July, 28 2016, 04:00pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7413 5566,After hours: +44 7778 472 126,Email:,press@amnesty.org
Syria: Safe Passage for Civilians Will Not Avert Humanitarian Catastrophe in Aleppo City
This morning Russia's Defense Minister announced it was coordinating a "humanitarian operation" with safe corridors set up to allow civilians and fighters who lay down their arms to leave Aleppo city, and food and first aid points established outside the city. However, many civilians may be skeptical of the Syrian government's promises of safety and might choose not to leave for fear of reprisals. The city's only aid supply route, Castello Road, has been cut off by Syrian government sniper fire and heavy shelling since 7 July.
This morning Russia's Defense Minister announced it was coordinating a "humanitarian operation" with safe corridors set up to allow civilians and fighters who lay down their arms to leave Aleppo city, and food and first aid points established outside the city. However, many civilians may be skeptical of the Syrian government's promises of safety and might choose not to leave for fear of reprisals. The city's only aid supply route, Castello Road, has been cut off by Syrian government sniper fire and heavy shelling since 7 July.
"For years the Syrian government has blocked crucial aid from reaching besieged civilians while subjecting them to the horrors of daily shelling and air strikes, using starvation as a weapon of war and deliberately causing unbearable suffering to those living in opposition-held areas," said Philip Luther, Director of the Middle East and North Africa Program.
"Providing safe routes for those civilians who wish to flee Aleppo city will not avert a humanitarian catastrophe. It is not a substitute for allowing impartial humanitarian relief for civilians who remain in opposition-held areas of the city or other besieged areas, many of whom will be skeptical about government promises."
Russia's promises are also likely to be viewed with suspicion by some civilians in Aleppo as its government has carried out unlawful air strikes in opposition-held areas, including possible war crimes, and consistently failed to use its influence with the Syrian government to end widespread human rights violations.
Five local humanitarian organizations told Amnesty International that food reserves in the Aleppo could run out in as little as two weeks' time, putting civilian lives at risk.
UN humanitarian chief Stephen O'Brien has also warned that food in Aleppo city is expected to run out by mid-August, adding that between 200,000 and 300,000 people are at risk.
Attacks on homes, hospitals and medical facilities in and around Aleppo city by Syrian government forces have also intensified in recent days.
Amnesty International spoke to residents trapped inside Aleppo city as well as 10 doctors and several humanitarian organizations in Syria and Turkey. The testimony gathered paints a deeply desperate picture of what has unfolded over the past 20 days.
'Road of death'
A humanitarian worker told Amnesty International that Castello Road is now under 24-hour surveillance by the Syrian government and forces of the
Autonomous Administration, led by the Syrian Kurdish political party Partiya Yekitiya Demokrat (PYD).
"Anything that moves on the road is attacked," the humanitarian worker said.
Even in the days before the road was cut off two trucks transporting enough food aid to feed 400 families were attacked.
"All of the items were destroyed. These families rely on aid provided by us. What will these families do when the food reserves are fully depleted?" he said.
A former resident of Aleppo city told Amnesty International how he and his family made a harrowing escape risking their lives to cross Castello Road to travel to Turkey eight days ago.
"My family and I could not bear the sound of warplanes and explosions any more so we decided to leave the city at dawn. The 'road of death' [Castello Road] is approximately 500 meters long... The taxi driving a family in front of us was hit by an air strike. The car burst into flames... we couldn't stop to check if anyone survived. On the way, I saw five human bodies rotting on the side of the road," he said.
"Hala" (name changed for security reasons), a resident of Aleppo city, told Amnesty International that prices inside the city have doubled in recent days.
"The price of basic food such as sugar and bulghur wheat have doubled. One kilo of sugar now costs around US$13. I cannot afford to buy the very few vegetables available."
"Hussam", a resident of Aleppo city and father of two boys, told Amnesty International: "Each morning, my eldest son and I start our day by going to bakeries to find bread. The supply barely meets 30% of the people's needs. Most of the days we either come back with one loaf of bread or empty-handed."
Relentless air strikes:
Life in the city has been made even worse by the relentless air strikes and heavy shelling by Syrian government forces. Residents of Aleppo city and doctors told Amnesty International that the city, in particular al-Sakhour, al-Shaar and al-Fardous neighborhoods, have sustained daily aerial attacks over the past 10 days.
"Maen", a resident of Aleppo city, said: "We wake up to the sound of the bombing and we sleep after burying people who were killed."
He described how he witnessed an air strike near his home in Bab al-Hadid neighborhood, a residential district of the Old City of Aleppo on 19 July, which destroyed six homes.
"I ran through the smoke to reach the site of the attack. I saw one pregnant woman and her infant boy killed and a nine-year-old girl was also killed. The scene was horrific. Twenty minutes later I heard the sound of a warplane again. We warned people to evacuate the area as quickly as possible. I was able to hide before another strike targeted the exact same place. [Afterwards] I ran back to the site to find a woman whose leg had been instantly severed; her injured daughter of around 12 years old was beside her," "Maen" said.
The shrapnel from the attack sprayed across a 200m-wide radius, he said, adding that he believed it was a cluster munition attack because he saw the bomb split in the sky and then create a series of small explosions. Cluster munitions are banned under international law and the use of these inherently indiscriminate weapons violates international humanitarian law.
Seven hospitals and medical facilities in Aleppo were attacked by air strikes in the space of 10 days, according to local doctors. Only three hospitals in the city are still functioning and able to provide emergency medical care to injured civilians.
Doctor Abdel Basset, a doctor inside Syria, told Amnesty International that air strikes had damaged two warehouses and partially destroyed medical and food supplies.
A Syrian doctor monitoring the situation from Turkey warned that medical supplies will also soon run out.
"The medical supplies will not last more than two months if the frequency and scale of the strikes continue at the same rate. Some of the injured people are dying from their wounds while waiting in line due to a shortage of staff and lack of functioning hospitals," he said.
Doctors, humanitarian workers and residents of Aleppo city have told Amnesty International that the deadliest attacks have occurred on populated residential neighborhoods inside the city far away from front lines and military objectives.
International humanitarian law prohibits attacks on civilians and civilian objects, including hospitals and other medical facilities, and the starvation of the civilian population as a method of warfare.
"The Syrian government and its allies have shown an appalling disregard for international humanitarian law and have shamelessly flouted every human rights provision of UN Security Council resolutions adopted on Syria. For its part, the UN Security Council has failed to prioritize the protection of civilians from these horrific violations," said Philip Luther.
"All states involved in talks on Syria in Geneva, in particular Russia, the Syrian government's ally, must exert the utmost pressure on them to end their relentless attacks on civilians and civilian objects and allow unhindered access for aid."
Background:
According to the Syrian Network for Human Rights, 99 civilians, including 25 children, 16 women and 58 men, were killed in Aleppo city between 10 July and 23 July by Syrian government forces. Out of the total number of casualties, 14 were recorded as killed on the Castello Road.
In February 2016, Amnesty International published a press release, Syrian and Russian forces targeting hospitals as a strategy of war, which documented what appeared to be the deliberate and systematic targeting of hospitals and other medical facilities by the Syrian and Russian forces.
In May 2015, Amnesty International released a report, 'Death everywhere': War crimes and human rights abuses in Aleppo, which documented relentless barrel bomb attacks and other attacks on civilians by the Syrian government forces in Aleppo.
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
LATEST NEWS
'Insane This Is Legal': Bettors Make Huge Profits From Suspiciously Timed Wagers on Iran War
"Reminder that Donald Trump Jr. sits on Polymarket's advisory board and his firm invested double-digit millions into the platform last year."
Mar 01, 2026
Bettors on the prediction platform Polymarket made a killing with suspiciously timed wagers that the United States would attack Iran by February 28, the day President Donald Trump announced a bombing campaign against the Middle East nation.
Bloomberg reported that six accounts on Polymarket, all newly created this month, "made around $1 million in profit" by betting on the timing of the US attack on Iran. The accounts, according to Bloomberg, "had only ever placed bets on when US strikes might occur," and "some of their shares were purchased, in some cases at roughly a dime apiece, hours before the first explosions were reported in Tehran."
One account with the name Magamyman raked in over $515,000 by betting roughly $87,000 that the "US strikes Iran by February 28, 2026."
The lucrative bets quickly drew scrutiny from lawmakers. US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) wrote on social media that "it’s insane this is legal."
"People around Trump are profiting off war and death," Murphy alleged. "I’m introducing legislation ASAP to ban this."
Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.) wrote that "prediction markets cannot be a vehicle for profiting off advance knowledge of military action" and demanded "answers, transparency, and oversight."
"Reminder that Donald Trump Jr. sits on Polymarket's advisory board and his firm invested double-digit millions into the platform last year," Levin wrote, referring to the president's eldest son. "The [Justice Department] and [Commodity Futures Trading Commission] both had active investigations into Polymarket that were dropped after Trump took office."
There's no concrete evidence that Trump administration officials or staffers were behind the hugely profitable bets, but the wagers heightened concerns about the possibility of insider trading using increasingly popular prediction market platforms such as Polymarket and Kalshi. Last month, bettors used Polymarket to make big profits on suspiciously timed wagers on when the US would oust Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
Polymarket currently allows users to bet on when Iran will have a new supreme leader, when the US and Iran will reach a ceasefire agreement, and when the US will invade Iran.
The celebrity news tabloid TMZ reported Saturday that "a group at a Washington, DC restaurant was talking openly in the bar area Friday afternoon about a national secret that was about to literally explode hours later—the bombing of Iran."
As journalist David Bernstein noted, that—if true—leaves open the possibility that "these 'insider' bets have been placed by any rich person with good ears in DC."
"Not to mention that for all we know these administration clowns were probably gossiping about it on a text chain with half a dozen people they accidentally invited," Bernstein added. "This is hardly the locked lips brigade we’re dealing with."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Experts Pillory Trump Case for War on Iran: 'Flimsiest Excuse for Initiating a Major Attack' in Decades
"What they posed as the threat they were trying to preempt—an attack by Iran against US forces—is so extremely implausible, it is also laughable," said one analyst.
Mar 01, 2026
Senior Trump administration officials attempted during a briefing with reporters on Saturday to make their case for the joint US-Israeli military assault on Iran that has so far killed hundreds and plunged the Middle East into chaos.
According to experts who listened to the briefing, which was conducted on background, the justification for war was incredibly weak. Daryl Kimball, president of the Arms Control Association, told Laura Rozen of the Diplomatic newsletter that the administration's argument was "the flimsiest excuse for initiating a major attack on another country without congressional authorization, in violation of the UN Charter, in many decades."
During his early Saturday remarks announcing the attacks, President Donald Trump claimed that "imminent threats from the Iranian regime" against "the American people" drove him to act. But Kimball said that administration officials "provided absolutely no evidence" to back that assertion during the briefing.
"What they posed as the threat they were trying to preempt—an attack by Iran against US forces—is so extremely implausible, it is also laughable," said Kimball.
Following the start of Saturday's assault, which Trump explicitly characterized as a war aimed at overthrowing the Iranian government, unnamed administration officials began leaking the claim that Trump feared an Iranian attack on the massive US military buildup in the Middle East, prompting him to greenlight the bombing campaign in coordination with Israel and with a nudge from Saudi Arabia.
Kimball, in a social media post, took members of the US media to task for echoing the administration's narrative. "Reporters need to do more than stenography," he wrote in response to Punchbowl's Jake Sherman.
"The American people were lied to about Iraq. The American people are being lied to again today—and once again, it is ordinary people who will pay the price."
Trump and top administration officials also repeated the longstanding claim from US warhawks that Iran is bent on developing a nuclear weapon, something Iranian leaders have publicly denied—including during recent diplomatic talks. Neither US intelligence assessments nor international nuclear watchdogs have produced evidence indicating that Iran is moving rapidly in the direction of nukes, as claimed by the administration.
Rozen noted that some remarks from administration officials during Saturday's briefing "suggested Trump’s negotiators"—a team that included Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff—"may not have had the expertise or experience to understand the Iranian proposal to curb its nuclear program." Rozen reported that one administration official kept misstating the acronym for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog.
Trump administration officials, according to Rozen, seemed astonished that Iranian negotiators would not accept the US offer to provide free nuclear fuel "forever" for Iran's peaceful energy development, viewing the rejection as a suspicious indication that Iran was opposed to a diplomatic resolution—even though, according to Oman's foreign minister, Iran had already made concessions that went well beyond the terms of the 2015 nuclear accord that Trump abandoned during his first stint in the White House.
Experts said it should be obvious—particularly given Trump's decision to ditch the previous nuclear accord—why Iran would not trust the US to stick by such a commitment.
The administration's inability to provide a coherent justification for war tracks with the rapidly shifting narrative preceding Saturday's strikes—an indication, according to some observers, that Trump had made the decision to attack Iran even in the face of diplomatic progress and left officials to try to cobble together a rationale after the fact.
In a lengthy social media post, Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth insisted war was necessary because Iran "refused to make a deal" and because the Iranian government "has targeted and killed Americans," hardly the claim of an imminent threat push by the president and other administration officials.
Brian Finucane, a senior adviser to the US Program at the International Crisis Group, noted in response that the Trump administration has "sidelined anyone who could articulate... a coherent argument, partly because expertise is deep state and woke and partly because they just don't care."
The result is another potentially catastrophic war that runs roughshod over US and international law, puts countless civilians at risk, and threatens to spark a region-wide conflict.
"President Trump, along with his right-wing extremist Israeli ally Benjamin Netanyahu, has begun an illegal, premeditated, and unconstitutional war," US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement on Saturday. "Tragically, Trump is gambling with American lives and treasure to fulfill Netanyahu's decades-long ambition of dragging the United States into armed conflict with Iran."
"The American people were lied to about Vietnam. The American people were lied to about Iraq," Sanders added. "The American people are being lied to again today—and once again, it is ordinary people who will pay the price."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Democratic Leaders Face Backlash Over 'Cowardly' Responses to Trump War on Iran
"As we plunge headlong into another catastrophic war, Sen. Schumer and Rep. Jeffries’ throat-clearing and process critique only serves Trump and the war machine."
Mar 01, 2026
The top Democrats in the US Congress, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, faced backlash on Saturday over what critics described as tepid, equivocal responses to President Donald Trump's illegal assault on Iran—and for slowwalking efforts to prevent the war before the bombing began.
While both Democratic leaders chided Trump for failing to seek congressional authorization and not adequately briefing lawmakers on the details of Saturday's attacks, neither offered a full-throated condemnation of a military assault that has killed hundreds so far, including dozens of children, and hurled the Middle East into chaos.
Schumer (D-NY)—who infamously worked to defeat the 2015 nuclear deal that Trump later abandoned during his first White House term, setting the stage for the current crisis—said he "implored" US Secretary of State Marco Rubio to "be straight with Congress and the American people about the objectives of these strikes and what comes next."
"Iran must never be allowed to attain a nuclear weapon," he added, "but the American people do not want another endless and costly war in the Middle East when there are so many problems at home."
Jeffries (D-NY), a beneficiary of AIPAC campaign cash, said in his response to the massive US-Israeli assault that "Iran is a bad actor and must be aggressively confronted for its human rights violations, nuclear ambitions, support of terrorism, and the threat it poses to our allies like Israel and Jordan in the region."
"The Trump administration must explain itself to the American people and Congress immediately, provide an ironclad justification for this act of war, clearly define the national security objective, and articulate a plan to avoid another costly, prolonged military quagmire in the Middle East," said Jeffries.
The Democratic leaders' responses bolstered the view that their objections to Trump's attack on Iran are based on procedure, not opposition to war.
This is a disgusting and cowardly statement handwringing about process and the need for a briefing.
No you idiot. This war is a horror and a disaster and must be directly opposed. Any Democrat who can’t say that needs to resign and ESPECIALLY the ones in leadership. https://t.co/CdZoEyNkOy
— Krystal Ball (@krystalball) February 28, 2026
Claire Valdez, a New York state assemblymember who is running for Congress, said that "as we plunge headlong into another catastrophic war, Sen. Schumer and Rep. Jeffries’ throat-clearing and process critique only serves Trump and the war machine."
"Democrats should speak clearly and with one voice: no war," Valdez added.
Schumer and Jeffries both committed to swiftly forcing votes on War Powers resolutions in their respective chambers. But reporting last week by Aída Chávez of Capital & Empire indicated that top Democrats worked behind the scenes to slow momentum behind the resolutions, helping ensure they did not come to a vote before Trump launched the war.
"The preferred outcome of many AIPAC-aligned Senate Democrats, according to a senior foreign policy aide to Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, is that Trump acts unilaterally, weakening Iran while absorbing the domestic backlash ahead of the midterms," Chávez wrote.
Neither Schumer nor Jeffries backed legislation last year aimed at forestalling US military intervention in Iran.
The top Democrats' responses to Saturday's US-Israeli attacks on Iran, which Trump said would continue "uninterrupted" even after the killing of the nation's supreme leader, contrasted sharply with statements of rank-and-file congressional Democrats—and even some members of leadership—who condemned the president for shredding the Constitution and driving the US into another deadly war that the American public opposes.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who has been floated as a possible 2028 challenger to Schumer, said Saturday that "the American people are once again dragged into a war they did not want by a president who does not care about the long-term consequences of his actions."
"This war is unlawful. It is unnecessary. And it will be catastrophic," said Ocasio-Cortez. "This is a deliberate choice of aggression when diplomacy and security were within reach. Stop lying to the American people. Violence begets violence. We learned this lesson in Iraq. We learned this lesson in Afghanistan. And we are about to learn it again in Iran. Bombs have yet to create enduring democracies in the region, and this will be no different."
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), a vice chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, was more blunt.
"Congress must stop the bloodshed by immediately reconvening to exert its war powers and stop this deranged president," she said. "But let’s be clear: Warmongering politicians from both parties support this illegal war, and it will take a mass anti-war movement to stop it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


