Rojava and the Battle for Truth: Media, Power, and the Politics of Narrative

PUKMEDIA

Abbass Abdulrazzaq

Written by Abbass Abdulrazzaq, retired university professor and a veteran journalist.

Translated by Sharo Abbas

Introduction: When Truth Becomes a Battlefield

The recent developments in Rojava are not merely another episode in Syria’s protracted conflict. They represent a revealing moment in the struggle over truth itself. In contemporary conflicts, battles are no longer fought solely on the ground; they are increasingly waged in the media sphere, where narratives compete, facts are contested, and political legitimacy is constructed or dismantled.

In this context, the recent events in Rojava exposed a structural crisis in Syrian state media and its affiliated platforms. This crisis manifested in the distortion of facts, the exclusion of independent journalism, and the systematic misrepresentation of Kurdish identity. At the same time, Kurdish media outlets emerged as influential actors, capable of shaping alternative narratives and mobilising regional and international public opinion.


1. Syrian Media and the Logic of Power

From the outset of the recent escalation, Syrian state media adopted a singular and centralised narrative, closely aligned with official political discourse. Independent journalists and international media were largely denied access to areas under the control of the Autonomous Administration, limiting the possibility of direct observation and verification.

This approach should not be interpreted merely as a professional failure, but rather as a deliberate political strategy. Within authoritarian systems, media often functions not as a platform for public debate, but as an instrument of control, designed to manage perceptions and maintain ideological coherence.

By framing Kurdish political actors as security threats or separatist elements, Syrian media sought to depoliticise Kurdish demands and delegitimise their historical and social context. This narrative was reinforced, to varying degrees, by several regional and international media outlets, including major Arabic-language networks, whose coverage often reflected selective framing rather than comprehensive analysis.

Simultaneously, digital disinformation networks affiliated with armed factions played a crucial role in amplifying polarising narratives, spreading misinformation, and reshaping public perception through coordinated campaigns.

2. Media as Symbolic Violence

The dynamics of media coverage in Rojava illustrate what sociologist Pierre Bourdieu described as “symbolic violence”: a form of domination exercised through language, representation, and discourse rather than direct physical coercion.

Through selective reporting, semantic framing, and discursive exclusion, Kurdish communities were portrayed not as political subjects with legitimate grievances, but as objects of suspicion and securitisation. This discursive practice contributed to the normalisation of violence against them and to the moral justification of military actions undertaken by various armed groups.

In this sense, media did not merely reflect the conflict; it actively participated in its reproduction by shaping the categories through which violence was understood and legitimised.

3. Independent Voices and Human Rights Documentation

Against this backdrop, independent journalists, activists, and human rights organisations attempted to challenge the dominant narrative. Their efforts were crucial in documenting violations, providing alternative accounts, and preserving a space for factual inquiry within a highly politicised environment.

The role of human rights monitoring bodies, as well as individual researchers and journalists, was particularly significant in producing evidence-based reports that countered official discourse. By reframing events as human rights issues rather than purely security concerns, these actors contributed to a more nuanced understanding of the conflict.


4. Kurdish Media and the Construction of a Counter-Narrative

The increasing presence of Kurdish media on the ground marked a turning point in the informational dimension of the conflict. Kurdish outlets deployed correspondents to frontlines, displacement camps, and civilian areas, producing a continuous flow of firsthand reports.

Their coverage was characterised by several key features:
• Field-based reporting, prioritising direct observation over secondary sources.
• Human-centered storytelling, focusing on civilian experiences rather than military rhetoric.
• Visual documentation, using images and videos to challenge official narratives.
• Narrative coherence, linking individual suffering to broader political structures.

Through these practices, Kurdish media succeeded in articulating a counter-narrative that highlighted the scale of abuses committed by armed factions operating under the banner of the Syrian Arab Army, as well as the role of regional and international actors in legitimising these forces.


5. Shifts in International Perception

As visual and textual evidence from Rojava circulated across digital platforms and international media, perceptions of the Kurdish issue began to shift. Kurds were increasingly portrayed not merely as political actors in a fragmented civil war, but as communities subjected to systematic violence within a complex geopolitical framework.

Kurdish media played a decisive role in this transformation by reframing the conflict in moral and humanitarian terms, thereby challenging the legitimacy of dominant political narratives.


6. Media and the Politics of Kurdish Identity

Parallel to the media struggle, Kurdish regions witnessed large-scale demonstrations, humanitarian initiatives, and expressions of political unity. These developments were not separate from media dynamics; they were deeply intertwined with them.

Media became a central mechanism for articulating Kurdish political identity, transforming collective emotions into political discourse and public mobilisation. Images of displaced families, grieving mothers, and children raising symbols of freedom became powerful representations that transcended local boundaries and resonated with global audiences.


7. The Paradox of Official Discourse

A striking paradox emerged when Syrian official media issued statements only after Kurdish media had already established a strong presence on the ground and shaped public discourse.

These statements appeared less as attempts to clarify facts and more as efforts to regain narrative control in a context where informational monopoly had already been broken.

While Kurdish media documented human suffering in real time, official discourse remained trapped in the logic of political justification and symbolic dominance.


8. Rojava as a Model of Contemporary Media Conflict

The case of Rojava illustrates a broader phenomenon in the Middle East: conflicts are increasingly fought through narratives as much as through weapons.

Media has become:
• A tool of political domination.
• A space for the construction of identities.
• A mechanism for legitimising or exposing violence.

Rojava thus represents a microcosm of the struggle between state-centered narratives and popular counter-narratives, between official discourse and human-centered storytelling.


Conclusion: Media as a Form of Symbolic Resistance

The experience of Rojava demonstrates that the media is no longer a neutral observer in times of conflict. It is an active participant in shaping reality, defining legitimacy, and determining whose suffering is visible and whose is erased.

Despite limited resources, Kurdish media managed to disrupt dominant narratives and assert an alternative vision of the conflict. In doing so, it revealed a fundamental truth: in modern conflicts, power is not defined solely by military strength, but by the ability to control meaning.

Ultimately, the question is no longer who controls territory, but who controls the narrative.
And in the struggle over narratives, the future is at stake.