Rania Khalek: External players in Syria spend much more fueling conflict then aiding refugees
Story Transcript
JAISAL NOOR, TRNN PRODUCER: Welcome to The Real News Network. Iām Jaisal Noor in Baltimore.
As the humanitarian and refugee crisis in Syria continues to worsen, our next guest has noted how many countries, such as the United States, Qatar, and Iran, continue to spend more money supplying arms that fuel the conflict rather than on humanitarian assistance for Syrian refugees.
Now joining us to discuss this is Rania Khalek. Sheās an independent journalist reporting on the underclass and marginalized. Her work has appeared on The Nation, Extra!, Salon, Truthout, AlĀ Jazeera America, and much more.
Thank you so much for joining us.
RANIA KHALEK, INDEPENDENT JOURNALIST: Thanks for having me on, Jaisal.
NOOR: So, Rania, what can you tell us about this disparity between the money spent to kill people versus the money spent to help people in Syria?
KHALEK: You know, itās really striking, because, you know, weāve been hearing a lot about how thereās all these outside actors, you know, fueling the violence in Syria. And itās true Syriaās turned into a huge proxy war, where youāve got certain countries like the United States and Saudi Arabia and Qatar and Jordan and Turkey on one side supporting the rebels, and then on the other and youāve got Russia and Iran.
So itās really interesting if you look at these countries who have been arming either side and are largely, I would say, at least, you know, are partly to blame for the violence. What you see is that theyāre spending way more money on arming the side that they want to win and, you know, flooding the country with weapons than they are on the humanitarian crisis that has resulted with refugees, which I think number now in something like 6Ā million, 2Ā million outside of Syria and 4 million displaced.
So, for example, the United States, the United Statesāto be fair, the United States has spent the majority or, you know, has given the bulk of humanitarian aid, you know, to the UN. The UNās requested something like $3Ā billion. The United States has given around $1Ā billion. So thatās great. But if you compare that to how much the United States has spent backing the rebels, itās not quite as much.
First off, the United States has spent somewhere around $1Ā billion at least giving what they called nonlethal aid to the opposition. So, I mean, that doesnāt seem like the biggest deal in the world, but at the same time, this is things like, you know, trucks and radios and, you know, medical equipment. I mean, thatās reallyāyou know, food. Thatās really important stuff. But when you have a situation where thereās a humanitarian crisis and youāre sending lots and lots of, you know, whether itās food or fuel to the opposition, I mean, thereās no guarantee that thatās going to get to the people who need it most inside Syria.
But on top of that, the United States has also been actively funding a CIA program to basically arm the opposition. We donāt know how much has been spent on that, because itās been mostly covert. Theyāve alsoāaccording to various news reports, the U.S. has been, you know, covertly training Syrian rebels. So we donāt know how much thatās costing us either, but I would imagine itās not cheap.
And so, you knowāand then, also, if you look at the Syrian refugee crisis that has resulted, the United States has only taken in 33 Syrian refugees at this point. I mean, thatās a pretty pathetically low number. And overall the U.S. has offered to take in a total of 2,000 Syrian refugees, which is also a pathetically low number.
So, a yeah, you see this huge disparity.
And the same goes for, you know, [incompr.] the two countries that have really been, you know, spending the most money on arming the opposition in Syria, which are Qatar and Saudi Arabia. I mean, with Qatar theyāve spent $3Ā billion on arming the rebels, and compare that to $2.7Ā million, I believe, which is going to humanitarian aid for Syrians, and thatās a huge difference.
And the same thing with Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia spent something like $50Ā million or maybe a little bit more than that on humanitarian aid, and, you know, they havenāt taken in any refugees as far as I know. And theyāve spent, you know, billions and billions of dollars. Theyāve been one of the main backers. We donāt know exactly how much, but itās more than Qatar is spending, so itās billions of dollars, on arming the opposition. And, you know, it goes both ways.
Also, with Russia and Iran, which had been, you know, steadfastly supporting the Assad regime. You know, it wouldnāt be possible for Assad to commit all the violence and brutality heās committed without weapons that have beenāyou know, that heās been able to buy from Russia. And, that was really crucial when the uprising first began. I mean, for a while, Russia stopped arming or stopped sending weapons to the Assad regime, but after diplomatic talks broke down a few months ago, they started sending arms again. So we know RussiaāsāI mean, theyāreāspent aroundāor not spent, but Russiaās at least given $1Ā billion in arms to Syrian troops. I imagine itās probably more than that. And, you know, Russiaās also spent very little money on humanitarian aid, only aboutāI think itās, like, under $20Ā million. And plus Russiaās also basically used its veto power to protect the Assad regime from the UN Security Council, and I donāt know that you can really put a price on that.
And then, you know, the same thing with Iran. Iran has spentāIran has given tons of surveillance technology to the Assad regime that was crucial to suppressing the uprising when it first began, when it was still nonviolent, even. You know that Assad wouldnāt have been able to keep a tab on protesters without that technology and to shut it down the way he did. And the same with the arms. Theyāre still giving arms. And, I mean, IranāI couldnāt even find Iran on the list of countries giving humanitarian aid to Syrians.
So itās the same pattern with all these countries that are involved. Itāsātheyāre more invested by far, by billions of dollarsātheyāre more interested in fueling the horrific violence in Syria and are doing very, very little, ifāyou know, some of them are doing nothing to contribute to aiding Syrian refugees, who are reallyāI mean, theyāre in some of the most inhumane circumstances right now, and itās really, really tragic. So I think itās important to look at that contrast and point it out, ācause it should elicit, I think, outrage among people who care about this conflict.
NOOR: Rania Khalek, thank you so much for that very important report.
KHALEK: Thank you for having me on to talk about it.
NOOR: Thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.
End
DISCLAIMER: Please note that transcripts for The Real News Network are typed from a recording of the program. TRNN cannot guarantee their complete accuracy.