Syrian security forces 'oversaw' armed civilians who killed Alawites, accused man says
One of the men accused of taking part in a wave of sectarian violence against Syria's Alawite minority two months ago has told the BBC that he and other armed civilians who travelled to the area were advised and monitored by government forces there.
Abu Khalid said he had travelled as a civilian fighter to the Mediterranean coastal village of Sanobar on 7 March, to help battle former regime insurgents.
"The General Security department told us not to harm civilians, but only to shoot at insurgents who shot at us," he told me.
"There were eight men with me, but it was a large group, and the General Security department was overseeing things so that no-one would vandalise the village or harm the residents."
He later filmed himself shooting dead a 64-year-old village resident, Mahmoud Yusef Mohammed, at the entrance to his house.
Abu Khalid, who has now been arrested, insisted Mahmoud was an armed insurgent - but video he filmed of the incident does not support his account.
Military police told the BBC there had been no coordination between security forces and Abu Khalid.
Human rights groups estimate that almost 900 civilians, mainly Alawites, were killed by pro-government forces across Syria's coastal region in early March.
The Alawite sect is an offshoot of Shia Islam and its followers make up around 10% of Syria's population, which is majority Sunni.
Syria's coastal area - a stronghold of the former regime - has been largely sealed off, but a BBC team gained access, speaking to witnesses and security officials about what happened in Sanobar.
The violence came a day after fighters loyal to the country's overthrown former President Bashar al-Assad, who is an Alawite, led deadly raids on government security forces.
The new Sunni Islamist-led government had called for support from various military units and militia groups to respond to those raids – but that escalated into a wave of sectarian anger aimed at Alawite civilians.
Witnesses told the BBC that several different armed groups had targeted Alawites for summary executions. Some also said that government security forces had battled violent and extremist factions to protect Alawite villagers from attack.
When the violence along this coast erupted, the village of Sanobar was right in its path. Some 200 people were wiped out from this small Alawite village, over the course of a few days in early March.
Almost two months after the killings, there have been no funerals in Sanobar.
A mass grave now squats beside the winding village road. Hurried burials have cleared the remaining corpses.
This is now a village of women and secrets. Most survivors are still too scared to speak openly but their stories, shared with us privately, are often strikingly similar.
The body of Mahmoud Yousef Mohammed lay outside his simple breeze-block house in Sanobar for three days after he was shot dead.
His wife, daughter and grandchildren, sheltering in a neighbour's house, were too afraid to emerge from hiding and bury him, as armed groups roamed the village.
His family said Mahmoud was a polite man, known and respected in the village; a farmer with a military background, who sometimes worked as a minibus driver.
His house, on a quiet street at the edge of the village, stands less than 300m (985ft) from the main highway where, on 6 March, army officers from Syria's former regime led co-ordinated attacks on the country's new security forces.
For two days, government forces battled former regime fighters, known locally as "filoul" ("remnants"), in the villages along this coastal highway, calling for support from allied militia groups who helped push Bashar al-Assad from power last year.
An array of armed supporters responded to the call, including foreign jihadist fighters, civilians and armed units now nominally part of the new Syrian army, but still not fully under government control. All are groups now accused by survivors of civilian executions.
All day on 7 March, Sanobar residents listened to the sounds of intense fighting around the village, as families hid in their houses.
Then the targeting of civilians began.
"All day, many groups entered our house," one survivor from Sanobar told me. "They weren't from the [military] groups based here, but from Idlib, Aleppo and elsewhere. Some wore camouflage uniforms. But the ones who killed us were wearing green uniforms with a mask."
"They stole everything, insulted us, threatened the children," she continued. "The last group came around 6pm. They asked, 'Where are the men?' and took my father and my brother Ali. We begged them not to kill them. They said, 'You're Alawite, pigs,' and shot them in front of our eyes."
Some time that day, Mahmoud stepped outside the building he was sheltering in with his family. One of his relatives said he could smell toxic fumes from a fire nearby, and wanted to check on his own house.
He never reappeared.
"We found the next morning that he had been killed," the relative told us.
The story of what happened to Mahmoud began to emerge when a video of his killing surfaced on social media, filmed by the man who shot him.
In the video, Abu Khalid is seen grinning and taunting Mahmoud from the back of a motorbike before shooting him six times.
To meet Abu Khalid, we travelled to Idlib, the heartland of transitional President Ahmed al-Sharaa's Islamist group, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which swept Syria's old regime from power last December.
Now in military police custody pending an investigation, Abu Khalid shuffled into the room, blinking and stretching as his blindfold and handcuffs were removed.
A young man in camouflage pants, he seemed keen to talk, explaining that Mahmoud was not a civilian, but an insurgent who was fighting in the village that day, and had been carrying an 8.5mm-calibre rifle when he shot him.
"I turned the camera on him and told him to sit down," Abu Khalid told me. "He was running away and he wanted to kill me, so I shot him in the shoulder and the leg. When I got closer, I saw him moving his hand as if he had a bomb or a gun. I was afraid, so I killed him."
But the video Abu Khalid filmed of the shooting - its location and timing verified by the BBC - does not support his account.
A former member of the British special forces confirmed that there was no weapon visible on or near Mahmoud at any point in the video.
And at no point does Abu Khalid ask the 64-year-old to stop or sit down - nor does he appear scared or under threat.
Instead, he is shown whooping and grinning on the back of the motorbike, before calling out to Mahmoud, "I've caught you, I've caught you! Look at the camera!"
He then shoots him three times in quick succession. Mahmoud falls to his knees inside the doorway of his house.
"You didn't die?!" Abu Khalid calls out, as he follows him to the building.
Mahmoud can be heard begging for his life, before Abu Khalid shoots him three more times at close range.
International law forbids the killing of civilians, the injured, or disarmed fighters.
Khaled Moussa, from the military police unit now holding Abu Khalid, said he had gone to fight in Sanobar without coordination with the security forces.
"Civilians are not supposed to be there during military operations," Mr Moussa said. "He made a mistake. He could have captured the person, but instead he killed him."
But Abu Khalid has little regret for what he did.
When he cries during our interview, it's not for Mahmoud - or even for himself. It's for his little brother, killed in a bomb attack by President Assad's former army in 2018 as his family sat down at home to break their Ramadan fast.
"He was eight years old, and I held him while his soul left his body," he told me, before tears start flowing down his face.
"I was raised during the revolution, and saw nothing but injustice, blood, killing and terror. They ignore everything that happened in Syria before the liberation, and focus on the video I filmed."
He tells me his family's latest casualty was his 17-year-old cousin, killed while fighting insurgents near Sanobar. "He was completely burned," he said. "We took him away in a plastic bag."
"If I was going for revenge for what they did to us, I wouldn't have left any of them."
The insurgent attacks on 6 March ripped open sectarian fault-lines that Syria's new Islamist government had tried to paper over with promises of tolerance and inclusion.
The Syrian Network for Human Rights (SNHR), an independent monitoring group, says former regime loyalists killed at least 446 civilians, including 30 children and women, and more than 170 government security forces, most of them on 6 March.
Those attacks resurrected deep-seated anger over the repressive dictatorship of former President Assad, with Alawite civilians seen by some as complicit in the crimes of his regime - and as part of the insurgency that followed his fall.
The SNHR says the government's crackdown on insurgents on the coast "escalated into widespread and severe violations", most of which were "retaliatory and sectarian".
The group says that pro-government forces and supporters killed at least 889 civilians, including 114 children and women, in the days following the insurgent attacks.
Amnesty International has investigated dozens of attacks it says were "deliberate", "unlawful" and targeted at Alawite civilians.
One video from Sanobar shows a pro-government fighter marching through the village chanting, "ethnic cleansing, ethnic cleansing".
Lists of victims from the village, compiled by local activists, include the names of more than a dozen women and children, including an 11-year-old, a pregnant woman and a disabled man.
The survivor who watched gunmen kill her father and brother said the family showed their killers the men's civilian ID cards to prove they hadn't been part of Assad's army. But it made no difference; their only accusation, she said, was that the family were "Alawite pigs".
Separating civilians from insurgents is key to the new government's plan to secure the country, and its promise to protect minorities.
But that will require prosecuting those responsible - and proving it can control its own military forces and armed allies.
Sharaa's HTS group - once the local affiliate of al-Qaeda and still designated as a terrorist organisation by the UN, US and UK - formed the backbone of his new army.
There has been rapid recruitment to fill the ranks of a new civilian police and the General Security Forces.
Training has reportedly been shortened and many units say they are under-equipped. One commander looked wistfully at my body-armour and radio when we joined them on a patrol. "We don't have those," he said.
Turkish-backed militia and jihadist fighters who once fought alongside HTS to remove Bashar al-Assad are among those named by witnesses and human rights groups as carrying out summary executions.
In the streets of Sanobar, the names of Turkish-backed units, now supposedly under government control, have been graffitied on the walls, and the BBC heard several reports that their men were still present in the village.
Some videos of alleged violations also appear to show the presence of vehicles and uniforms from the official General Security Forces - prompting Amnesty International to call for investigation.
The head of the General Security Forces for the Latakia region, Mustafa Kunaifati, told me that civilians with friends or relatives in the army were responsible for most of the crimes, but admitted that members of armed groups had also been involved - including what he called "individual cases" from his own General Security units.
"It happened," he said, "and those members were also arrested. We can't accept something like that."
After the former regime fighters were expelled and the situation brought under control, he said his men "began removing all the rioters from the area and arresting anyone who had harmed civilians".
Several witnesses have confirmed to the BBC that Mr Kunaifati's forces intervened to protect them from other armed groups.
One of Mahmoud's neighbours in Sanobar told us they evacuated him and his family 30 minutes before Mahmoud was killed.
And the witness who described the killing of her father and brother said the General Security Forces had helped them escape the village, and later to return and bury their relatives.
Sharaa has vowed that "no-one will be above the law" when it comes to prosecuting the killings on the coast.
A special committee is currently investigating both the initial 6 March attack by insurgents, and the violence by pro-government forces that followed. The BBC understands some 30 people have been arrested.
But in a country still waiting to see justice for the crimes of the past, this is a delicate moment.
Some have argued that the government's decision to issue a general call for support after the insurgent attacks made violence predictable, even inevitable.
Many Alawite villagers say they want the government's General Security Forces to police their villages, and for other factions, now positioned at some checkpoints and bases, to leave.
Two months after the violence here, government security forces are acting as the shield against their own hard-line allies.
The future of Sanobar is a test for the future of Syria, and the country's other minorities - Druze, Christians, Kurds - are watching.
To see how far Syria's Islamist government can hold this wounded country together without resorting to the repression of the past.
'We will rescue anyone': BBC accompanies Syria's White Helmets after deadly attacks
BBC finds Syrian families sheltering at Russian airbase from sectarian attacks
Whole families dead in recent Syria violence, says UN
Syrians describe terror as Alawite families killed in their homes
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Foreign Office staff told to consider resigning if they disagree over Gaza
More than 300 Foreign Office staff who raised concerns about potential UK "complicity" in Israel's conduct in Gaza were told if they profoundly disagreed with government policy they could consider resigning. The staff letter, seen by the BBC, was sent to Foreign Secretary David Lammy last month. In it, officials questioned the UK's continued arms sales and what they called a "stark… disregard for international law" by Israel. The Foreign Office said it had systems for staff to raise concerns and added the government had "rigorously applied international law" in relation to the war in Gaza. The reply to the staff letter was sent from Sir Oliver Robbins and Nick Dyer, the two most senior civil servants in the Foreign Office. They told the signatories: "[I]f your disagreement with any aspect of government policy or action is profound your ultimate recourse is to resign from the Civil Service. This is an honourable course." The response was met with "outrage" according to one official who signed the letter. "[There is] frustration and a deep sense of disappointment that the space for challenge is being further shut down," said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity. The officials' letter signed on 16 May was at least the fourth such document sent by concerned civil servants to ministers and Foreign Office managers since late 2023. The BBC understands the signatories represent a wide range of expertise across Foreign Office departments, embassies and missions including in London and overseas. The letters have reflected the scale of the civilian death toll in Gaza, Israel's restrictions on aid supply and Israeli settlement expansion and settler violence in the occupied West Bank, among other issues. Staff are also said to feel disquiet that many of their warnings have not been acted on, and those whose jobs it is to implement decisions could be liable in any future legal proceedings against the UK government. The 16 May letter said: "In July 2024, staff expressed concern about Israel's violations of international humanitarian law and potential UK government complicity. In the intervening period, the reality of Israel's disregard for international law has become more stark." It went on to list the killing by Israeli forces of 15 humanitarian workers in March and Israel's suspension of all aid to Gaza in the same month "leading many experts and humanitarian organisations to accuse Israel of using starvation as a weapon of war". It said the UK government's position had contributed to "the erosion of global norms", citing continued weapons exports and the visit to London in April by Israel's foreign minister Gideon Sa'ar "despite concerns about violations of international law". It added that, "supported by the Trump administration, the Israeli government has made explicit plans for the forcible transfer of Gaza's population". In their response on 29 May, Sir Oliver and Mr Dyer told the staff the department wanted to see "healthy challenge" as part of the policy-making process and had already set up a "bespoke Challenge Board" and regular listening sessions with employees to hear concerns in this policy area. They wrote that officials were entitled to their personal views, but added it "might be helpful" to "remind" them of mechanisms available to those uncomfortable with policy. It went on to list a series of ways staff could raise issues, before adding that resignation was an "ultimate recourse" and "honourable course" for those with profound disagreements over government policy. "[T]he bargain at the heart of the British Civil Service is that we sign up to deliver the policies of the Government of the day wholeheartedly, within the limits imposed by the law and the Civil Service Code," it said. A former official who saw the correspondence described the response as "obfuscation". "This… simply provides the government with supposed 'plausible deniability' for enabling breaches of international law," said the former official who also spoke on condition of anonymity. They said that the FCDO and broader civil service seemed unable to learn the lessons of the past, referring to the 2016 Chilcot Report recommendations following the inquiry into the Iraq war. Chilcot criticised the emergence of an "ingrained belief" within senior levels of the UK policy community over the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. His recommendations led to civil service reforms designed to challenge "groupthink" and empowering officials to speak out about policy concerns. The UK government's position is that Israel is "at risk" of breaching humanitarian law. Israel has previously said it operates according to international law. Palestinian rights groups have rejected this, taking evidence to several legal cases brought internationally. In September, Foreign Secretary David Lammy announced the suspension of around 30 arms export licenses to Israel, out of a total of about 350, citing a "clear risk" they might be used to commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law. It came weeks before the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Israel's prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant as well as the military commander of Hamas. Israel's government has consistently rejected allegations it has committed war crimes in Gaza, calling the ICC's decision "antisemitic", while the US Department of State last week announced sanctions against four ICC judges for "transgressions against the United States and Israel". In a statement, the FCDO said the job of civil servants was to deliver on government policies and provide professional, impartial advice as set out in the Civil Service Code. "There are systems in place which allow them to raise concerns if they have them," said the spokesperson. They added: "Since day one, this government has rigorously applied international law in relation to the war in Gaza. One of our first acts in government was to suspend export licences that could be used by the Israeli Defence Forces in Gaza… "We have suspended direct exports of F-35 parts for use by Israel, and we categorically do not export any bombs or ammunition which could be used in Gaza," added the spokesperson. On 19 May the UK issued a joint statement with France and Canada threatening "concrete actions" against Israel if it did not stop its renewed military offensive and lift aid restrictions.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Missing Bride Arrested After Allegedly Murdering Husband on Honeymoon
Originally appeared on E! Online An Indian bride who went missing on her honeymoon has been arrested on suspicion of plotting to murder the groom. Newlywed Sonam Raghuvanshi was taken into custody by police after surrendering herself June 8, six days after the body of her new husband Raja Raghuvanshi, with whom she disappeared during their honeymoon in northeastern India, was discovered in a gorge with his throat slit. Authorities allege that the 25-year-old and her boyfriend Raj hired a group of men to kill Raja while the newly-married couple was vacationing, prompting the arrest of Sonam and four other individuals. 'The plan was to kill Raja in a distant place,' Indore deputy police commissioner Rajesh Dandotiya told reporters, per Hindustan Times, 'dump his body somewhere where it would not be found and then live happily.' However, Sonam's dad Devi Singh adamantly denies the allegations against his daughter and has accused the local government of 'lying from the beginning' of their investigation. More from E! Online Blake Lively Breaks Silence on Legal Victory Against Justin Baldoni Julie Chrisley Debuts New Blonde Hair After Prison Release Addison Rae Changes Her Name "My daughter is innocent,' he told reporters June 9, per the Indian news outlet The Tribune. 'I have trust in my daughter. She cannot do this. They got married with the consent of both families.' E! News has reached out to a lawyer for Sonam for comment and has not heard back. Sonam and Raja, 30, tied the knot in the Indian city of Indore on May 11, which Raja's brother Vipin Raghuvanshi said was a reflection of their positive arranged marriage. "Their marriage was arranged four months back and they were both happy,' he told reporters, per the BBC June 9. 'There had been no fights between the couple before or after marriage." Four days after the couple embarked on their honeymoon May 20, they went missing, prompting a search effort from police, disaster relief teams and local citizens. Following the discovery of Raja's body June 2 and no sign of Sonam, the pair's families criticized the authorities and petitioned the Prime Minister of India for help. After Sonam's arrest, Raja's brother Vipin initially said he would "not accept' his sister-in-law's 'involvement in the murder until she confessed." However, once he learned that one of the alleged accomplices was known to Sonam, he expressed his faith in authorities' investigation. "I now believe that Meghalaya government was not lying,' he said, per the BBC. 'They were telling the truth." For the latest breaking news updates, click here to download the E! News App
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
People on £10,000 to £96,000 tell us what they want from the Spending Review
This week the government will set out how much it is going to spend over the next four years on the public services that millions of people use every day. That includes the NHS, schools and public transport as well as welfare benefits, armed forces, energy projects and a whole range of other government spending. We asked a handful of readers, who had contacted the BBC via Your Voice, Your BBC News, what they would like to see in Wednesday's announcement. Lewis Eager, 26, works two shifts a week in the on-demand delivery service for a supermarket in Southend-on-Sea, earning £850 a month. He lives with his parents who he pays £120 a month. He would like the Spending Review to include a plan to help young people like him find well-paid, full-time jobs. Lewis completed a business administration apprenticeship and an Open University degree, but says he cannot find full-time work. He estimates he has applied for more than 4,000 jobs without success. "Getting knocked down all the time is horrible." Even entry-level jobs seem to require experience, he says. He sees a "looming crisis" among young people unable to get on the jobs ladder, and would like to see more money go into adult education. "I live with my parents which I have nothing against, but I thought I would have achieved more by now," he says. Resheka Senior, 39, is a nursery nurse and her husband Marcus, 49, a school caretaker. Between them they take home more than £50,000 a year. But the couple say they are still struggling, particularly while Resheka is on maternity leave. When she goes back to work, Resheka says she won't be much better off because she will have to pay for childcare before and after school for her five-year-old and all day for the younger children, aged two and nine-months. They have debts that they are shuffling between credit cards and no prospect of moving out of their two-bedroom council flat in Woolwich, London. "I don't want to stay at home. I've been working since I was 15 years old," says Resheka. But she would like to see more support for couples who are "making an honest living". She wants the government to pay for free breakfast and afterschool clubs or more free childcare on top of the 30 hours a week currently provided. "It's not as if I'm saying I want benefits," she says. "We're putting back into the economy. We just need some help." Ollie Vass works for a nutritional supplement company, where he earns £31,000. His girlfriend Grace Sangster also 19 is on an apprenticeship scheme earning £40,000. They each started saving from the age of 13, earning money mowing lawns and working in restaurants. In April, with the help of a small inheritance and their Lifetime ISAs, the couple completed on a £360,000 two-bedroomed terraced house near Slough. Ollie and Grace would like to see more support for young people starting out, especially first-time buyers, and more apprenticeships. They also think the tax-free allowance, which has been frozen since 2021 should rise so that people on low wages can keep more of their earnings. Ollie also wants to see cheaper rail fares: "At the moment it's too expensive to use." Leah Daniel, 23, and her partner are entitled to £800 a month in Universal Credit and the council pays £900 a month rent for the flat in Birmingham they share with their two-year old daughter. But currently around £100 a month is being deducted from their Universal Credit to pay for advances they took while homeless for a short time. Leah says they run out of money every month and have to borrow from friends and family, sometimes having to skip meals to make sure their daughter is fed. If the government decides to cut the welfare budget in the Spending Review, that would be "absolutely heartless", she says. "It's one thing to make sure the country's growing and we aren't wasting money and people aren't taking advantage of the system. "It's another thing if you aren't giving more support to help people out of poverty and help them look for work," she says. Above all she and her partner want stable jobs so they can "build up their lives". "So many times we haven't eaten and we're worried about tomorrow," she says. "I just want this situation to change." As a GP and practice partner earning £96,000 a year, Dr Kirsty Rogerson says she is aware she is well-off. She and her husband, a hospital consultant, own their own house, and are putting some money aside to support their sons through university. But she sees plenty of people in her surgery in Sheffield who aren't so fortunate and face what she thinks are impossible choices. If she could choose one thing for the government to take action on it would be to subsidise fresh fruit and vegetables and make processed food more expensive. "What [the government] shouldn't be doing is just tackling it at the other end with weight loss drugs," she says. "That's going to bankrupt the NHS." She would also like to see more money spent on public services. "As a mother, I'd rather pay more tax and know my children were being well educated and there's a good healthcare system," says Dr Kirsty Rogerson. The same goes for the police. "I'd rather go to bed each night knowing those things were there," she says. Sylvia Cook, 72, used to sell accounting software, then published books about Greece, before she retired. Living on a pension of £20,000 means being careful with her outgoings, so she welcomes the government's u-turn on winter fuel payments as "a good decision, if a little late". The extra £200 "obviously eases things", she says. But in general she thinks that rather than increasing spending, the government should look at where it can save money. "You can spend a lot of money and achieve nothing," she says. Instead she suggests changes to the tax system, efficiency savings across government and cutting perks for MPs and civil servants. "There are so many inefficient things they haven't got the common sense to sort out." The health service is a case in point she says. "Throwing more money at the NHS doesn't necessarily help if they don't sort that out," she says.