This interview was conducted by Philipp W. Hildmann, managing director of the Bavarian Alliance for Tolerance in Bad Alexandersbad, Germany. He is a member of the Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Bavaria and the European Academy of Sciences and Arts.
Your Holiness, in 2014, following the death of Patriarch Ignatius Zakka I, you were elected as his successor as Patriarch of the Syriac Orthodox Church of Antioch and all the East. How many believers are you responsible for and which countries does your congregation cover?
The Syriac Orthodox Church is a “universal” church, which means that our followers are spread all over the world. Originally, our center was in Antioch. Now it is in Damascus. We have the most believers in the Middle East. But we also have over 100,000 followers in Germany, around 200,000 in Sweden, and also some in other European countries. Other members are in North and South America, Australia and India. In total, we have more than 6.5 million followers worldwide, including 1 to 1.5 million in Latin America and 3.5 million in India. But we are scattered all over the world.
What unites these many but widely scattered believers into one church? And what can you as Patriarch do for the unity of the universal Syriac Orthodox Church?
From the very beginning, our church was very broadly based with Greek, Syriac and Arabic-speaking people as part of our church. That is why we have historically had many diaspora communities in the Arab world and the Emirates. What unites people is faith and belonging to the oldest church after the early church in Jerusalem in uninterrupted apostolic succession from St. Peter onwards.
Personally, I try to be with my parishioners as much as possible. And we have synodal meetings, where the bishops from all over the world come together. They are the links to the faithful in the respective dioceses.
When you were elected Patriarch in March 2014, Syria had already been under the rule of the Assad clan for 44 years. A civil war had torn the country apart for three years. Even then, taking responsibility for the communities in Syria must not have been an easy task. How did the situation change during the civil war?
After my election as Patriarch, I had the opportunity not to go to Syria. I was very comfortable living in the United States. But I understood the election as a call from God in these very difficult times for the life of my church. And so I accepted the challenge, trusting in God’s grace and help, and went to Syria.
The Christians there were going through a difficult time. There were also bomb and drone attacks by the rebels around the seat of the Patriarchate in the Cathedral of St. George in Damascus, which was around two kilometers away. We heard the screams of children and elderly people. There were many victims.
Over time, the fighting became less intense and people felt safer again. But then we started to feel the effects of the sanctions, which were also destructive and—unlike the localized fighting—affected everyone equally in their daily lives. As a result, many people, especially Christians, began to leave Syria.
How would you respond to the criticism that the churches in Syria have been too close to the Assad regime? Has the church, or have you yourself, bowed too much to secular power?
Not really. The churches were not close to the regime, they were close to the people. And the Syrian people, not just the Christians, felt protected by the regime.
People like me, who initially looked at the war in Syria from the outside—in my case from the USA—were initially hopeful. Syria seemed to be getting a new face, which would hopefully be better for the people, because the old regime had many failures, shortcomings and mistakes, including the prohibition for people to articulate their identity, their language, their culture, if it was different from the Arab one, as in our case, the Syriac one. As far as our religion was concerned, we had complete freedom. But we lacked other freedoms.
We did not support the regime. I was actually always a very critical person. When I sat with the president, I addressed the difficult issues and didn’t sweep anything under the carpet. Like the fact that our people are suffering. For this reason, I have not been invited by him for the last four years, because he no longer wanted to hear what I had to tell him about the bad mood of the people and problems such as corruption in the government. So I would not consider myself or the churches as supporters of the regime.
With the overthrow of the Assad regime by the Islamist militias of Hayat Tahrir al Sham (HTS) and the takeover of power by Ahmed al-Sharaa, the situation in Syria has changed fundamentally since the end of 2024. Is the impression deceptive, or are many Christians in Syria (after initial euphoria) now living in even greater fear for their future?
I would say it’s not just the Christians in Syria. All Syrians are currently afraid. And I can assure you that these are also the feelings of other so-called minorities such as the Alawites, Shiites, Druze and even many Sunnis in Syria. They are worried because they don’t know what the future holds for them—what will happen in terms of the government, what kind of government we will have. Will it be a religious government that will implement Sharia law? Or will it be a civic, modern government, an equal representation that will represent a civic principle that we are all for?
Yes, the fear is there. Thank God, there have been no serious incidents of violence against Christians. But we have many incidents against Alawites and Shiites, which hurts us, because they are all Syrians and human beings. Many of them have been targeted because of their association with the Alawite religion of the former president. However, many of the Alawites are very poor people who did not benefit at all from the former regime. Only a few of them benefited; the majority had no advantages and were oppressed.
In any case, we are all very worried and don’t know how things will develop. That is why we need the international community, the European Union, the Americans, the United Nations and others to somehow accompany the people in Syria and, of course, the current Syrian government, whose members used to be part of extremist and violent groups. In any case, we welcome the changes that have now taken place. And we hope that the new rulers are sincere and will adopt a new, modern and civic way of governing. We welcome this and would like to work with them on this.
The situation is incredibly volatile in Syria at the moment. Between the time of our interview [during the Munich Security Conference in February 2025] and the publication of the printed version, many unexpected things will certainly have happened. But what is your assessment today? Will the situation of Christians develop away from the old, confessional system towards a more equal citizenship? Do you see any signs of this with the new rulers?
If we look back over the many years of the Assad regime, we did not apply the old Millet system in Syria at all, with the exception of civil law in the area of marriage and divorce, as well as inheritance law, etc. Otherwise, Syrian Christians were not subject to the old system. Syrian Christians were part of the government, public and political life of the country. What we do not want is the introduction of a confessional system of any kind, as in Lebanon, for example. That would not be helpful.
We demand equal rights and equal duties for us and for all Syrians, based on citizenship for all, a rule of law that applies equally to all, and a constitution in which all Syrians, regardless of their religious or ethnic background, feel that it is their constitution and that they are happy with it.
Would the role of the churches in this new Syria be more political or spiritual?
The role of the church is always a spiritual one. But you have to differentiate between a political role and the role of the churches for the common good and the public work of the churches, which is part of their mission. When we feed the hungry, when we defend the rights of the oppressed and exhort political leaders to do more for the people, that is not political in the strict sense. It’s part of our mission to protect people and to be there for them wherever possible, to address their problems, because that’s the only way to help them. This is not political. This is public work, public service to the people, and we will of course continue to do this.
Do you have any advice for Western political actors? How can they deal with the new Syrian leadership without abandoning their principles, but in such a way that their commitment fits both the tribal culture and the Islamic society of Syria?
What we have noticed is the rush by Western rulers to pander to the new de facto government, which was never elected by the citizens and never received a mandate from them. They appointed themselves. And the Western world has welcomed this, works with them and visits them. The fact that the Western rulers welcomed the fall of Assad was perfectly fine. But the fact that they are now legitimizing the new government, regardless of its lack of legitimacy in the Syrian context, regardless of the fact that the Syrian people have not said that this should now be their government, I consider that to be difficult.
I am very grateful to the West for its interest in this new Syria, and the easing of sanctions. But if I were to make a recommendation, please continue to observe what is happening in Syria. Note that Syria has one of two different paths ahead of it. Either Syria becomes a religious state where Sharia law applies and most people are just second-class citizens, or we give ourselves a new constitution and adopt it with new elections with equal rights for all people in Syria. Please make sure that we succeed on this path—for the benefit of all Syrians, not just the Christians.
What are your expectations of Christians in the world, in the West, in Europe? What do you expect from the ecumenical movement for Christians in Syria and in the region?
During the crisis in Syria, many, many Christians worldwide have prayed for our country, contacted us and offered us help. This was highly praised and we appreciated it very much. We would like Christians around the world to continue to keep Syria in their memories and prayers. And that they continue to stay in touch with us, with the Christians who have been living here in Syria for two thousand years. We need their engagement with the local churches.
It is a critical time. We do not need new churches, new denominations that are founded here with foreign help and tend to divide and weaken us as a Christian community. We need the support of those churches that have been at home here for two thousand years. We want to come together and unite, not be weakened. The main churches in Syria are working together and coordinating their responses to the new developments. And we expect our Western brothers and sisters to continue to support us on the way to a new Syria that is open, safe, and prosperous for all people in Syria.
We have been very active in the ecumenical movement for many decades. And we will continue to do so in the Middle East Council of Churches, the World Council of Churches and many other organizations, because we believe in the cohesion of Christians among themselves and hope for the support of our Western brothers and sisters.
His Holiness Moran Mor Ignatius Aphrem II, born Sa’id Karim in 1965, was enthroned as the 123rd Syriac Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch in Damascus in 2014. Prior to his election as Patriarch, he was Archbishop for the Eastern United States of America. Since then, he has travelled the world, devoting much time and energy to ecumenical and inter-religious dialogue as well as visiting the parishes of his global Church. He is the foremost advocate on behalf of Christian in the Middle East, the cradle auf Christinaity. He is a regular speaker at the Munic Security Conference.