It's silly to assume that this was not written prior to the current unrest in the Middle East and that Vogue though hey, let's published this today. The piece was thoughtful and largely unpolitical and gave a glimpse into the life of a woman who I found to be very different than initially expected. For example, she walks the streets largely without security and works arduously at her foundation. I think people should read the piece before leaping to conclusions and the quotable parts about her glamour are largely overblown. Maybe Vogue introducing people to things they aren't comfortable with is not the worst thing in the world.

If you want to talk about embarrassing and unfairly biased articles, you might want to think twice before calling the kettle black.

Mrs. Assad is a smart and educated woman who is doing a lot of good in her country, and the Vogue article describes many examples of this work . It also discusses some critiques in a balanced manner. Pointing out one anecdote in a long article to paint a "fair" picture of her, which is what you do here, is better?

Also, the "scattered protests" you refer to, if you read the link, are patently not against the government. There is a different attitude in Syria about the government's relationship to the people, and in many respects it is a very positive feeling. Despite the Western media's best efforts, there have been no protests against the government in Syria. Journalists that lump all countries in the Arab world together and try to force their established narrative onto them miss the point, and betray their naivete about the region.

This is in Vogue. Not FP. It's a profile piece on an impressive First Lady who's actually trying to make a difference in the region. Let's get a little perspective here, shall we?

...given everything more substantial that's going on in this world, and ahem, even in the U.S?

Vogue publishes "puff pieces"? You don't say. Is the Pope also Catholic?

And by the way, that video of a demo in Damascus that's hyperlinked to this non-story is the worst piece of damning evidence you could include, since it actually offers evidence that President Assad has popular support, and not the other way around.

Nice one, Foreign Policy!

David, I was in the middle of writing a response to your puff blog entry to point out that you 'accidently' cut out the section following the one you quoted where the first lady desrcibes exactly why she said this to the kid; and to point out that if you had done any research regarding Asma al-Assad you would have never compared her to Leila Trabelsi; but then I read other people's comment and realized that there is really no need to beat a dead horse.

Thank you though for pointing your readers to an article they might have otherwise missed. Glad you gave it further exposure.

The only embarrassing thing here is some people's continued instance that every piece of writing must be politicized, even if it happens to be in a fashion magazine.

stop with the propaganda pieces FP! You guys are going down the line of faux news!

David,

Do you realize that the text of the article from your link to the "Syrian Protests" completely contradicts what you're insinuating in your post?

From the Syria NewsWire:
"They chant 'the Syrian people will not be humiliated,' interspersed with, 'shame, shame' and 'with our soul, with our blood, we sacrifice for you Bashar.' That’s a very Syrian way of saying they were furious at the police, not the president. Also, note there was no chanting of “the people want the fall of the regime.'"

Might want to read before you mislead....

Puff piece? This vogue article highlights the life of one of the most charismatic individuals in the world's most volatile region. When I read the article I welcomed the informal look into the life of First Lady Assad and her family. Take this story for what it is...the profile of a woman who seeks prosperity and stability for her people.

This blog post is a journalistic low. Receiving a precise explanation of why you would write a piece like this is too much to expect, but what. at. all! made you think that there was even a scintilla of validity in your piece? It is repugnant that you would chop the quote about closing Massar to fit a narrow evil-minded context. When you look at the author's recount of the visit to Massar, the context is clear:

...After lunch, Asma al-Assad drives to the airport, where a Falcon 900 is waiting to take her to Massar in Latakia, on the coast. When she lands, she jumps behind the wheel of another SUV waiting on the tarmac. This is the kind of surprise visit she specializes in, but she has no idea how many kids will turn up at the community center on a rainy Friday.

As it turns out, it’s full. Since the first musical notation was discovered nearby, at Ugarit, the immaculate Massar center in Latakia is built around music. Local kids are jamming in a sound booth; a group of refugee Palestinian girls is playing instruments. Others play chess on wall-mounted computers. These kids have started online blood banks, run marathons to raise money for dialysis machines, and are working on ways to rid Latakia of plastic bags. Apart from a few girls in scarves, you can’t tell Muslims from Christians.

Asma al-Assad stands to watch a laborious debate about how—and whether—to standardize the Arabic spelling of the word Syria. Then she throws out a curve ball. “I’ve been advised that we have to close down this center so as to open another one somewhere else,” she says. Kids’ mouths drop open. Some repress tears. Others are furious. One boy chooses altruism: “That’s OK. We know how to do it now; we’ll help them.”

Then the first lady announces, “That wasn’t true. I just wanted to see how much you care about Massar.”

As the pilot expertly avoids sheet lightning above the snow-flecked desert on the way back, she explains, “There was a little bit of formality in what they were saying to me; it wasn’t real. Tricks like this help—they became alive, they became passionate. We need to get past formalities if we are going to get anything done.”...

Even before that butchering, how you dismissed Mrs. Al-Assad and implied that there is nothing more to this piece beyond bling and largesse is astounding. A ruling family that lives in the neighborhood among their countrymen, a president and first lady who drive themselves around their country, and a first lady who operates with focus, deliberation and determination to work to improve the lives of the people of Syria - and all you can do is attack from your keyboard.

Do not call yourself a journalist or blogger. Hater is the only title that you deserve.

Most of the targeted readers in Vogue, have no idea of international public policy or diplomacy, and I think this piece was just fine in giving readers an insightful taste on First Lady Assad and her family and background. She is glamorous, and the issue was the "Power Issue". It was an refreshing change to have an article about politics, and even more taboo for a typical Vogue reader, international politics (gasp) showing that a woman can take her role of power, and present something inspiring, all while wearing Chanel. She is advocating for her people, and striving to maintain peace in her country, something that should not be described as "fluff" but should be kept for the targeted audience - vogue readers to judge.

meant to bolster Syria’s first lady in the eyes of gullible Western readers. It makes sound like she is the only educated and open-minded person in the middle of a “desert” savages. The truth is she married the son of a brutal dictator. Her husband continues to oppress his people to the point they are terrified of even chanting for the fall of the regime.

To say that I agree with the majority of the posts on here which think your piece was a lot more Puff than the Vogue article..Ms Asma Al Assad is boon to her country and her work is insightful, much needed and on the right track...Your selective quote which conveniently left out the context of her "trick" says it all...While I am glad all these dictators in our region are tumbling down this is one dictatorship that is using its iron fist to gently guide their nation towards a better future...let them finish opening the people's minds before they let them open their mouths..

Maybe if she steps out of her thousand dollar Louboutin shoes for a short moment and gives a bit more time to the media-less reality of her country she would be more helpful to her husband.
The problem with this new wave of first ladies, following the model of Queen Rania, is that they are more concerned about their own personal image as stars and "wonder women" leading their hubbies, than about the realities of their countries and the modesty of their people.

Today Aisha Ghaddafi, tommorrow this lady.

The Syrian regime has pilfered its people of Billions of $$$ for 40yrs, rivaling the Mubarak and Gaddafi's of the world. Their atrocities are only rivaled by Saddam in the region.

Glorify these fools for now, the people of Syria and its diaspora expelled are waiting for the baton to be passed. To believe the yes men of this regime and the rosy picture they have painted what a sham. The people are tip toeing the line, waiting to achieve critical mass to erupt. Dont take my word, read the numerous dissidents now speaking openly against the regime...the fear will be broken.

A 'puff piece'

In a fashion magazine?

Never.

I think the post is really just trying to say that this was a risky editorial decision at Vogue. Vogue is a fashion magazine and tries to avoid politically controversial matters - and thus this piece tries not to focus on politics. However, current events have not been so kind to Vogue's editorial calendar and intentions. Topics related even tangential to sitting governments in the Middle East are now incredibly vulnerable to misinterpretation or being misconstrued; they are inherently risky for editors. But, seems Vogue decided to run the piece anyways, probably not having an alternate on hand (I'd assume). Seems like a simple and straightforward point about Vogue and not necessarily one about the first lady.

I don't watch this region very closely, but a colleague recently sent me an interesting piece that argued Assad's regime is very rickety. In his 10 years in power he's been very tactically adept in managing day-to-day crises, all the while structural tensions are building up. I'll try and find this piece and post later. No doubt he's losing the business community now that he's issuing bonds at interest rates lower than inflation. How many crucial allies does he have left?

I could not agree more with Guyver and Phaedrus2, although having spent a year in Syria as a student, I think it is more the regime and security forces at large that is more oppressive and rules with an iron fist; I get the impression Bash closes his eyes to it, and justifys any actions by being determined not to let go of what his father built. All of my international phone calls were listened in on by security forces during my time in Damascus; how interesting can "Hi darling, how was your day? I miss you." be?!

As admirable as Asma's efforts are, they will get no where unless her husband encourages the slow and gradual political and economic liberalisation that will bring Syria out of the dark, corrupt ages in which it is fermenting. The poverty and oppression is second only to Egypt, from what I've seen and experienced. From what I understand of talking to Syrians, broadly the people support Bashar, but hate the regime. This is a most important distinction. The almost sole reason why this is the case, is that many Syrians remember the frightening days under his father - so to many, Bashar really has brought in new freedoms and is a damn sight better than Hafiz. However, what many Syrians fail to see (and trying some of them doesn't work - I've tried!) is how much better and progressive their lives and political system could be, even under Bashar.

I would like to reiterate that my views above, and the views of others I have expressed are those of only the individuals I have encountered. Every society contains vastly differing opinions. I did indeed meet people who were vehemently against the regime and Bashar, but I felt them to be in the minority. Not only that, but those who expressed such opinions were solely young adults and very well-educated, and spent much of their time reading Western political analysis in English - and therefore were able to align their views with what some describe as "the Free World".

I, as a naive and young player of the Middle east analysis game, hope that Bashar, with his strong connections to the UK and parliamentary democracy, believes that a broadly democratic parliamentary system needs to and will be introduced in Syria, but perhaps believes that Syrian society is not yet ready for it, after the years of terror under his father. What is in no doubt is how the ruling elite and the living remainder of his father's cronies are not and never will be ready for such democratic freedoms; so the question remains, will Bashar bring Syria into a democratic age, and how far will he go to achieve it?

It really makes no difference whether or not the profile was agreed to before or since the protests in the Middle East. It doesn't change the fact that Mrs. Assad is married to a dictator who is responsible for thousands of deaths in both Syria and Lebanon . . . any human rights website (Amnesty, Human Rights Watch, etc.) will say as much. The Syrian regime is one of the most repressive in the Middle East. Why anyone thought this article would ever be a good idea is beyond me.

Apparently the US ambassador to Egypt, Ms Scobey, is going to be charged with crimes in Egypt for when her driver, a former Egyptian security official, drove the ambassador's white truck through a crowd of protesters, killing several of them.

The video of this incident is horrid- you can hear bones breaking at the truck guns it through people. It sounds like a bear running through a grove of samplings- crack crack crack crack crack.

That is the sound of the American empire. Syria's Baathist party was installed by the CIA decades ago. The Baathists are dominated by the Alawi, a tiny Shia sect who colloborated with foreign powers to get an upper hand over the majority Sunni population. They are mafia more adept at suppression and oppression than most states. Torture and disappearance is common in Syria.

This is America's legacy for the Muslim world- crack crack crack crack crack.

The West is indeed at war with Islam and has been for some time.

FP was kind enough to only quote that paragraph. Aside from the shallowness and the astonishing stupidities, two issues struck me!
Mrs al Assad should know better than to expose her kids to the media!
All for an over-theatrical piece of false modesty in order to reassure herself of her superficial stardom needs! Shame!
And with her westernized I know it all, know better and will fix you poor ignorant people, she is on the verge of working against herself (and her husband) .

Taking on Vogue magazine? Really?

You do a disservice to yourself, FP and its readers.

People are accusing this author of blowing the Vogue piece out of proportion, but they do the same in their commentary.

I think it is profoundly unwise for any magazine to speak well of a member of a repressive ruling family in any Arab nation, regardless of how kindly that individual may be. And we should all keep in mind that these sorts of puff pieces at times have tendrils leading back to regime PR activities. This article seems incredibly poorly timed, and casts a shadow on Vogue's editorial process.

Beyond that, whatever. I'm sure Mrs. Assad is a perfectly nice person when she's not ripping the hearts out of young children to prove a point.

you wouldn't like this article, which shows an untrue side of a deeply repressed society that is ruled by a clan and is called a "republic" at the same time.

Perhaps Vogue should've asked Mrs Assad about Tal El Mallouh, the 19-year-old blogger who has been sentenced to 5 years in jail after a dubious trial by a military court.

http://is.gd/sko84f

They unblocked Facebook and Twitter the other day, and started rounding up bloggers two days afterwards.

The Syrian leadership is head over heels with this campaign - it actually is not Vogue who sought it. As one comment said above, why a Vogue reader would give a toss about Mideast politics/power?

It's a trend: Vogue article, Syrian School documentary series by the BBC, and what's next? Oprah episode about how Syria is "secular"?

The Syrian regime has played in the past the card of alliance against Saddam and then terrorism to get the US enticed; now they're playing the card of "tolerance" and "moderation" - of which Mrs Al-Assad and her husbands are reportedly champions.

The Syrian leaders also do not understand that the quick sand of the middle east started to move already and going on like this won't help.

I think that it is unfortunate that this piece emerged with such bad timing, however, I agree with many of the posters who suggest that it is in bad taste as well. These leaders are all in love with their public image, and just want to hear that they are doing a good job so that they themselves can rationalize the fact that they are mafia or married to the mob. Otherwise, they could not look themselves in the mirror. Asad puts an arms length relationship between him and the torture and persecution that happens in his country as though since he is not directly responsible that he does not carry the burden of overall responsibility. The First Lady is making up for the failures of her husband, so the worse a job he does, the better she looks helping the more and more disadvantaged and underprivileged manufactured by her husband's non-governance and lousy leadership. As long as they focus on what they are doing that they think is positive, and at the same time not allow the crimes that they are accomplices to to set into their conscience, they can sleep at night, and the stealing, torture, oppression will continue laundered by the good deeds of helping orphans (some of whom perhaps were created by the regime directly or indirectly), the poor (manufactured by corruption, mismanagement and poor leadership) and the youth (who face unemployment and no future thanks to the regime). So, they will sit at home and say we are better than those who came before us, and better than those who would come after us, so we can sit pretty and pretend we are royalty. Then one day their doors will get kicked in and they will suddenly remember all of the important issues they pretended was not their doing.

Contrary to what David Kenner said in his piece, I found the Vogue Magazine article very interesting in this very moment of change in the Middle East. It gave me a human touch on my perception of the Syrian leadership. It is always noteworthy to know about others from their perspective and to not obscure ourselves to our perception of them which reveals sometimes inaccurate.

Moreover, Mr. Kenner mingled between the Arab regimes, and did not mentioned that resents revolts in the Middle East took place against our allies there and not against those who consider themselves as ‘rejectionist’, like Syria. Therefore, one should think whether the problem lies on the Arab regime or on our support of regimes that do not represent their people.

Finally, I personally admire the great job the first lady of Syria’s doing in her country; especially her considerable efforts to develop the life of poor people in rural areas and enhancing the quality of education for children. I think we should praise the good work of others even if we differ with them on opinion.

I found Max Fisher piece very assaultive and aggressive. Fisher appears naive to blame Syria for all the troubles in the region. Someone should remind him that Israel occupies parts of Syria and Lebanon and not the other way around. He also needs to ask any Lebanese elementary school student to learn that Hezbollah is a resistant movement that stands against the Israeli occupation of part of Lebanon. Furthermore, Hezbollah represents a considerable segment of the Lebanese society, and therefore, it is really insulting to considerer it as a terrorist organization or to assimilate it to Al-Qaeda.

Moreover, Fisher said that President Bush dubbed Syria as fourth member of his “axis of evil” without mentioning that almost all the disasters that we are witnessing today in the Middle-East are the consequences of Bush’s wise policies.

The sad point of Fisher’s piece is the fact he never mentioned some of the good things the First Lady of Syria has done for her country, such as opening financing sources for the poor, working on developing the rural areas, enhancing the status of women, countering the illiteracy among women, focusing on improving the children education… It seems like Fisher’s goal is only to vilify Syria at all cost.

However, I am happy to learn from this article that the Washington foreign policy community, despite its very busy schedule, has some time to read Vogue Magazine.

Asma is the "best first lady" in the whole region, and it's the jealousy and the dark hate that drive such low comments that is unfair and baselessis toward such intelligent and creative woman who is doing all that possible to help her country and to raise the level of thinking of the new generation.

For unexperience people I say, I know just managing small business that some employees try to take advantages and no loyalty, how about running a country in that region ! Oh, my God, I would have heart attack the first day on the job, I don't know how they do it !

Definitely, a lot need to be done better by the first family, and hope they'll listen to the people demand, and search for real loyal, honest people around them to clean the mess before it is too late.

Nothing new above, just the usual pro Zionist anti Syrian rabble who doubtless would be gratified to see a positive report of Israel’s first lady even though Israel has killed, wounded, and imprisoned without trial many more of its subjects in the last 10 years than Syria has, and actually Israel holds more political prisoners than Syria. But why should should the Zionists and their rent-boys trouble themselves with facts.