Eva Filipi. Photo: Celia Pérez
CELIA PÉREZ CARRASCOSA, Prague (Czech Republic)
Lately, the dominant, or official, discourse on various events is very present in the mass media and it is difficult to find real experts who can explain what is going on with their extensive knowledge of the matter. The Syrian war is a case in point. The Arab Spring came to the original land of the Umayyads in March 2011. Following protests against the government of Bashar al-Assad, a war was unleashed that is still raging in the cradle of civilisation today. A year after the outbreak of the war, in 2012, the EU and the US decided to withdraw their ambassadors from Damascus, due to insecurity in the country and in response to al-Assad’s repression[1]. However, one country did not follow in Brussels’ footsteps: the Czech Republic. The small Slavic country decided to stay in Syria and continue working diplomatically with Damascus. The Czech Republic was represented in Syria by its ambassador, Eva Filipi. And it is she who has been kind enough to grant us this interview.
Eva Filipi has extensive experience in the Middle East. She graduated in Middle Eastern Studies in 1962 from Charles University in Prague. She supplemented her degree with further Middle Eastern studies at the University of Münster (Germany), as well as improving her Arabic in Tunisia. In 1981 she completed her doctoral thesis The Beginning of the Ottoman Empire, Iskendername in the works of Ahmedi. Before turning to diplomacy, she worked as a journalist and translator in communist Czechoslovakia, where it was not easy for her to make a name for herself because she was unwilling to accept something she did not believe in.
The former ambassador, who has spent 33 years in the Middle East, tells us in a very pleasant conversation about her experience in that part of the world, especially in Syria, her last diplomatic posting, where she spent thirteen years as ambassador, something very unusual. Furthermore, she spent 12 years in the theatre of the war and she explains to us how the conflict developed.
Question: You have dedicated much of your life to the Arab and Turkish world, especially the Arab world. Why did you specialise in the Middle East?
Answer: I was born into an evangelical family and my father received philosophers, priests, thinkers… every evening. They discussed and talked about the Middle East, in the sense that three monotheistic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) come from that part of the world. I did not know what to do. My mother wanted me to be a good wife. But I have two older brothers, and my older brother said no, that I should study. He studied theology. And one day, when I was 17, he said to me: “Look, I speak many languages, but I do not have room for Arabic, study Arabic”. And I said to myself: “Why not?” The reason why the Middle East is that they are our neighbours. We have to know what is going on there. So, before I went to university, I studied Arabic for a year and, I loved it.
Question: Before going into diplomacy, you worked as a journalist for Czechoslovak Radio and the Czechoslovak News Agency. You also worked as a translator and interpreter. What were those years like?
Answer: They kicked me out from Czechoslovak Radio because I was in prison. It was the first anniversary of the Russian invasion. I went to the university, and I had a little Czech flag here – she points to her chest – and a policeman told me to take it off. I, as I like to argue, asked him if he could explain why, and then I would take it off. And he took me to jail. I was there for 21 days. They thought I was doing something against the government, but I was not involved in politics. In the end, they released me because they did not find anything against me. It was horrible because they did not tell anyone. My mother did not know. So, in that kind of regime, they do not want to hire you for that kind of things, so they kicked me out of the radio. Then I started working for the Czechoslovak News Agency, but one day the agency’s recruiter asked me if I had not realized that I should not work there, and I told him that I wanted to work at the agency… I think he did not expect my answer. And that day, I do not know why, he said that he was tired of firing people and that I could continue working at the agency. But it was not easy for me because I was not a member of the party. In fact, once a journalistic trip to Algeria was organised and I was very excited, I wanted to go, but I was not allowed to go because I was not a member of the Communist Party. They told me to become a member of the party, but I did not, so Eva did not go to Algeria!
Then my daughter was born, when I was working at the agency, and they wanted me to go back to work after two years. But my daughter was still very little. And, the same day they called me from the news agency, they also called me from the translators and interpreters’ agency because they needed someone who spoke Arabic. It was very good, I had to work five days per week and I had the weekends off, so I chose the best for my daughter. In the years I worked as an interpreter and translator, I travelled to many Arab countries with government delegations and I must say that Syria impressed me very much compared to other Arab countries. And when I went with the delegations, they did not trust me. They said they needed me because I spoke Arabic and they did not.
Question: What made you to take the leap into diplomacy?
Answer: They called me from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In 1991, after the Velvet Revolution, they needed new diplomats, not communists, and new experts in various areas. And they called me. It was my destiny. I was very enthusiastic because I could finally do what I had studied.
Question: Before becoming Ambassador to Syria, you were Chargé d’affaires in Iraq (1991-1996), Ambassador to Lebanon (1997-2002), Head of the Middle East Department in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2002-2004) and Czech Ambassador to Turkey (2004-2010), what was your experience in these countries like?
Answer: Every country is different. In Iraq, I was very excited, but we were in a commission against Saddam Hussein, so it was a bit difficult. Also, the regime in Iraq was very despotic and Iraqis were not allowed to meet foreigners. The police could arrest them for that. But my enthusiasm was so great that I was happy there.
On the other hand, Lebanon was different. There are Christians, Muslims, Druze… Also, they admire ambassadors, so that I could have 18 invitations in one day. It was very good. There was no war, so I was able to do good diplomatic work for my country.
Then came Turkey. It was a good experience… interesting. I saw how with Erdogan the country was changing; it was becoming more religious. Because Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) is very religious. Erdogan really is a Muslim brother, and Turkey is becoming more religious. And it was interesting to see that.
Question: When you arrived in Syria in 2010, the war had not yet started. What was Syria like then? Was a war imaginable? You said that Syria impressed you when you were an interpreter.
Answer: When I arrived in Syria, it was a safe and a secular country. All Christians, Sunnis, Druze, Alawites… lived in harmony. It reminded me of Europe in the sense that religion and state were separated in an excellent way. For example, Muslims celebrated Christmas with Christians. It was after Tunisia, Libya, Egypt… but nobody expected that it could also happen in Syria. I was talking to people and they told me: “No, do not worry, it will not happen in Syria. In our country people have a normal life, there is security, there are no problems…” Of course, the structure and the system were similar to those in Czechoslovakia. There was no democracy, but nobody expected that to happen in Syria. It was a surprise when the demonstrations started, but the young Syrians were asking for reforms, they were not asking to overthrow the government, they were not saying: “al-Assad must go”. And yes, I have an affinity for Syria, I do not know why. It is a country I like. In the end, I ended up being an ambassador there, it was my destiny.
Question: The demonstrations began in March 2011, in the town of Daraa. The mainstream media usually talk about rebels and the repressive regime of Bashar al-Assad. Could you, who have been there, tell us what these protests were like?
Answer: There are two narratives: mainstream media and reality. The mainstream narrative is that there were protests and that there was violence by the government. The other side is that in these protests there were people who were only asking for reforms and the police were not authorized to have weapons. But there was the fact that someone killed some people in the protests and it was not known who it was… people who want to cause trouble, it happens in many conflicts. Then they started talking about violence by the government and the West said: “Yes, the demonstrations against al-Assad”. Many people talked to me, they said they wanted reforms, but when they saw that among the demonstrators were Al-Qaeda, Al-Nusra, Islamic State… they said: “No, it is better al-Assad”.
Question: Were members of Al-Qaeda, Al-Nusra, Islamic State… in the demonstrations from the beginning?
Answer: One thing is the people who went to the protests and asked for reforms. But in fact, from the beginning, different sources (Qatar, Turkey, the West, Wahhabism…) were paying the rebels to go to the protests. So, because of this, many Syrians understood that among the opposition there were Islamists, Muslim brothers… and they said to themselves that al-Assad was better. In fact, in Damascus there were also demonstrations in favour of al-Assad when they realised who was part of the opposition. Moreover, the exalted opposition in the West was also demonstrating and asking for democracy. There are many Syrians in London and Washington, for example. They were talking to politicians to help them. That is one thing. Now Turkey. Turkey and Syria did not have bad relations, but Erdogan wanted to bring the Muslim Brotherhood into Syria, which al-Assad opposed. Then, when Erdogan saw that there were demonstrations in Syria, he also sent people to Syria to join the protests. On the other hand, also Qatar, Saudi Arabia. Israel also acted badly in Syria, especially in the south, in Daraa, but Israel never said that al-Assad must go. It is different and complicated. And the West, the West was able to help those rebels who were not democratic at all and who were fully armed. And not only Syrians, I call it international jihadist, because many bought tickets to Turkey and then joined those rebels in Syria.
But within the opposition, the exalted opposition, there was no unity. We had the opposition in Washington, London, Istanbul, Riyadh… And the opponents, the rebels, were changing depending on who was paying them. That was really dirty politics, very dirty. But here, in the EU, there was always talk of a single opposition, but there were several.
Syria really became a space where regional and non-regional countries wanted to achieve their goals. Turkey, the Muslim Brotherhood; Qatar, the Muslim Brotherhood; Saudi Arabia, Wahhabism; the West, our values, democracy, human rights… And the West talked to the so-called exalted opposition. Many Syrians live in London, Washington… and they talked to the politicians. They said they wanted their values, their democracy…
I spoke to several opponents, called the grey zone. Many of them, even before the protests, were calm. But they formed small parties. Many of them had good ideas, but the problem is that they couldn’t work together, they couldn’t unite.
Question: Why were so many countries interested in Syria?
Answer: Turkey and Qatar, mainly because of the Muslim Brotherhood. Saudi Arabia because of Wahhabism. The West, because of our values. It is all very complicated.
Question: Shortly after the start of the war, in 2012, the US and the EU closed their embassies in Damascus because of insecurity in the country and in protest of the repression by the al-Assad government. However, the Czech Republic kept its embassy in Syria. Why did you decide to stay?
Answer: It was actually the decision of my foreign minister, Karel Schwarzenberg. He was very interested in the Middle East, and Syria. When the big countries left, many of them officially left, but they actually moved to Beirut and commute to Damascus every day. Spain, for example, did that too. So, my minister called me and asked me about security. I told him that security was very bad, but that commuting from Beirut to Damascus seemed more dangerous than staying in Damascus. And he said: “al-Assad will not sleep more or less because we are there or not, but we need information from the ground”. He understood that the media was going to repeat the same thing over and over again, so he wanted information from the ground. I was lucky with the Ministry because they understood that we had to stay there to get real information. But the opposition against me was very strong. There were those who thought al-Assad was bad, so we did not have to be there.
In addition, not staying means not helping. If you do not stay, you cannot influence the country because you are not there. If you want to maintain your relations, you have to keep your diplomatic relations, even if you do not agree with everything. But you have to have contact with all sides. In the end, many countries have understood this and are coming back, like Hungary, Greece and Cyprus.
Question: What has been the EU’s role in Syria and how has it acted?
Answer: The EU has lost its influence in Syria because it maintains the same narrative thirteen years later… and we have achieved nothing. If you want to achieve something, you have to maintain relations, to see and understand what is going on, to be able to influence. That is why I lost my idealism about the EU in Syria. At the beginning, I believed in the EU, but then I saw how Brussels acted without taking advice, and we have achieved nothing, but the country is devastated. Are we guilty? Yes, we are guilty because we are part of what has happened. It is not about supporting al-Assad, I know many injustices in Syria. But it is about maintaining relations to understand what is actually happening. Why am I so angry with the EU? Instead of trying to stop the war, it made it bigger, with weapons. We helped those jihadists who said: “al-Assad must go”. And now they are in Germany and want to make a caliphate. I fought for my country, for Europe, but the EU did not understand… My minister did not agree to send weapons to the Syrian rebels, because he knew that they would then fight against us. The jihadists of Al-Nusra, Al-Qaeda, Islamic State… were against the secular state. How is it possible that we have collaborated with such conservative regimes as Qatar or Saudi Arabia? Ok, the goal was to spread our values. Of course behind that there are gas, oil, whatever… but, I am not sure how it is, I am not an economist. But how do we do it? We destroyed Syria.
Another point is that the system in Syria reminds me of what I lived in Czechoslovakia. There was harmony in the country, but not in the sense that there was democracy and freedom. But what do we want? That is the main question and the one that politicians should ask themselves. If we want to spread our values, fine, that is fine, but is it possible? How do we do it? I am not a politician; I was always reporting the reality in Syria. I was obliged to tell the truth in my reports. It is true that we protested against communism in the streets, but if it was not for the agreement between Gorbachev and Reagan, it would not have ended. I mean, there was something afterwards, there was a plan. In Syria, okay, there are protests, but we have to know what is B, C, D… there is no organisation. Now the country is destroyed. We also have to think about our interests; the US is far away. Was the migration wave in our interest? No. Besides, first of all, if there is a change in Syria, it should be made by Syrians, not by foreigners.
Also, a group of countries like Spain, Austria and Italy tried to explain to Brussels what was happening, that we cannot continue with the same conclusions, that al-Assad is still in power. But nothing.
Question: Did you also advise other countries to stay?
Answer: No, they should have known. We tried to explain to Brussels what was happening, the reality. They listened, but they did not do it. So, we have achieved nothing, and the country is devastated.
Question: In addition to the Czech ambassador, when the US withdrew from Syria, you acted as a diplomat for the US and the EU in Syria. What was that like?
Answer: Yes, we were the protective power of the US in Syria. We worked very well with them. It is a very big embassy. We did a lot of work with them and we had consultations in Washington. And I had the feeling that Washington understood better than Brussels that Western policies against Syria were not working, but they were not doing anything different, either. That was my feeling.
On the EU, according to EU Codex, if a country needs help, you have to help it. For example, I helped Germany with prisoners and also other EU countries.
Question: The al-Assad government was also accused of using chemical weapons against the population in 2013, but it is unclear if this was true or not. What do you think, as you were there during the war?
Answer: Look, Syria agreed to get rid of chemical weapons and the UN Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) made sure that it did and stated that there were no longer chemical weapons in Syria. Plus, al-Assad was winning the war. He was recovering territories. It did not make sense to use them. The OPCW inspectors were there; it made no sense. And there is an attack with chemical weapons? They would be rebels, opponents…
Question: Do you think other diplomats also warned their ministers about what was actually happening in Syria, as you did?
Answer: Good question. One example, the French ambassador in Damascus was Eric, very good, excellent. He knew the area, the country and everything that was going on very well. Sarkozy called him for consultations and explained to him what France’s objectives were in Syria. Eric explained to him that it was not going to work. And Sarkozy told him that if he wanted to stay there, he had to shut up. Only a few diplomats like Eric dare to tell politicians the truth. The question is how many diplomats dare to say something against their politicians. I think very few, most prefer to keep their chair. But, to my surprise, Eric wanted to keep his chair, even knowing the truth, so he started working with the exalted opposition. I was always honest with my government. I always told them what was happening in Syria. It was my duty.
Question: You were an ambassador to Syria for 13 years. Why so long?
Answer: Because they needed me. My country, the EU, Washington… they needed me. In Washington they said I was a very good analyst, a very good expert.
Question: Why do you think the Arab Spring did not succeed in Syria?
Answer: Why this Arab Spring? Tunisia, Libya, Egypt… In Egypt, after Mubarak, came Morsi, who was a Muslim brother. We destroyed countries, systems… is that our policy? The West, we think we lead the world because our values are the best. Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, then Syria… I wish the best for the Syrians. I know the structure of the country. In 2011 Bashar al-Assad proposed to talk to the opposition and Brussels immediately put Syria on the sanctions list.
I remember when the Arab Spring started in Tunisia. Some of my colleagues were very happy because our values would be spread. Some saw it as something wishful, but it is also a kind of ideology. Now, many of those who attacked me come to tell me: “You were right.”
Syria is a secular state. They believe that al-Assad is better than the Islamists. Besides, before the war there was harmony. People had work, food… it was a normal country. Now the country is destroyed, there are no jobs. Another point is that in the twelve years of war, Syrians were in dialogue in Syria, the opposition and the government. But the West also had part of the opposition abroad. What I admire about al-Assad is that he has been in Syria all the time, in such a situation.
But you know what? The West has achieved nothing, it is still with the same narrative and the country is devastated. But Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey… they know. Syria is back in the Arab League. These countries accept that al-Assad is still in power. Turkey and Syria have also returned to negotiations for relations.
Question: At the end of your diplomatic mission in Syria in 2023, Bashar al-Assad presented you with the Syrian Order of Merit for your work in the Arab country and for strengthening Czech-Syrian relations, what does it mean?
Answer: We worked a lot with Syrian diplomats and diplomats from other countries, because that is our job. We also had many tasks from the USA and other European countries. But the medal was given to me thanks to the Syrian Foreign Ministry, it was not the president’s idea. Faisal Mekdal, who is now the Syrian foreign minister, lived in Czechoslovakia for fourteen years and likes my country very much.
Regarding the medal, my embassy understood that a small country is different from super powers. Small countries are more flexible, we think more about the situation, how it is. Therefore, we can achieve more things than the US. Apart from this, they value the work we have done for Europeans and for Americans. It is valuing our work. I have maintained good relationships with those who make the decisions. Many of the agreements, objectives… are not achieved in the European departments, but you have to know them and they will trust you, and you will trust them, so they can help you. It is a thank-you for what I did, both with good and bad results, because of course, Syria wanted the US to withdraw all the troops it has in the east of the country. There are contradictions. They know I was not able to achieve everything. But, if many parties trust you to solve the problem: Washington, EU, Berlin, Damascus… why will they not thank me for the work I did? I did my best. I was happy when they gave me this news. At the same time, they told me that they did not want to harm me for this in my country. They knew what the EU was like, what my country was like… But, it is just a thank-you for what I did.
And, something very interesting. They asked me, at the Syrian Foreign Ministry, who I wanted to be present at the medal ceremony. I answered that the European countries and the Arabs. The ceremony was good, but from the European countries, only the chargé d’affaires from the Hungarian Embassy came. Nobody else from the European embassies. I asked my colleagues from other embassies and they told me that they had not been allowed it. They had not been allowed to go to my ceremony! Despite this, days later, I also received a certificate of appreciation from the Czech Ministry of Defense. Appreciation for my work.
Question: When do you think the war in Syria will end?
Answer: The war is almost over. In Idlib and a few places more there is war. I think Erdogan wants to end the war soon, I do not know how. I think currently it is more about life in Syria, the country is destroyed. Sanctions also have an impact in Syria. When Brussels realizes and says: “Ok, al-Assad is still in power. “I’m sorry”. And stop sanctions on Syria, which is at war. That would be real policies, they would help. Because now people are having a hard time, are our values that people are hungry and suffering? I do not think so.
Question: Do you think the Czech Republic can be the bridge between the EU and Syria?
Answer: We tried to explain the reality and bring the EU and Syria closer, until this government. It depends on my government. If they want to understand what Syria is, what the Middle East is… This government may change the policies towards Syria, change the narrative, follow the steps of the EU… Ah, that will be my nightmare! But I say what I have always said, that it is not going to work in Syria. Before we could be the bridge between Brussels and Damascus. Now I do not know.
Question: We are moving towards a multipolar world. How do you see the EU in this new stage?
Answer: Yes, we are going towards it. Since the fall of the USSR, the US has dominated the world for decades. Now, Asia is getting stronger, like China and India. Look, the Middle East, that region is changing. When President Biden visited Saudi Arabia, he had a normal reception. But, Celia, when the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, visited Saudi Arabia, the reception was impressive… That region knows what is happening, that we are moving towards a multipolar world, but I think Brussels still does not know what I am talking about. The time of Washington supremacy is over. Europe has to look after its interests. It may be very difficult for those with a very strong ideology, but if they do not understand what is happening, they will not think for the good of their country and will act against the interests of their own country.
Question: You have always fought for what you believe in, since the communist period, when you did not accept to be a party member.
Answer: Yes, I am a big fighter. I cannot accept something that I do not believe in, that is not true.
Question: Thank you very much. It was a pleasure.
Answer: Thank you. My pleasure.
Eva Filipi: “I lost my idealism about the EU in Syria” © 2023 by Celia Pérez Carrascosa is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 
[1] España cierra la embajada en Siria “en repulsa por las salvajes matanzas” El Mundo, 06.03.2012 https://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2012/03/06/espana/1331024902.html