Rami Makhluf is everything that the Syrian people say and more. And I am not in dispute of what is in this article about him by Anthony Shadid (although I think that capitalism is crony by definition). But this passage got my attention: "“Ideologically the regime doesn’t stand for much anymore beyond the interests of certain individuals,” said Nadim Houry, a researcher with Human Rights Watch in Beirut. “ He’s a symbol of what is perceived as private interests controlling large chunks of Syria’s economy.”" I have often accused Human Rights Watch (and I have said this to Nadim) treats the pro-Hariri government of Lebanon much differently than it treats the Syrian government. It is much softer in covering the human rights violations of the Hariri-run government. For example, what Nadim said about Makhluf above applies (and a bit more) to Rafiq Hariri and his son in Lebanon. But would he ever dare be quoted saying that about them? Just wondering.
PS Furthermore, is not Rami Makhluf the logical outcome of the "reforms" that Western countries wanted Syria to adopt?
PS Furthermore, is not Rami Makhluf the logical outcome of the "reforms" that Western countries wanted Syria to adopt?
