Western world has been mostly indifferent towards the situation in Syria.
What do you think is the reason for that?
Well, the Western world is directly engaged in what happened in Syria.
First of all, from the very beginning, we, like Syria,
was seeing the influence of some Western powers coming inside its country
and trying to influence what was happening.
I'm thinking of the roles that France played,
and I'm thinking of the role that the United States played in trying to support those rebels
that then were identified in a second phase as terrorists.
And so this is not something new that I'm saying,
but it's something that has been confirmed by the words of Donald Trump last week
when he ordered to stop the training of the rebels inside Syria.
But another reason for the silence of the West is that there were some actors,
some foreign actors that played an important role inside the Syrian conflict,
which are strongly linked to the Western, to the Western main countries.
For instance, I was interviewing some people from the opposition in Syria
that took part to the first manifestation, to the first demonstration
that happened against the government, the Syrian government in 2011.
And if, in the first moment, those demonstrations were really coming from the people
that were asking for change, well, then, step by step, after the very first days,
some external influence started to be part of them.
And so people started to listen to slogans against Shia people, against Iran, against Hezbollah,
which were at that time not present on the Syrian ground.
And so, from the very beginning, it was evident that there were some external actors
trying to use the rivalry, the conflictuality happening between the Shia world and the Sunni world
in order to make this situation develop into not a Syrian conflict, not a civil conflict,
but into an international conflict, which is today.