Syria’s components face hate speech… Discrepancy between official rhetoric, ground reality

Syria’s current transitional phase is facing major challenges related to establishing civil peace and coexistence among its diverse components, in light of increasing incidents and reports related to what is known as “hate speech.” This phenomenon has raised questions about the extent of the transitional government’s commitment, and that of its affiliated media, to rejecting hate speech, and whether official statements truly reflect a clear stance on this crucial issue.

One of the key references limiting this trend is Article 7 of the agreement between the Syrian Democratic Forces and the transitional government, which explicitly states the “rejection of calls for division, hate speech, and attempts to incite discord among all components of Syrian society.”

Despite the transitional government’s announcement of a “Transitional Justice Law” project and the formation of “investigation committees” into acts of violence across various Syrian regions, particularly the coast and Suwayda, these measures have not explicitly highlighted a specific clause addressing the fight against hate speech. This has prompted the UN Human Rights Commission to warn about ongoing violations, including the escalation of hate speech in Syria.

Concrete examples of the persistence of hate speech have emerged through statements by some officials within or affiliated with the transitional government, delivered from official platforms during various occasions.

Most notably, former spokesperson for the Syrian National Dialogue Committee, Hassan al-Dughaim, issued a series of selective statements targeting the Syrian Democratic Forces, protesters on the Syrian coast, and Druze calling for the right to self-determination, crossing the line from political criticism into inflammatory language that threatens civil peace.

Further indicating the spread of this mindset, activists circulated videos of an imam in Jobar issuing a fatwa calling for the killing and beheading of those demanding federalism.

In parallel, programs on the official Syrian state-run channel “Al-Ikhbariyah” have hosted guests who used their platforms to broadcast hostile messages against components such as Kurds, Druze, and Alawites, contributing to the fueling of sectarian and regional divisions.

The same rhetoric has also appeared during official celebrations sponsored by the government, including an event in Deir ez-Zor marking what was described as the “liberation of Syria.” During the event, figures affiliated with the transitional government’s Ministry of Defense addressed attendees with slogans and positions directly targeting the components of northern and eastern Syria, focusing on insulting Kurdish, Druze, and Alawite communities.

Meanwhile, Damascus witnessed sporadic demonstrations during which participants raised banners containing explicit hate messages against these components.

These incidents indicate that hate speech is not limited to individual statements, but is also linked to official and media practices of the transitional government, revealing a gap between public discourse on coexistence and the daily reality faced by Syrians.

In response, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) criticized the transitional government in a statement, affirming that some gatherings and celebrations it called for were accompanied by inflammatory and hostile rhetoric against components such as the Kurdish people, describing it as “hate speech” that poses a threat to civil peace.

The SDF statement condemned inciting chants by armed groups affiliated with the transitional government’s Ministry of Defense during official celebrations, stressing that what occurred “goes beyond individual emotional reactions” and reflects practices that revive a culture of incitement and hatred from which Syrians have suffered for decades.

This places the transitional government before a clear responsibility: either to adopt such rhetoric or acknowledge its inability to control it.

Similarly, several Kurdish parties issued a statement expressing concern over racist discourse that appeared at some events called for by Ahmad al-Sharaa, considering that these platforms were used to spread hatred and target Kurds and other Syrian components. They called on the transitional government to take a clear and firm stance in rejecting such rhetoric.

These reactions come amid broader criticism warning of the spread of hate speech in society, and emphasizing the need for clear laws to combat media-driven and sectarian incitement.

Reports from Syrian organizations indicate that the absence of effective official measures reinforces the continuation of incitement and hatred, and that legal regulation of media content and incitement remains delayed compared to the official rhetoric declaring commitment to national tolerance.

On the other hand, media outlets affiliated with the transitional government focus on vague efforts related to “state-building” and transitional justice, without directly and clearly addressing the issue of combating hate speech within official media policies.

This vacuum contributes to ongoing accusations from societal components that the government has yet to implement clear mechanisms to confront verbal and sectarian incitement.

All of this confirms that the transitional government, at this sensitive stage, has not yet firmly and directly adopted the principle of rejecting hate speech. A clear gap remains between public statements about civil peace and the field and media realities that reveal the persistence of rhetoric deeply worrying to Syrians, underscoring the urgent need to develop real policies and executive measures to combat this phenomenon.

ANHA