Ibrahim Hamidi: 3 reasons to let him go
It’s been several weeks since the Syrian journalist,
Ibrahim Hamidi, Al-Hayat’s bureau chief in Damascus and a
frequent contributor to The Daily Star, was arrested for
allegedly publishing incorrect information. Those familiar
with the goings-on in Syria suggest the arrest is linked to
occult Damascene power struggles. Perhaps, however that is
irrelevant here. What isn’t is that a journalist has been
detained for doing his job, one he does quite well, with no
sign that what he wrote was consciously malicious. There
are three arguments in favor of releasing Hamidi. The first
pertains to the article that led to his arrest. The second is
practical, and is tied to Hamidi’s being an influential voice
on Syrian affairs. The third is more general, and is related
to the supposed reform of the Syrian system. The
incriminating article was published in the Dec. 20 issue of
Al-Hayat. In it, Hamidi reported that Syria was preparing to
receive 1 million refugees in the event of a war in Iraq. The
story was based on information from “high-level sources,” but
it also contrasted the preparations with Syria’s official line
that it would grant no international legitimacy to an American
attack. While Hamidi implied Syrian doublespeak
preparations for a war Syria officially rejects
his article was abundantly factual. He wrote,
for example, that last October President Bashar Assad
issued instructions at a meeting of the National Progressive
Front that Syria was to organize itself to receive
“hundreds of thousands of Iraqi refugees.” The president
based this on a desire to stand by “the Iraqi state and
people, not the regime and opposition.” Hamidi went on to
point out that a ministerial commission under Deputy Prime
Minister Naji Atri had been established to implement Assad’s
instructions, and that the United Nations Development Program
had been contacted for assistance. The article noted that the
Syrian Red Crescent had started to set up hospitals in the
border area, and that the International Committee of the Red
Cross had received Syrian permission to set up a base in Deir
al-Zor. In other words Hamidi wrote a solid article, using
local and international sources and citing specific government
actions, which demonstrated that Syria intended to deal
responsibly with a potential humanitarian crisis. The article
not only illustrated Assad’s foresight, it echoed the mood
in Damascus today, where Syrian officials routinely warn
that the US is ignoring the possible human toll in any Iraq
conflict. Aspects of the article irritated some
quarters in Syria. Evidently, the mere fact of
preparing for war, and showing it, was seen as
tantamount to approving of a US military invasion. Not
surprisingly, since the arrest officials have denied aspects
of Hamidi’s story. How ironic that the denials came as the UN,
too, has kept under wraps a study estimating the potential
humanitarian cost of an Iraq war, largely for the same reasons
as Syrian officials. A second reason to release Hamidi is
that, in his own way, he is among those most responsible
for a nuanced reading of Syrian politics. He is routinely
cited in the Western media, and those who have benefited from
his analysis can say that Hamidi, though independent, is often
far more valuable an advocate of Syrian interests than many
government officials. In his work Hamidi has managed to
navigate the difficult path between maintaining journalistic
autonomy and explaining Syrian motivations. Such a path may be
inevitable in the Syria of today, where reporters remain
vulnerable. Thanks to his many contacts, Hamidi has broken
noteworthy stories, while only rarely embarrassing the Syrian
authorities. It was he, for example, who in this newspaper
wrote an article about the dilemma Syria faced on UN Security
Council Resolution 1441. It would be shortsighted not to see
how the Syrians benefited from his piece. Arab readers were
better able to understand Assad’s predicament and Syria’s
subsequent vote in favor of the resolution, while Western
readers were given an insight into Syrian pragmatism. A
third reason to let Hamidi go is that we were promised a
different kind of Syria two years ago. In the new Syria
people like Hamidi, a proactive and self-made journalist, are
not supposed to be punished, but promoted. When Assad came to
power, it was plain that he had no use for lifeless
apparatchiks who feared merit as a criterion for advancement.
Hamidi’s arrest is their victory. The arrest, which
came soon after Assad’s visit to Britain, harmed the
president, whose budding authority is a feature of the new
Syria. Assad was resolute in London, an image Hamidi relayed
in his article. Yet the arrest suggested dissonance in Syria’s
Iraq policy: by claiming Hamidi lied on Syria’s humanitarian
efforts, his jailers seemed to oppose the efforts themselves,
which the president ordered. Surely dissonance is not an
image Assad wants to project as an Iraq war looms. Syria must
convince the rest of the world that while it is opposed to
war, it is also a serious interlocutor if war is
inevitable. Syria’s relevance is a running theme in
Hamidi’s articles, and detaining him any longer does Syria no
good at all.
Michael Young writes a regular column for THE
DAILY STAR |