Since 2020, French judicial authorities have persistently investigated the activities of the organisation “Save the Christians of the Orient” (SOS Chrétiens d’Orient), suspecting its complicity in crimes against humanity, deliberate attacks on civilians and actions amounting to war crimes. Most recently, in late September, the French National Anti-Terrorism Prosecutor’s Office announced raids on the organisation’s offices in Paris and surrounding areas. During the operations, its president, Charles de Meyer—known for his alignment with the hardline monarchist right—was interrogated, and electronic devices and documents relevant to the case were confiscated.
Yet behind this formal investigation lies a parallel, equally compelling story: the personal and legal struggle of two Syrians who helped expose the organisation’s activities, but who did so without any meaningful support from their fellow Syrians in exile. Dr Ilias Warda, originally from Sqaylabiyah, and Firas Quntar, from Suwayda, contributed to the 2020 investigative report published by the French outlet Mediapart and the US-based New Lines Magazine. Their revelations laid the groundwork for the French Public Prosecutor’s preliminary inquiry into the organisation’s compliance with French association laws—a process that revealed its underlying purpose: amplifying the Syrian regime’s narrative within France by portraying all opposition as Islamist and foregrounding the plight of Christians.
Following the publication, a group of activists—including Dr Warda, Mr Quntar, an independent French journalist, a French advocate for the Syrian cause and a Belgian academic—used their personal accounts on platform X to disseminate posts exposing the organisation’s activities. The investigation linked SOS Chrétiens d’Orient to regime-affiliated militias in areas such as Mhardeh and Sqaylabiyah—groups accused of war crimes including indiscriminate shelling, looting and the recruitment of child soldiers. Photographic evidence also surfaced showing the organisation’s leaders bearing arms, praising militia commanders and distributing aid to the families of fighters in the National Defence Forces. Such actions violate humanitarian norms and French law, which prohibits religious discrimination and bans support to combatants—particularly where donors benefit from tax exemptions.
In retaliation, the organisation filed two legal complaints—one against Dr Warda and one against Mr Quntar—on grounds of defamation. Dr Warda has stated that he “won a legal victory in his case, although the legal struggle continues.” He said he had “assisted prosecutors by providing testimony, translating numerous incriminating documents and presenting the names of witnesses whose statements now reinforce the case file—all at significant personal and financial cost.”
Mr Quntar also gave evidence to the French Public Prosecutor but was ultimately forced to withdraw from the legal battle. The lawsuit, prompted by his posts criticising the group’s support for Assad’s militias, proved financially unsustainable.
Both men expressed deep disappointment at the lack of support—material or moral—from Syrian organisations and individuals. Despite directly appealing to several prominent figures and institutions engaged in the pursuit of justice and accountability, they were met with silence. Among those approached was the Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression in Paris, whom they asked to initiate legal action against the organisation for aiding Assad’s regime. No response came—not only from this entity but also from other human rights groups. Their cause, rooted in justice and the exposure of institutional collusion with a regime responsible for well-documented atrocities, was met with indifference.
Amid this overwhelming silence, one faint gesture emerged: the Syrian Center for Legal Studies and Research did not directly support Warda and Quntar, but contributed to the ongoing investigations by submitting witness statements. Though limited, this act exemplified what could have been possible had there been coordinated legal efforts among Syrian organisations in Europe.
The failure of Syrian exile institutions to act reveals a fundamental structural flaw in their operational model—one closely tied to the broader institutional disarray that defines their work. Justice, in this context, is often reduced to mere rhetoric, and major causes are filtered through the lens of personal affiliations and factional agendas. This speaks to a deeper crisis within the exiled Syrian advocacy landscape: the absence of structured legal support, the weakness—or complete absence—of coordination. The matter at hand is not solely about a foreign entity; it poses an ethical challenge to those who claim to speak on behalf of victims and the revolution’s principles.
The Syrian cause today calls not only for the condemnation of Bashar al-Assad’s crimes, but also for the exposure of those who facilitated them—particularly those who disguised political allegiance as humanitarian work. When figures like Quntar and Warda are abandoned by those who profess to defend the afflicted, the issue extends beyond the actions of a single organisation. It becomes a broader inquiry into the nature of belonging, the limits of solidarity, and the Syrian diaspora’s ability to foster meaningful, principled collective action.
The efforts of Ilias Warda and Firas Quntar go beyond courtroom proceedings; they expose weaknesses in our discourse, the fragility of our networks and the profound absence of solidarity when the personal cost becomes high. Justice begins with the prosecution of crime, but it is only fulfilled when silence is also held to account. Revolution is not merely the opposition of a tyrant’s architecture; it is the challenge to those who launder tyranny under the guise of relief.
The Syrian cause demands more than denunciations of Assad’s brutality. It requires the unmasking of his accomplices—those who sought to legitimise his crimes behind the banner of humanitarianism. Syrian organisations in exile need more than statements; they require serious introspection on their purpose: to amplify the voices of victims, or to mute them.
The testimony of Ilias and Firas is more than a personal narrative—it is a call to reimagine what it means to be Syrian, to redefine collective work and moral responsibility. If their solitary voices could open the door to this investigation, how many more breakthroughs might emerge if individual action were joined by genuine, principled communal resolve—non-partisan and unbought?
This article was translated and edited by The Syrian Observer. The Syrian Observer has not verified the content of this story. Responsibility for the information and views set out in this article lies entirely with the author.
