Syria had always prided itself on being self-sufficient with regards to food. With over 60% of the population working in agriculture, an abundance of fertile lands, a favorable climate and large government subsidies and low interest loans for farmers, there was never a shortage of inexpensive, fresh food. Several years' worth of grain and wheat were stored in large silos all over the country to guarantee a steady supply of the basic supplement in the diet of most Syrians, pita bread. Even then, bakeries were heavily subsidized by the government with flour and fuel, and prices fixed at 15 lira (around 30 U.S cents) per kilo, which meant even the poorest of Syrians never starved or went hungry. There was an abundance of fresh vegetables too, and seasonal fruits which were reasonably priced. Even so, government run co-ops would sell them even cheaper, and malnutrition was almost unheard of before the war. Then the conflict came, and all that dramatically changed. Food security, along with all other types of security went out the window. The war brought with it a great deal of disruption in farming and food production, dangerous or impassable roads, skyrocketing prices, and a collapse of the subsidy system that provided the most vulnerable with vital sustenance. And that was just in the safer areas away from the major conflict zone. In the hot spots where the clashes were fiercest, entire towns or whole blocks of major cities were cut off and isolated, whether by a deliberate siege and blockade, or de facto circumstances on the ground. The opposition first accused the regime of a deliberate blockade at the outset of the uprising in Deraa. There was even a public campaign called "send milk to the children of Deraa" sponsored by several prominent figures, but no cases of starvation were ever documented back then. Later on, as rebel and regime forces clashed in the district of Baba Amr in Homs, the opposition again accused the regime of deliberately blocking food supplies to the area. Videos were disseminated showing people gathering rain water to drink, after the water supply was cut off. As the conflict intensified and spread across the country, it soon emerged that this tactic of siege and blockade would be a prominent strategy employed by both sides, doing the most harm and damage to ordinary civilians. In most areas, it was the regime doing the blocking, but in some parts of the country rebels were doing the same thing too. For example, the predominantly Shiite towns of Nibol and Zahra in the Northern Aleppo countryside have been under rebel siege for around 18 months now, and the only way to get people and supplies in and out is through helicopters. More recently so has the mainly Kurdish town of Ifrin as Kurdish PYD fighters clashed with opposition and Islamist rebels. Even the city of Aleppo itself, divided into a rebel held east and an enclave in the west controlled by the regime has been under a crippling rebel blockade for over a year. But nowhere is this deplorable tactic more pronounced and dangerous than the Damascus countryside, where regime forces have been fiercely battling to dislodge entrenched rebel fighters for over a year now. Cutting off food and basic supplies is just another tool of war here, another weapon in a large arsenal to use to pound your foe into submission, and it seems the regime is using to extreme effect. Although the regime strongly denies this, dismissing it as propaganda and misinformation, and points to the fact that rebels seem to have no problems getting in weapons and ammunition, many videos have been broadcast showing children with severe cases of malnutrition. Cats and Dogs Fatwa The opposition claims there is a major humanitarian crisis and reports many deaths, especially among children, from starvation. Activists even broadcast videos showing families cooking tree leaves and grass for lack of any proper food. This prompted an extraordinary Fatwa (religious edict) from clerics in the area, allowing the consumption of cats and dogs, or the meat of dead animals, strictly forbidden under Islamic Sharia law as non-Halal. Usually in normal times Muslims are only allowed to consume the meat of animals which have been slaughtered in a ritually proper manner, and only herbivores, no carnivorous animals like cats and dogs. Carrion is also banned. But in times of war, and under extreme circumstances, it is permissible to break these rules, even without direct permission from a higher religious authority. Desperate times call for desperate measures, and in this case the desperation stems from the real threat of death by starvation. The profound psychological and emotional impact of such extreme measures on ordinary Syrian people should not be underestimated. It is not considered proper or humane to subject anyone, even your worst enemy to deliberate starvation. In a society where generosity and hospitality are great virtues, it's very taboo. No doubt, the regime risks a negative backlash at home as well as abroad and it appears they might be easing on their policy. Recently, they've allowed the Red Crescent to evacuate around 1500 people from Moadhamiyeh, mostly women and children. Negotiations are under way to allow aid agencies access to the worst affected areas, and it remains to be seen if it will ease the suffering of the people there. However, all those steps are only temporary, like a band aid on a gaping wound, they won't fix the underlying problem. What needs to happen is a lasting cease fire and the start of of a peace process, only then will those most vulnerable of Syrians living in desperate conditions get the help they require, and can start to rebuild their shattered lives again.
