-
Extensive controversy over the participation of Salim Dabboul, Assad’s secrets keeper, in the RIFNA campaign
Salim Dabboul’s involvement, son of the confidant of the Assad regime, Hafez Assad, and son of Bashar Assad, continues to generate debate and criticism on social media platforms and among the Syrian opposition. Dabboul, known for his close ties to the Assad family and previously dubbed the "Keeper of Hafez Assad’s secrets," is at the center of controversy regarding his role as a major financier and active participant in the "RIFNA" campaign, which opponents say is organized with the apparent intention of channeling stolen funds taken from the Syrian people.
According to independent reports, Dabboul participated in funding the campaign with millions of dollars collected from businessmen and traders across different regions of Syria. Questions remain about the source of these funds and how they were generated, with claims that they came through theft and smuggling. Supporters of the campaign justify it as a gesture of support for certain humanitarian and service initiatives.
In a notable incident, a delegation of businessmen from Deir Attiyeh attended the RIFNA campaign and donated ten million dollars, according to sources, with Salim Dabboul personally present. This donation was not mentioned in official media reports. Some analysts view this act as reflecting a mingling of money and influence, which distorts the concepts related to aid directed at the suffering Syrian population.
This raises deep questions about the intentions of those providing aid, whether these funds serve the interests of the people or are diverted into private accounts—similar to what happened with the sons of Hamsho, who invested their wealth derived from Syria’s blood trade.
Amid the absence of genuine accountability for the tainted financiers, observers continue to wonder how the regime’s apparatus and its followers react to such news. How do they justify the ongoing collection and funding of projects that appear to be a deceptive facade covering the regime’s deep-rooted corruption? Can this be described other than as participation within a corrupt network inherited across generations, reproducing the same dead and profiteering system amid the suffering of the Syrian people?
Ultimately, the question remains: How long will the funds continue to be stolen and redistributed into accounts of those undeserving, instead of being used as a means to rebuild Syria and alleviate its people’s suffering?
