Search

Do the Syrian Authorities Bear Responsibility for the St. Elias Attack?

The authorities bear responsibility for failing to prevent the tragedy and for their poor handling of its aftermath, according to Daraj.
Do the Syrian Authorities Bear Responsibility for the St. Elias Attack?

It is highly unlikely that the Syrian authorities played any role in the horrific attack on St. Elias Church in the Duwayla neighborhood of Damascus. Equally improbable is the suggestion that elements within the country’s new security apparatus were involved in planning or executing the assault. The conspiratorial notion that the regime orchestrated the attack—to portray itself as a moderate force in contrast to radical Islamist groups or to send blackmail signals to domestic and international actors—is both unfounded and implausible.

It is important to recognize that such an incident is not unique to Syria. Numerous countries—whether stable or unstable, democratic or authoritarian, wealthy or impoverished—have experienced violent attacks by individual jihadists or militant organizations advocating for change through bloodshed.

Nevertheless, the St. Elias Church attack underscores a broader and more persistent failure on the part of the authorities in Damascus to manage the country’s affairs. This failure is evident more than six months after the fall of the Assad regime, particularly in the state’s handling of this incident and its broader inability to prevent or effectively respond to similar threats.

A Renewed Security Failure

The first indication of this failure lies in the realm of security and intelligence. Rather than witnessing a gradual return to stability following the initial chaos of regime change, Syria appears to be descending deeper into disorder. The church attack joins a string of serious security incidents, including bombings in the Manbij area of Aleppo’s countryside, culminating in a deadly car bomb in early February that claimed at least 20 lives.

Similarly, on 6 March, remnants of the former regime launched a coordinated attack in the coastal region, killing dozens of security personnel. This was followed by mass killings perpetrated by government-affiliated forces, resulting in hundreds of civilian deaths. Meanwhile, the southern province of Daraa continues to experience a security vacuum, with near-daily assassinations targeting civilians, local leaders, former opposition fighters, and even defected diplomat Nour al-Din al-Labbad during a visit to his hometown of Sanamein.

Yet, these catastrophic events have prompted no resignations from top security officials, including the Minister of Interior. This lack of accountability was also evident in the authorities’ mishandling of tensions with the Druze community, following a fabricated audio recording that appeared to insult the Prophet Muhammad. The recording, falsely attributed to a Druze cleric, incited violent demonstrations in several cities, culminating in unrest in Jaramana and Ashrafieh Sahnaya. Rather than holding the agitators to account, the Interior Ministry issued a statement thanking citizens for their “sincere feelings and religious zeal”.

The ministry’s performance has further deteriorated with the dismissal of many officers who had defected from the former regime or remained in service until 8 December last year, particularly within the criminal security sector.

The Exclusion of Others

The state’s failure to maintain impartiality—towards its citizens and towards the country’s religious, sectarian and ethnic groups—is further evidenced by the Interior Ministry’s aforementioned statement. This bias deepens societal mistrust, particularly when a targeted community senses discrimination or neglect. In this context, the St. Elias Church attack was even more devastating, given the prevailing sense of exclusion among many Syrian Christians in the post-Assad era.

Recent provocations, such as Islamic missionary vehicles blaring Qur’anic verses in Christian-majority areas—including Duwayla—serve more to intimidate than evangelise. These actions continue unchecked by the authorities. Furthermore, locals from these communities are neither integrated into efforts to maintain local security nor included in the newly formed Syrian army, which is increasingly perceived as an exclusively Sunni force adhering to an Islamic military doctrine.

At the constitutional level, the new Declaration is fraught with controversy: from issues surrounding its drafting committee and the haste of its preparation to the centralisation of power in the presidency. It also codifies Islamic dominance by declaring, “The religion of the President of the Republic is Islam, and Islamic jurisprudence is the main source of legislation.” Meanwhile, public statements by officials and state media figures echo a sectarian tone reminiscent of the Ottoman millet system.

In such a climate, the appointment of Christian figures to ministerial or other high-level posts appears largely symbolic. Much like the Assad regime’s tokenistic appointments of unrepresentative Sunni and other minority figures, the current government’s approach suggests image management rather than genuine inclusion.

Confusion and Mismanagement

Official responses following the church attack reflect a state of institutional confusion and public mistrust. Notably, the statements failed to refer to the victims as “martyrs”, a term explicitly used in the presidential address after the Manbij bombing—further fuelling perceptions of discrimination.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued an oddly worded statement: “The Syrian Arab Republic extends its sincere condolences to the victims’ families and wishes a speedy recovery for the injured”—language more befitting foreign nationals than the country’s own citizens.

The official media’s handling of the attack was equally inept. The performance of the state-run Al-Ikhbariyah channel was widely criticised. However, the deeper issue lies in the media sector’s leadership. The new authorities have sidelined dozens of defected journalists and veterans with extensive regional and international experience. Instead, they have filled senior positions with loyalists lacking the necessary credentials, such as Alaa Barsilo, appointed to head the Radio and Television Corporation, and Jamil Sorour, now director of Al-Ikhbariyah. Neither has demonstrated the editorial, managerial, or technical expertise required to lead such significant institutions.

It is clear that the Syrian authorities were not the perpetrators of the heinous St. Elias Church attack. Indeed, President Ahmad al-Sharaa faces opposition from factions further to the right—groups that advocate a more explicitly Islamic vision for Syria, which complicates his handling of public freedoms and national rhetoric.

Nonetheless, the authorities bear responsibility for failing to prevent the tragedy and for their poor handling of its aftermath. Their broader failure to harness the talents of experienced individuals and to include diverse political and social actors has undermined the legitimacy of the new order—and left Syria vulnerable to further attacks and deeper divisions.

 

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.

Helpful keywords