The appearance of Bashar al-Jaafari, Syria’s former permanent representative to the United Nations and former ambassador to Moscow, in a video filmed at a Moscow restaurant has sparked a sharp reaction among Syrians. He attended Syrian journalist Akram Huzam’s birthday celebration alongside people linked to Bashar al-Assad’s former regime. The singing, applause and festive atmosphere were seen as provocative against the backdrop of the continuing consequences of the war and the former rule.
Huzam posted the video several days ago, after which it quickly spread on social media. Users began asking why Jaafari remained in Moscow and what his position was following the fall of the regime. His appearance also renewed attention to the fate of former officials who left Syria and moved to Russia. Some commentators condemned Jaafari’s participation in the event itself, while others criticized his conspicuously festive demeanor alongside representatives of the former authorities.
Syrian journalist Hasib al-Zayni said he initially did not believe that the person in the video was really Jaafari. He criticized the invitation extended to the former diplomat, calling it contempt for Syrians’ feelings. According to the journalist, Huzam explained that he had invited Jaafari because he intended to interview him and was prepared to act as “the devil’s advocate.” However, Jaafari attended the celebration without agreeing to an interview, prompting al-Zayni to say that Huzam had “lost the interview and gained the anger of Syrians.”
Critics stressed that professional motives should not serve as an excuse for ignoring journalists’ moral responsibility. Political analyst Mahmoud Ahmad Hafez described Jaafari’s conduct as a kind of “glass diplomacy” after the end of his official career. Activist Omar Madania also said that Jaafari and other former regime officials were dancing in Moscow at the expense of the Syrian people. These statements reflect a broader dispute over whether former government representatives living abroad should remain beyond political and public scrutiny.
Jaafari was one of Syria’s most prominent diplomats for many years: he represented the country at the United Nations, defended the regime’s positions at Security Council meetings and political negotiations, and became deputy foreign minister in 2020. He was later appointed ambassador to Russia, where he continued to represent Assad’s government until its fall in December 2024. After that, Jaafari almost disappeared from public view, but the video from the Moscow celebration has once again put him in the spotlight and intensified calls for information about the fate of former officials and for those involved in abuses during the former rule to be held accountable.
Comments on the news
Why did Moscow become a place of residence for many former Assad-regime officials, and what official status do they have in Russia after the fall of the regime? — Moscow was historically the Assad government’s main international ally, while Russia provided it with military, political and diplomatic support. Former officials and members of the security services could therefore rely on Russian connections, security and the possibility of obtaining refuge. However, their exact official status in Russia depends on the individual: publicly confirmed information about citizenship, asylum or residence permits is not available for all of them. After the fall of the regime, residence in Russia by itself does not mean automatic immunity from investigations or international requests.
What justice or investigative mechanisms exist in Syria regarding former officials accused of abuses if they are abroad? — Possible avenues include national investigations and trials in Syria, international investigations under the auspices of the United Nations, and cases brought under universal jurisdiction in foreign courts. Several European countries have already investigated and heard cases involving torture and crimes against humanity committed in Syria. The practical difficulty lies in gaining access to suspects, evidence and archives: without cooperation from the country of residence, extradition or arrest is often impossible. The International Criminal Court also does not have automatic jurisdiction over Syria, since Syria is not a party to the Rome Statute and the UN Security Council has not referred the Syrian situation to the court.
Why does the work of Syrian diplomats at the UN Security Council, including their defense of the Assad government’s positions, remain such a painful subject for Syrian society? — For many Syrians, the diplomats represented not the state in a neutral sense, but a government accused of repression, mass detentions, torture and attacks on civilians. Their statements denying or justifying such accusations were perceived as a denial of the victims’ suffering. Russia’s support for the Assad government in the Security Council was particularly painful, including its use of the veto, because this blocked a number of international decisions and deepened the sense of impunity. At the same time, Syrian society is not homogeneous: views of the diplomats depend on political beliefs, region and personal experience of the war.
Full version: "Assad’s diplomat": Bashar al-Jaafari’s appearance at a Moscow celebration angers Syrians