First Female Alawite Officer Defects

by The North Star on October 11, 2012

Translation by the Syrian Freedom team:

I am colonel  Zbeyda Al-Miki of the Syrian army from the sold “Golan”.  I declare my defection from the traitorous Assad army.

As I am the first woman officer of the Allawi sect to defect, this is my message:

People of my country, people of my sect, the conflict in Syria is between the oppressor and the oppressed, between the people and the regime, which means that the conflict isn’t between sects and minorities.

But the regime is making the conflict sectarian to destroy the revolution.

Brothers in arms, fight for the victory of the people’s revolution, and provide the revolution with a national soul and the feeling of belonging to the nation, not to a sect, with the values of nationalism, not sectarianism.

Teach the people that the county’s geography is not the geography of sects and that belonging to the nation is to refuse all others attachments that interfere with national unity.

Teach and learn that sectarianism is a destructive, a defeat for the country, to pride and freedom, and is a victory for escalation and a humiliating regime.

You should know that the Syrian revolution is for dignity, pride, equality, and citizenship. That is the national plan, as opposed to that of the criminal, sectarian regime.

Don’t be hit men for the regime. Remember Allah saying: the one who  kills  one person, is like one who kills all people, and the one who saves  a life is like one  who saves all lives.

Finally, I would like to thank all who helped me to defect from this criminal regime. I would like to thank my brothers in arms in the Free Syrian Army, Jund Allah battalion, with the coordination of the military council of Damascus and its outskirts. This is my identification.

{ 15 comments… read them below or add one }

Anthony Abdo October 11, 2012 at 3:45 pm

BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!!! NATO US ally, TURKEY, takes to hijacking Syrian airplanes with Obama’s approval, and the approval of many on the US Left, too???? @


Pham Binh of Occupy Wall Street, Class War Camp October 11, 2012 at 4:20 pm

Too bad they didn’t fly the plane into Assad’s house.

Denying counter-revolutionaries arms is progressive in everyone’s world but yours.


Aaron Aarons October 12, 2012 at 6:22 pm

In the absolutely necessary global revolution against imperialist capitalism, the main counter-revolutionaries on n the ‘Middle East’ are (1) the NATO powers, including Turkey, (2) Israel, and (3) the U.S.-allied monarchies. Personally, I’d cheer the flying of a plane (but only with no innocent civilians on board!) into the houses of any of the leaders of any of those countries.


Aaron Aarons October 12, 2012 at 6:29 pm

To clarify my ranking of counter-revolutionaries, I’ll add that I don’t rank Turkey as any more counter-revolutionary than Israel or the monarchies. Incidentally, are there any monarchies, at least in that part of the world, that are not clients or junior partners of Western imperialism?


Anthony Abdo October 11, 2012 at 8:19 pm

How interesting to see you now defend the hijacking of civilian planes by NATO, Pham. Is there any level of pro US imperialism you will not reduce yourself down to?

I find it truly sad that so many Leftists in the US have gotten themselves so lost that they do not recognize air piracy by US allies to be any sort of war crime or for the act of terrorism that it actually is. This comes about from the lack of broad Socialist effort to build any true antiwar movement in the US since the mid ’70s.


Aaron Aarons October 12, 2012 at 8:28 pm


Pro-government media remained silent on Monday night’s suicide attacks in Harasta, a town northeast of Damascus, but a security source said the assault had been largely foiled, although some people were hurt when one vehicle blew up.

The blasts were claimed by the jihadist Al-Nusra Front, which said one attacker drove a booby-trapped car and a second an explosives-packed ambulance

Isn’t the use of an ambulance for such purposes considered a war crime? In any case, it’s harmful to those who use such methods and those seen as allied with them, since it gives their enemy a reason to stop, and perhaps even fire at, real ambulances and alleged medical personnel.


Brian S. October 13, 2012 at 7:48 am

@AaronAarons I doubt that the use of the ambulance constitutes a “war crime” although it certainly violates the norms of warfare. I am more concerned about what has happened to the prisoners held in the basement of the building, who don’t seem to have been properly taken into account. The Syrian struggle is in several respects in a bad place – but who is responsible for that? In my book, its first and foremost the Assad regime, who have created the conditions and driven people into accepting these kinds of actions; and secondly the spineless “friends of Syria” who have kept the more moderate FSA forces on a shoestring, denying them the sort of weaponry that would even partially redress the military imbalance and forced them into pacts with these sort of forces.


Arthur October 14, 2012 at 10:56 am

There is no doubt whatever that its a war crime and that the people responsible for it are the criminals who committed it.

They are the same takfiri war criminals who engaged in mass murder in Iraq (and also used ambulances there):

They are not allies but vicious enemies of the revolution. Making excuses for them only helps the enemy.


Arthur October 13, 2012 at 10:00 am

Yes, use of ambulances for such purposes is a war crime. Takfiri groups like the Al-Nusra Front are notoriously inclined towards war crimes and need to be crushed. BTW this group is able to operate in Syria because of the regime’s covert protection of jihadists passing through Syria to fight with Al Qaeda in Iraq.


Aaron Aarons October 13, 2012 at 6:31 pm

Re: “the regime’s covert protection of jihadists passing through Syria to fight with Al Qaeda in Iraq”

Could you be more specific, Arthur? When? Which jihadists? I have been under the impression that, at least recently, the Alawite-dominated Syrian regime has had good relations with the Shia-dominated Iraqi regime, at least when the latter has been able to resist U.S. pressures, and that both are regarded as enemies by Sunni sectarians, the most extreme of whom are probably those who call themselves ‘Al Qaeda in Iraq’.

It’s certainly possible that the Syrian regime was too careless, if it in fact had the power to be selective, about whom it let pass through Syria to fight the United Snakes occupiers of Iraq, although it was right in principle for the Syrian government to let people through for that purpose.


Arthur October 13, 2012 at 9:02 pm

Which jihadis? – the group now returning from Iraq calling themselves the Al Nusra front.

Since you are a person like the Assad regime, they are people like you and so they too felt that it was right in principle to “carelessly” let people through for the purpose of fighting the US even though they were not just Sunni sectarians but takfiri mass murderers.

The US and Saudis did the same using Al Qaeda to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan.

Reactionary stupidity is nothing unusual.


Brian S. October 13, 2012 at 7:57 am

@ Tony:re Turkish interception of Syrian military equipment : For the last 18 months we have been witnessing a brutal regime slaughtering its own people in the thousands, and your instinct hasbeen to sign up as a cheer leader for the killers; now we have a minor incident in which there was no loss of life, no injuries (not even band-aid needed) and you come over all self-righteously indignant. Has your hypocrisy no limits?


Aaron Aarons October 14, 2012 at 10:12 am

The important issue is whether or not one legitimizes the assertion by the imperialists of their ‘right’ to take such actions.

BTW, why is a ‘regime slaughtering its own people’ worse than one slaughtering people who are not ‘its own’ ? Is it because imperialist powers don’t usually slaughter ‘their own’ people?


Aaron Aarons October 14, 2012 at 8:34 am

Genuine leftists sided with the pro-soviet government of Afghanistan against both the U.S. and its clients. In Iraq, there was no side to wholly support once the imperialist invasion succeeded, but actions directed specifically against the imperialists and those closely tied to them, and not having a sectarian character, were supportable. Hypothetically, if leftists could have given reactionary Islamists information to help them target imperialist forces, it would have bee correct to do so. OTOH, it would have been wrong to help such reactionaries obtain weapons, which they might well have used for other purposes.


Aaron Aarons October 14, 2012 at 10:31 am

In case there’s any confusion, this was a response to the comment by Arthur that begins with ‘Which jihadis?’. I don’t know whether its appearance in the wrong place is my mistake or the fault of the website software. But whatever problems there might be with the latter, at least it’s not as annoying as DISQUS.


Leave a Comment

{ 7 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: