Archive for the ‘coverage of foreign events’ Category
Tuesday, April 16th, 2013
(developing story)
The international news media willingly, and almost casually, reported that Nicolás Maduro, the Chavista presidential candidate in Venezuela, had been “elected” president in the elections held on April 14, when if they had only taken the effort to look into the facts they might at most have reported that the National Elections Council (four of whose five members are reputed Chavista ideologues) had declared Maduro the winner by the thinnist of nargins (1,7%, which represents some 230,000 votos out of a total of almost 15 million valid votes case), while his opponent Enrique Capriles had accused Maduro of widesspread fraud, and demanded a recount vote by vote. If they had inwquire even further, they might have also reported that the declaration of Maduro as president occurred well before all of thevotes hadbeen counted.
El Pais,one of the leading papers in the world, reported–almost alone–the details of Capriles’ charges:
Capriles and his command have pointed to evidence of some of the irregularities which have been formally denounced this Monday before the electoral authorities. Among them are photographs that show “assisted voting” by Chavista observers, who watched over the voters and indicated to them in front of the voting machine who they should vote for. He said that the obsrvers from the opposition were expelled by force, in some cases using firearms, from 183 voting centers; that he possessed reports of 535 voting machines which were damaged furing the voting process, which affected the votes of some 700,000 voters; that it is calculated that there are 600,000 voters who have died but who are still registered on the voting lists; and that in some voting centers the (Chavista) candidate Maduro obtained up to 500% more votes than did the deceased Chavez in the presidential elections of October, 2012. when he obtained his fourth re-election. “Who can blieve that Maduro has been able to obtain more votes in a votng center than Chavez?” Capriles asked, showing the offical registy of hundreds of recorded voting tallies where this result was produced.
The full Spanish text is as follows:
Capriles y su comando han enseñado las pruebas de algunas de las irregularidades que han sido denunciadas formalmente este lunes ante la autoridad electoral. Entre ellas, fotografías que muestran el “voto asistido” por testigos chavistas, que vigilaban a los electores y les indicaban frente a la máquina de votación por quién sufragar. Dijo que los testigos de la oposición fueron expulsados por la fuerza, en algunos casos utilizando armas de fuego, de 183 centros electorales. Que posee reportes de 535 máquinas de votación dañadas durante el proceso, que afectaron el voto de unos 700 mil electores. Que se calcula que hay 600 mil electores ya fallecidos y aún registrados en el padrón electoral. Y que en algunos centros, el candidato Maduro obtuvo hasta 500% más escrutinios de los que obtuvo el fallecido presidente Chávez en las presidenciales de octubre de 2012, donde logró su cuarta reelección. “¿Quién puede creer que Maduro haya podido sacar en un centro de votación más votos que Chávez”, preguntó Capriles, mostrando el registro de cientos de actas donde se produjo este resultado.
–See Maye Primera (Miami,”Capriles suspende las protestas tras los siete muertos por enfrentamientos; El líder opositor venezolano insiste en la auditoría de las elecciones presidenciales y llama a sus seguidores a “recogerse” de las calles para evitar estallidos de violencia; También ha pedido diálogo para solventar la crisis política que atraviesa Venezuela,” El Pais, 17 de abril de 2013 (1:26 CET)
Given Maduro’s massive drop in the polls in the last weeks of the election (10-14%), Capriles’ harges, which are extremely serious, appear to be plausible.
In fact, looking at all of the factors in play, it is hard to escape the conclusion that there is a very strong possibility that Maduro and the Chavistas are trying to steal the election by fraud, and to avoid an accurante recount by virture of the fact that they currently control the key state instiutions, including the Electoral Commission and the Supreme Court.
The Trenchant Observer
Tags: Chavista, electoral fraud, Enrique capriles, hugo chaves, legitimacy, National elections council, Nicolas Maduro, seizure of power, Venezuealan, Venezuela, Venezuela elections April 14, Venezuelan electorl council
Posted in corruption, coverage of foreign events, Dimming Vision of World Affairs, elections, foreign correspondents, foreign news coverage, Latin America, South America, State Department Legal Adviser, Venezuela | No Comments »
Thursday, November 22nd, 2012
DRAFT–developing
Intelligence agencies use deception as a standard operating procedure. CIA operations are by nature secret, and intelligence agencies go to great lenghts to keep them secret, even if their existence sometimes may be leaked if it suits the president’s purposes.
It should come as no surprise, therefore, that the reporting by American reporters on the Benghazi attacks has been mostly based on off-the-record interviews with administration officials, and that the latter have presented their revelations and confirmations in ways which pursue their own objectives, on background, usually on deep background where even the agency of the source is not revealed. Such reporters seem quite content to simply pass on the latest “revelations”, without vetting them against other known facts and statements. Often, it does not add up.
The constantly evolving narrative of the CIA “talking points” used by Susan Rice on the Sunday talk shows on September 16 illustrates the confusion of such spinning by intelligence officials whose modus operandi is deception and secrecy. First we learn that the so-called talking points were drafted by the CIA. Then we learn they were changed by someone, but all the intelligence chiefs testified that they didn’t know by whom. Then we learn that the CIA draft was not changed by the intelligence agencies, but sent up to the NSC Deputies Committee. Wednesday we learn that the DNI now says that they edited the talking points, as did other agencies.
None of the edits were necessary for national security reasons, in the original opinion of the CIA. Intelligence officials on background justify their edits on the grounds that leaving in the references to al-Queda affiliates and sympathizers would have revealed methods and sources, thereby revealing methods and sources.
On Wedneday, Susan Rice reiterates that she only told the talk shows what was in the talking points. The media fail to point out that she also included references in her statements on those shows to “armed individuals” and “small groups of armed individuals” in an effort to stress the disorganized nature of the attack, when such presumably classified information was not in her “talking points”.
The first duty of a journalist used to be to get to the bottom of things, to sort out all the conflicting evidence and tell the audience what it means, not simply to pass it on. The Washington press corps has, by and large, failed to get to the bottom of things. That is why, two months and 11 days after the attacks at Benghazi, we the public still don’t know for sure exactly what happened, or exactly what the CIA black operation was doing in Benghazi.
Were they providing arms to the Syrian rebels?
The press has failed, spectacularly, to provide an answer to this question, which lies at the heart of the Benghazi affair.They have done so, presumably, because they were asked to withhold those details by the Obama administration’s intelligence agencies. With very few and limited exceptions, the fact that they have published no further details about the CIA’s black operation in Benghazi demonstrates the extent to which the Washington press corps has become a servile instrument of the Obama administration’s foreign policy.
The fact that the administration was able to control the media’s reporting of the CIA’s black operation in Benghazi should be a matter of extraordinary concern to citizens of a free country who are utterly dependent on a free press, and a free press which to be meaningful must aggressively seek out and publish the facts even when the government wants to keep them secret.
Indeed, more broadly, there has been precious little fundamental criticism of Obama’s foreign policies and the details and quality of their implementation.
What were the CIA’s operatives doing in Benghazi?
The answer is of overriding importance for the development and implementation of an effective U.S. foreign policy. From a policy perspective, there is a fundamental question of whether the nation’s interests have been served by Obama’s covert operations relating to Syria, or would have been better served by an open and public policy of support for those forces in Syria who are seeking to bring to an end al-assad’s barbarism, involving widespread commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Such attacks have not been seen in a modern state at least since the Balkan wars of the 1990′s, and possibly since the atrocities of the German Nazi state of Adolph Hitler before and during World War II.
Some 40,000 Syrians have died as a result of the inaction of the international community, and the failure of leadership of the Obama administration. Obama has even blocked the efforts of other states to bring force to bear to halt Bashar al-Assad’s assault on the civilization and people of Syria.
Quite simply, the United States has failed to lead, and whatever beneficial results it has achieved through covert operations have come at a heavy cost. The Saudi defense minister is reportedly playing a key role in coordinating the covert supply of weapons to the Syrian opposition, just as he did with respect to supplying the insurgents in Afghanistan in the 1980′s following the Soviet invasion of that country, when he was ambassador to Washington. We are still dealing with the “blowback” from that operation, as the war in Afghanistan grinds on in its 11th year.
It should come as no surprise that Islamist groups are benefitting from this arrangement at the expense of more secular groups. This is a direct result of the U.S. pursuit of a covert policy in Syria, instead of an open policy that might have led to early confrontation with al-Assad and the saving of tens of thousands of lives.
The spill-over effects of this covert war are being felt throughout the region. Hamas was emboldened by the visit of the leader of Qatar in recent weeks. A looming confrontation between Syria and Turkey, with NATO involvement in supplying Patriot missiles to Turkey while Russia vehemently objects, demonstrations in Jordan including calls for the end of the monarchy, and a continuing threat against the independence of Lebanon, are only some of the knock-on effects of Obama’s covert policy and lack of leadership on Syria. In the
The foreign policy of the United States towards Syria should be debated in public, and carried out in public.
The press has a crtical role to play in guaranteeing that this occurs. Its job is to search out the truth and to report it to its readers and its electronic audience. That truth, and only that truth, can guide the nation in choosing a wise and effective foreign policy.
The Trenchant Observer
Tags: armed individuals small groups of armed individuals, attacks on bengazi, Barack Obama, Bashar al-Assad, Benghazi, cia black operation in Benghazi, cia operatives in benghazi, cia talkking points, David Petraeus, duty of journalkists, duty of reporters, duty of the press, duty to get to the bottom of things, evotlution of talking points narrative, Free press, other classified information, revelaing methods and sources, supply of weapons to syria from benghazi, susan rice, syria, talking points, talking points narrative, U.S. press, U.S. reporters
Posted in Afghanistan, Barack Obama, CIA, coverage of foreign events, Crimes Against Humanity, Dimming Vision of World Affairs, Egypt, electronic curtain, extrajudicial execution, foreign correspondents, foreign news coverage, freedom of speech, Intelligence, internal supporters of human rights, Iran, Israel, kosovo, Lebanon, Libya, Middle East, NATO, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, State Department, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, Taliban, targeted assassinations, targeted killings, television, Torture, Turkey, U.N. Security Council, U.S Foreign Relations, U.S. Congress, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, U.S. news coverage, United States, use of force, war crimes | No Comments »
Monday, November 5th, 2012
Latest Reports and Opinion
Adam Housley, “Exclusive: Security officials on the ground in Libya challenge CIA account,” Fox News, November 3, 2012.
Jennifer Rubin, “Obama’s legacy: The blunder in Benghazi,”
Washington Post, November 5, 2012 (12:20 ET). Rubin cites the Lake and Bing articles cited below.
Eli Lake, “Ansar al-Sharia’s Role in Benghazi Attacks Still a Mystery;The U.S. didn’t consider Ansar al-Sharia a threat—until they showed up in Benghazi on Sept. 11,” The Daily Beast, November 5, 2012 (4:45 a.m. EST).
Bing West, “Cynicism Confirmed,” National Review Online, November 3, 2012 (5:59 P.M).
Brett Baier, “CBS Held Damaging Obama Benghazi Tape: What President Obama really said in that ’60 Minutes’ interview about Benghazi,” Fox Nation, November 5, 2012.
The Intelligence Failure in Benghazi, and Beyond
Lake reports that the U.S. was not following Ansar al-Sharia before September 11, as follows:
Before the attacks, the U.S. intelligence community didn’t consider Ansar al-Sharia a threat to American interests, and the group wasn’t a priority target for the CIA officers monitoring jihadists in Libya, according to U.S. intelligence officials with knowledge of the investigations into the Benghazi attacks.
This assertion underlies a fundamental weakness in U.S. intelligence capabilities: As the CIA has become increasingly focused on conducting drone strikes and preparing kill lists, it has also increasingly failed to adequately perform its core mission, which is to collect and disseminate intelligence information that serves the strategic interests of the United States.
One need only reflect on the intelligence debacle which led to the Khost tragedy, where a CIA commander lacking field experience was responsible for the poor tradecraft that enabled a double agent to penetrate to the core of the outpost and explode his suicide vest, without being searched.
See
The Trenchant Observer, “Intelligence Matters: CIA Capabilities in Afghanistan, March 20, 2010.
The Trenchant Observer, “Intelligence Matters: Khost, The Flynn Report, and a Few Hypotheses,” March 17, 2010.
Over and over, the U.S. has been blindsided by developments which the CIA and other intelligence agencies should be picking up but aren’t. The Ansar al-Sharia attack on the Benghazi consulate in the only the latest example.
The sheer incompetence of the intelligence failure at Benghazi, when there was a CIA operatilon based right there reportedly tasked with monitoring jihadist groups in Libya, is staggering.
Questions Regarding the Incompetence of the Security Precautions in Place on September 11
Second, a number of questions have been raised regarding the adequacy of the security forces and precautions in place in Benghazi, and the denial by the Obama administration of repeated and urgent requests for more protection.
One aspect is of particular significance. A striking fact about Ambassador Stevens’ death was that he was reportedly in the “safe room” at the Consulate, but nonetheless succumbed to smoke inhalation. Housley reports,
One former Special Op now employed by a private company in Benghazi said that even the safe room wasn’t properly set up. He said “the safe room is one of the first measures you take” and that he is “not sure how you can set a safe room without fire suppression and ventilation in case of fire.” He also said, “Ambassador Stevens would likely be alive today if this simple and normal procedure was put into place.”
Questions Regarding the Incompetence of the Response
A third issue is raised by the incompetence of the responses of American officials to the impending and then ongoing attack. Security officials were reportedly aware of roadblocks being set up hours before the attack. The attack itself, according to sources on the ground, began at least an hour before the time stated by the administration. See Housley.
The Manipulation of the Truth
A fourth issue involves the very obvious manipulation of the truth by the Obama administration in statements to the American people about what had occurred at Benghazi. See the Trenchant Observer articles cited above.
Of particular note are Obama’s words in the third presidential debate on October 22 denying any misrepresentation, when he stated he had characterized the attack on the Consulate as a terrorist attack in his comments in the Rose Garden on September 12.
On rebuttal, Obama seemed rehearsed, but indignant. “The day after the attack, Governor, I stood in the Rose Garden, and I told the American people and the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened, that this was an act of terror… And the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the secretary of state, our U.N. ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we’ve lost four of our own, Governor, is offensive. That’s not what we do. That’s not what I do as president. That’s not what I do as commander in chief (emphasis added).”
–Brett Baier, “CBS Held Damaging Obama Benghazi Tape: What President Obama really said in that ’60 Minutes’ interview about Benghazi,” Fox Nation (Fox News), November 5, 2012.
CBS held video footage of the president’s remarks on “60 Minutes” which effectively refuted the claim that he had stated there had been a terrorist attack, but withheld it and did not finally release it publicly until November 4. See Baier.
Particularly striking is the similarity of the language used by Obama here, and the language he used in a June 8 press conference when he denied that the White House had been the source of leaks regarding targeted killings by drone strikes and other covert operations.
In the June 8 press conference, President Obama was asked directly the following question:
There are a couple of books out with, essentially, details about national security issues. There are reports of terrorist kill lists that you supervise and there are reports of cyber-attacks on the Iranian nuclear program that you ordered. Two things. First of all, what’s your reaction of this information getting out in public? And secondly, what’s your reaction to lawmakers who accuse your team of leaking these details in order to promote your reelection bid?
In response the President stated, among other things, the following:
(S)ince I’ve been in office, my attitude has been zero tolerance for these kinds of leaks and speculation.
Now, we have mechanisms in place where if we can root out folks who have leaked, they will suffer consequences. In some cases, it’s criminal — these are criminal acts when they release information like this. And we will conduct thorough investigations, as we have in the past.
The notion that my White House would purposely release classified national security information is offensive. It’s wrong. And people I think need to have a better sense of how I approach this office and how the people around me here approach this office (emphasis added).
See the following articles by The Trenchant Observer:
“The Obama Leaks: The issue is not the leaks, but whether the president lied to the American people,” July 4, 2012.
“Holder’s Investigations into Torture and Covert Operations Leaks–An Obama Cover-up?” June 26, 2012.
“Did the White House authorize recent leaks on covert programs?” June 10, 2012.
The Failure of the Press to Find and Report the Truth
Finally, the failure of the press corps to uncover and publish the facts relating to the attack on the Benghazi consulate and annex, over a period of some seven weeks, is truly shameful. To be sure, there have been some exceptions. But the studious way in which the national media avoided addressing obvious questions in their reporting, and their equally obvious failure to uncover the underlying facts in a timely manner, reveal both an overdependence on information fed to reporters by government officials, frequently speaking on background, and an apparent reluctance to delve too deeply into matters which could lead to revelations that might hurt Obama in the his reelection campaign.
The last point is addressed with forceful logic by Bing West in an op-ed piece on November 3.
See Bing West, “Cynicism Confirmed,” National Review Online, November 3, 2012 (5:59 P.M).
He asserts,
The intent is to cause the press and the public to lose interest in a story that seems exhaustively repetitive, while the key issues are never addressed:
1. Why did the State Department ignore repeated warnings that security at Benghazi was deficient?
2. Did operations centers in Washington receive or monitor requests for help during the attack on 9/11/12?
3. Did the president direct the military to use all means to save American lives?
4. If authorized to enter Libyan territory, why did the military not send a fighter aircraft overhead to frighten what the White House claimed was a mob? Why did the military not send an ad hoc rescue force from Sigonella Navy Base, while the CIA was sending six men as the rescue force from Tripoli, about equal distance from Benghazi? Is the U.S. military too rigid to do anything helpful during a seven-hour battle?
5. Why did the White House persist for weeks in spinning a false story about a mob enraged by a YouTube video, when no intelligence supported the story? Who gave our ambassador to the U.N. her “talking points” that emphasized the video? Our intelligence community says it did not come from intelligence agencies.
The Duty of a Free Press: Speak Truth to Power, at All Times
We need a national press corps that eagerly and passionately leaves no stone unturned in its pursuit of the truth, and which never pulls its punches to favor one candidate or party over another. Holding Barack Obama to account for his administration’s actions and statements is essential for the foreign policy of the United States to be successful.
The vocation and the duty of the true journalist is to speak truth to power, always.
Attempts to hold Obama to account do not reveal an intention to help his opponent, Mitt Romney, who may indeed be even more unqualified as a foreign policy leader. Rather, they reflect a dogged insistence that the President of the United States–and his administration–never lie to the American people, and always be held accountable.
Whoever the President may be.
The Trenchant Observer
Tags: Adam Housley, Banghazi, barck obama, bengasi, Benghasi, Brett baier, cia black operation, denial, drone attacks, Eli Lake, Eric Holder, failure of the press, fox nation, Fox News, Holder investigation into leaks, jennifer rubin, Khost, Mitt Romney, never lie to the American people, response failures, speak truth to power, speal truth to power at all times, The Daily Beast, Washington Post, white house leaks
Posted in Afghanistan, Barack Obama, CIA, coverage of foreign events, Dimming Vision of World Affairs, extrajudicial execution, foreign correspondents, foreign news coverage, Intelligence, Libya, Mitt Romney, public diplomacy, self-defense, State Department, targeted assassinations, targeted killings, U.S. Military, U.S. news coverage, United States, use of force | No Comments »
Tuesday, September 18th, 2012
Responding to Atrocities in Syria: It’s Not Just About Al-Assad, It’s About Us
Originally published March 6, 2012
I heard a boy in Syria on the BBC talking about what was going on there, a few days ago, and he said that ultimately the atrocities could not be stopped until people in other countries really cared about the suffering of the people in Homs, and elsewhere in Syria, and intervened to stop it.
It really comes down to that. Whether the leaders and populations of the countries of the civilized world care about al-Assad’s ongoing commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity, sufficiently to stop it. That boy hit the nail on the head. It all boils down to whether we care. Enough.
About the individual human beings who are being slaughtered.
But the leaders of the civilized world, such as they are, don’t care. Not enough to act, not enough to undertake the only action that might stop al-Assad, which is using military force to halt the killing.
Given the momentum and tempo of the murderous offensives underway, it is highly doubtful that even China and Russia, al-Assad’s accomplices in the commission of these crimes, could force Syria to stop the killing. Nor is it likely that a new Security Council resolution, even with the abstention or support of China and Russia, could stop the killing. Unless it authorized the use of military force, and even then delays in execution–such as those that occurred in Libya–could cost thousands of more lives.
**************************************************
For earlier articles on Syria by The Trenchant Observer, see the Articles on Syria page.
**************************************************
It is difficult to sleep, here in the United States, knowing that dozens or hundreds of people are being murdered each day by Bashar al-Assad’s soldiers and security forces, during these same hours, in broad daylight in Syria. Men and boys are being rounded up in groups and taken away to be executed–or executed on the spot. Men are pulled from cars at checkpoints, and taken to be shot.
This is what General Franco’s forces did during the Civil War in Spain from 1936-1939. It is what Hitler’s officers and soldiers did throughout Europe in World War II, from September 1939 until they were stopped in May, 1945 by the combined military forces of the Allied Powers.
Not just men and boys, but also women and children are being killed every day in Syria by the indiscriminate shelling by tanks, artillery and anti-aircraft weapons into apartment blocks and homes. Round-ups are underway, where individuals believed to be opponents of al-Assad, or who just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, or who just happen to be Sunni instead of Alawite, are hunted down and either taken away to be tortured and/or shot, or have their throats slit by knives as they lay tied on the ground.
Hell has come to Syria.
A merciless slaughter and brutal repression are currently underway in Syria, each day as we try to sleep in the United States–a relentless, grinding slaughter, with horrors beyond all telling.
We know this. The world knows this. The world has first-hand testimony from witnesses, videos from cameras and smart phones, almost in real time. We have the U.N. Special Commission Report on Syria of February 22, 2012, which provides the details. News accounts bring us up to the present, with chilling accuracy.
The death toll has already surpassed the 7,000 men and boys massacred at Srebrenice, in 1995–as U.N. peacekeepers from the Netherlands, stationed in Srebrenice, stood by and did nothing to protect the population from the butchery of Slobodan Milosovic and Ratko Mladic.
It is some consolation that both were taken to The Hague, where Milosovic died while being tried, and where Mladic’s trial will commence in May. But their trials cannot bring back the men and boys who were slaughtered in Srebrenice on July 11, 1995.
And we, in the civilized world, swore that we would never let Srebrenice happen again.
One would think the Dutch would be out front on this one. But they aren’t.
To be sure, there have been other crimes against humanity, in Rwanda and Darfur, for example. And it is demonstrably true that we in the civilized world cannot stop all such crimes in all such places.
But in Syria, at the center of the lands and civilizations, going back four thousand years, which once formed part of the Roman Empire, close to Jerusalem and the heartland of the three religions of the The Book (Chirstianity, Judaism, and Islam), the civilized world could do something to stop this killing–if it had the courage and the will to do so.
Tragically, our leaders are too feckless to act. It would be difficult to take down the Syrian air defenses, our military leaders testify before Congress. The mililtary action would be difficult, and that is adduced as a reason not to undertake it. As if the Normandy invasion was not difficult. Or the Battle of Corregidor. Or taking down the Serbian air defenses in the bombing in Serbia in 1999 to stop the the ethnic cleansing by the Serbs in Kosovo.
Why is it hard to sleep?
Because I believe that President Obama has real-time intelligence on the details of the atrocities that are being committed, and may well be able to watch events in real-time from cameras on satellites and drones and other platforms (as he did when Bin Laden was taken down). I believe he knows exactly what is going on. And he is unwilling to lift a finger to do anything about it.
He has reportedly vetoed any military action, within the last week.
I support Obamacare, but I can’t support “Obama doesn’t care”.
I heard a boy in Syria on the BBC talking about what was going on there, a few days ago, and he said that ultimately the atrocities could not be stopped until people in other countries really cared about the suffering of the people in Homs, and elsewhere in Syria, and intervened to stop it.
It really comes down to that. Whether the leaders and populations of the countries of the civilized world care about al-Assad’s ongoing commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity, sufficiently to stop it. That boy hit the nail on the head. It all boils down to whether we care. Enough.
About the individual human beings who are being slaughtered.
But the leaders of the civilized world, such as they are, don’t care. Not enough to act, not enough to undertake the only action that might stop al-Assad, which is using military force to halt the killing.
Given the momentum and tempo of the murderous offensives underway, it is highly doubtful that even China and Russia, al-Assad’s accomplices in the commission of these crimes, could force Syria to stop the killing. Nor is it likely that a new Security Council resolution, even with the abstention or support of China and Russia, could stop the killing. Unless it authorized the use of military force, and even then delays in execution–such as those that occurred in Libya–could cost thousands of more lives.
That is why Kofi Annan’s U.N. mediation effort is so tragic. It is misbegotten on principle, and the principle is that we should not negotiate the cessation of the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity. We should not negotiate with war criminals, except for the terms of their prompt exit from the scene.
It is ill-considered in that, wholly aside from the principle of the matter, Annan’s consultations will 1) give al-Assad control of the pace of the “mediation” efforts; and 2) lead to drawn-out diplomatic consultations that will give the Syrian Dictator the time he wants to commit more war crimes and crimes against humanity to wipe out his opponents, and their villages and towns.
Only mass amnesia at the office of U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, and other powers he may have consulted, could account for the failure to take into account the sad history of the Arab League’s negotiations with Syria over implementation of its November peace plan, and its experience in sending monitors to the country. Whatever al-Assad might agree to, would be utterly worthless, as he has zero credibility. And more time would be lost, to check on his compliance with any agreement, for diplomatic consultations as to what to do. More time for war crimes and crimes against humanity, and the total destruction of neighborhoods and towns that have shown opposition or resistance.
Actually, there has been one notable exception to the general passivity of leaders in the civilized world. U.S. Senator and former presidential candidate John McCain had the courage to speak up on the floor of the Senate yesterday, March 5, and to call for air attacks on al-Assad’s forces to halt the killing and other atrocities. In the United States, his speech was reported in general, but the powerful and cogently reasoned arguments he presented, supporting his call for immediate military action, have as yet received little coverage in the United States. News coverage in Europe, in fact, may be better.
The speech is of fundamental importance for understanding the options that face us in Syria, and the consequences of inaction. It should be mandatory reading for anyone who is following developments in that country.
So why should all of this cause anyone to be troubled as he goes to sleep?
The crimes are eerily similar to the crimes for which the Nazi war criminals were prosecuted at Nuremberg.
We are doing nothing effective to stop al-Assad from continuing with his massacres. We know what is going on. We are gutless wonders.
So, what is going on in Syria is not only about al-Assad. It is also about us.
It is about the levels of barbarism we are willing to watch, in real time, close to Jerusalem and the heart of Europe and the Middle East, without lifting a finger.
We have no principles left which we believe are worth fighting for.
Afghanistan long since ceased to be about building democracy and the rule of law, even in incipient form, and there we fight only so we can get out without the Afghan government falling. Victory is not the goal, but “degrading the Taliban”, while we delude ourselves with thoughts of a negotiated settlement that would amount to something short of capitulation–over time–to the Taliban.
I doubt that Obama would have acted to bomb Serbia in order to halt the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, if it had occurred on his watch.
We have no leaders, and the world is adrift.
Civilized countries now accept the commission of crimes against humanity and war crimes.
That is not right. And so it is with a troubled mind that I now seek sleep.
The Trenchant Observer
observer@trenchantobserver.com
twitter.com/trenchantobserv
Tags: 1936-1939, 2012, a troubled mind, al-Assad, al-assad accomplices, anti-aircraft, apartment blocks, Arab League, Arab League monitors, artillery, Assad, battle of corregidor, bbc, bombing of serbia, boy in syria, China, Christianity, comen and children indiscriminate shelling, courage, Crimes Against Humanity, death toll, degrading the taliban, democracy and the rule of law, dutch out fron, enough, ethnic cleasing, Europe, February 22, Francisco Franco, fundamental human rights, going back four thousand years, hell has come to syria, HItler, Holland, homes, I now seek sleep, in the wrong place at the wrong time, Islam, jerusalem, John McCain speech, Judaism, kofi annan, kosovo, lands and civilizations, leaders too feckless to act, Libye, mandatory reading, mass amnesia, mediation, men and boy, merciless slaughter, military force to stop the killing, military intervention, military intervention in Syria, misbegotten on principle, monitors, Nazi war criminals, no principles left, normandy invasion, November peace plan, Obama, obama doesn't care, obamacare, opponents of al-assad, opponents of assad, press coverage, Ratko Mladic, real-time intelligence, Roman Empire, round-ups, roundups, Russia, Rwanda and Darfur, serbs, Siria, sirie, slobodan milosovic, Spanish Civil War, Srebrenice, struggle for democracy, struggle for democracy in syria, sunni instead of alawite, syria, syrian air defenses, Syrien, tanks, the civilized worldç dutch, the courage and the will, the individual human beings who are being slaughtered, the Netherlands, the three religions of the book, the world is adrift, u.n. mediation effort, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, u.n. Special commission report on syria, United States, unwilling to lift a finger, victory is not the goal, war crimes, we have no leaders, whether we care, widespread grave violations, will, World War II
Posted in "that spark of the divine", Barack Obama, China, coverage of foreign events, Crimes Against Humanity, Deutschland, Dictatorship, Germany, History, human rights, Intelligence, kosovo, Middle East, NATO, Russia, Serbia, State Department, syria, Taliban, Torture, U.N. Charter, U.N. Security Council, U.N. Torture Convention, U.S. Congress, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, U.S. news coverage, United States, use of force, war crimes | No Comments »
Tuesday, July 31st, 2012
To get around the Filter Bubble, do the following:
In general, to see what leading newspapers around the world are reporting about Syria, click on one of the links in the right-hand column on our home page, which if you are not there already, can be accessed by clicking on “The Trenchant Observer” in the blue box at the top of this page. You may also find other recent and older articles on Syria by clicking on the link to the Articles on Syria page.
Coverage of Syria in the U.S. press leaves a lot to be desired. Even the Washington Post, as has been remarked here on various occasions, doesn’t even try to provide its readers with detailed reports of what is going on in Syria on the ground, limiting itself to printing wire stories and its own reports based on confidential interviews with American government sources and information provided by them.
More generally, to get around “The Filter Bubble”, you can use a Search Engine like “Startpage.com” which does not track you or filter your results except as you direct.
Tags: articles on syria page, coverage iof syria in the U.S. press, how to get around the filter bubble, startpage.com, syria, the filter bubble, The Trenchant Observer, Washington Post
Posted in coverage of foreign events, Dimming Vision of World Affairs, foreign correspondents, foreign news coverage, syria, U.S. news coverage, United States | 1 Comment »
Saturday, July 28th, 2012
The Opening of the XXX Olympic Games
It was a poignant moment, as world leaders gathered in London last night (July 27) for the opening of the XXX Olympic Games, with the performance of an extraordinary spectacle, in which at one point five Olympic rings appeared suspended in the heavens over the Olympic Stadium. Over a billion people were said to have watched the opening ceremonies on television.
Here, in the very heart of the democratic civilizations of Europe, the Olympic ideal shone brightly.
In ancient Greece, the Olympic Games were preceded by a “Sacred Truce” among the warring city-states, in which athletes were guaranteed safe passage to and from the games, and all fighting was to be halted for a period of one month. This period was eventually extended to allow the athletes and visitors to return home.
The games were held every four years from 776 BC to 393 AD, when they were abolished by the Christian Byzantine Emperor Theodosius I. The ancient Olympic Games lasted for 1170 years. The Modern Olympic Games were initiated in 1896, and have been held every four years or more often since then except for 1916, 1940 and 1944.
–”Brief History of the Olympic Games,” NOSTOS (Hellenic Information Society, UK).
Importantly, the Olympic Games today stand as a symbol for humanity’s goal of one day achieving universal peace. The alternative, it seems, is either the goal of endless war, or the resignation that goes with the sense of helplessness we feel when we reject the goal of peace.
The Battle for Aleppo, and the Response of the World
Meanwhile, in Aleppo in Syria, a country where the international community and the Security Council have been unable to reach agreement to act effectively to halt the atrocities of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, the portents of death and destruction were all too palpable yesterday and today, as the regime’s troops, tanks, artillery, helicopters and war planes began a concerted assault on the lightly armed rebels of the Syrian Liberation Army, in what a pro-Assad Damascus newspaper termed “the Mother of all Battles”.
Today, on Saturday, July 28, the battle was joined in earnest.
For news of recent developments on the ground in Syria, see
Luke Harding (in Anadan, on the Aleppo front line), “Syrian rebels near Aleppo: ‘We are besieging Assad’s army’; Regime forces have been pulverising rebel-held districts using artillery and helicopter gunships. But the rebels are upbeat,” The Guardian, July 28, 2012 (11:35 EDT).
Damien McElroy (in Aleppo), “Badly armed rebels face tanks as Syria’s mother of all battles begins,” The Telegraph, July 28, 2012 (6:57PM BST).
Álvaro de Cózar (Special Correspondent in Marea), “El Ejército sirio avanza para tomar Alepo; Las tropas de El Asad atacan con bombas y tanques los barrios en manos rebeldes; Las líneas de teléfono y el suministro de energía han sido cortados, El País, 28 Julio 2012 (23:45 CET).
Kareem Fahim and Ellen Barry, “Syrian Military Intensifies Assault on Rebels in Aleppo,” New York Times, July 28, 2012
***
Unfortunately, Americans accessing the Internet do not find it easy to gain a sense of what is actually taking place on the ground, due to “The Filter Bubble” which prevents most U.S. observers on the Internet from seeing the search results for newspapers outside of their own country (including, e.g., British and other newspapers which have correspondents on the ground in Syria). To get around The Filter Bubble, see the directions in the bottom right-hand column on the right on our Home Page, or go here.
Thus, as the world turns its attention to the joyful spectacle of athletes from countries throughout the world competing on the basis of individual merit, as humanity comes together for its quadrennial celebration of the richness and diversity of the human family, the people in Aleppo and in Syria are left to face the absolute terror and barbarism of the Bashar al-Assad regime, alone.
Russia and China, along with the Syrian regime, are clearly to blame for this state of affairs, and populations who follow international affairs throughout the world are aware of the role they have have played in thwarting effective U.N. Security Council action. Memories of how they have backed the murderous regime of al-Assad are likely to be long indeed in the Middle East, and also in the democracies of the world.
The United States and other Western countries warn of an impending massacre in Aleppo, as if anyone but they themselves could save the day.
It is a new role for Americans: Eyewitness News reporters without an inkling of any sense of moral responsibility that might lead them to act. In this role, they are following the lead of their president.
The Americans, the Europeans, top U.N. officials and others loudly deplore the lamentable state of affairs in Syria in general, and the unfolding of the “mother of all battles” in Aleppo, in particular.
Leaderless, they stand helpless and paralyzed before the terror and barbarism of al-Assad.
They provide countless declarations of moral outrage, and call for the nations of the world to increase their “pressure” on the al-Assad regime.
The “pressure” of which they speak is a “pressure” of words, of plaintive moral appeals directed to war criminals whose moral depravity is beyond dispute. Or perhaps the “pressure” may even consist of voluntary economic sanctions, imposed by different countries outside the framework of the U.N. Security Council, whose impact is uncertain and in any event will take much time.
Neither words nor economic sanctions, however, will stop al-Assad’s armies.
These leaders are at once appalled by the terror, the barbarism, the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity before their very eyes, and caught in their own moral cowardice, impotent, helpless, with verbal reproaches the only weapons they have the courage to wield. Paralyzed by their own cowardice, they will not act—not effectively, not in time to save the thousands of additional deaths that the grinding gears of war portend to claim, and of which they so earnestly warn.
Enough with Words!
These leaders can all do the world one big favor: Stop denouncing al-Assad’s atrocities, at least until they are willing to do something really effective to bring them to a halt.
With their moral energies thus freed, they can pay close attention to the facts on the ground, to what is actually happening to thousands of human beings in the maw of war, and then they can seek quiet solace in their churches, their synagogues, their mosques, and the other spiritual refuges in which they must, as individual human beings, come to terms with what they have seen, and what they have not done.
Enough with words!
Enough with the self-absolving declarations these leaders offer to the world, and to themselves, so they can sleep at night, knowing they were present at Srebrenice, present at Auschwitz, present in Rwanda, over a very long period of time, and did nothing.
President Theodore Roosevelt, Recipient of the 1907 Nobel Peace Prize, on Words and Deeds
As for President Obama, who reportedly likes to think of himself as emulating the great American presidents, the words of President Theodore Roosevelt, recipient of the 1907 Nobel Peace Prize, come to mind. Roosevelt declared:
“International Peace”
…
We must ever bear in mind that the great end in view is righteousness, justice as between man and man, nation and nation, the chance to lead our lives on a somewhat higher level, with a broader spirit of brotherly goodwill one for another. Peace is generally good in itself, but it is never the highest good unless it comes as the handmaid of righteousness; and it becomes a very evil thing if it serves merely as a mask for cowardice and sloth, or as an instrument to further the ends of despotism or anarchy. We despise and abhor the bully, the brawler, the oppressor, whether in private or public life, but we despise no less the coward and the voluptuary. No man is worth calling a man who will not fight rather than submit to infamy or see those that are dear to him suffer wrong. No nation deserves to exist if it permits itself to lose the stern and virile virtues; and this without regard to whether the loss is due to the growth of a heartless and all-absorbing commercialism, to prolonged indulgence in luxury and soft, effortless ease, or to the deification of a warped and twisted sentimentality.
Moreover, and above all, let us remember that words count only when they give expression to deeds, or are to be translated into them (emphasis added). The leaders of the Red Terror2 prattled of peace while they steeped their hands in the blood of the innocent; and many a tyrant has called it peace when he has scourged honest protest into silence. Our words must be judged by our deeds; and in striving for a lofty ideal we must use practical methods; and if we cannot attain all at one leap, we must advance towards it step by step, reasonably content so long as we do actually make some progress in the right direction.
[Footnote] 2. The “Terror” is a term characterizing the conduct of power in revolutionary France by the second committee of Public Safety (September, 1793-July, 1794), sometimes identified as the “Red Terror” to distinguish it from the short-lived “White Terror”, which was an effort by the Royalists in 1795 to destroy the Revolution.
–Theodore Roosevelt, 1907 Nobel Prize Acceptance Speech, delivered May 5, 1910.
President Obama and the other leaders of the world would do well to take these words to heart, today, and every day hereafter until they find the courage to take effective action to halt the barbarism and the terror in Syria.
The Trenchant Observer
observer@trenchantobserver.com
www.twitter.com/trenchantobserv
For links to other articles by The Trenchant Observer, click on the title at the top of this page to go to the home page, and then use the “Search” Box or consult the information in the bottom right hand corner of the home page. The Articles on Syria page can also be found here. The Articles on Targeted Killings page can also be found here.
Tags: 1907 nobel peace prize lecture, al-Assad, al-Watan, Alep, Alepo, Aleppo, Álvaro de Cózar, Anadan, articles on syria page, atrocities, barbarism, Crimes Against Humanity, Damien McElroy, Debacle in Syria, El País, Ellen Barry, Kareem Fahim, Luke Harding, New York Times, Nobel Lecture, Nobel Peace Prize, NOSTOS, Obama, Olympic Games, Siria, syria, Syrie, Syrien, the Battle for Aleppo, the filter bubble, The Guardian, the mother of all battles, the response of the world, the sacred truce, tHE tELEGRAPH, the Washington Post, theodore roosevelt, war crimes, words and deeds
Posted in Azerbaijan, Barack Obama, Brazil, Canada, China, coverage of foreign events, Crimes Against Humanity, Dimming Vision of World Affairs, foreign correspondents, foreign news coverage, France, Germany, human rights, International Law, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mali, Mossad, NATO, Oslo, Portugal, Qatar, religious belief, sanctions, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, State Department, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, targeted assassinations, targeted killings, Togo, Torture, Tunisia, U.N. Charter, U.N. Convention Against Torture, U.N. Security Council, U.N. Torture Convention, U.S. Congress, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, united arab emirates, United Kingdom, United States, vision of peace, war crimes | No Comments »
Sunday, March 11th, 2012
Predictably, Kofi Annan was rebuffed by Bashar al-Asad in talks in Damascus on March 10-11. Inexplicably, Annan declared following his talks in Damascus that there exist grounds for “optimism”.
As the fighting continues in and around Idlib and in other parts of the country, it is difficult to see Annan’s mission as anything other than a smokescreen to obfuscate the abject failure of outside powers to intervene militarily to stop the killing. In the judgment of Senator John McCain and many others, only such intervention can stop the Syrian military from their current slaughter of civilians as they seek to repress all opposition to the government. Bashar al-Assad has labeled all of his opposition as “terrorists” and affirmed he will not negotiate with them. The Syrian opposition also rejects negotiations.
Annan’s grounds for optimism are hard to discern, if it refers to anything more than his continuing his mission–as Syria with Russian support proceeds with its rampage against civilians in towns where both unarmed and armed opposition have taken hold. By failing to establish a ceasefire as the only topic for discussion, Annan has in effect offered the Syrian Dictator and his Russian and Iranian backers more time to “finish the job” of wiping out all opposition within the country through the use of terror and the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
On the diplomatic front, the foreign ministers of Russia, France, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Germany are due to meet for a Security Council meeting in New York on Monday (March 12), where Syria will undoubtedly be a principal topic of discussion.
For current developments on the ground, as well as the latest diplomatic moves, see:
Patrick J. McDonnell (reporting from Beirut), “Kofi Annan meets with Syria President Bashar Assad; “As tanks reportedly attack rebels in Idlib, the former U.N. chief holds talks in a bid to head off what world leaders fear could become a full-fledged civil war,” Los Angeles Times, March 11, 2012.
Lourival Sant’Anna (enviado especial), “Do lado turco da fronteira, rebeldes tramam o fim de Assad; Opositores sírios preparam-se para combater um inimigo determinado e mais forte,” O Estado de São Paulo, 10 de março de 2012 (17:42 h).
Enric González (Mokaibli, Líbano), “Siria se ha convertido en una cárcel; Menos de 30.000 civiles han logrado escapar del país; El control sobre la vigilancia de las familias de los oficiales impide la desintegración del Ejército,” El País, 10 de marzo de 2012 (21:40 CET).
Assocated Press (Beirut), “Kofi Annan leaves Syria after talks with Assad; Former UN secretary general says he offered Syrian president concrete proposals ‘which will have a real impact on the ground,’” The Guardian, March 11, 2012 (14:19 EDT). Article details diplomatic developments, including meeting in New York on March 12 with foreign ministers of U.S., U.K. Germany, and Russia.
Peter Beaumont, “Syria in turmoil: Assad launches fresh shelling of civilian housesKofi Annan’s ceasefire mission falters as the tanks roll in to besiege the city of Idlib,” The Guardian, March 10, 2012 (11.01 EST).
Jean-Jacques Mevel, “Syrie : les Occidentaux craignent l’enlisement,” Le Figaro, le 11 mars 2012 (21:34 h).
(Le Figaro), “Syrie : “l’armée poursuit son offensive, Annan «optimiste»,” Le Figaro, le 11 mars 2012, (acualisé à 17:39 h).
One final thought: For 60 years the Arab world has viewed developments in the Middle East primarily through the template or prism of the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Palestinian issue. In 2011, an alternative narrative developed, which offers the possibility that in the future events in the region will be viewed through a lens that emphasizes human rights and the rule of law.
The response of the United States and other key Western countries to the ongoing terror in Syria may well have a determinative impact on the template through which the Arab world views the West in the future. This is ultimately what is at stake, in addition to our own sense of who we are and the kind of world in which we want to live.
The Trenchant Observer
observer@trenchantobserver.com
www.twitter.com/trenchantobserv
***
–For earlier articles by The Trenchant Observer, see the Articles on Syria page.
–To use the Search function, click on “The Trenchant Observer” at the top of this page to go to the home page, and then enter your search term in the box at the upper right.
–A list of the most recent 15 articles (on all subjects) is also found on the home page, on the right.
***
How to find news reports from around the world
–Google and other major search engines use a series of filters amounting to what has been termed a “filter bubble” to limit search results to those keyed to the location, language, and previous search results of the user. See Eli Pariser, The Filter Bubble (2011).
–To find the latest news from around the world on Syria (or any other subject), you can bypass the “filter bubble” of Google and other search engines by going to and beginning your search at www.startpage.com
***
Tags: 5000 or more have died isnce November 2, al-Assad, an alternative narrative, appalling coverage, Arab League, Arab League and Lavrov statement, Arab lens, Arab template, Arab world, associated press in beirut, Baba Amr, Bashar al-Assad, Ben Y-Moon, Cairo, crimenes de guerra, crimens de guerra, crimes contre l'humanité, crimes de guerre, Damascus, Edmund Blair, El País, enric gonzález, events on the ground, Homs, Idlib, immediate ceasefire, interminable diplomatic dance, Jean-Jacques Mevel, John McCain, kofi annan, Kriegsverbrechen, Le Figaro, Le Monde, Lebanon, lens, Líbano, Los Angeles Times, Lourival Sant'Anna, March 9 and 10, military intervention, military intervention in Syria, Mokaibli, narrative, New York Times, O Estado de São Paulo, Patrick J. McDonnell, Peter Veaumont, Reuters, Reuters/Africa, Russian foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, Siria, speech of March 5, Spiegel, struggle for democracy, struggle for democracy in syria, syria, Syrie, Syrien, tanks overrun villages, tanks roll in idlib, template, The Daily Star, The Guardian, through the lense of human rights and the rule of law, tv5monde, United Nations, Verbrechen Wider der Meschlichkeit, Washington Post, Yasmine Saleh
Posted in Barack Obama, China, coverage of foreign events, Crimes Against Humanity, human rights, internal supporters of human rights, International Law, Iran, Lebanon, NATO, Russia, State Department, syria, Torture, U.N. Charter, U.N. Security Council, U.S. Congress, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, United States, use of force, war crimes | No Comments »
Saturday, November 19th, 2011
Originally published August 20, 2011
Bashar Al-Assad is pursuing the Libyan solution to civilian demonstrations–turn your tanks and your weapons on the demonstrators, and kill as many of them as necessary in order to restore “order” and remain in power.
The world, oddly, stands idly by.
It was a really slow burn, for the world even to notice. NATO’s hands were full with Libya, much fuller than they would have been had the United States led the alliance, instead of “driving from the backseat”. As President Obama might have learned had he looked into it, cars driven from the back seat don’t have the best of accident records.
Plus, the political acquiescence of Russia and China in allowing a United Nations Security Council Resolution to be adopted similar to the one which authorized the use of all necessary measures to protect the civilian population of Libya, was out of the question given Russian objections to the scale and duration of NATO military operations in Libya.
Then there was the delicate balance of Israeli-Arab relations, and Western-Iranian relations as a backdrop. Everyone was afraid–afraid to upset the current dynamically unstable “equilibrium” in the Middle East, particularly in Lebanon but also in the delicate interplay of forces among Israel, the Palestinian Authority, and the entrenched position of Hamas in Gaza. Lebanon alone, with the STL indictments of Hezbollah operatives allegedly responsible for the assassination of Rafiq Hariri in 2005, was a powder keg waiting to go off.
So all factors militated toward outside powers–at least in the West–taking a “look the other way” approach to the atrocities Al-Assad was committing against his people.
Except one curious thing happened. The Syrian people did not desist, even in the face the massive use of force against the people by the Syrian regime.
Now, inaction is beginning to look riskier than at least looking at what is taking place inside Syria.
Russia apparently is blocking the adoption of any U.N. Security Council resolution with enough teeth in it to possibly influence the actions of the murderous regime in Damascus.
Why are the Russians so comfortable with barbarism? That is the driving question that must be asked.
Is it the memory of their own tanks rolling into Prague, 43 years ago on this date, on August 20, 1968, to put down an even milder form of civil disobedience? Is it the authoritarian state that Russia has once again become, despite the heroic efforts of Boris Yeltsin to break the grip of communism and the state-controlled economy? His administrative skills and execution of policies weren’t that great, perhaps, but he was a real democrat, and he launched an incredible, peaceful, democratic social revolution which is still ongoing. At least we can say that.
So, is it the new authoritarian state in Russia that blocks the world from acting to protect the civilian population of Syria?
Coudn’t the Security Council at least, acting under Chaptain VII of the U.N. Charter, grant the International Criminal Court the authority to investigate and punish the war crimes and crimes against humanity that Bashar Al-Assad and his regime have committed and are committing, every day, right before our eyes?
How long can the populations of the West passively regard such brutality without themselves in a sense becoming a part of that same brutality through their own acts of omission?
What will it take for Russia–and the world–to act?
The Trenchant Observer
oberver@www.trenchantobserver.com
www.twitter.com/trenchantobserv
See also earlier articles by The Trenchant Observer:
Repression in Syria, and the spread of universal ideals throughout the world, May 11, 2011
Update: Torture, The STL in Lebanon, and Obama’s “Way Forward” in Afghanistan, July 1, 2011
Ratko Mladic to join Radovan Karadic in The Hague; Moammar Qaddafi and Bashar al-Assad await similar fates, May 28, 2011
The Struggle for Democracy in Bolivia, Spain, Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Lebanon, Ivory Coast, and Iran, March 3, 2011
Tags: "look the other way" approach, al-Assad, all necessary measures, arab spring, Arab-Israeli, Assad, assassination, Bashar al-Assad, Bashar al-Assadsimilar fates, China, comfortable, did not desist, driving from the backseat, epochs in history, Gaza, Hafez al-Assad, Hama, Hamas, happened, Hesbollah operatives, Hezballah, Hezbollah, historical epoch, Hizbollah, ICC, international arrest warrant, International Criminal Court, Israel, Israeli-Arab, Lazarov, Lebanon, Libia, Libya, Libye, Lybien, Mededev, Mededev-Putin, Medyedev, Middle East, military intervention, military intervention in Syria, Misrata, Misurata, Moammar Qaddafi, NATO, new era of history, Observer, one curious thing, Palestinian Authority, President Obama, Putin, Radovan Karadic, Rafi Hariri, Ratk Mladic, Relations, reprise, Resolution 1973, Russia, Russian Federation, Russians, Russians comfortable with barbarism, shame of the world, Siria, Soviet Union, spread of universal ideals, spread ofuniversal values, STL Indictments, struggle for democracy, struggle for democracy in syria, syria, syrian people, Syrie, Syrien, The Trenchant Observer, throughout the human population, throughout the world, U.N. Security Council, Western-Iranian, with Barbarism
Posted in China, coverage of foreign events, Crimes Against Humanity, Dictatorship, extrajudicial execution, France, History, human rights, internal supporters of human rights, International Law, Iran, Israel, Lebanon, Libya, Middle East, NATO, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, State Department, syria, Torture, Turkey, U.N. Charter, U.N. Security Council, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, united arab emirates, United Kingdom, United States, use of force, war crimes | 1 Comment »
Thursday, August 12th, 2010
Guards and officials at a prison in northern Mexico let inmates out, lent them guns and sent them off in official vehicles to carry out drug-related killings, including the massacre of 17 people last week, prosecutors claim.
–”Convicts used as hit squad by Mexican prison governor,” The Telegraph (Telegraph.co.uk), July 26, 2010
The United States has ignored Mexico and Latin America for over a decade, with disastrous results. As the United States and NATO continue in the ninth year of the war against the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, the degree to which public order has deteriorated in Mexico and other Latin American countries has been obscured by events half a world away. Interest in foreign policy among the American electorate is low, and what there is has been overwhelmingly directed toward events in the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Meanwhile, public order in Mexico has worsened dramatically, while other states in the region also have been increasingly weakened by the influence of drug gangs and cartels. In Guatemala, according to reports, the office of the Attorney General was briefly taken over by individuals close to the drug cartels.
See, e.g., Tim Johnson, “How Guatemala almost went ‘narco’”, McClatchey Newspapers, July 8, 2010
Every once in a while, a news story or event flashes across the world’s consciousness for a brief second, like a lightning flash illuminating a dark countryside. The news stories about the director of a Mexican prison who used inmates as a hit squad represents one such lightning flash.
It also suggests that the continued low priority given to Latin America by the Obama administration, notwithstanding Hillary Clinton’s own lightning-like visits to the region, will continue to have dire consequences for both the region and the United States.
If the rule of law is important in Iraq, should we not also pay attention to what is going on in Mexico and Guatemala?
The Trenchant Observer
www.trenchantobserver.com
E-mail: observer@trenchantobserver.com
Twitter: www.twitter.com/trenchantobserv
Comments are invited.
Tags: Afghanistan, American electorate, assassination, Central America, director, drug cartel, Durango state, foreign policy, Gomez Palacio, Guatemala, hit squad, Houston, Iraq, Latin America, McClatchey Newspapers, Mexican prison, Mexican prison director, Mexico, Middle East, narco, Obama administration, Pakistan, prison, Ricardo Najera, Tim Johnson, Torreón, we have a problem
Posted in coverage of foreign events, Dimming Vision of World Affairs, human rights, Mexico, United States | Comments Off
Saturday, January 2nd, 2010
As we enter 2010 and a new decade, a good question to ask is how well our news organizations are reporting on and how well we are comprehending significant events and developments throughout the world.
One of the greatest costs of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the struggle against international terrorism has been that as these subjects have attracted greater news coverage and public attention, they have done so at the expense of the attention we in the U.S. pay to what is going on in the rest of the world.
Moreover, over the last decade, just as the United States has become increasingly dependent on its interactions with other countries, the number of foreign correspondents employed by U.S. news organizations has continued its precipitate decline. For example, the New York Times Company, which owns the Boston Globe, laid off the Globe’s entire roster of distinguished foreign correspondents in 2007.
Significant coverage of developments in Latin America by major U.S. media is virtually non-existent. In earlier times there might have been political outcries of “Who Lost Venezuela?” or “Who Lost Bolivia?” But today no one seems to notice or to be paying sustained attention to developments in these countries. In Brazil, a highly-regarded international human rights organization reports that the police in Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo have been responsible for the deaths, including a high number of extrajudicial executions, of some 11,000 people in the last six years. (See Juan Forero, Washington Post, December 8, 2009). But in Washington, no one seems to notice, or care.
Even in countries where the U.S. is at war, news coverage is not always as good as it should be. The media missed the story in Afghanistan for the better part of the last eight years, while today cutbacks in coverage sharply limit detailed analytical reporting from Iraq.
An additional factor affecting our vision of foreign affairs is the decreasing knowledge of history that is characteristic of both readers and journalists today. Relatively few of the foreign correspondents who remain seem to have the deep interest in and knowledge of history and diplomacy that their predecessors, such as James Reston, so often displayed.
There are obvious and notable exceptions to these generalizations, to be sure. Indeed, today there are reporters and correspondents who meet the highest standards of the profession. But there are not enough of them, in enough places.
As a result, our vision of the world has dimmed. Our ability to discern significance out of the glut of information arriving from all corners of the world has diminished. Absent highly-trained foreign correspondents who know the countries and regions, and often the languages, of the places where they live and from where they report, we have fewer independent lenses through which to view the world. Instead of keen and analytical reporting by knowledgeable experts, we are forced to rely on quotes from “trusted officials” and their take on events.
Such correspondents are uniquely qualified to provide us with the analysis and nuanced understandings of trends and developments in other countries that enable us to understand the significance of current events–including things that are not happening. A journalist with a deeper understanding of the society from which he or she reports can choose the right people to interview, ask incisive questions in research and interviews, and knowledgeably interpret the answers that are received. Their dispatches go beyond reports of bombings and military casualties, or accidents and natural disasters. At best, they provide a cumulative base of insights and analysis that informs our understanding of events and developments that are of real and lasting significance.
In effect, as we enter a new decade, when we need to see more clearly than ever before where we are going, our vision grows fainter. Our vision of the world is dimming due to the decrease in original reporting from foreign correspondents, as well as the skewed concentration of remaining resources on news of terrorism or other eye-catching news of the moment, often reported without the context or even reference to previous reporting on the subject.
What can be done to resolve this problem is far from clear. A necessary starting point, however, is to recognize that the problem is one of critical national importance.
The Trenchant Observer
www.trenchantobserver.com
Twitter: www.twitter.com/trenchantobserv
E-mail: observer@trenchantobserver.com
Comments and debate are invited, in any language. If in a language other than English, please provide an English translation, if possible, in order to reach the broadest possible audience. Where this is not feasible, please submit your comment anyway; other readers are invited to offer accurate translations of any such comments.
Tags: Afghanistan, Bolivia, Brazil, extrajudicial executions, foreign correspondence, foreign correspondents, International Human Rights, International Law, James Reston, journalism, New York Times Company, overseas reporting, Pamela Constable, police in Rio de Janeiro, police in São Paulo, training of foreign correspondents, U.S. media, U.S. news organizations, United States Foreign Relations, Venezuela, Washington Post, Who lost Venezuela?
Posted in coverage of foreign events, Dimming Vision of World Affairs, foreign correspondents, foreign news coverage, U.S. news coverage | 1 Comment »