVIELE: Well I agree and I don't agree. Because there have been several initiatives that have been instituted by the Ministry of the Attorney General to deal with the backlogs. For example, there was an initiative called Justice on Target, where specific and focused measures were attempted to be brought into the courtrooms and to the court houses to try to bring down the delay. The problem again is that, but I do agree, sorry, I do agree with Daniel with respect to the fact that with several of the changes to what sentences are available, it does disincentivize individuals from entering into resolutions that would otherwise be something that could be acceptable. We have to--

LL: We’re talking about plea bargains here.

ANTONIETTA RAVIELE: Plea bargains, yeah. And you have to remember too that with respect to the crown, their job isn’t just to resolve matters, but it's to resolve matters in a way that is meaningful and significant in terms of justice and in terms of the punishment that is being accepted and acknowledged, and the impact that it's going to have, and the resolution that it is meant to bring to the table has to be something that's more than just I'm selling the farm because I don't have the time to bring this thing to trial. So that kind of pressure tends to undermine what most people consider to be justice.

LL: For Crown prosecutors, how big is the burden on them right now? What kind of caseload are they carrying?

ANTONIETTA RAVIELE: I can tell you from my own experience, when I was a Crown, the case loads, and this was several years ago, I left in 2009, was significant. And the pressure at that time to move matters forward was extremely significant. So that's pressure you carry with you every day into court no matter what you're doing. But now, and I have spoken to many Crown attorneys that I know and that I have worked with, that not only is the ministry not filling positions where people retire, quit, or on mat leave. So they are not only back filling those positions but no new positions are being created. So you have, let's say you have a hundred Crowns, well, 10 of them are gone, so you have 90 dealing with what a hundred crowns were supposed to be dealing with. And on top of everything else, with this case it's clear that a hundred Crowns regularly would not be enough. So the pressure they're carrying is immense.

LL: And Daniel Brown, I want to talk about another aspect of this. It’s the funding of legal aid, how does that play into it?

DANIEL BROWN: Well, it's significant, because right now there's so many people in this country that can't get proper legal aid funding to defend themselves against very serious allegations. In Ontario the cut off for a single person without dependents is about 15,000 dollars. Meaning if you make more than 15,000 a year you simply don't qualify, regardless of how serious the charge is. Even those that make less than 15,000 dollars aren't entitled to legal aid unless there's a likelihood they're going to jail. And so what it does is it leaves a number of people lost wandering the system by themselves because they can't afford a lawyer and they can't get government support for a lawyer and so they're forced to represent themselves. And that consumes a huge amount of resources. Judges need to take extra time in court. Prosecutors struggle to try and streamline the cases when there's an accused person who has a right to hear all the evidence and has a right to challenge all the witnesses, and they don't know where to focus their time and energy, and rather they take a shotgun approach to defending the case. It really tends to spiral out of control. And so these unrepresented accused persons are placing a huge burden on the court system and it results in lengthier delays to trial because fewer cases are being heard at trial.

LL: And that presumes that there's going to be a judge to hear them at all. Here is another issue and you mentioned it Ms. Raviele, is the availability of judges. That's a problem too.

ANTONIETTA RAVIELE: That's a huge problem. You don't have enough judges. You don't have enough court staff. You don't have enough space. You don't have enough courtrooms. You don't have enough daily, you don't have any enough hours in the day. When they're scheduling trials, generally speaking, trials are scheduled somewhere between 12 and 16 hours in one day. Whereas realistically you're going to perhaps get four and a half hours of real trial time. But the point of that is that many matters end up resolving at the last minute. But you have all of these matters that should otherwise have been tried. But there's just not enough time and there are just not enough resources. If you had more judges, more space, more everything, if the government invested in the system then this backlash wouldn't happen. And you wouldn't have Crowns leaving in droves. They're over worked and I'm not going to talk about the pay but their pressure and the impact it has on their life is enormous.

LL: What is the reason why there's a shortage of judges?

ANTONIETTA RAVIELE: I really couldn't tell you. I can tell you, I know a lot of lawyers, myself included, who would be quite interested in sitting on the bench. But it's something that is very, I think it's a political monetary decision. And for years you have governments in Liberal and Progressive Conservative and NDP saying we have to invest in this system, but every time you get someone in power there is a flat line of funding or there's a withdrawal of funding. And there is an extreme impact that's going on in terms of your prosecution service. They are suffering.

LL: Now so far we're talking about the impact on the criminal justice system. But is there also, because of this lack of resources and impact on the civil part, where people are trying to get justice in civil suits, is that a problem too Daniel?

DANIEL BROWN: Yeah absolutely. So in criminal cases there's a constitutional guarantee to a trial in a reasonable amount of time. But that constitutional protection doesn't extend to the civil law realm. So it means that anyone who's got a civil law dispute is often bumped in order to accommodate the criminal cases. So while we see presumptive ceilings set that criminal cases, serious criminal cases are expected to be heard within two and a half years, there is nothing that protects civil cases from being heard sooner. And so they're often bumped four or five or six years into the future. And again, that's not timely justice and even though it's not a criminal resolution, many people's lives turn the outcomes of these civil cases as well.

LL: Now when you are dealing with courts, we often hear complaints about defense lawyers who drag cases out. So isn't this part of the problem? The defense of a criminal client is just taking too long?

DANIEL BROWN: I don't think it's that the defense is taking too long. As I said, it's really a resource issue. There are too many cases in the court system and too few judges, too few courts to accommodate them. We heard too few prosecutors. So either the answer is to hire more judges and prosecutors, that's one possible solution. Or it’s to better screen and focus on the cases that are important to be in the justice system. There's so many cases that we see enter the justice system that we know are going to fall apart when we come to trial. We know, for example, there's questionable witnesses or cases that feature constitutional violations that aren't going to stand up to judicial scrutiny. And yet these cases aren't screened out early in the process. Rather than make a difficult decision to drop a charge where there may have been some sort of violation, the cases press on to trial only to see them collapse at the last minutes.

LL: Ms. Raviele, I wonder what your response is to hearing that? Is it true that the crown is just not applying its discretion properly?

ANTONIETTA RAVIELE: I don't agree. I mean, in the end I think the cases that Daniel is talking about more often than not there is a corresponding public interest in the prosecution of those cases. When you have a Charter violation for example, what may seem blatant on the one hand and on paper oftentimes things always look very black and white, but once you get into that courtroom, the circumstances and nuances that come into play are taken into consideration by a judge. And the fact is in Canada and our constitutional guarantees are subject to several savings to say that even though there may be a Charter violation, the public interest or the seriousness of this offense is such that it requires us to really move forward with it. So while I agree that there are cases, there are always going to be cases that perhaps didn't have to go forward, you know, there could have been some alternative that could have been considered. That doesn't necessarily mean that the Crowns have to be or ought to be held hostage by these deadlines.

LL: We have talked about a whole bunch of problems with the system now. Here's the big question for both of you briefly, what's the fix?

DANIEL BROWN: Well, as we've been talking about, perhaps there’s a number of things. Certainly better funding for those, I guess, marginalized people that simply can't afford a lawyer, raising the cut off for legal aid help can relieve some of the problems with the system, filling those judicial vacancies. There is no shortage of good prospects for judges, there's lots of people who want to be judges. And so those are easy fix to the system. Perhaps giving judges back the ability to tailor appropriate sentences again, bringing back house arrest sentences, eliminating some of the mandatory minimum sentences that have really had no positive impact on the justice system. These are some of the things that we can do in order to relieve some of the stress and the burden on the justice system.

LL: Antonietta Raviele, besides naming you to the bench, [chuckles] what else could we do?

ANTONIETTA RAVIELE: Everybody's listening. Oh, I think there are several things that could happen. Number one, we were talking about judges and how in the civil courts they end up having to shuffle things around for the criminal matters. You have to understand in Superior Court, so the higher court, they hear family, civil, criminal. Appoint judges in the Superior Court to simply listen to criminal cases. And the other thing I'd like to suggest would be if you have certain types of offenses like a theft under someone doesn't have a criminal record and they're an adult. Let the police divert it. Let the police deal with that charge, rather than have them go into the courtroom, courthouse, let the police figure it out. They already do that in youth cases. So why not let them do it with adults?

LL: Alright. We will have to leave it there. Thank you very much to both of you. Daniel Brown is a criminal defense lawyer and a Toronto Region Director of the Criminal Lawyers Association. And Antonietta Raviele is a former Crown prosecutor, now practicing at RV law in Toronto. Now, we requested an interview with the Federal Minister of Justice Jody Wilson-Raybould, but the request was declined. And we're going to be talking about this issue again on The Current. Later this week, we're going to be looking at potential solutions. And we want to hear from you. Let us know if you've experienced court delays or if you've had an efficient experience in Canada's court system. Go to our website, click on the contact link. That’s cbc.ca/thecurrent. The CBC News is next. Then how the chaos of Donald Trump's travel ban could translate to a brain gain for Canadian universities. I'm Laura Lynch and you are listening to The Current.

[Music: Extro]

Back To Top »

How Trump's travel ban could mean a brain gain for Canadian universities

Guests: Sohrab Redjai Sani, Noreen Golfman, Massieh Moayedi

LAURA LYNCH: Hello I'm Laura Lynch and you're listening to The Current.

[Music: Theme]

LL: Still to come, we go back to Aleppo, Syria. It's been about a month since the city was returned to regime control and it remains a city divided between east and west. We'll check in with residents about the struggle to get back to some kind of normalcy in the Syrian city left in ruins by civil war. But first, tracking the US travel ban on campus.

SOUNDCLIP

MIKE PENCE: I mean, the American people know that the threats that we face are real and they elected President of Donald Trump for many reasons, but one of them was for us to rethink our immigration policies relative to ensuring that people who represent a threat to our families and communities don't come into this country. We'll continue to press that and we remain very confident that the president's actions are on solid constitutional and legal grounds.

LL: United States Vice President Mike Pence doing the rounds on the Sunday talk shows after a stunning legal setback for the Trump administration. On Friday, a federal judge in Seattle Washington issued a restraining order against President Donald Trump's temporary ban on refugees and travelers from seven predominantly Muslim countries. On Saturday, the White House lost an initial appeal of that ruling but has vowed to continue the fight in the courts, which means that for now anyway, the travel ban is no longer being enforced. It's another dramatic development in a fast changing story that has led to confusion and uncertainty for people all over the world since the president first signed the Executive Order. People like Ali Abdi, an Iranian Ph.D. student at Yale University, who last week suddenly found himself afraid to return to his studies in America despite being a green card holder.

SOUNDCLIP

Let's see who are these people who are now banned from entering the country. There are students like me, graduate students who were doing their Ph.Ds, doing their master’s and they were meant to later serve the American public by teaching there, by producing knowledge.

LL: The Trump administration did go on to state that green card holders would be allowed to enter the United States after all. But regardless of the legal back and forth, many international students enrolled in American schools are left feeling uncertain about their place in the US. And they,along with students around the world, may now be considering studying elsewhere — including Canada. One academic who is considering his options is Sohrab Redjai Sani. He's a postdoctoral fellow in the Materials Science and Engineering Department at MIT and he specializes in advanced nanotechnology. And he is in our Washington studio. Hello.

SOHRAB REDJAI SANI: Hi Laura, thanks for having me.

LL: What was your first thought when you heard about President Trump's travel ban?

SOHRAB REDJAI SANI: I was initially very shocked, because everyone thought something like this might happen but nobody expected this to really happen. So I was both shocked and very disappointed, because I was imagining myself living in US for a longer period of time. And with that news I started to thinking about how my future in this country would look like and if I want to stay or not.

LL: And now that the judge has at least temporarily put a restraining order on the ban, how would you feel about that?

SOHRAB REDJAI SANI: That's a great news that the public, at least part of public is against what President Trump is preaching and trying to enforce. But at the same time, there is another part, the uncertainty of day to day life, even the green card holder at some point were afraid of coming back or traveling. Living in the situation is not pleasant and takes so much energy and planning. And at some point, I need to figure out if this worth it.

LL: Well, even before all of this, as an Iranian working in a high level scientific research, how have you found the United States as a place to live and to work and learn?

SOHRAB REDJAI SANI: That's yeah, that's a very good point because before President Trump get elected and all these things that we are facing, I had difficulties getting access to advanced research facilities such as in Stanford and national labs in Brookhaven National Lab because of my nationality. Working in similar facilities back in Europe when I was doing my grad study both in Sweden, France, and UK we had no problem I managed to find and do good research in those facilities. But unfortunately due to my nationality I was not allowed to conduct continue my research there. And I also was granted a single entry visa upon my arrival, which limited my travelling to Europe and to conferences in Europe and also seeing my family for that matter.

LL: So you have had experience of some discrimination then?

SOHRAB REDJAI SANI: Absolutely.

LL: Now, you say you are looking around. What options are you considering?

SOHRAB REDJAI SANI: Canada definitely sounds very interesting. I mean, I like the culture of North America. I've lived in Europe for many years, about nine years. But I like the diversity in North American university like Toronto University and British Columbia, McGill, York University seems to be very interesting opportunities.

LL: Was there anything holding you back from making the move?

SOHRAB REDJAI SANI: No. This is just early. I'm just, you know, starting. [chuckles]

LL: Are you seriously considering this though now? I mean, this is still a live issue in the courts and it may come down that you will be able to travel back and forth freely.

SOHRAB REDJAI SANI: That's for sure. But till when? That's a question. At the same time we see the report 47 per cent of Americans according to a CNN poll were agreed that these travel bans are effective and are good for the public, US public. And it feels like we are basically in sort of an environment that we are not invited to stay. And although we're contributing greatly, in my opinion, to this society but it's not appreciated. So it doesn't feel good.

LL: You have a very specialized field of research. And you mentioned a number of institutions in Canada. What kind of opportunities can Canada offer you that the US? can't?

SOHRAB REDJAI SANI: As a part of research, I think the universities are competing quite well. I mean, I’ve experienced both New York University and MIT and I’ve visited a couple of other universities. So MIT is definitely a specific place, and it's very unique for different matters. But different universities around US, I wouldn't say that Toronto university has anything less than them.

LL: Now, I'm wondering you obviously this is a very important debate you're having with yourself but have you been talking to others in similar situation in the US about this?

SOHRAB REDJAI SANI: Yes, I actually have a friend at MIT that I was recently talking with him, he was applying to get tenure track in US. But with all this progress, and he's also a green card holder, with all his progress he was thinking, he started, he applied for tenure tracks in Canada.

LL: And there are others as well? Is this becoming a big option for a lot of your colleagues?

SOHRAB REDJAI SANI: Yes. I mean, because Canada is so close and so similar to US in many ways. So it's a very interesting opportunity.

LL: So you say you're just starting to look at your options. How soon do you think you'll make a decision?

SOHRAB REDJAI SANI: I don't want to make a rash decision. So I'm hoping like exploring my option within the next month or two and then making a move.

LL: Alright. Thank you very much.

SOHRAB REDJAI SANI: Thanks.

LL: Sohrab Redjai Sani is a postdoctoral fellow at MIT. And he was in Washington D.C. Well one school here in Canada reacted to the US travel ban with a bold and welcoming measure. Memorial University of Newfoundland and Labrador has offered to waive the application fees of students applying from the seven countries named in President Trump's Executive Order. Dr. Noreen Golfman is Provost and Academic Vice President of Memorial University. And she is in San Diego, California today. Hello.

NOREEN GOLFMAN: Hi.

LL: Why did Memorial University decide to waive the application fees for the students who've been affected by the travel ban?

NOLAN BELLEROSE: Well, it seems like the, I guess, the first easiest gesture we could make to signal to students who, and not just who might be applying not just from the seven countries affected by the ban, but also from the US who were considering leaving, just as the person you've just been talking to has indicated. A lot of anxiety south of the border as well. And it would be a sign that we were welcoming, inclusive, that there was some other option for them if they were considering applying to a university outside the US. So we did that. It was an easy thing to do right away. And we've also, I should add, indicated that we're exploring some form of scholarship support for students who do get admitted from many of those countries. And--

LL: What has the response been like so far to your offer to waive application fees?

NOLAN BELLEROSE: It's been really through the roof. The number of calls and emails and inquiries we've had has put a lot of stress on our staff. In fact, we've had to add staff and borrowing staff from all over the university to help just cope with just the sheer intensity of it.

LL: Can you put a number on it?

NOLAN BELLEROSE: I don't. People have told me it's doubled. So I don't actually know what that means but it's been pretty intense. The officer in the school of grad studies wrote me last week and said he's just never seen anything like it.

LL: Will the university though have to revisit the decision in light of the ruling late Friday to put a temporary stay on the ban?

NOLAN BELLEROSE: I don't think so. I mean, everybody is watching this very closely obviously all across Canada and, you know, we'll see how this plays out. But there's still a lot of uncertainty. I think too as you just heard, students who even if the travel ban is lifted might not feel all that welcome in a country where a sizable part of the population that was polled believes in the travel ban, regardless of its legality. So I think if it's kind of shifting the culture.

LL: Does Memorial University already have many students from the seven affected countries?

NOLAN BELLEROSE: Yeah, we have about 220 students from those countries.

LL: And what are you hearing from them?

NOLAN BELLEROSE: Expressions of solidarity. Enormous expressions of or certainly very heartfelt expressions of gratitude for this, for what Memorial is doing. We've had a lot of alumni writing me personally into our offices saying they're so proud of the university, they're proud of being Canadian, they're proud of being part of a Newfoundland expression again of welcome and inclusiveness. So it's just been a really really reinforcing.

LL: Now we've reached you in California this morning, you're there to speak with US students and I'm wondering have you heard anything from them about this?

NOLAN BELLEROSE: Well I've actually been with colleagues, vice presidents and deans, about 30-35 on a board as the only Canadian rep on this board, so it's been really interesting. I feel in some ways as if I'd been parachuted in from Utopia because my colleagues sitting around the table after the last few days here have been expressing, as you might imagine, anywhere from shock to, you know, not resignation but some form of defeatism certainly. And they're very very anxious, very uncertain. You know, a lot of the students in the universities and colleges that they come from have depended upon again, a kind of welcoming culture. They feel as if coming to the US to study here is, you know, a huge leap, personal accomplishment for them. And they depend of course on state funding in almost all of the public schools. So it's really rattled everybody here who I've talked to.

LL: Now I can imagine some of our listeners wondering what the impact would be of a spike in international students at Canadian universities have on the Canadian students. Would they be crowded out?

NOLAN BELLEROSE: Oh no. I couldn't imagine that would happen. I mean, I should think wherever there's capacity, international students from these countries will be welcome. They would still have to satisfy all the criteria that universities have for eligibility, for admission into programs. But no, I haven't heard anything like that. I think we have a lot of capacity in our systems.

LL: The other question about these kinds of things is again if you have a large number of international students coming in, perhaps focused on certain areas of study, would academic programs or campus services be tailored to meet their needs?

NOLAN BELLEROSE: Well they already are, because we've been internationalizing in Canada for some time now. And you need to look at someplace like UBC, even Memorial that has increased pretty significantly in the last ten years and international numbers. You have to start supplying the kind of services and accommodations. And international students require everything from quite obviously English as a second language classes and you have to enhance that capacity to all kinds of services. International students have other needs, adjusting to our cultures, our national as well as our local and regional cultures. And advisors need to be sensitive to their needs. There might be health issues, all kinds of questions that have to do just with the day to day existence on a university campus. So we won't be going from a standing start, we’ll be if anything, just increasing the services that we have been developing for some time now.

LL: Just very briefly, that all sounds like it might be added costs for the university. But I would guess there are ways that a university would benefit as well?

NOLAN BELLEROSE: I should think so. I've never heard an argument against internationalization from an educator. International students add to our diversity quite clearly, they bring their own expertise.

LL: They pay higher fees as well.

NOLAN BELLEROSE: Yeah, that's quite differently deployed across the country. Memorial still has the lowest fees in Canada. We do have a very modest differential between the domestic and the international fees. Other provinces obviously have much bigger differentials and I don't know what they do with that differential money. I know at Memorial what we have done ever since we established this differential policy is that we channel that differential back into services for international students.

LL: Alright. We will leave it there. Thank you.

NOLAN BELLEROSE: Pleasure.

LL: Goodbye.

NOLAN BELLEROSE: Bye bye.

LL: Dr. Noreen Golfman is Provost and Academic Vice President of Memorial University. And she was in San Diego, California. Now as we said, the controversial US travel ban is in legal limbo after a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order against it. Depending on what happens with that battle in the courts and the larger climate toward immigrants in the United States, some academics say Canada could well see a brain gain. Massieh Moayedi is an Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Dentistry and the collaborative program in Neuroscience at the University of Toronto. He was born in Iran and he is a Canadian citizen. He is in our Toronto studio. And I'm sorry I probably didn't pronounce your last name [chuckles] all that correctly.

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: That’s fine, hi.

LL: Hi. Before Friday's court order lifting the travel ban, how were you seeing it affect your friends and colleagues in the academic world?

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: It was pretty severe to be honest. I'm Iranian-Canadian, so I was initially banned before the Trudeau government negotiated my ability to go. And that would have affected my ability to attend conferences, share ideas and start collaborations. I had a few friends who actually held at JFK. They were international students from Iran returning from holidays, they were green card holders, they were not allowed to enter the country. And a lot of I think just the climate is really negative. A lot of professors are either sons or daughters of refugees or immigrants themselves and they just feel like the climate is not as welcoming or as open as it would be normally.

LL: But for the time being are they planning to continue their work?

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: Well at the moment yes, but a lot of Canadian academics for instance Adrian Owen at University of Western Ontario has decided to pull out of every American conference for the year and is reimbursing his staff to pull out as well. And I think that's a really strong bold move that is maybe appropriate at the moment.

LL: But that is more of a case of making a gesture.

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: Yes.

LL: Beyond the waiving the application fees, as we just heard to attract students from abroad, how would you like to see Canadian institutions respond to the moment of uncertainty? We just heard you say one measure being taken. What else?

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: I would love to see other institutions, so University of Toronto, McGill, really attract this talent. I mean, we have world class institutions here who do world class research and it’d be fantastic to get these amazing students and academics here to help grow our research portfolio, grow our research funding and also just like grow our talent pool. It'll give back to the Canadian economy, it will give back to the teaching for the students, and it will just make our universities stronger and better. And beyond that, I think the open and warmer culture in Canada might actually help foster a larger migration towards here and help us grow that aspect of our economy.

LL: If there are people pulling out of academic conferences in the US, could Canada be seen as the location to come to for academic conference?

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: We're hoping to. I mean, in light of Brexit England and this Trump US, I think Canada might be an excellent place for us to hold a lot of academic conferences. One of the largest ones in my field, the Society for Neuroscience, used to hold meetings in Vancouver and Montreal. And hopefully that would start up again, just because it be easier for us.

LL: Now there are obvious reasons right now why some might choose to study in Canada instead of the United States. But are there other advantages that you can see? I mean the United States has always been seen as one of the leading countries in the world for academics.

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: And I think that’s just a branding issue, right? The research coming out of Canada is top notch. University of Toronto and McGill are in the top 20 universities consistently internationally. And I think that we are competitors in those fields. And I think that we really could attract that talent. And I think we should. I think we need substantial funding from the federal government, provincial government, and the universities to really allow this attraction of the talent, because we can’t just create new labs out of thin air. And I think if that investment were there, we would benefit in the long run.

LL: You name McGill and the University of Toronto, but how about others? I mean, you've got a vast number of people who might need to go to academic institutions here. How do they measure up?

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: I mean, our institutions are world class. I'm mentioning McGill and U of T because internationally they're the most reputable, but there is McMaster, Western, UBC, and all the Canadian universities really do stand on good solid foundations.

LL: How optimistic are you that governments would be willing to put in extra funding?

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: I would hope that the government has a long term plan to adapt to the current situation globally. It is a good chance for Canada to actually maybe try to attract talent and grow.

LL: You heard me talking to Noreen Golfman from Memorial University about whether an influx, a large influx of international students might skew what courses are being offered, might skew services. Do you have any concerns about that?

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: I don't. I think a lot of Canadian universities have actually shifted their focus to attracting international students and are actually, unfortunately, largely relying on their tuition fees to maintain operations. At the same time, it's not, you're not getting the average joe student when they come internationally, you're getting the cream of the crop. These are people who really have achieved high standards, who are able to travel internationally and who show a strong level of resilience. These are the people Canada wants to attract so that we can grow our economy. I think these are the people who will do good research, good work, and lead to massive breakthroughs.

LL: And what do they bring to the table in terms of academics who are at your level? What else are they bringing to the table in Canada?

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: I mean, so one of the key ideas in academia is exchange of ideas, right? And often growing up academically in an environment, you kind of develop the same ideas. What this allows is for exchange of ideas and approaches. And it really fosters an environment of growth and new ideas and new approaches. And that can really lead to massive breakthroughs in the field and breaks down a lot of barriers.

LL: So what are you saying to your friends who are in the United States?

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: I'm trying to get them to come. I have a lot of Democratic friends and I try to get them to come and I'm trying to advertise Canada as a great place to work. And for those who are kind of stuck, I've seen some really fantastic initiatives from Canadian universities and abroad, who are giving lab space to people who can't go back to their own labs so that they can continue their work. And hopefully those people will decide to stay as well.

LL: Was there ever a time in your career when you considered going to the United States?

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: Yes. I did apply for a job under the Obama years. But to be honest, I was very hesitant because it is a tough environment, right? There is this back and forth in the US that makes you feel welcome, makes you feel less welcome. That's not to say that under Harper we all felt very welcome here either, right? There was the same talk of a refugee ban and a religious type of policies under him. So I think we just need to be vigilant to remember that we are a country based on multiculturalism.

LL: And if this ban is permanently rescinded by the courts, there's every indication this is going to have to go to the top court in the United States. Do you expect all of this discussion to die down?

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: I hope not. I mean, let's not forget that 48 per cent of the American population supports this ban, right? And I think that's very telling. And I think that even though if this one policy might be changed, there is still an attitude against migration at the moment in the US and that's very isolationist. And I think Canada under Trudeau has really shifted. And I think that would be very positive for us to use that message and to really try to bring in more immigrants who bring top talent.

LL: One more thing from you. From the people, friends that you've spoken to, how many do you sense are actually really ready to make the move?

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: Moving a lab is a really big deal. You risk losing funding, you risk losing trainees who might not be able to come with you. It's a very very very big decision to make. I know that there are some that are seriously considering it. But at the same time right now, funding levels in Canada are at eight per cent for Canadian Institutes of Health Research. So it's not a very attractive funding environment at the moment. We have to work on that and really have some more investment from the federal and provincial governments to help foster these moves.

LL: Alright, we'll leave it there. Thank you very much for coming in.

MASSIEH MOAYEDI: Thank you.

LL: Massieh Moayedi is an Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Dentistry and the collaborative program in Neuroscience at the University of Toronto. And he was in our Toronto studio.

[Music: Interlude]

LL: Well coming up next, we're checking in on the situation in Aleppo one month after Syrian government forces regained control. I'm Laura Lynch and you're listening to The Current.

Back To Top »

'Life is going to get even better': Residents rebuild in divided city of Aleppo

Guests: Ibrahim Nseir, Zouhir Al-Shimale, Nader Hasemi

LAURA LYNCH: Hello, I'm Laura Lynch and this is The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound: crowds chanting]

[Sound: trumpets playing]

LL: In Aleppo, Syria last week, a semblance of life as it used to be. For the first time in five years, two of Aleppo's soccer clubs faced off for a match at home. There was evidence of bomb damage around the pitch and security in riot gear in the stands, but as you can hear from the crowds there for those who remain in the battered Syrian city, a taste of normal life is something to cheer for. It has been just over a month since the rebel held eastern portion of the once thriving city fell to government forces. President Bashar al-Assad's forces now control the city in full. And it's a major blow to the rebel uprising that started in March of 2011. Peace talks will resume later this month in Geneva. But for the residents of Aleppo, east and west, the challenge is to rebuild life now one brick at a time. Ibrahim Nseir is a Reverend with the Arab Evangelical Presbyterian church of Aleppo. His church was bombed in 2012 and he is now hoping to rebuild. He's on the line from Western Aleppo today. Hello.

IBRAHIM NSEIR: Hello. Good morning.

LL: Now, you heard the sound of that soccer match and everyone gathered there. Is that a sign to you that life in Aleppo can start returning to normal?

IBRAHIM NSEIR: We are always have learned from our Lord Jesus Christ that we should live in hope, and this is our hope that Aleppo will be back and get it’s life again. And not only it is a matter of hope, it is a matter of effort. Everybody in the city of Aleppo is dedicating their efforts in order that the city will get back it’s normal life and it’s important role in the whole of the geography of Syria.

LL: Now we know that for all those years of conflict, it was mostly eastern Aleppo that was hit by damage. Although your church is hit as well. But I wondered if you could tell me what life is like overall in Aleppo today?

IBRAHIM NSEIR: Today life is better, life is going to be better. We know some people who went back to their homes and they started rebuilding their homes, starting back to go to their work. And the main services of the city started to get their normal term in the life of the city of Aleppo. Yes, the challenges are very critical in front of us because as you know, the war did a very big amount of damage but the people of the city have decided together with the government, with all the friends all around the world, to rebuild the city and things which should be better for the coming time.

LL: Now you mention things getting back to normal. What about food, water, electricity, do all the residents have that now? In matter of water, all the city of Aleppo has no water. Because ISIL have cut the water from an area called [unintelligible] so it not matter of only eastern side of Aleppo, all the city of Aleppo has no water. Yet the local authorities are doing the very important things in the city of Aleppo, they are trying to dig wells and to fulfill the needs of the people in the city of Aleppo by getting them water.

LL: Given that you don't have basics like water in the city, how secure do you feel there?

IBRAHIM NSEIR: Whenever you see the Syrian legal military you feel secure. Because you are not facing any more people who carry weapons who are not legal. Who can kill just because of your identity.

LL: Reverend, I do understand that but you do support government forces. I am wondering though for those who perhaps did not support the government, are they returning to Aleppo?

IBRAHIM NSEIR: Yes yes. There are people who are coming back to the eastern city. And not tomorrow, after tomorrow I will be in areas in the eastern cities distributing food baskets and distributing hygienes and trying to fulfill the needs of the people in that area. So people are coming back. Yes. And in fact, I have met many people who talked about their suffering because of what is called between two quotations “opposers” because I don't believe they were opposers, they were more young who have different policies.

LL: Can you tell us what happened to your church?

IBRAHIM NSEIR: My church, first of all it was targeted on June of 2012. We were going to worship God in our church and we have seen suddenly gangs within the square of the church. So we had to flee because we were threatened by their weapons and we had to worship God in an apartment on the fifth floor for three years and half. At the end of 2012, the church was bombed.

LL: How soon do you think you can rebuild your church?

IBRAHIM NSEIR: We want to rebuild our church. As you know we need a little bit of support of our brothers and sisters in order to rebuild the church. But we are planning to be very quick in our rebuilding of the church because the church should always be there, and should always testify for the glory of Jesus Christ and His great salvation that he did [unintelligible] with humanity.

LL: Reverend, obviously there is much of Aleppo that has been completely destroyed and we're now seeing reports that Russia has sent in troops to help with the rebuilding. What can you tell us about that?

IBRAHIM NSEIR: I am not a politician. I have not that much of interviews with the Russian powers here. But we know that according to the media, that they are ready to rebuild and in fact they have a centre reconciliation between the people, I think they are trying to build the relationship first, bridges between people before going to build buildings and stores and etc.

LL: Speaking of reconciliation, how long do you think it will take to heal the divide between people?

IBRAHIM NSEIR: I think the whole issue is not an issue of the time. It is the issue of position. Whenever you take the position to reconcile with the other, it is a process. And this process needs to time. But if it is the motive of everybody, we will reach each other and no problem anymore. So the reconciliation, it is a process and it is a position that we have taken to [unintelligible] everybody in the city of Aleppo.

LL: How critical is that reconciliation though to establishing a lasting peace?

IBRAHIM NSEIR: We believe in our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the lord of reconciliation. And we think that our civilization is a civilization of reconciliation. Therefore we had really difficulties to believe that what is happening belongs to our history and to our geography. In fact, there is a lot to be done in order to implement that reconciliation. And I think the most important thing is they have a department of education. Through education we can build reconciliation and through the violence of the country, we can rebuild reconciliation. And through giving ourselves to the others, we can build reconciliation. It is critical but it can be implemented, no problem with it.

LL: Reverend, I thank you for your time.

IBRAHIM NSEIR: Thank you Laura.

LL: Bye bye. Ibrahim Nseir is a Reverend with the Arab Evangelical Presbyterian church of Aleppo. And he was in Western Aleppo. Our next guest was raised in East Aleppo but was forced to flee his home in December when government forces retook the whole city. Zouhir Al-Shimale is a Syrian freelance journalist. We reached him in Gaziantep, Turkey. Hello.

ZOUHIR AL-SHIMALE: Hello.

LL: What is life like for you now that you have left Eastern Aleppo?

ZOUHIR AL-SHIMALE: [sighs] Yeah, in the first couple of days after leaving the city of Aleppo was quite hard, leaving from your city, from your land to an anonymous area where I don't know the people, the streets was quite odd. It was quite different, you know, in a good way and in a bad way. Because in a bad way because I don't know the city and I don't know the people and everything is strange and I left my home [unintelligible] In the east of Aleppo, it was good because it was normal city in a way. There was no siege, there was food and everything was available in a way. But yeah at the end there is some normal, some bloodshed all over the city. So I left to the countryside.

LL: OK. Why did you feel you had to leave Eastern Aleppo?

ZOUHIR AL-SHIMALE: Because the regime, let’s say not just the regime, the international community gave us no other options in the city where we were under siege. But they gave us no aid and they deprived us after bombing the convoy’s aid of the Syrian Crescent before two months of our leaving. They have gave us no option, they just let us to go or ask us to go and put kind of pressure on us as we were like, there was more than 60, 70,000 thousand people who were living there, mostly children and mostly children and women who needed like urgently to medicines.

LL: How many people are left there now? Is anyone you know still left in the eastern part of the city?

ZOUHIR AL-SHIMALE: Still live there? Yeah of course. Still some residents in the east of Aleppo. In Aleppo because when the regime was advancing, [unintelligible] were evacuating the city to the west and others were staying there. So yeah, there is still people living in the east from its residents, as they were living with us. So they didn’t left, they didn’t leave and they’re still there in the regime area.

LL: Now, as a freelance journalist I imagine you saw quite a bit of suffering over your time in Eastern Aleppo. How are you now? I'm wondering what kind of toll witnessing that has taken on you?

ZOUHIR AL-SHIMALE: Mmm yeah, because the situation, especially in the last few months of the siege have been seeing bombs and experiencing lots of bloodshed on the city. Now living I’d say in north Syria and Turkey back here, normal life. Everything is available. Electricity, water, supplies, everything you can imagine in a normal city or country, it's available now. You will have a kind of a civil shock because we don't used to live in here in a situation like this. You have everything is available as we were like experiencing for six years. And still now there are some Syrians here with shortage of water and electricity and aid as well, because the situation is still, the country is still in a war situation. And even the bombs, still like not as much as it was before. And there was this kind of let’s say political argument in the international community. So the situation is quite bad still. But here, yeah it’s good.

LL: Given all of the damage that we've heard about in Eastern Aleppo, I'm wondering how long you think it would take to rebuild it?

ZOUHIR AL-SHIMALE: It would take years. It depends on how much money it will cost and how the countries who will like cooperate to rebuild this Syrian state let’s say. Whether Russia or America, as they will kind of split the country, some will like take the rebel held areas to rebuild it, other will take regime area as Russian, mainly working with the regime, so they will take the responsibility and they will bring their airliners to rebuild this country. And it will takes long long time.

LL: Where is your family now?

ZOUHIR AL-SHIMALE: [sighs] They’re all in North Syria right now. They couldn’t be able to make it here because it was quite hard. So they stayed in the country.

LL: Do they talk to you about possibly going back home to Aleppo?

ZOUHIR AL-SHIMALE: No, we talked about it but we said we couldn’t. We talked and we get the conclusion that they can’t go because they fear that the regime will take them and will arrest my brothers, let’s say, and my family members because they know for me and my other mates work, like, against the regime as pro opposition journalists, who used to work in East Aleppo covering the regime massacres and Russian as well. So if they went back there they would be arrested as many were in the same situation. They were arrested in East Aleppo. But not just because they were like working against the government, they were just living in the rebels area and, like, working there, butcher or a carpenter, etc. So those were kidnapped and arrested, so what would it be?

LL: Do you think you'll ever be able to go back?

ZOUHIR AL-SHIMALE: If the regime still take control of the country and the situation will still keep like the situation right now, I don't think I will get back there. But otherwise if the situation changed in the next few years, I can say I will get back, because I don't want to be, like, kind of a refugee or living in a country, out of my country I mean.

LL: You just talked about your family not wanting to return either because of feeling that they are under threat for living in Eastern Aleppo and some because they were supporting the rebels. Do you think reconciliation is possible between government supporters and rebel supporters in Aleppo?

ZOUHIR AL-SHIMALE: It will work if there will be an international observation, let's say cooperation in this case. Otherwise if the regime and Russia will be the only party working on this conciliation, it won't work because they have done it before back in the east, arrested many people and now yeah, it's the same theory right now, they can't do it.

LL: Mr. Al-Shimale thank you.

ZOUHIR AL-SHIMALE: Thank you too so much.

LL: Good bye.

ZOUHIR AL-SHIMALE: Bye bye.

LL: Zouhir Al-Shimale is a freelance journalist who was raised in East Aleppo and had to flee the city for his safety after government forces retook the city. We reached him in Gaziantep, southern Turkey. Well clearly there is much riding on the upcoming peace talks in Geneva this month, including the lives of millions inside Syria. Just who will participate in those talks is still up in the air. The US for one hasn't yet committed to sending a delegation. But my next guest will be watching the talks very closely. Nader Hashemi is an Associate Professor at the University of Denver and the Director of the Center for Middle East Studies. He joins me from Denver. Hello.

NADER HASHEMI: Morning.

LL: Yet another round of Syrian peace talks. What are you expecting will happen?

NADER HASHEMI: Very little. I think these peace talks are simply a way of Russia affirming its complete control over the future of Syria after the fall of Aleppo. The peace talks in Astana, Kazakhstan were I think largely just a public relations display so that Russia could, I think, send a message to the world that they are number one in control and that they are trying to bring about some sort of peace process after presiding over sustained war crimes in Syria, after they intervened in September of 2015. So I think the peace talks in Syria, right from the very first meeting in Geneva a couple of years ago, really were determined by the battlefield conditions on the ground. And those battlefield conditions on the ground now are in complete control by Russia and its Iranian allies. So that's I think really where the real story is. I don't think these peace talks, the forthcoming ones that you mentioned in Geneva are really going accomplish very much.

LL: Who do you expect to be there?

NADER HASHEMI: Well I suspect the same sides that were in Astana. It's largely a Russian, Iranian, Turkish sort of effort right now, those are the key players. The two sides in Syria, the government side and the rebels really are dependent on their regional and external backers. So I suspect there's going to be a meeting, the rebels of course are the weakest party now. They’re primarily interested in, you know, solidifying the ceasefire and allowing for humanitarian aid and political prisoners to be released, but of course they have very little leverage. And you could see that in the Astana peace talks in Kazakhstan. Their major allies, primarily Saudi Arabia, weren't even participants. The United States which was rhetorically supporting the rebels didn't even send a delegation. So I suspect it's going to be largely ceremonial. And Syria will continue to sink into deeper despair and will contribute not only the destabilization of the Middle East but as we've seen the conflict in Syria now has destabilizing effects in Europe and also in the United States, in terms of the question of refugees. So this is, I think, just another phase of this conflict. But the big question I think really here is what the Trump administration wants to do with respect to--

LL: [interposing] Well, do you expect the Trump administration to send a delegation then?

NADER HASHEMI: Well that's something to watch for because they didn't send anyone in Astana, Kazakhstan, largely because the transition from one administration to the other had just begun. But it will be interesting to see whether they do send anyone to Syria, to the peace talks in Geneva. I suspect that the Trump administration, my reading is that they don't really care what the political future of Syria. They're very happy to concede that to Russia. What we're seeing right now, and this is the big complicating factor, that the Trump administration is uniquely obsessed with the Islamic Republic of Iran. They view Iran not just as a destabilizing force for the Middle East but for the entire world, if you listen to the rhetoric and the writings of Trump's close foreign policy advisers. So if Trump decides to go after Iran, and I think we're seeing the early stages right now in terms of the sanctions and the rhetoric, that could have a complications for the future of Syria. We don't know how that will play itself out. But all of these things of course are linked. And I suspect as we speak right now, the Trump administration is trying to figure out its Syria policy and we're all watching to see how that will manifest itself.

LL: You don't give these talks much hope of accomplishing anything. Who do you see is the real power players that are needed to be at the table to hammer out a real lasting peace agreement?

NADER HASHEMI: Well there would have to be some pressure really on the Russian and Iranian governments to make serious concessions over the future of Syria. And what's so concerning about the conversations that we're having is no one wants to talk about the fundamental roots of the crisis in Syria, which is the 45 year rule of the house of Assad that is largely responsible for the destabilization of Syria, largely responsible for the half a million deaths that have been lost over the last six years. And until there is some serious discussion over that particular question, there's no hope of, I think, a genuine and lasting peace coming to Syria and no hope of the over 12 million Syrians who've been displaced returning to their home, and no real, you know, hope for national reconciliation. And the tragedy of this entire story is now the one side that's responsible for most of the atrocities and violence, at least half a million people, now they're in full control and trying to exert their full hegemony over the rest of the country. And that will only lead to not only destabilization, but of course the biggest beneficiaries here of what we're seeing in Syria are the radical jihadi Al-Qaeda ISIS forces that will benefit from the unfolding of events. They will be able to recruit more, they’ll be able to sort of send a message to young disgruntled Syrians who have been completely frustrated and disillusioned by the promises of the international community. So we're headed for, I think, greater destabilization of not just the Middle East but the ripple effects.

LL: When you talk about the house of Assad though, I gather that you don't see any prospect of Bashar al-Assad stepping aside?

NADER HASHEMI: No. I mean, he's not going to step aside by himself. I mean, these brutal regimes in the Arab and Islamic world, this is the problem, they're not willing to share power, they're not willing to concede power. And there was some hope, I think, with serious pressure internationally and militarily on the ground that they might be willing to concede power. But as we've seen over the last few years, the conflict has shifted in the direction of Russia and Iran and there's been no, you know, comparable pressure on the Assad regime to concede anything. So they're in the driver's seat, they're very happy. And this of course will be completely disastrous for not only the Syrian people, not only for the future of the Middle East, but for our entire world.

LL: What power does the United Nations have here?

NADER HASHEMI: Symbolic. I mean, the United Nations as we know is simply a convening authority. There was, you know, some hope that in the last year of the Obama administration that there could be some, you know, a common policy between the United States and Russia, both of them exerting pressure on their respective allies in Syria to come to the bargaining table and to make concessions. But it was pretty clear that the Obama administration had zero effort in terms of getting involved militarily in the Syrian conflict to shift the balance of power. But while on the other side, Russia and the Iranian allies were heavily invested. So the United Nations simply was trying to, you know, bring the two sides together. But the future of Syria is really being written on the battlefields of the Syrian conflict and those battles have all gone in the direction of the Assad regime and the Russian and Iranian allies. So the United Nations is really impotent here. And every time the United Nations has tried to convene UN Security Council meetings, Russia has vetoed any serious initiative. And so this is, you know, I think just a continuation of a story that we've been seeing where Russia now is not only in full control of the military conditions on the ground, but now politically and diplomatically Russia is basically running the show as well.

LL: Just very very briefly, what is the best possible outcome of the talks?

NADER HASHEMI: Well the best possible outcome would be for Russia to perhaps exert serious pressure on their Syrian allies in Damascus to agree to a serious implementation of the Geneva process, which calls for a political transition in Syria and the creation of some sort of national transitional government to preside over, you know, a new Syrian government that's truly representative. But I doubt it’s going to happen, because Russia has no reason to concede anything.

LL: We'll have to leave it there. Thank you very much.

NADER HASHEMI: Thank you.

LL: Nader Hashemi is an Associate Professor of the University of Denver and Director of the Center for Middle East Studies. He was in Denver, Colorado. Well, that is our program for today. And finally, after our discussions about US President Donald Trump's travel ban and life in Syria today, let's go out on some music. British DJ Four Tet got some attention on the internet last week, when soon after the travel ban was announced he released a special mix of music made up entirely of musicians from the seven countries banned from traveling to the US. Here is one of them. This is singer Omar Souleyman from Syria, on a track produced by Four Tet. I'm Laura Lynch, thank you for listening to The Current.

[Music: Omar Souleyman]

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

CBC would like to acknowledge the support of the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.

February 6, 2017 full episode transcript

More Stories Like This