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 12, 2016

Host: Amanda Lindhout

[music: theme]

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Listen to the full episode

Prologue

[missile firing]

[rapid gunfire]

AMANDA LINDHOUT: In the battle for Aleppo, Syria rebels are barely holding on against government forces and residents are struggling under siege. Last night in Munich a diplomatic breakthrough may have given them time to breathe but optimism in Syria is too often short-lived. We'll get the latest from Aleppo, the centre of the Syrian chessboard and ask how last night's diplomacy could change the game. That's in an hour. Also on the program:

SOUNDCLIP

[translated] I will never forgive them no matter what happens or who comes in the middle. The world should see this. Brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts so this doesn't happen again.

AL: Her father and uncle wanted her dead. But she would have been just another unreported victim of a Pakistani so-called honour killing except that she survived. And now her story is being told by Oscar award-winning Canadian filmmaker Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy who joins me to discuss A Girl in the River in half an hour. But first:

SOUNDCLIP

When I first stepped out of plane, my mother was standing on the tarmac, it was one of the most beautiful moments of my life, but then right away the cameras flashing and all the people- I just wanted to crawl back into a hole.

She spent 400 days in captivity. What she, and I, both know is one of the most trying aspects of living as a captive comes after your release and re-adjustment to life outside the cell. I'm Amanda Lindhout and this is the Friday edition of The Current.

[music: theme]

Stories of survival, recovery and backlash from 4 people all held captive

Guests: Sarah Shourd, Dr. Dilip Joseph, David Rohde

AL: Those of you who know my story, know that I was held captive in Somalia, for 15 months. My ordeal started in 2008, when I was there as a reporter. I've told my story many times since my release. It's an intensely public experience, but it's also an intensely personal one, one that's nearly impossible to relate, especially when it comes to the experience of recovery after being released. Today, we've brought together a few people who can relate, other survivors of captivity who know what it's like to start life again. In July 2009, Sarah Shourd was hiking in Iraqi Kurdistan with her fiancé and a friend. An Iranian soldier lured them across an unmarked border into Iran, where the three were then arrested and taken to Evin Prison in Tehran. Sarah spent 410 days in solitary confinement. She joins me from Oakland, California. Dr. Dilip Joseph was working in a remote medical clinic in rural Afghanistan in December of 2012 when he was ambushed by the Taliban. It was his 10th trip to the country. He was held for four days until he was rescued by US Navy Seals. Dr. Dilip Joseph is in Colorado Springs. David Rhode is a former New York Times journalist who was researching a book in Afghanistan in 2008 when he was kidnapped by the Taliban. He was held for eight months until he escaped. And David Rhode joins me from New York City. Hello and welcome to you all.

DILIP JOSEPH: Thank you.

AL: Sarah, after 410 days in Evin in solitary confinement, what was freedom like once it finally came?

SARAH SHOURD: Well, to be honest, I just was completely in shock for a long time. The really difficult thing for me was that I was forced to leave without my husband- then my fiancé- Shane Bauer and my friend Josh Fattal. And every day of that 410 days that I was imprisoned in solitary confinement, even though I saw them very rarely, I was so deeply connected to them. My pain was their pain and my hope was their hope. But there was also that incredible-- I felt like I had a mission to get them out and I had a purpose and I had power and a certain level of agency that I hadn’t experienced for a very long time which was exhilarating.

AL: I too was kept in solitary confinement for much of the 460 days that I spent in captivity and people ask me about that. I often find it hard to describe what that experience was like, just being alone in a room with your own mind, really as a form of torture. How would you describe that?

SARAH SHOURD: Time stretches out and time becomes your enemy. Every second took an incredible amount of strength and you find that strength. I found a sort of inner resolve and determination and also a love for life that I didn't have any idea was as strong as it is. But there's a whole range of experience from trying to read a book and reading the same paragraph over and over again because your mind starts to deteriorate and just not being able to understand the words on the page until I would just throw the book at the wall in frustration. There were times when I tapped into a kind of inner freedom that felt like defiance and that really kept me going and I would dance and sing in my cell. But the majority of the time was just spent trying to hang on to hope.

AL: That experience of solitary confinement I found to be so dehumanizing. Dilip, you were held by the Taliban and you were freed and a very dramatic rescue operation by the same US Navy SEALs responsible for killing Bin Ladin. Can you tell us what happened to you?

DILIP JOSEPH: Yeah, at the time of the rescue I had five of the Taliban members with me, so they were killed, and the house we were held at, th head of the house along with his friend was killed during the rescue, so altogether 15 or 16 people got killed.

AL: Including one of the Navy SEALs who had been sent to rescue you.

DILIP JOSEPH: That's right.

AL: So, what was going your mind as all of this was happening?

DILIP JOSEPH: I pretty much resolved to, perhaps, my time here on earth coming to an end very quickly. But during the rescue, you figure that you're somehow going to get hit by all this crossfire. But, you know, the SEALs definitely know what they're doing. They're incredibly trained. There was this one guy, one of the SEALs- in fact he's getting a Presidential Medal of Honor for my rescue later this month- he came in just laid on top of me. And that's when I began to hear firing around me. And so they tried their best to keep me as secure as possible during this entire event.

AL: David, you escaped your Taliban captors about eight months into captivity. Describe that scene to me.

DAVID ROHDE: Well, I was lucky. It was because of this incredibly brave Afghan journalist who was abducted with me. We were very lucky in that there were the Pakistani army base only about a kilometre away from where we were being held captive. So, when the guards were asleep we were able to use a rope and lower ourselves down a wall and, again, this Afghan guided me to the base. He had been clever and had the guards to take him outside when they went to shop for food so he sort of knew the layout of the town. We were almost shot by the guards outside the Pakistani base. And, again, this Afghan requested shelter and eventually we were led inside.

AL: What was that moment like when you realized that you were actually free and safe?

DAVID ROHDE: It didn't seem real. Like, I never imagined the kidnapping would end that way.

AL: So, even after freedom there's a lot that still lingers emotionally, psychologically. For me, I found it very difficult coming home and trying to re-adjust to life on the other side of such a traumatic experience. Sarah, what do you feel like the effects of solitary confinement have been on you long term?

SARAH SHOURD: I mean, it's so hard to say because there's this kind of new normal. You know, there's the person that I was before and the person that I am now and in many ways I really like the person that I am now, but I think the PTSD effects lasted years, really. My nervous system was sort of amped up on adrenaline in protection mode for a long time and you react to a cat like it's a tiger. And a lot of this you wouldn't necessarily notice these things. At least I feel like I learned how to really control the way that I am perceived in the world in a really calculated way. But years later, I think the stakes of my life are still just a lot higher. I guess I need to always prioritize self-care and down time and just bringing joy into my life because life is pretty intense.

AL: You’re talking PTSD in the in the past tense. So is it not something that you feel that you suffer from anymore?

SARAH SHOURD: I mean, I still have nightmares. I mean, still dream about being back there and the dreams feel normal to me. Part of the fact that it feels so familiar and normal, it really bothers me. I wish that it wasn't. But then at the same time I embrace that as part of my story and I think that's a really crucial part of my story that has been empowering and I've been able to transform it into who I am now in the work that I do now. But I think that I've had to work incredibly hard to get to where I’m at.

AL: For me, I found it difficult to connect with friends and family when I first came home, trying to struggle very privately with PTSD and, for you, how much do you find the people around you understand those private struggles?

SARAH SHOURD: In the beginning, when I first stepped out of that plane there on to that free Omani soil and my mother was standing on the tarmac there was a brief moment where it all dropped away and I felt it was one of the most beautiful moments of my life. I just felt that I had my life back and it was never going to be taken from me again. But then after that moment, right away the cameras flashing and all the people, I just wanted to crawl back into a hole and be alone. I had to force myself because I had this higher purpose. But it was hard to make eye contact. It literally hurt to make eye contact and to be touched, I would flinch. I just wasn't able to connect with people. Like you said, for a very long time I felt a deep, kind of, emptiness inside that was impossible, seemed impossible to fill.

AL: Dilip, can you relate to any of what Sarah's saying?

DILIP JOSEPH: You are left with a lot of those thoughts. You know, I had nightmares. I distinctly remember a time, on the second, pretty bad nightmare where I was drenched in sweat. Woke up and made a statement to myself, I am not going to think through all the scenarios that would have worked out differently, because I had to separate reality and what might have happened. While reality was quite harsh to deal with I had to make a point to really separate out the two. Now, while that sounds great in theory and sounds quite easy, it's a reality that’s a daily process for me. As Sarah said, now I'm living in a new reality. I have to think through both my experiences and whatever that experience brings in terms of a responsibility for me.

AL: David, I've heard you talk about how connecting with other survivors has really helped you with your recovery. You and I have known each other for years. We've connected on our own similar situations.

DAVID ROHDE: Yeah, it's been a real plus. It's a very sort of small but strange club all four of us are in. There is commonalities. I think everybody does have a hard time when they come home. I've worked and still meet with this counsellor. Talking with her has been a godsend in helping me normalize my life and make this transition. There’s a group that my wife and I and, actually, the parents of Jim Foley, the journalist murdered in Syria, are trying to start a US chapter of a British group. The British group is called Hostage UK. Terry Waite, who was held captive in Lebanon for many years, founded it and it's essentially, you know, a non-profit to help the families of captives and captives themselves. And we're close to opening of this group, Hostage US. You know, as we all know these captivities keep happening. And I felt a lot of regret in terms of what my family went through and my editor, so talking to other captives and helping to start this group helped me a great deal.

AL: Yeah, I want to talk now about blame and guilt. In my situation, I was a young freelance journalist and went to Somalia of my own accord and I got kidnapped and I was really criticized in the media for my choice to go to Somalia. Sarah, did you experience a backlash for ending up in prison?

SARAH SHOURD: Definitely and that was really shocking. I guess, the entire time that I was there one of my most important coping mechanisms for me was to really feel secure in the fact that what was happening to me wasn't my fault. Because when you're being physically and you feel hatred-- I mean, some guards were actually very kind to me, but others did hate me just because I was American and my defence to that was to remind myself that I've made so many good decisions in my life and that my reasons for coming to the Middle East were altruistic and for a love of justice and that it was a random occurrence and it wasn't my fault. But when I got out the first time I published an article I remember just staying up all night reading the comments, just hundreds of comments from death, really, like, explicit death threats. People telling me, go back to Iran and I wasn't wanted here and that they wanted to hurt me and my husband and friend. And these are fellow Americans and I needed their support and at the same time I was walking out of my house and I would get recognized many times throughout the day, people coming up to me, wanting to throw their arms around me giving me flowers. So I think I learned just like I learned not to take my imprisonment personal. And these are large historical realities, you know, decades, if not hundreds and hundreds of years in the making, these political realities I was a victim of and other people's ignorance is not my fault and I’ve learned how to not take it personally.

AL: Dilip, a Navy SEAL lost his life in your rescue. Do you feel guilty about that?

DILIP JOSEPH: You know, the level of, probably, the responsibility I felt, feeling responsible for that death was quite great in the beginning. And I was very blessed to come across some great advice early on, right from the military, which was the very best thing for you to do to honour the SEAL that gave his life for your rescue is to live a life that would count for yourself and for others. And, you know, military telling me left and right that these guys sign up for this, that if they die, this is how they want to die. And, you know, it's nice hearing all this stuff and certainly helps in your own thinking, but you still are left with, could we have had a different consequence.

AL: David, do you resent your captors for taking away those eight months of your life?

DAVID ROHDE: I do. I don't resent the guards. I saw them as sort of brainwashed and pawns and all this stuff. But I do blame the commander that invited me to an interview and I came armed to hear his story. And I see it as a criminal act. I don't blame all Afghans at all for what happened to me. I’m here because of this Afghan journalist that I mentioned earlier that saved my life. So, I love Afghanisand and Pakistan, but that individual, yes, I still see him as a criminal. What he did to me, there was no justification for it.

AL: Dilip, did you feel angry towards your captors?

DILIP JOSEPH: They do what they do because they don't have a better example in their lives. So this guy, 19-year-old who pretty much was crying out from the depths of his soul, asking me questions like, do you think there's a better way to live? Can you take me to America? Can I start my life all over again? Barely 19 years old, a veteran in the Taliban insurgency. I was kind of given an opportunity to see through their filter a little bit and I think that's been helpful in my own processing of all of this.

AL: Sarah, justice will never be served for you. How do you reconcile that?

SARAH SHOURD: Yeah, anger is something that I still struggle with. In a way, I feel like anger really served me while I was in prison because it kept my ability to resist. It sort of drove me. The border guards that picked me up, I don't think that they were intentionally looking for us. I think we just, kind of, fell into their laps. One of the border guards contacted me over Facebook and apologized to me years later. For a long time I was very angry with my interrogator because of his, I thought, his moral hypocrisy because on the one hand he told me that I didn't deserve what was being done to me and that it was un-Islamic, but he never did anything about it. I see it as part of a much larger political reality that we all have responsibility to engage with.

AL: For me, I see my life now as before and after that experience. And I suppose now, and probably for the rest of my life, I'll be known as the woman from Alberta, Canada who was kidnapped and held hostage for 460 days in Somalia. And on the other side of that I felt it very important to redefine myself, to make meaning out of what had happened to me. For me, that included starting a non-profit organization that works in the country where I lost my freedom for a long time. David, how has your experience affected your work as a journalist?

DAVID ROHDE: Well, I made a decision to not cover a conflict any longer. We talk about resentment of the captors. I really resent them for what they were doing to my family. Kidnapping is an incredibly, you know, personal crime because the family feel like that they could do enough, if they could pressure the Taliban or whoever the captor is, that they can save the life of their loved one. The family doesn't really have any power. So, I don't cover conflict anymore. I had just gotten married two months earlier when I was kidnapped. I’ve since had two children, two wonderful daughters with my wife. I do some editing now along with writing. And so I'm trying to be a different kind of journalist and not be in a situation like that again. I don't think I did anything wrong. I blame our captors for what happened to us. But that's the change I’ve made. And it's like you said, it's sort of a new identity.

AL: Do you resent that?

DAVID ROHDE: Sometimes, but, no, I mean, we all have different chapters in life and my captivity is one chapter. It's part of me and my identity, but I don't want it to be my entire identity. [Indecipherable] sometimes I do, but my new Life is so rich and wonderful. And I'm just lucky to be here. We're all so lucky to just be alive.

AL: Sarah, how did your time in prison define who you are today?

SARAH SHOURD: Ultimately, the fact that I was lucky enough to get out has given me a lot of courage and determination. I mean, the whole public part of it really does at times require some a lot of self-control when people define you by something that happened to you, for me now five years ago. But it also really gives me a certain insight and authority into what's happening right now and in my own country and around the world. And I feel like as long as I can really use it to do something positive with my life then ultimately I'm kind of okay with it most days.

AL: Thank you all so much for being here today. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

SARAH SHOURD: Thank you, it's great.

DAVID ROHDE: Thank you.

DILIP JOSEPH: Yeah, thank you, guys.

AL: Dilip Joseph is the author of Kidnapped by the Taliban. Sarah Shourd is the co-editor of the book Hell is a Very Small Place: Voices From Solitary Confinement. And David Rohde is the Reuters National Security Investigations Editor.

Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy fights to end honour killings with her film A Girl in the River

Guests: Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy

[Music: theme]

AMANDA LINDHOUT: Hello, I'm Amanda Lindhout and you're listening to the Friday edition of The Current. Still to come, the future of the Syrian crisis could lie in Aleppo, a former bustling hub and commercial capital has been bombed into rubble, but it hasn't fallen yet to the government forces. We'll get the latest from the region and find out what last night's apparent diplomatic breakthrough could mean for Aleppo and other Syrian cities under siege. But first, the voice of one girl speaking for many.

SOUNDCLIP

Translation
transcribed audio content

A pistol was pointed at my brain near my temple and my uncle was clutching my neck but I was just slightly able to tilt my face, which led to the shot missing its target. Then they put me in a bag and threw me in the river.

AL: Left for dead by her own uncle and father, Saba Qaiser was the intended victim of a so-called honour killing. She survived to tell her tale but every year, many other women and girls in Pakistan do not. Honour killings remain a shockingly common occurrence there today and the Oscar award-winning Canadian journalist and filmmaker Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy, has turned her lens on the phenomenon for her latest film. It's titled A Girl in the River: The Price of Forgiveness and it is the story of Saba Qaiser. It's been nominated for Best Documentary Short at this year's Academy Awards and I've reached Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy in San Francisco. Hello.

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: Hi.

AL: Tell me about this girl. Who is Saba Qaiser?

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: Saba is an 18-year-old girl who comes from a small town in Pakistan. She is not very educated, she was engaged to a young man, had fallen in love with him, but her uncle opposes the marriage because he wanted her to marry someone else. So, she ran away from home and got married to Qaiser and her father and her uncle duped her into coming back. Instead of taking her home, took her to a dark, wooded forest, shot her, and threw her in the river. And I found her a few days later in the hospital.

AL: So, we've heard a bit of the description of the attack but can you tell us further details? What did they do to her?

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: Well, what had happened was that her father and uncle had come to the in-laws’ house where she was living and had said that you know, she has dishonoured the family by running away, so why don't you send her back home and you come and take her in a few days in an honourable manner. Instead of taking her to the house, they took her to the forest where it was very dark at night and they had a gun which they pointed at her after beating her almost unconscious. And then they pulled the trigger, but because they were amateurs, they almost missed because she moved her face. Then she was tied in a gunny bag and thrown in the river. Miraculously, the water woke her up and she caught hold of some reeds that were on the side of the river, and then rolled out and found her way to a fuel station, a petrol station that was open. The guard that was present over there, the night watchman, he called the Rescue 1-1-2-2 services, which is the 9-1-1 of Pakistan. The paramedics came, they rescued her, took her to the local hospital which was run by a man who really believes in women’s rights. He got his best surgeons out there and a local policeman helped apprehend her father and uncle. But actually, the story shows that in Saba’s case, the local services worked. The paramedics worked, the hospital worked, and the police officer as well. Unfortunately, the law did not support her.

AL: How unusual is it for a girl or woman to survive an honour killing?

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: It is very unusual for a woman to survive an honour killing. You know, I've been trying to make a film about honour killing for a long time, but almost always the victim is dead and oftentimes nobody even knows her name, her body is never found, no one even registers the case because it is considered shameful for the family to do so. When I picked up the newspaper one morning and I read two lines in it that said that a girl had been shot and been thrown in a river in what appeared to be an honour killing, I was shocked that she’d survived and that's why I decided to pursue the story, because it's absolutely very rare. To tell the story of an honour killing, you have to get it from the perspective of a survivor because you want the audience to walk in the shoes to understand the ordeal, the trials and tribulations, and what they're up against by society.

AL: Can you tell me more about this idea of honour that the father was talking about?

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: You know, for years now there is this concept that the honour of a young woman who defies her parents and chooses to get married and have free will-- if an older woman who was married once-divorced, in trivial issues of inheritance, in pressing matters of disagreement, men kill women and claim that it is in the name of honour. But really, it is cold-blooded, premeditated murder. Somehow they are trying to make it look like it is part of Islam or part of culture, but a religion that gives its women the freedom of choice, of marriage, inheritance, divorce, definitely does not condone honour killings. What has happened is that there's been a loophole in the law in Pakistan which allows for forgiveness to take place. The father kills his daughter and his wife can forgive him. Brother kills his sister and the parents can forgive him. And so, the laws are manipulated and it's very seldom that people go to jail and because people don't go to jail for it, many people think that it's not a crime because people get away with it. You can go to small towns or villages in Pakistan and even medium sized cities and know people who have killed women and their families but are roaming around free. Until we start making examples of people, people will continue to think that it is okay to kill a woman and somehow there is something known as honour killing.

AL: We're going to hear from Saba now, again. Here she is in your film describing how she felt after the attack.

SOUNDCLIP

Translation
transcribed audio content

I will never forgive them, no matter what happens or who comes in the middle. These people touched the Qur’an and lied. Even if someone powerful asks me, I will not forgive them. The world should see this- brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts so this doesn't happen again. They should be shot in public in an open market so that such a thing never happens again. With God's will, I'm going to fight this case. With His blessing, I will move forward.

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: You know, initially Saba was determined to fight the case. She has an excellent pro bono lawyer, she went to court a few times. The police is very keen that she fight this case because they had invested a lot of resources into finding her father and uncle. But, society pressures are too great in communities in Pakistan and the neighborhood elders would gather every day and tell her in-laws that she's further shaming the family by continuing to fight this case. They told the family that if the family ever needed money or if the family ever needed anything, they could no longer come to the community for it because the community would shun them if they did not forgive the father. The way the community has made it sound like, it was Saba’s fault she had run away and her father had no choice left but to kill her; that it was Saba’s good wishes that she survived but now she must forgive. For a while her in-laws resisted the pressure, but they are very poor and at the end of the day they had to give in and Saba had to go to court and tell the judge she was forgiving her father and her uncle and that she was okay with them walking free.

AL: How often are women expected to forgive these kinds of heinous acts?

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: Women routinely forgive acts like this in Pakistan and it's because the justice system is stacked against them. They cannot afford to go to court for years and society pressures and the community pressures are always so great. That's why it is very important to remove the loophole in the law that exists, that it's not a crime against a person, it's a crime against the state and the state has to prosecute, and people have to go to jail. As long as people know that this loophole exists in the law, women will be forced to forgive because that's how society is structured in Pakistan.

AL: So, I found it really interesting that you have her mother and her sister in the film, both of whom are standing by what the men did. How do you explain that?

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: It's years of brainwashing. It’s years of having men tell women that they're superior to them, that it's their way or the highway. I interviewed Saba’s father in prison and I asked him did Saba’s mother know about your plans of killing her. And he said she's just my wife, she doesn't need to know anything. When I killed her I went and told her. She couldn't have done anything to stop me. So you know, I mean, that's just how societies function. I I was horrified to hear about the younger sister almost justified the act. That what did Saba expect by choosing to get married on her own free will? This was about to happen. And it is further perpetuated now that Saba’s father is free. It's not only Saba’s mother and sister who think that but there will be all of these other young women in town who will think that Saba made the wrong choice, not her father. Because her father is walking free now.

AL: We have a clip of the father, so let’s listen to him.

SOUNDCLIP

Translation
transcribed audio content

After this incident everyone says I am more respected. They say I am an honourable man. They say that what I did was right. It was the proper thing to do. I have other daughters. Since the incident, each daughter has received proposals because I am called an honourable man. I can proudly say that for generations to come none of my descendants will ever think of doing what Saba did. My daughters will have fear in their minds that one of their sisters did something like that, and if we do the same God knows what our fate will be.

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: And he says that he's gotten more honourable. He's gotten a better stature in society because now people look at him as a sort of a hero. That is why sending people to jail is the first step in making sure we curb honour killings.

AL: And in the end even her own husband was pushing her to compromise, to forgive. What was that like for Saba?

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: You know, at the end of the film Saba says very clearly that I have forgiven my father because of society and the community but in my heart he will always be unforgiven. And you know, Saba’s husband did not want her to forgive her father and he resisted it for a very long time. But again, he didn't control things. Family was very poor, he had to listen to his elder brother, his mother and they didn't have much of a choice. As the film progresses we began to notice they had to do as they were dictated to because of the poverty, because of circumstances that surrounded them.

AL: So what did Saba do in the end? How was she able to come to terms with making the choice to forgive the people who did this to her?

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: I don't think that Saba will ever come to terms with the fact that she's forgiven her father and her uncle. I think that she has just moved on with her life. She was pregnant. She's given birth to a son now, she's looking forward to educating him. And in some ways I think a part of her died the day that she went into court and had to forgive them.

AL: How do you think that poverty plays a role in all of this?

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: Poverty plays an enormous role in all of this because if Saba was not poor she would have had more success in court. She would have had more resources available to her to fight the cases against her father and uncle. But having said that, even in wealthier families, the issue of shame is so much. The issue of honour is so much, that most families like to keep these kinds of issues within the four walls of their home. They encourage girls not to talk about it, encourage girls not to pursue the case. We as a society need to open up. We need to have difficult conversations. We need to let young women know that it is okay to fight cases, that it is okay to speak out against injustices and I hope that A Girl in the River: The Price of Forgiveness, the film that I've done, is one small step towards that. Because what has happened is that it has started a national discourse in the country about honour killings. We've had for years a lot of people who worked on the issue but suddenly everyone is talking about it. Being nominated for an Academy Award has, I think inspired the Prime Minister of Pakistan to come out with a statement in which he wants the first screening of the film to take place at the Prime Minister’s house and he wants to bring all the stakeholders together to think about how to close this loophole in the law.

AL: How much of an uphill battle is this for the police and government?

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: It's a huge uphill battle for the police because in Saba’s case for example, Ali Akbar, the Chief Investigator took all his resources, went out and found her father and her uncle. He wanted so much for Saba to fight the case. He counseled her for a very long time and in the film he says look at the kind of message that Saba would send out, look at the kind of message that will go out to the community and to society, that it is okay to kill a woman and you will walk free if you do that. So, the police find it very frustrating that these loopholes exist in the law and I think in the judiciary as well. Saba’s first lawyer, because she was forced to change her lawyer, but her first lawyer says very eloquently in the film that our judicial system and our courts have become like post offices, where people come in and record a statement and then leave. They're not dispensing any justice because of these loopholes that exist.

AL: What do you think it's going to take to change that fundamental understanding of these crimes, that they are murder and it has nothing to do with honour?

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: I think that the most important thing is that people need to be made examples of. If people start going to jail, one, two, three, four people go to jail, the fifth person will think twice before killing a woman and her family because he will realize that he's going to spend the rest of his life behind bars. I think that is very important and as a society, we've already begun to have a difficult conversation about honour killing. Why do we call it honour killing when it should just be called premeditated murder? Is it part of a religion, is it a part of our culture? I think the film has sparked this conversation in Pakistan, on the internet, on social media, in newspapers, and television channels, people are talking about it, and I think that at least people are talking about it and there comes a certain level of awareness, people educating themselves about the issues. And then, what is hopefully the gap in the law being closed, together I think, they will really impact the way honour killing is processed in country in the future.

AL: What do you want to Canadians to think about when they hear stories like Saba’s?

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: I think I want Canadians to understand that the story of Saba is a story of any woman around the world. Even today, women around the world, even most [indecipherable] women around the world don't have choices over their bodies, over their own lives, over education, where they work. They don’t have freedom to get married and that, despite all of this, young women are fighting for their rights to make sure that in this generation they achieve it. Saba is a fighter and her story will inspire so many other young women to come forward with their stories in Pakistan, and it can potentially inspire the Prime Minister into changing the law. So, the way I look at Saba is that she's a hero and that she had brought upon a national discourse on honour killings simply by telling her own story.

AL: How is she doing now, are you concerned for her safety?

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: Saba is doing well. You know, she has a young son now, a donor has come forward and donated a piece of land and she's hoping to build her own home on it. She's also looking to educate her son. Things are coming along well for her. She has indicated that if the Prime Minister does move forward with taking a leadership role in changing the law that she would like to meet with him and thank him in person. I think that she's doing well.

AL: So, what's at stake for the women of Pakistan, and the country as a whole if this continues?

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: Well, you know Pakistani society is changing. 60 percent of the population is under the age of 25, you have high levels of internet and telephone penetration now, many young women are going to schools and colleges, the economics of the country demands that women work, so women are leaving their homes, which means that more women are becoming economically independent and are beginning to understand what their rights are. I think there's a push and pull factor taking place in a deeply patriarchal society like Pakistan where women want to move into the 21st century, they want more rights and more say over their lives and a lot of people in the status quo are resisting that, which means that honour killings and attacks on women are rising because of that. Unless we start sending people to jail, unless we start making examples of people, these crimes will continue, and they will continue to rise. I think more than ever, it is important now to talk about the implementation of the laws in Pakistan.

AL: Can Canada help Pakistan stop these honour killings? Is there any role that Canada can play?

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: Yeah, I mean Canada can definitely--Canada leads in terms of women and human rights around the world with Prime Minister Trudeau now, with 50 percent of his cabinet women. I think that a real discussion you know, the Prime Minister of Pakistan is taking a brave and bold decision by saying that he wants to help with honour killings and Canada should congratulate the Prime Minister of Pakistan and offer to see how Canada can help to make sure that his loophole is closed in Pakistan.

AL: Sharmeen, we want to wish you the best of luck at the Oscars. Thank you so much for being here today.

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: Thank you.

AL: Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy’s documentary is called The Girl in the River: The Price of Forgiveness. It's been nominated for an Academy Award in the Short Documentary category. The awards will be given out at the end of February and it won't be the first time Sharmeen will walk the red carpet. In 2012, her film Saving Face, won in the Short Documentary category. That film told another story about attacks on women by those close to them. It was about two women who survived acid attacks and the plastic surgeon working to help them put the incidents behind them. Here's how Sharmeen accepted the award in 2012:

SOUNDCLIP

[clapping]

SHARMEEN OBAID-CHINOY: I just, Danny and I want to dedicate this award to all the heroes working on the ground in Pakistan including Dr. Mohammad Jawad who's here with us today. The plastic surgeon working on rehabilitating all of these women, Roxana and Zakia, who are our main subjects of the film whose resilience and bravery in the face of such adversity is admirable, and to all the women in Pakistan who are working for change: don't give up on your dreams. This is for you.

AL: Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy accepting the Academy Award in 2012 for her short documentary, Saving Face.

[music interlude]

AL: Speaking to Sharmeen about Saba and that pressure she was under to forgive, stirs up a lot of feelings in me. I've thought a lot about forgiveness, whether or not it's something I can genuinely and deeply find. Forgiveness is something that I choose, meaning I want to forgive and it's a choice I make. But, that doesn't mean that I always get there. Every day, before I even get out of bed, I choose to point my feet in the direction of forgiveness even if it's just a distant point on the horizon. Some days I get there and some days I don't but my hope is that by continuing to choose it, one day forgiveness can be a state that I live in all the time. It's never been something that I choose for them, the teenage boys who hurt me and took away my freedom for 460 days. It's a choice that I make for myself as a way to free myself from the anger that would otherwise ruin my life. I feel like I can only have real peace in my life when I make the conscious choice to move into that forgiving state of mind. When we, as individuals, move into that state of mind, we can then contribute to living in a peaceful community, country and planet, and that really is one of the most powerful things that we can do.

Russian airstrikes on Aleppo have devastating consequences for Syrians

Guests: Rami Jarrah, Bessma Momani, Julien Barnes-Dacey

AMANDA LINDHOUT: Hello, I'm Amanda Lindhout, and you're listening to the Friday edition of The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

[explosions, artillery fire]

VOICE 1: With the full force of Russia's military behind them, Syrian government forces are sweeping rapidly toward Aleppo.

VOICE 2: The Syrian government under President Bashar al-Assad has started a brutal offensive in this part of the country.

VOICE 3: The United Nations is warning that the Syrian government assault on Aleppo could cut off food supplies to hundreds of thousands of civilians still living there.

VOICE 4: You can sense the panic here. They’re fleeing what could be one of the worst fights yet: The battle for Aleppo.

[explosions]

AL: Aleppo, Syria. It was the country's commercial capital and its biggest urban center before the civil war began in 2011. Today, it is being described as the center of the chessboard in the complex Syrian civil war, and Aleppo is dangerously close to falling. Rebels are still in control of parts of the city, but government forces, with the help of Russian airstrikes, have nearly encircled it over the past two weeks. Thousands of residents have fled to the Turkish border in search of refuge, and those who remain in its bombed out buildings in rubble are bracing for what may be a fatal siege. Though there may be a shimmer of hope in a diplomatic breakthrough last night; the United States and Russia agreed on a plan to deliver aid to besieged cities over the next few days, in advance of purported ceasefire and renewed peace talks. Rami Jarrah is a journalist for ANA PRESS, an independent network of journalists in Syria. He's also the recipient of Canadian Journalists for Free Expression's 2012 International Press Freedom Award. We've reached Rami Jarrah in Istanbul, Turkey. Hello.

RAMI JARRAH: Hi, there.

AL: First of all, what do you make of last night's agreement in the Munich talks between the United States and Russia?

RAMI JARRAH: I don’t want to be negative, because all we have is hope, given the situation after five years. But the truth of the matter is that there have been many agreements before this, one of which was the Geneva I talks, and there were six points that were agreed on, there was consensus. And this was consensus between all the parties involved, and even the Syrian government, but the Syrian government failed to implement. And then we had Geneva II, and then Geneva III, and during each session, there was a military offensive like the one we're seeing now. As soon as the talks begun for Geneva III, an offensive was launched on Aleppo, trying to besiege the city. Getting aid into these areas, Russia and the U.S. agreeing on doing that, it sounds promising, but what it is, it's political aid. And it means that the people in Syria have to submit to whatever these international parties agree on, and if they don't, they don't get the aid.

AL: So, what do you think that this development is actually going to mean for the people of Aleppo?

RAMI JARRAH: The thing that is happening right now is we have around sixty to seventy thousand people at the border. Only around ten thousand of those, I mean the Turkish-Syrian border, only about ten thousand of those have been let into the country. We're going to see much more, because what the Syrian government and the Russian, backed by Russian, air strikes are trying to do is they're trying to reach the border and totally seal off the city. And that would be done in total collaboration with ISIS. I don't mean that they're directly coordinating, what I mean is that ISIS control half of the areas on one side of Aleppo, and the Syrian government control the other side, and Russia controls the skies. So this will be a total siege in that sense, and that will mean is starving the people in Aleppo. We're talking about 300,000 to 500,000 people. I am sure that we will not see any political developments that are promising or will call for a cease fire. This is this is a hoax. This is what we've seen before, and this is what the world, I think this narrative has become very common, but it's still not something that people understand.

AL: Rami, you yourself spent two months in Aleppo. What did it look like when you left?

RAMI JARRAH: When I was there, for the last, let's say few weeks, the attacks had risen to around fifteen air strikes a day, and that was intolerable. We were staying in an area that was very close to one of the front lines, between the regime and the rebel groups. And that's considered a safe haven, because the airstrikes do not target those areas in, basically wary that they would target their own troops. I'm talking about Syrian and the Russian air strikes. So even being there over the last few days I was there, they began using new weaponry. And it was to force people even out of these areas that were safe. And what was obvious, that they were trying to totally clear this city. In general, there’s a general sense of despair, a sense that the international community has turned its back on these people. When I was talking to people in the marketplaces, asking them questions, they would say, because everyone knows what's happening in Syria. I would say, no, they actually don't. And they would say, no, they do, they just don't want to, they don't want to help us. They want us to die. And this is what people believe, this is really a narrative that people believe.

AL: Let's talk about those people on the ground, these people who haven't fled. What kind of life are they living?

RAMI JARRAH: They’re totally isolated from the rest of the world. So anything that we would see sensible around the world, or we would see as being normal, might be happening in Syria, but there are things that we wouldn't understand. For example, children are not living in any way something that can be called a childhood. Children in the streets are very fond of the fighting. They want to be part of that fighting, because they see that, you know, their fathers, their uncles, their older brothers, are involved in this. And it's very disturbing seeing that situation in society. Women have no say in Syrian society today; and this is not related to the sort of fundamentalism that is always being portrayed or conveyed by that propaganda media, this is because women are not involved in the fight. There are a few women fighters, but in general, women have a lesser role in society. So you don't really hear women conveying how they feel. And so society is very defragmented, it is very isolated. Walking around in the streets, it's a very slow movement. You see people only out to just get their needs, their necessities. There's no enjoying life, there's no, I'm going to see my sister, for example, because I miss her, I want to talk to her. That emotion is dead in Syria. There's a continuous expectation that at any moment, we're going to die. And for those that are leaving, I mean, this is what I would ask them, why don't you leave the country? We're not going to be humiliated. We don't want to cross the border and be attacked by soldiers. We don't want to cross the sea and die at sea. We don't want to land somewhere where people don't want us and they're already sending some of us back. So people would rather live under the bombing and the attacks than to be humiliated.

AL: You've seen the airstrikes firsthand. Can you describe, first of all, what those airstrikes sound, feel and look like?

RAMI JARRAH: The difference when I last went to Syria, it was the first time that I'd witnessed a Russian airstrike. I was driving a vehicle, and we were in a marketplace. And then, I heard this sudden roar. And I first didn't comprehend what was going on, it was the first time I'd witnessed a Russian airstrike. But there was about a second and a half, and then we heard this large thud, and then an explosion. So, I mean, there was debris everywhere in the air. I got out of the car. There were two buildings that were totally destroyed. Anyone that was in them had vanished. There was rubble about six meters high. It took about five minutes for the civil defense to arrive. Before that, there were just normal human beings trying to dig through the rubble. Very unsuccessful, but it was just a hopeless effort to reach for their own loved ones that they knew were under that rubble. When the civil defense arrived, everyone was trying to help them. They, too, didn't have the means or machinery needed to dig through this rubble. On that particular attack, 15 people died in that rubble. Some of which died because no one was able to reach them in time, they'd been trapped under there for about ten hours while people were digging through. That situation is repeated today over 25 times a day in central Aleppo, and it happens on local markets, very busy markets, it happens on schools, children don't go to schools now. They study in small flats on the front lines because those areas are safer, as I said. This happens on hospitals. Now the hospitals have also been moved to small flats, there are no large compounds to treat people. Right now, there's a lot of pressure on these hospitals because the casualties, the numbers have gone up. We’re seeing a hundred, two hundred, sometimes three hundred deaths a day, and that doesn't include the injuries that are countless. It's impossible to count. The real numbers and real size of this destruction is not measurable.

AL: In your opinion, what needs to happen to save Aleppo?

RAMI JARRAH: What needs to happen is that there has to be an effort for a real political solution. What this requires is strong diplomatic pressure on Russia to actually be serious about these peace talks. Rather than front these talks each time with a escalated attack on civilians. What has become normal now is for people to hear that civilians have died in Syria, and it's just become this norm that everyone accepts. What we need to do, and what I think those in responsible positions like the United Nations need to remind people, that this is unacceptable. That one person, two people, ten people, it's unacceptable that people die this way, and that the Russians are able to carry out attacks like this that are only killing civilians and are not killing militants and are not killing ISIS. ISIS is expanding. ISIS is an ideology. And if you push people to decide whether they have to choose between Assad or between ISIS, it might sound strange, but for people who have loved ones that have been tortured and killed and raped by government like Assad's government, then people will choose ISIS.

AL: Rami, thank you so much for your insights and for being with us today.

RAMI JARRAH: Thank you, thank you for having me, Amanda.

AL: Rami Jarrah is a journalist for ANA PRESS, an independent network of journalists in Syria. We reached him in Istanbul, Turkey. Leaders from the United States, Russia and the 17-nation Syria contact group met in Munich this week. And last night came news that the US and Russia had reached an agreement to allow in more aid, forge a new cease fire, and ultimately resume peace talks. We have two guests standing by with their thoughts on this latest development, and more on the situation in and around Aleppo. Bessma Momani is a senior fellow at the Centre for International Governance. She joins us from Waterloo, Ontario. Julien Barnes-Dacey is a senior policy expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations. He joins us from London. Hello.

BESSMA MOMANI: Hello.

JULIEN BARNES-DACEY: Morning.

AL: Bessma, what's your reaction to last night's agreement between the United States and Russia?

BESSMA MOMANI: Well, sadly, it really is about just giving Russia more time to continue its siege and destruction of Aleppo. In many ways, the whole notion of post-dating this peace agreement to March first is quite laughable. It really just notes how, as the opposition has often accused the government and the Russians, that they really just engage in these peace talks to string along much of the world community, and basically delay the inevitable, just so that they could continue to, continue their bombings.

AL: Julien, what are your thoughts on what we heard out of Munich last night?

JULIEN BARNES-DACEY: Well, I mean, one is reluctant to condemn it, but one is obviously very pessimistic, given the history of this conflict over the last five years. I think the sad reality today is that the only hope of shifting the trajectory is some kind of international political deal that pulls in the Russians, but that is dependent on Moscow playing ball. And for the moment, we haven't seen that. But there continues to be the lack of any real alternative, there is no desirable, there's no feasible, viable way on the ground to make a difference in a military way or in a humanitarian way, without really working with the Russians. So we’re very stuck. I guess the hope amongst some diplomats at the moment is that having secured a position on the strength on the ground now, the Russians will pivot to this political negotiated track, because they realize that in the end, the prospect of an outright military victory is beyond them, and that they need to siege this opening of strength. But obviously, there's a lot to be seen of how this plays out, and we have to hope more than assume that this will bear fruit.

AL: Bessma, can you explain why the battle for Aleppo is especially fierce right now?

BESSMA MOMANI: Well, it's fierce because I think the Russians and the [audio distorts] government have [audio distorts] the way to the basically make the opposition succumb is to encircle Aleppo. It's obviously the most populous city, and if they can suffocate Aleppo, they will have the upper hand. I mean, not just geostrategically, which is really important, but also I think the morale of the entire revolution, and particularly parts of Aleppo that are almost self-governing at the moment. It has been a place that's actually been flourishing in the sense of these civil society organizations, these popular committees that have basically been self-governing in a very effective manner. Flourishing media, a women's center, I mean, there is a very interesting sort of grassroots movement that has often, I think, motivated the opposition and much of the rebel movement to continue their fight. So strangling Aleppo, in many ways, is not just geostrategic, but also symbolic. The sad part is, though, as Rami rightly noted, encircling Aleppo is a tactic that we've seen before in other places, and it meant the starvation of hundreds and thousands, and we're looking at 300,000 people who will be basically food insecure through cutting off this important supply line to Turkey, which was the only gateway for Aleppo to get its food and supplies. So there is a humanitarian crisis that's looming, as Rami pointed out rightly, but I think also, this is going to be a really important win for the Russians and the Assad regime to really, I think, put a nail in the coffin of what has been this really interesting grassroots revolution.

AL: Julien, what's your assessment of what's unfolding in Aleppo right now? How significant is this military escalation?

JULIEN BARNES-DACEY: I think it's hugely significant. We're seeing the Russian intervention that began last year really bearing fruit, and now we see them surrounding this key symbolic and strategic hub of Aleppo. And I agree that if Aleppo was to be entirely cut off, that would really have an enormous impact on the ability of the opposition to survive. I don't imagine, personally, that the regime is about to launch an all-out assault on the city, because it would probably be too hard to take. But I think the intent in Moscow and Damascus is to really squeeze it and use this to extract a favorable political solution out of the opposition and its backers. And I think we're incredibly stuck.

AL: Bessma, how well-equipped are the rebels in Aleppo to fight back?

BESSMA MOMANI: Not that well-equipped, especially if they're starved to death, which is really the tactic. I mean, at the end of the day, there aren’t enough ground forces to really retake Aleppo. This is a very important and dense city, and they don't have, the regime doesn't have the forces, despite being supported by Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, which is really the main fighters because there's a depletion of any real forces within the Syrian regime, and much of them are really focusing on Damascus, if they have any. But, you know, the challenge here is it's not just about encircling and suffocating Aleppo. What that essentially means is that they don't want to go street by street to try and retake Aleppo. What they'd rather do is that, exactly what James said, is encircling and suffocating the city until they capitulate. And so we're going to see those horrific images that we already saw in Madaya and other places of starvation happen in the largest city in Syria. So that's the kind of consequence of this. It's absolutely crucial to, I think, have the international community see that this is a looming humanitarian crisis in addition to a geostrategic one.

AL: Julien, this is all happening against the backdrop of talks between the US, Russia, and other countries in Munich. Aside from last night's apparent breakthrough, how effective do you think these talks can be if they're happening while Russian and Syrian forces are battling the rebels for Aleppo?

JULIEN BARNES-DACEY: Well, the effectiveness from, probably really lies in, from a Russian and Assad’s perspective, from their ability to dominate the situation on the ground, to basically dictate what the political outcome looks like. And I think Western powers, the US, have increasingly accepted that not only is the question of transitioning away from Assad no longer on the table, but that any terms are going to have to be more favorable to what the Russians want. But I think if the imperative now is getting in humanitarian access, and stopping the brutality of the conflict, then the urgent priority that has become de-escalation, first and foremost. Whether that means that Assad stays in power, I think, is increasingly meaningless compared to the urgency of just trying to stop the violence on a day to day basis. And I think that is what is driving Kerry's approach, that was driving a lot of the European and broader Western approach. These states no longer, or realize that the commitment that they are prepared to put into this conflict does not match that of the Russians and the Iranians, and that the best outcome, therefore, is some kind of freezing of the conflict, simply to stop people dying.

AL: What if the negotiations don't work?

JULIEN BARNES-DACEY: Well, I think there's a very good chance that they're not going to work. I think we've seen this cycle happen again and again. One is dependent on the Russians and the Iranians playing ball, and I think that, in part, is a function of what the opposition do. And I think that there is a good chance that we may now see a surge of new military support from the likes of the Saudis and the Turks, to the opposition, to try and re-balance the situation on the ground. But unfortunately, It's the same cycle that we've seen for five years now. It’s escalation and counter-escalation and so on and so forth, the balance moving from one side to the next without any viable outcome. I mean really, there needs to be this kind of breaking away from this logic, where both sides still think that the ultimate aim needs to be victory, towards an acceptance that that is impossible because neither side will bend, neither side will bow in this conflict, and the priority must therefore be de-escalation and a halt to the violence.

AL: Bessma, how much blame do you put on the international community, the US in particular, for the situation in Syria right now? Do you think this could have been avoided?

BESSMA MOMANI: Yes. I think that the Americans did, very early on and continuously say that they have these red lines with the regime. We heard, for example, Obama say that chemical weapon use is a red line. Well, the regime not only use chemical weapons, it continued in a sense, with its conventional weapons. And so it actually interpreted that red line as a green light to continue its conventional armaments and hitting of much of the rebels and the opposition areas. And so there is, I think, some blame to be held by the Americans, taking that podium and often calling for these great speeches, but never really delivering in terms of providing the support. Not just to the rebels, but more importantly, to really, I think, back up their threats. And so we've seen both John Kerry and President Obama and others constantly say that they want Assad to step down, or that, you know, enough is enough, and this is a red line, but nothing's ever done about it. And I think that's often been a signal that the regime has taken to basically, and rightly, Interpret that the Americans are not going to do anything. They're all about hot air and there's no action there. So there is some blame to be held, I think, but also, it's about the entire international community really just kind of hoping that Syria will go away. From the very beginning, it was always about, well as long as Syria implodes, and they fight among themselves, we’ll turn around and ignore it. But, you know, the international community has obviously seen that Syria doesn't implode, it explodes. And what we've seen, in fact, is this enormous humanitarian crisis now literally hitting the shores of Europe. Now literally, perhaps even weakening neighboring countries. So it's not going to be contained within Syria, it was always going to be a spreading of this conflict, and unfortunately, I think many world powers are really trying to ignore this reality.

AL: Julien, what do you think? Do you think that more decisive action from the US and the international community could have prevented what we're seeing unfold now?

JULIEN BARNES-DACEY: Well, I think the tragedy of Syria, in a sense, was the absolute commitment, in particular from regional powers, to ensuring that their side won. And I think of the Iranians, first and foremost, but then also the likes of the Saudis and the Turks. And I think from a Western perspective, the mistake was not to recognize the nature of the regional struggle, and to essentially not recognize that victory was not possible, and the West themselves was never going to be prepared to intervene as would be necessary to achieve their ends. So the West has, for five years, continued this mantra, Assad must go, understandably so, without a willingness to intervene militarily, which is frankly the only way that that would be the case. I think everyone recognizes the Syrian conflict is so complex, there are so many different dynamics. The prospect of Western boots on the ground, or planes over the skies wouldn’t necessarily be an out, but it would be a new cycle of escalation. But despite this, there's been this continued encouragement, messaging to the Syrian opposition, that you can win this, that your time will come, the Assad will go. And I think it's that messaging to regional allies, to Syrians on the ground, which has been so destructive, because it's fed this illusion that there was an outcome, a favorable outcome in the offing, which was never the case. This conflict was always only ever going to be solved by some kind of compromise between the domestic and regional actors. And I think until we recognize and moved in that front, that hope, that is where Munich is heading. Unfortunately, we're so dug in, we’re dug in so deeply now, we could be years before we actually reach the political, the necessary political outcome. But I think, you know, that's where the West should have focused, rather than essentially becoming an active participant in this conflict, whatever the morality of the situation. Because, of course, all of us wanted Assad to go, but if we weren’t able to invest the resources and make that happen, it was always going to be a struggle.

AL: Bessma, what do you think is going to be the outcome of this battle for Aleppo?

BESSMA MOMANI: I think it's going to be an enormous humanitarian crisis. I think what we're going to see is the starvation of Aleppo. It is the modus operandi of the government. They've done this before, they first did it in Yarmouk, and they've continued to do it throughout the entire country. And we'll watch, and we'll see these images come out of Aleppo in horror, and say what could have we done? And yet, sadly, I think the international community will yet again put more words and more moral outrage and pressure on the regime and the Russians to do something, but we won't actually intervene in any way for all the reasons that Julien noted. That at the end of the day, the West is extremely afraid of getting really deeply involved in Syria, rightly so. I think the sort of legacy of Iraq is still with us in many ways. But sadly, it is the Syrian people that have paid the ultimate price for, I think, our inability to recognize this as a real ethnic cleansing in many parts of Syria, and also an enormous humanitarian catastrophe.

AL: Lots to think about there, thank you both for being here.

BESSMA MOMANI: Thank you.

JULIEN BARNES-DACEY: Thank you.

AL: Bessma Momani, a senior fellow at the Centre for International Governance. She was in Waterloo, Ontario. Julien Barnes-Dacey is a senior policy expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations, and he joined us from London.

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

Feb. 12, 2016 Episode Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode