Posts Tagged ‘fundamental human rights’
Tuesday, May 28th, 2013
REPRISE
Originally published March 25, 2012
Latest news reports
Oliver Holmes and Steve Gutterman (Beirut/Moscow), “Syrian forces on the offensive; Annan in Moscow,” Reuters, March 25, 2012 (10:14pm IST).
Syria: Local Residents Used as Human Shields; Reports of Residents Forced to March in Front of Soldiers in Idlib, Human Rights Watch, March 25, 2012.
Rami G. Khouri, “A new world order is born in Syria,” The Daily Star (Beirut), March 24, 2012 (01:25 a.m.).
Khouri’s optimism regarding the U.N. initiative led by Kofi Annan is noteworthy, particularly in view of the earlier pessimism expressed by the Editorial Board of The Daily Star. On March 9, 2012, they wrote:
The scene around Syria overflows with talk. The world’s big players proffer big words, which amount to zero in their impact on the Syrian regime – if anything they are utilized in their propaganda campaign.
The international community is attempting to save face, and by doing so is exhibiting its hypocrisy in every step and every word. This is hypocrisy of the worst kind, not only uncovering the ulterior motives of the world powers, but also serving as an eye-opener as to the intentions of the small, medium and super powers. God help any downtrodden party who takes the words of those powers at their face value. In this, the international community’s reaction to the crisis in Syria should be a lesson for many nations that look to it for support.
In the meantime, help for Syria is still at square one and none of the steps currently being taken are going to eradicate the shame of the international community.
–Editorial, “We procrastinate,” The Daily Star, March 9, 2012.
While the Observer has the highest respect for Khouri and his judgment, the available evidence in the public domain suggests that the March 9 Editorial of The Daily Star is much closer to the mark than his March 24 column on “the birth of a new world order.”
Correction: Earlier versions of this article mistakenly atribributed this text to Rami G. Khouri, to whom we apologize for the error.
It is indeed a historical moment in which the international community is called upon to craft a new response to regimes in crisis that cling to power against the democratic demands of their populations by the use of terror and the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The response that is required, however, and which may yet emerge–if not in this crisis perhaps in the next–does not countenance long, drawn-out negotiations with a Dictator who continues to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity against his population. It does not accept a scenario in which negotiations continue in diplomatic time, as thousands are killed in real time.
It does not accept a diplomatic dance that places the trump cards in the hands of authoritarian regimes complicit in the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity, and in the hands of the Dictator committing those crimes.
It does not accept the “devil’s bargain” of negotiating with a war criminal the cessation of war crimes and crimes against humanity in exchange for his retaining power and the capability of using the instruments of state power to continue widespread and grave violations of fundamental human rights, including the right of assembly, the rights to free speech, freedom of the press, and to receive and impart information and ideas, the right to life and physical integrity of the human person, and the right to due process and a fair trial by an independent judiciary.
Instead, the response that is required, for both moral and political reasons, is an insistence on the cessation of crimes angainst humanity and war crimes as a condition precedent to negotiations betwen the dictatorial regime, its democratic opposition, and the international community. Limited military actions to halt the ongoing commission of such crimes may form a part of this international response, with the approval of the Security Council whenever possible, but without it if Security Counil action is blocked by a veto and the atrocities and butchery continue.
***
Original Article (March 24, 2012)
Der Spiegel reports in some detail on Iran’s assistance to the al-Assad government in its war against the opposition.
See “Aufstand in Syrien: Teheran liefert Assad angeblich Waffen,” Der Spiegel, den 24 März 2012.
See also, “Hopeless Diplomacy: Syrian Regime Resembles Mafia Cartel; Hopes that diplomacy will force Syrian President Bashar Assad to back down seem misguided, given that his regime resembles a mafia cartel bent on defending its turf by any means. There is no turning back for Assad’s clan or the rebels — both sides know that would spell their doom,” Der Spiegel (English), March 19, 2012.
In Syria, al-Assad’s troops, assisted by non-uniformed men, continued their attacks on rebel strongholds and conducted roundups of civilians.
Associated Press, “Syrian forces shell towns and clash with rebels; dozens killed,” The Washington Post, March 24, 2012.
The website of the London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights provides updates in English here, and in Arabic here.
We should not forget what is going on in Syria on the ground, not for a single day.
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: a historical moment, a new response to regimes in crisis, a new world order, al-Assad, birth of a new world order, Daily Star, devil's bargain, diplomatic dance, diplomatic time, fundamental human rights, Geneva peace conference 2013, Iran, iranian assistance to syria, military intervention, negotiating with war criminals, news update syria, Obama, Oliver Holmes, rami g. khouri, real time, rebellion in syria, Reuters, Siria, sirye, Steve Gutterman, struggle for democracy, struggle for democracy in syria, syria, syrian observatory for human rights, Syrie, Syrien, the response that is required
Posted in Barack Obama, China, Crimes Against Humanity, Dictatorship, extrajudicial execution, France, History, human rights, Iran, Lebanon, Russia, State Department, syria, Torture, U.N. Security Council, U.S. Congress, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, United States, use of force, war crimes | 1 Comment »
Friday, January 18th, 2013
There was an article in the Washington Post recently that suggested that Barack Obama plans to draw the maximum mileage out of the coincidence that his second inauguration will take place on the Martin Luther King, Jr. national holiday.
See Wil Heygood, “Inauguration will cement ties between Obama, Martin Luther King Jr.” Washington Post, January 15, 2012.
The Observer thinks of Martin Luther King’s courageous struggle as one to liberate not only black people but also white people from the scourge of racism that has plagued our country. The leitmotifs of that struggle were non-violence and a deep moral demand for legislation that gave effect to the fundamental civil and human rights of all Americans, and in particular the black citizens of America who had for so long been deprived of the benefit of the fundamental rights promised to them in the Constitution.
King fought for justice and the rule of law in the United States, and also had a deep appreciation of the struggles of other peoples to achieve respect for their fundamental rights.
On January 21, 2013, the day celebrating his life and moral perserverance, and also the day the first African-American president will be inaugurated for a second term, what are we to make of the connection between Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream, the racial progress that has undeniably been made in America since 1968 and yet the vast progress that remains to be achieved, and the fact that we have a an African-American, a black man, as President of the United States?
King’s speech at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. on August 28, 1963, is worth recalling. He said, in part:
…
So even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal.”
I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit together at the table of brotherhood.
I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.
I have a dream that little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
I have a dream today.
I have a dream that one day down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its Governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification, one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.
I have a dream today.
I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places plains, and the crooked places will be made straight, and before the Lord will be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.
This is our hope. This is the faith that I go back to the mount with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the genuine discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, pray together; to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom forever, knowing that we will be free one day.
And I say to you today my friends, let freedom ring. From the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire, let freedom ring. From the mighty mountains of New York, let freedom ring. From the mighty Alleghenies of Pennsylvania!
Let freedom ring from the snow capped Rockies of Colorado!
Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California!
But not only there; let freedom ring from the Stone Mountain of Georgia!
Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain in Tennessee!
Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill in Mississippi. From every mountainside, let freedom ring.
And when this happens, when we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every village and hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God’s children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, “Free at last! Free at last! Thank God almighty, we’re free at last!”
That so much of King’s dream has been accomplished, in 50 years, is cause for celebration, and also cause for a rededication of efforts to achieve that part of his dream which has not been realized with, in a phrase used elsewhere in the speech, ”the fierce urgency of now”.
Yet we must also recall that Martin Luther King, Jr. did not represent African-Americans alone. He also represented white people, and others. He drew on the non-violent tradition and spiritual force of Gandhi, who helped inspire South Africans early in the 20th century, and later to liberate the subcontinent of India from British rule. King’s own message and moral example also inspired others, most notably Nelson Mandela of South Africa, who shared a similar dream and acted effectively to bring it about.
On January 21, 2013, we must also acknowledge that Martin Luther King, Jr. was the moral hero of millions of white men and women in the United States, as well as in Europe, and of many millions of men and women of other ethnicities throughout the world. He does not belong to African-Americans alone. Indeed, he belongs not only to all Americans, but to all of humanity, to “all of God’s children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics.”
By 1967, when he spoke out against the war in Vietnam, if not long before, King made it clear that “all of God’s children” were not limited to those who lived in the United States.
If he were alive today, there can be little doubt that Martin Luther King, Jr. would be an ardent supporter of the struggle for human rights and democracy throughout the world.
In this connection, it is worthwhile to consider again the points made by former President Jimmy Carter in his op-ed in the New York Times on June 24, 2012, in which he seeks to hold America to account for its human rights violations.
See
Jimmy Carter, “A Cruel and Unusual Record,” New York Times (op-ed), June 24, 2012.
The Trenchant Observer, “REPRISE: ‘A time to break silence’: Dr. King on the Vietnam war, and President Carter on America’s human rights violations,” January 6, 2013 (originally published June 27, 2012).
Jimmy Carter was also an heir of Martin Luther King, Jr., and one who has done more than any other recent American president to advance the cause of respect for international human rights throughout the world.
So, as we celebrate the legacy of Dr. King on January 21 with the second inauguration of Barack Obama, the first African-American president of the United States of America, let us also celebrate those other individuals of all races and from all countries who, like former President Jimmy Carter and former President Nelson Mandela, have fought valiantly for the respect and observance of the fundamental human rights of all individuals, from whatever country or ethnic group they may come.
That struggle, too, is a critical part of Dr. King’s legacy, and one which the first African-American president should take up in his second term, with “the fierce urgency of now.”
President Obama could start by pushing for Senate ratification of the American Convention on Human Rights, signed by President Jimmy Carter and submitted to the Senate for ratification in 1979. Almost all the countries of the Americas have ratified the treaty, though the new authoritarian states of Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and Nicaragua are now attacking its institutions and threatening to withdraw their ratifications. Without Senate action, the president could immediately renew cooperation with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights with respect to cases brought against the United States.
The Trenchant Observer
Tags: 1963 Washington Memorial speech, 2013, August 28, Barack Obama, civil rights, fundamental human rights, Ghandi, I have a dream speech, inauguration day 2013, January 21, jimmy carter, Jimmy Carter op-ed, June 24 2012 op-ed, king as hero of millions of white men and women, martin luther king, martin luther king holiday 2013, Martin Luther King Jr., Nelson Mandela, non-violence, second inauguration, the fierce urgency of now, the rule of law, Wil Heygood
Posted in "that spark of the divine", Barack Obama, History, human rights, internal supporters of human rights, International Law, Latin America, South Africa, South America, State Department Human Rights Country Reports, State Department Legal Adviser, United States | 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 »
Friday, September 7th, 2012
In March, 2011, as the Obama administration dragged its heels and made clear it had no intention of intervening in Libya, we wrote:
For days, the administration has been signaling its unwillingness to act. First, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates tilted the scales by weighing in heavily against the approval of a no-fly zone….Finally, today, the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, stated in Congressional testimony that Qaddafi was likely to prevail given his advantages in troops and hardware. It is difficult, to say the least, to understand the logic that could have underlain such a tone-deaf and politically maladroit statement. Perhaps it was just inexperience and lack of foreign policy coordination. But it was disastrous in its impact.
Altogether, a most shameful spectacle.
History may well mark the month of March, 2011 as the decisive turning point in America’s leadership in world affairs. America has always been more than a state pursuing its self-interests. That era now seems past, at least under Democratic presidential leadership.
…
Despite its cynical record of dealings with dictatorships in the past, it is now to France, that other beacon of human liberty–since the Enlightenment, the French Revolution, and the defeat of Fascism in 1945 (made possible only with American help), that advocates of democracy and freedom must look.
If America does not want to be a champion of liberty, at least the French, drawing on their own deep traditions, have a possibility of articulating a clear moral vision that might guide us forward toward achievement of the goals of democracy and the rule of law which so many have fought for, at such great sacrifice, for over 70 years.
–The Trenchant Observer, “Libya—America Abdicates Global Leadership in Struggle for Democracy,” March 10, 2011
It seems clear that United States policy on Syria is “locked in” at least until the U.S. presidential elections on November 6, and probably far beyond. This policy is largely secret.
U.S. President Barack Obama has decided to undertake a program of covert operations relating to Syria, consisting of the following two elements:
1) the supply of non-lethal assistance to the Syrian rebels, including communications equipment, and logistical coordination; while mostly covert, these activities have been acknowledged in leaks to the press; and
2) a highly-secret covert operations program the details of which are not public, but which probably include the coordination with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and perhaps other nations of the supply of weapons, the provision to the rebels of actionable intelligence, the coordination of forces and attacks, and financial support for the insurgents, in addition to direct U.S. actions by special forces and other covert operatives within Syria. We can only speculate, as we really don’t know.
See
David Ignatius, “Syria’s eerie parallel to 1980s Afghanistan,” Washington Post, September 3, 2012.
Carlos Munoz, “US surges intelligence operations along Turkey-Syria border,” The Hill, August 6, 2012.
What this policy does not envision is the open use of military force to establish a no-fly zone or to defend safe zones which have been set up within Syria, or other measures which would defend the population of Syria against the murderous onslaughts of the Syrian Dictator.
Moreover, the covert nature of the program entails risks, as reports indicate that the approach used in Afghanistan in the 1980′s after the Soviet invasion of that country is perhaps being followed, with the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar Bin Sultan, playing a key role as he did in the 1980′s effort in Afghanistan when he was the Saudi Ambassador to the U.S.
The covert nature of the program also makes it difficult to mobilize support from other civilized countries, due to the absence of international legal constraints and the inability of such countries to mobilize domestic support for U.S. covert activities.
In any event, what Obama’s covert war in Syria promises is a long, drawn-out conflict and continuing civil war in Syria, which even the departure of Bashar al-Assad might not be able to stop. With the Saudis funding the operations, their affinity for groups that are either Wahabist or otherwise deeply conservative runs the risk of favoring such groups over other more secular groups among the Syrian armed opposition.
With the United States locked into a covert policy in Syria which does not promise to bring the mass crimes of Bashar al-Assad to an early halt, there is a gaping leadership vacuum among the civilized nations of the world which might potentially act, outside the Security Council, to bring the killing to a halt.
Will France step into the breach?
Despite President François Hollande’s initially cautious approach to Syria, there are signs that France is now moving in that direction. France has recently decided to provide financial support to five cities in “liberated” areas of Syria, and there have been reports that it is considering providing artillery to the Syrian armed opposition to help defend certain areas in Syria.
However, a European Union arms embargo may impose restrictions on the supply of arms to the opposition. U.K. Foreign Minister Willian Hague has stated that the supply of arms to rebels in Syria would violate a European Union arms embargo on Syria.
“At the moment we have a European Union arms embargo on Syria, it’s not possible or legal for any EU nation to send weapons to anybody in Syria and therefore our chosen route and is the same route of France and the United States, is to give non-lethal assistance and we’re doing that,” Hague told reporters in response to a question about whether France may be considering providing arms to the Syrian opposition.
–Lori Hinnant (AP), “French Direct Aid a Dubious Break for Syria Rebels
ABC News, September 7, 2012
The signficance of the reports that France is considering sending arms to Syria is that it now seems on the verge of taking on the mantle of leadership on Syria, or trying to.
Much will depend on whether the United States will attempt to block the French initiative, as it did recently with another initiative when France announced it would recognize a provisional government in Syria when it is formed. Also, any problem with the EU regulation establishing an arms embargo to which Hague referred would need to be resolved, unless France were to resort to the covert operations approach of the Obama administration.
Assuming it can overcome these obstacles, will France lead?
Former President Nicholas Sarkozy has called for intervention in Syria. As the leader of the UMP, the main opposition party, his demands have repercussions within the French political system. At the moment, it can hardly be said that there is any public clamor for intervention in Syria, though that could change. Nonetheless, any Socialist government policy of intervention in Syria that is supported by the UMP would be unlikely to generate strong domestic opposition.
See
Frédéric Gerschel, “Syrie : Bernard-Henri Lévy déçu par François Hollande; Alors que les combats font rage dans le pays, Bernard-Henri Lévy demande au chef de l’Etat d’être plus ferme. Comme son prédécesseur, Nicolas Sarkozy, l’avait été en Libye l’an dernier,” Le Parisien, 3 août 2012.
Bernard-Henri Lévy, “Des avions pour Alep!” Le Monde, 14 août 2012(Mis à jour le 15.08.2012 à 15h40)(opinion).
Frédéric Gerschel, “Hollande a reçu BHL à l’Elysée pour parler de la Syrie,” Le Parisien, 4 septembre 2012.
In principle, it could be in the interests of the United States to let France take the leadership role on Syria in the next two months, at least until after the elections.
There is an urgent need for leadership now, from some quarter, as the situation in Syria spins increasingly out of control. Iraq, it is now revealed, has been allowing Iran to use its air space to transport military personnel and equipment to Syria to support the al-Assad regime. There is sharp disagreement between Israel and the U.S. over whether and when to attack Iran if it continues on its path to nuclear weapons.
See
Michael R. Gordon, “Iran Supplying Syrian Military via Iraqi Airspace,” New York Times, September 4, 2012.
Unfortunately, world events do not march to the drumbeats of the electoral campaign in the United States, or defer to Barack Obama’s determination not to intervene militarily in Syria “regardless of the consequences”.
The big question is, “Will the United States, leading from the rear, allow France and others to lead from the front?”
For the French, the big question is, “Regardless of whatever obstruction the Obama administration may lay in its path, will France seize the mantle of leadership of the civilized nations in the world, and take the lead in acting to halt the destruction of Syria and its people by a murderous regime committing crimes against humanity, war crimes, and every other atrocity in the book?”
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 consult the information in the bottom right hand corner of the home page. The Articles on Syria page can also be found here.
Tags: a most shameful spectacle, actionable intelligence, america's leadership in world affairs, atrocities, Barack Obama, bernard-henri lévy, bhl, covert operations, covert operations in syria, crimenes contra la humanidad, crimenes de guerra, crimens contra a humanidade, crimens de guerra, Crimes Against Humanity, crimes contre l'humanité, crimes de guerre, David Ignatius, democracy and the rule of law, des avions pour alep, eu arms embargo on syria, financial support, fr'déric gerschel, France, françois hollande, fundamental human rights, James Clapper, John Irish, Kriegsverbrechen, leadership, Libya, locked-in, michael r. gordon, no-fly zone, Qaddafi, Robert Gates, safe zone, Siria, syria, syria policy, Syrie, Syrien, that other beacon of human liberty, the mantle of leadership, turning point, urgent need for leadership now, Verbrechen gegen die Menschlichkeit, war crimes, zone d'exclusion aérienne
Posted in Barack Obama, China, CIA, Crimes Against Humanity, Dictatorship, extrajudicial execution, France, Germany, International Law, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, Morocco, Mossad, NATO, Qatar, Russia, sanctions, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, State Department, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, Togo, Torture, Tunisia, Turkey, U.N. Charter, U.N. Convention Against Torture, U.N. Security Council, U.N. Torture Convention, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, united arab emirates, United Kingdom, United States, use of force, war crimes | No Comments »
Tuesday, July 17th, 2012
We are at a potential decision point on Syria. A draft resolution presented by France, the U.K., the United States and Germany, extending the UNSMIS observer mission for 45 days and calling for sanctions under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter if al-Assad does not withdraw his heavy weapons from towns within ten days, appears headed for an up or down vote.
See Ruth Sherlock (Beirut) and Adrian Blomfield (Middle East Correspondent), “Syrian rebels launch campaign to ‘liberate’ Damascus; Syrian rebel commanders on Tuesday night claimed to have launched a military campaign to “liberate” Damascus as the city echoed to the sound of gunfire for a third day and fighting came close to the country’s parliament building,” The Telegraph, July 17, 2012.
Alex Spillius (Diplomatic Correspondent), “Syria United Nations vote delayed; A crucial vote on Syria at the United Nations has been delayed as Western countries make a last ditch bid to persuade Russia to threaten Bashar al-Assad with tough sanctions,” The Telegraph, July 17, 2012.
Russia has said it will block the resolution.
It may well do so, as President Putin proceeds to ride the Bashar al-Assad regime down to flaming defeat, helping to set a template in the Arab world in which Russians will be viewed as the enemies of the Arab Spring and all it stands for, for generations.
It is absolutely important that the sponsors of the resolution not back down, and not cave in to Russia’s demand for an extension of UNSMIS and Kofi Annan’s mission with no consequences for al-Assad if he displays continued defiance.
Over 10,000 people have been killed since Russia and China vetoed a relatively bland draft resolution on February 4, 2012. Weakening the current draft resolution to get Russia and China on board should not be done if they are only to board a still-sinking ship.
Another toothless resolution will, like the last five months of Security Council paralysis and illusions, serve no purpose other than allowing thousands more to die.
Should the Russians (one almost writes “Soviets”) veto the resolution, what should its proponents and supporters then do?
The Observer offers the following suggestions:
1. Let UNMIS lapse.
It is not capable of providing widespread observation of what is going on in Syria, due to its limited numbers, the government’s ability to control its movements, and its inability to operate to monitor a truce when there is no truce but rather a raging civil war–when it has been targeted and fired upon repeatedly and subjected to the actions of hostile mobs orchestrated by al-Asad.
2. Do not extend or expand Kofi Annan’s mandate as Joint Special Envoy.
The Arab League should speak to the members of the Security Council, the General Assembly, and the civilized nations of the world with its own voice. It should not surrender its role in history, for another day, to Kofi Annan or anyone else. The Arab states need a voice, and have much to bring to the table. They cannot do this with Annan speaking for them.
The sooner Kofi Annan is shown the exit, the better. His mega-personality and vainglorious view of himself sucks up all of the attention of the world’s media, drowning out other potentially constructive voices as well as those of witnesses to the atrocities al-Assad is committing–every day.
If his mission is to continue at all, it should be conditioned on his not speaking to the press or the media.
If it continues, his mission should be a silent one. Let him mediate and report to the Security Council, without manipulating world opinion at every step of the way for the benefit, as it turns out, of the Russians and the Bashar al-Assad regime.
Let his efforts to build another bureaucratic empire in Geneva for himself, as a kind of second Secretary General’s office, lapse when the funding lapses, or sooner if a method can be found to halt this boondoggle.
Send Kofi Annan home. His efforts as a mediator have produced nothing. Absolutely nothing.
3. Let attention turn away from the Security Council, where effective action is blocked by Russia. Develop and pursue alternative strategies outside of the framework of the Security Council.
4. Such alternate strategies should include, as a high priority, the formulation of an economic aid package, including humanitarian assistance, which the civilized countries of the world will provide to the people of Syria, once the leaders currently committing atrocities have been removed from the scene.
These leaders should be brought to justice, whether sooner or later–whether through a referral to the International Criminal Court, prosecution within Syria in the future, or through prosecution in individual countries exercising “universal jurisisdiction” over international crimes, in accordance with their own domestic legislation.
5. A second alternate strategy would be to begin developing a “truth and reconciliation process” which may offer some prospect to soldiers and even officers that, in exchange for full cooperation with a “truth and reconciliation commission” and admission of their wrongful actions, they might be pardoned or receive lighter punishments than would otherwise be possible.
This effort (including both points 4 and 5) could be pursued within and with the support of the United Nations General Assembly. Detailed plans and sequences could be developed, with pledges of financial support from different countries–and other institutions. The idea would be to develop a concrete vision of the reconstruction of Syria, including sources of funding and specific measures to revive the economy. As this vision including the corresponding pledges of financial support takes shape, it is likely to become an attractive alternative to the al-Bashar regime, which promises only destruction and ruin.
It will be useful to shift the world’s attention, and that of those caught up in the struggle in Syria, to the future–to a future which lies on a path leading to atonement and reconciliation.
Somehow, some day, the Syria which Bashar al-Assad has done so much to destroy will have to be put back together, and rebuilt–both in material and in human terms It is not too early to focus on this aspect–the construction of the future.
Thinking about the construction of the future, and taking concrete steps towards its realization, may in fact serve as critically important means of moving forward through and beyond the terrible present.
Of course, miltary action may at some point also be required, e.g. if al-Assad were to start using chemical weapons or other WMD–or to start selling such weapons to terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda and its affiliates. It is also possible that once outside countries focus on the realities of Syria and its risks, instead of the illusions and castles in the sky generated by Kofi Annan, they may decide to use military force to halt the killing and to organize an orderly transition–with or without Security Council authorization.
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: Adrian Bloomfield, Alex Spillius, Bashar al-Assad, boondogle, China, construction of the future, Crimes Against Humanity, decision point on syria, France, fundamental human rights, Germany, kofi annan, Ruth Sherlock, security council, security council resolution, sergeik lavrov, Siria, struggle for democracy in syria, syria, Syrie, Syrien, the terrible present, United Kingdom, United States, UNSMIS, up or down vote, violations, Vitaly Churkin, vladimir putin, war crimes
Posted in Argentina, Barack Obama, China, Crimes Against Humanity, Egypt, France, Germany, human rights, International Law, Ivory Coast, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Qatar, Russia, sanctions, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, State Department, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, Torture, U.N. Charter, U.N. Security Council, U.N. Torture Convention, united arab emirates, United Kingdom, United States, use of force, war crimes | 2 Comments »
Wednesday, July 11th, 2012
Originally published May 29, 2012
With talk of orchestrating a Yemen-style transition in Syria through agreement between Russia and the United States, it may be useful to address the question of what the legitimate goals of the international community in Syria should be.
To start the discussion, the following goals are suggested:
1. Immediately halt the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity;
2. Ensure that any transitional regime fully respects the international “responsibility to protect” as set forth in U.N. Security Council Resolution 1674 (2006).
3. Establish an interim government committed to immediately respecting the fundamental human rights of the citizens of Syria, of all sects including Alawites, Christians and other minorities.
These fundamental human rights are set forth in the U.N. Declaration on Human Rights, and further articulated in the U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the U.N Convention Against Torture, and other international human rights treaties.
(The Security Council, through adoption of a mandatory resolution under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter, could provide that even those of these norms that have not become customary international law will be binding on Syria.)
4. Within this context of the interim government’s guarantee of respect for fundamental human rights, provide for the organization of political parties, the election of a constituent assembly to draft a constitution, and the subsequent holding of elections to a National Assembly followed by presidential elections to select a new, legitimate government to replace the interim transitional government.
5. Establish a Truth and Reconciliation process through which those responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity will be held morally, and potentially legally, responsible for the crimes they have committed. This process could involve creation of a National Truth and Reconciliation Commission, with optional referral to domestic judicial authorities or to the International Criminal Court, depending on the whether the individual concerned cooperated fully with the Commission and acknowledged the crimes he or she may have committed. (The South African and Argentine models might be taken into account in designing the appropriate truth and reconciliation process.)
6. Establish a United Nations Authority in Syria with a mandate to assist Syria in developing mechanisms designed to ensure observance of “the responsibility to protect”, and with residual powers to ensure compliance with the goals set forth in paragraphs 1-5 above.
7. Establish a United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Syria for an interim period of 1-2 years to ensure the safety and security of all citizens of Syria, incuding in particular the members of all ethnic and religious groups in Syria.
Any discussion of a possible Yemen-style “solution” to the situation in Syria should be measured against the 21st century goals set forth above.
The outcome of the actual negotiated, transitional “solution” in Yemen is far from evident, with al-Qaeda operating through large portions of the country’s territory and a revival of earlier civil wars between diferent regions of the country remaining a realistic threat.
Moreover, Syria obviously represents an entirely different political and social reality than Yemen, with a recent history of barbarism on a wholly different order of magnitude than anything done by the Saleh regime in Yemen.
The goals of the international community do not include maintenance of Russian control of the port of Tartus, just as they do not include agreement with the U.S. that it can conduct drone strikes on targets in Syria. These issues can only be decided by the interim government and then the elected government of Syria.
Instead of giving al-Assad more time to commit atrocities against his opponents as diplomatic negotiations continue, and to help focus his mind and those of his inner circle on what is to come, it will be essential to develop and if necessary undertake vigorous military actions to halt the crimes referred to in paragraphs 1-3 of the list of suggested goals above.
These options should be developed–and if necessary exercised–even in the absence of Security Council authorization. Russia must not be allowed to use negotiations as a cover for supporting al-Assad’s continued commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
It is time for the international community to act on an urgent basis to halt the atrocities in Syria, and to commence the transitional process that will lead to a future government based on respect for fundamental human rights, implementation of the “responsibility to protect”, and the establishment of a process that will lead to a government that reflects the aspirations and desires of the Syrian people.
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 consult the information in the bottom right hand corner of the home page. The Articles on Syria page can also be found here.
Tags: Alawis, Alawite, Barack Obama, Chapter VII, Christian, committed to immediately respecting fundamental human rights, constituent assembly elections, crimenes contra a humanidade, crimenes contra la humanidad, crimenes de guerra, crimens de guerra, Crimes Against Humanity, crimes contr l'hamanité, crimes de guerre, customary international law, dimtri medvedev, ensure respect for the responsibility to protect, fundamental human rights, fundamental human rights of all sects, goals for a transitional regime in Syria, goals of the international community, halt the commission of crimes against humanity, halt the commission of war crimes, human rights treaties, in syria, interim government, interim transitional government, Kriegsverbrechen, legitimate goals of the international community in syria, military intervention, national assembly elections, other minorities, presidential elections, responsibility, Responsibility to Protect, struggle for democracy in syria, suria, suriah, syria, Syrie, syrien siria, transition in Syria, transitional process, U>N. Peacekeeping Force in Syria, U.N. Charter, U.N. Convention Against Torture, U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, U.N. Security Council, U.S.-Russian agreement, United Nations Authority in Syria, United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Syria, United nations peacekeeping mission in syria, Universal declaration on human rights, Verbrech Wider der Menschlichkeit, vladimir putin, war crimes, yemen-style transition, yemeni, yemeni-style, yen-style
Posted in CIA, Crimes Against Humanity, extrajudicial execution, France, Germany, human rights, internal supporters of human rights, International Law, Iran, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Middle East, NATO, Qatar, religious belief, Russia, Saudi Arabia, State Department, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, Torture, Turkey, U.N. Charter, U.N. Convention Against Torture, U.N. Security Council, U.N. Torture Convention, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, united arab emirates, United Kingdom, United States, use of force, war crimes, Yemen | No Comments »
Wednesday, July 11th, 2012
For a long-time student of diplomatic history and international politics, it is painful to watch the amateurism of Barack Obama’s foreign policy and foreign policy team.
In the case of Syria, where the interests of Russia, China, Iran, and the al-Bashar regime stand in sharp opposition to the interests of the United States, Europe, NATO, and members of the Arab League, who oppose repression through the use of terror including war crimes and crimes against humanity, following Obama’s foreign policy actions over the last year has been painful indeed.
Russia and China have stood, together with Iran, in stalwart support of the murderous regime of Bashar al-Assad, vetoing Security Council resolutions in October 2011 and on February 4, 2012.
Russia, with a very experienced foreign policy team lead by Sergei Lavrov, a veteran diplomat, has acted with great clarity of vision in pursuit of its goal of maintaining Bashar al-Assad in power and deflecting or neutralizing all efforts to bring force to bear in order to halt al-Assad’s terror. Under President Medvedev (with Putin as Prime Minister, but hardly in the background), and now under Putin as president again, Russia has been unwavering in seeking and achieving its objectives.
On the first level, Russia has simply blocked any Security Council resolution that might work to the disadvantage of al-Assad and his regime of war criminals. It has watered down the two resolutions (2042 and 2043) adopted by the Security Council on April 14, and 21, ensuring that the illusory peace plan and cease-fire that they promised were embodied in resolutions with no teeth–with no consequences for al-Assad for violating them. Similarly, it has blocked adoption of any resolution by the Security Council conferring jurisdiction on the International Criminal Court (ICC) to prosecute those responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Syria.
On the second level, Russia has brilliantly played the weakly-led states of the West and the Arab League for fools–knowing fools, perhaps, but fools nonetheless.
The Russians’ willing tool and instrument has been Kofi Annan, with his 6-point peace plan and mediation mission. Annan’s mediation effort, interestingly, was already well underway before it was informally endorsed by the Security Council in a Presidential Statement on March 21 (which itself had no legal force).
Resolution 2042 formally endorsed the plan on April 14, and authorized Kofi Annan and his mission to “mediate” resolution of the Syrian crisis with al-Assad, who continued to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity even as Annan sought to mediate their cessation.
Resolution 2043 was adopted by the Security Council on April 21, expanding an observer mission authorized on April 14 to a 300-member mission known as UNSMIS to observe the cease-fire called for in the 6-point plan and Resolution 2042.
Al-Assad never complied with any of the peace plan’s provisions, and following numerous incidents where its observers were fired upon and threatened by crowds, UNSMIS was forced to stand down, confining its observers basically to their hotels in Damascus.
At various key decision points throughout this saga, Russia has raised the possibility of military engagement with them if the U.S., NATO, and the Arab states intervened in Syria.
One such threat was extraordinary: President Medvedev explicitly raised the possibility of a nuclear war in the region if there were military intervention against a state in the region (definitely Syria, possibly Iran).
At each decision point, the United States–without acknowledging the threat–went along with what the Russians wanted.
Now we are approaching another important decision point, to decide whether the UNSMIS mission should be extended when its initial 90-day authorization expires on or about July 20, and whether Kofi Annan should be authorized to continue his mediation effort. And, at precisely this moment, Russia has sent a group of warships including Russian soldiers to the Syrian port of Tartus, just in case anyone had forgotten the threat.
The UNSMIS mission and Kofi Annan’s mediation efforts clearly provide cover for al-Assad and his continuing efforts to exterminate his armed and unarmed opposition through the use of terror.
Russia and Iran, which Annan has tried to bring into the diplomatic muddle, and presumably China, strongly support both of these proposed actions.
Will the U.S., NATO, Europe and the Arab League blink again, and in effect accede to the Russian demand that al-Assad be given as much time as he needs to annihilate his opponents–without military opposition from those who would use military force, if necessary, to halt the commission of crimes against humanity and war crimes?
Will the countries which support a transition toward democracy in Syria, and an immediate halt to al-Assad’s crimes have the clarity of vision and the guts to oppose the Russians, the Chinese, Iran, and the Syrian regime? Stay tuned.
In the meantime, see the following article which offers a profound analysis of how Syria has divided the world, into what we have dubbed “The League of Authoritarian States,” on the one hand, and those supporting democratic transitions in Syria and elsewhere, on the other.
Michael Ignatieff, “How Syria Divided the World,” NYRblog (New York Review of Books), July 11, 2012.
Russia, China, Iran, and Syria share one bedrock principle: they will use “all necessary measures” in order to repress domestic opposition in their own countries, and will support others who do so abroad. These measures include terror, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other grave violations of fundamental human rights. Importantly, this support now includes the veto by Russia or China of any Security Council resolution that would confer on the International Criminal Court (ICC) jurisdiction and a mandate to prosecute those responsible for such crimes.
The battle lines are clearly set. Whether Obama will wake up from his illusion of a “reset” of U.S.-Soviet relations with Medvedev, and now with Putin, is an open question.
Obama is also reported to have a dream of concluding, in his second term, a significant new START treaty with Russia that would dramatically reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world. Given his fecklessness on Syria, and the consequences that are likely to flow from the policies and actions he has adopted, it may be doubtful that he could ever secure the two-thirds vote in the Senate needed for ratification of such a treaty. Having watched Obama being outmaneuvered by Putin in Syria, Republicans would likely be skeptical if not outright hostile to any arms control agreement concluded between the two.
Democrats in the United States have for decades had the reputation of being unwilling to use the military when necessary to protect national interests. Obama clearly seeks to overcome the image of Democrats as being weak on defense through his hard-line policies on civil liberties in the war on terror, and his use of targeted executions by drones and other covert means against those perceived as posing a threat to the United States.
Whether these policies will in fact overcome longstanding doubts about the Democrats being weak on defense, in the heat of an election campaign, is an open question.
Certainly, allowing the Russians to roll over the West and the Arab countries in defending Syria and al-Assad’s crimes, will not strengthen the Democrats’ reputation of being unwilling to use military force to stand up to the military challenges of our opponents in the world.
Obama risks being seen, once the voters focus on the issues and hear the Republicans’ arguments, as being all talk, and no action–no guts, no intestinal fortitude, no resolve to act to defend the nation’s vital interests.
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: 2012, 6-point plan, and instrument, arab states, Barack Obama, Bashar al-Assad, China, Crimes Against Humanity, dimitri medvedev, Europe, extension, fundamental human rights, ignatieff, Iran, kofi annan, medvedev, michael ignatieff, military shielf for syria, NATO, New York Review of Books, no guts, no intestinal fortitude, no resolve to act, NYRblog, Obama's foreign policy, Obama's foreign policy team, played for fools, presidential statement of March 21, Putin, reset of U.S.-Russian relations, Resolution 2042, resolution 2043, Russia, Russians'willing tool, security council, Sergei Lavrov, struggle for democracy, Sydney Morning Herald, the League of Authoritarian States, U.S., UNSMIS, vladimir putin, war crimes, weakly-led states of the West, willing tool
Posted in Barack Obama, China, Crimes Against Humanity, Egypt, human rights, International Law, Iran, Israel, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Middle East, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, State Department, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, Torture, Tunisia, Turkey, U.N. Charter, U.N. Convention Against Torture, U.N. Security Council, U.N. Torture Convention, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, united arab emirates, United Kingdom, United States, use of force, war crimes | 1 Comment »
Tuesday, May 29th, 2012
With talk of orchestrating a Yemen-style transition in Syria through agreement between Russia and the United States, it may be useful to address the question of what the legitimate goals of the international community in Syria should be.
To start the discussion, the following goals are suggested:
1. Immediately halt the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity;
2. Ensure that any transitional regime fully respects the international “responsibility to protect” as set forth in U.N. Security Council Resolution 1674 (2006).
3. Establish an interim government committed to immediately respecting the fundamental human rights of the citizens of Syria, of all sects including Alawites, Christians and other minorities.
These fundamental human rights are set forth in the U.N. Declaration on Human Rights, and further articulated in the U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the U.N Convention Against Torture, and other international human rights treaties.
(The Security Council, through adoption of a mandatory resolution under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter, could provide that even those of these norms that have not become customary international law will be binding on Syria.)
4. Within this context of the interim government’s guarantee of respect for fundamental human rights, provide for the organization of political parties, the election of a constituent assembly to draft a constitution, and the subsequent holding of elections to a National Assembly followed by presidential elections to select a new, legitimate government to replace the interim transitional government.
5. Establish a Truth and Reconciliation process through which those responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity will be held morally, and potentially legally, responsible for the crimes they have committed. This process could involve creation of a National Truth and Reconciliation Commission, with optional referral to domestic judicial authorities or to the International Criminal Court, depending on the whether the individual concerned cooperated fully with the Commission and acknowledged the crimes he or she may have committed. (The South African and Argentine models might be taken into account in designing the appropriate truth and reconciliation process.)
6. Establish a United Nations Authority in Syria with a mandate to assist Syria in developing mechanisms designed to ensure observance of “the responsibility to protect”, and with residual powers to ensure compliance with the goals set forth in paragraphs 1-5 above.
7. Establish a United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Syria for an interim period of 1-2 years to ensure the safety and security of all citizens of Syria, incuding in particular the members of all ethnic and religious groups in Syria.
Any discussion of a possible Yemen-style “solution” to the situation in Syria should be measured against the 21st century goals set forth above.
The outcome of the actual negotiated, transitional “solution” in Yemen is far from evident, with al-Qaeda operating through large portions of the country’s territory and a revival of earlier civil wars between diferent regions of the country remaining a realistic threat.
Moreover, Syria obviously represents an entirely different political and social reality than Yemen, with a recent history of barbarism on a wholly different order of magnitude than anything done by the Saleh regime in Yemen.
The goals of the international community do not include maintenance of Russian control of the port of Tartus, just as they do not include agreement with the U.S. that it can conduct drone strikes on targets in Syria. These issues can only be decided by the interim government and then the elected government of Syria.
Instead of giving al-Assad more time to commit atrocities against his opponents as diplomatic negotiations continue, and to help focus his mind and those of his inner circle on what is to come, it will be essential to develop and if necessary undertake vigorous military actions to halt the crimes referred to in paragraphs 1-3 of the list of suggested goals above.
These options should be developed–and if necessary exercised–even in the absence of Security Council authorization. Russia must not be allowed to use negotiations as a cover for supporting al-Assad’s continued commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
It is time for the international community to act on an urgent basis to halt the atrocities in Syria, and to commence the transitional process that will lead to a future government based on respect for fundamental human rights, implementation of the “responsibility to protect”, and the establishment of a process that will lead to a government that reflects the aspirations and desires of the Syrian people.
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 consult the information in the bottom right hand corner of the home page. The Articles on Syria page can also be found here.
Tags: Alawis, Alawite, Barack Obama, Chapter VII, Christian, committed to immediately respecting fundamental human rights, constituent assembly elections, crimenes contra a humanidade, crimenes contra la humanidad, crimenes de guerra, crimens de guerra, Crimes Against Humanity, crimes contr l'hamanité, crimes de guerre, customary international law, dimtri medvedev, ensure respect for the responsibility to protect, fundamental human rights, fundamental human rights of all sects, goals for a transitional regime in Syria, goals of the international community, halt the commission of crimes against humanity, halt the commission of war crimes, human rights treaties, in syria, interim government, interim transitional government, Kriegsverbrechen, legitimate goals of the international community in syria, military intervention, national assembly elections, other minorities, presidential elections, responsibility, Responsibility to Protect, struggle for democracy in syria, suria, suriah, syria, Syrie, syrien siria, transition in Syria, transitional process, U>N. Peacekeeping Force in Syria, U.N. Charter, U.N. Convention Against Torture, U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, U.N. Security Council, U.S.-Russian agreement, United Nations Authority in Syria, United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Syria, United nations peacekeeping mission in syria, Universal declaration on human rights, Verbrech Wider der Menschlichkeit, vladimir putin, war crimes, yemen-style transition, yemeni, yemeni-style, yen-style
Posted in Barack Obama, China, CIA, corruption, Crimes Against Humanity, extrajudicial execution, France, Germany, human rights, internal supporters of human rights, International Law, Iran, Lebanon, Libya, Middle East, NATO, Qatar, religious belief, Russia, State Department, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, targeted assassinations, targeted killings, Torture, Turkey, U.N. Charter, U.N. Convention Against Torture, U.N. Security Council, U.N. Torture Convention, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, united arab emirates, United Kingdom, United States, use of force, war crimes, Yemen | No Comments »
Wednesday, May 23rd, 2012
G-8 Camp David Final Communique: Statement on Syria
1. We, the Leaders of the Group of Eight, met at Camp David on May 18 and 19, 2012 to address major global economic and political challenges.
…
31. We remain appalled by the loss of life, humanitarian crisis, and serious and widespread human rights abuses in Syria. The Syrian government and all parties must immediately and fully adhere to commitments to implement the six-point plan of UN and Arab League Joint Special Envoy (JSE) Kofi Annan, including immediately ceasing all violence so as to enable a Syrian-led, inclusive political transition leading to a democratic, plural political system. We support the efforts of JSE Annan and look forward to seeing his evaluation, during his forthcoming report to the UN Security Council, of the prospects for beginning this political transition process in the near-term. Use of force endangering the lives of civilians must cease. We call on the Syrian government to grant safe and unhindered access of humanitarian personnel to populations in need of assistance in accordance with international law. We welcome the deployment of the UN Supervision Mission in Syria, and urge all parties, in particular the Syrian government, to fully cooperate with the mission. We strongly condemn recent terrorist attacks in Syria. We remain deeply concerned about the threat to regional peace and security and humanitarian despair caused by the crisis and remain resolved to consider further UN measures as appropriate.
–Camp David Declaration, The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, May 19, 2012.
For quotes from President Obama at the G-8 summit relating to Syria, Russian statements affirming their position had been adopted, and commentary, see
The Trenchant Observer, “Obama clueless on Syria? G-8 endorses UN 6-point peace plan—Obama’s Debacle in Syria—Update #39 (May 21),” May 21, 2012.
Latest New Reports and Opinion
Syrian forces have resumed their attack on Rastan. AFP reports,
Soldiers were trying to overrun Rastan for the second time in 10 days, with shells crashing into the town at the rate of “one a minute” at one stage, according to the Britain-based watchdog.
An activist told AFP that Free Syrian Army fighters were defending Rastan’s entrances but that “regime forces are being strengthened with new deployments,” including from the elite Republican Guard.
“Electricity has been cut off in Rastan, and water tanks have been shelled,” said activist Abu Rawan. “There is also a severe lack of food because the market is closed and we can’t bring food in from nearby villages.”
Hours later, the activist said the army assault eased when a team of UN observers entered Rastan.
“The situation is calm now because the UN monitors have arrived” having heard the shelling, Abu Rawan told AFP, adding, however, “God protect us when they leave.”
On May 14, 23 soldiers were killed in a failed assault on the town, which straddles the main highway linking the capital to the north and where rebels regrouped from the battered city of Homs.
…
More than 12,600 people have been killed in the bloodshed, nearly 1,500 of them since a UN-backed truce took effect April 12, according to Observatory figures.
–AFP, “Syria assails rebel town, admits sanctions hurting,” The Daily Star, May 23, 2012 (09:52 PM).
On Tuesday, May 22, in al-Busaira, Syrian police forces fired into a crowd of several hundred people who had gathered to meet with the U.N. monitors, as the latter looked on. According to opposition reports, at least two people were killed.
Unter den Augen von UNO-Beobachtern sollen syrische Polizisten in eine Menschenmenge geschossen und zwei Personen getötet haben. Ein Vertreter der Opposition berichtete am Dienstag, in al-Busaira in der ost-syrischen Provinz Deir al-Zor seien Hunderte begeisterte Menschen aus ihren Häusern gestürmt, um die UNO-Beobachter zu begrüßen. “Binnen Minutenfrist gerieten sie ins Feuer”, sagte der Sprecher der überwiegend aus Deserteuren gebildeten Freien Syrischen Armee (FSA). Andere Informanten aus der Opposition sagten, die Regierungstruppen hätten mit Flugabwehrraketen in die Stadt geschossen.
–”Syrien: Bürger vor Augen von UN-Beobachtern getötet?; Syrische Sicherheitskräfte sollen in eine Menschenmenge geschossen haben, die die UNO-Beobachter begrüßen wollte,” Die Presse (Die Presse.com / Wien), 22 Mai 2012.
On Monday, May 21, some 38 people were killed in the fighting in Syria, according to opposition sources. These included 22 soldiers, 11 rebels, and 5 civilians.
“Fast 40 Menschen sterben bei Gefechten; Seit Mitte April herrscht in Syrien Waffenstillstand, doch die Gewalt bricht immer wieder aus: Am Montag wurden erneut viele Menschen getötet, Kriegsgerät soll zerstört worden sein. Uno-Generalsekretär Ban sieht die internationalen Friedensbemühungen an einem “kritischen Punkt”, Der Spiegel, 21 Mai 2012.
For an incisive overview of the current situation, stressing the need for urgent action including potentially military action, see Itamar Rabinovich, “The Anarchy Factor in Syria,” ISN Blog (ETH, Zurich), 23 May 2012.
Analysis
The theoretical U.N. ceasefire “agreed to” as part of the Security Council’s 6-point peace plan was never observed by al-Assad. It seems now that the rebels have resumed their attacks in earnest. Meanwhile, a third element–linked to al-Qaeda–appears to have entered the fray.
The situation is no longer “spinning out of control”. It is out of control. Whether the U.S., Europe and the Arab countries can act quickly enough to stem the tide is an open question.
Judging from the statements at the G-8 summit at Camp David, these key countries are still asleep. Whether there is more than meets the eye, beneath the surface, remains to be seen.
Publicly, the G-8 and NATO are obviously not paying attention and working hard to come up with new solutions. Such solutions would probably involve the credible threat or actual use of military force.
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 consult the information in the bottom right hand corner of the home page. The Articles on Syria page can also be found here.
Tags: 2012, AFP, al-Busaira, Arab countries, Ban Ki-Moon, Camp David Declaration, Crimes Against Humanity, der spiegel, die Presse, DiePresse.com, Eth, eth Zaurich, fundamental human rights, g-8 "agreement" on syria, g-8 final communique, g-8 final statement, G-8 summit, grave violations, intervention militarie, Itamar Rabinovich, itn blog, May 19, May 22, Militärische Intervention, military intervention, monitors looked on, NATO, obama's debacle in syria, Office of the Presss Secretary, Rastan, Siria, suria, suriah, syria, Syrian police, Syrie, Syrien, the anarchy factor, the anarchy factor in syria, The Daily Star, The White House, threat of force, Torture, u.n. monitors, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, U.S., update #41, use of force, Vienna, war crimes, Wien, Zurich
Posted in Barack Obama, China, CIA, Crimes Against Humanity, extrajudicial execution, human rights, Intelligence, International Law, Lebanon, Libya, Middle East, NATO, Qatar, Russia, sanctions, Saudi Arabia, State Department, State Department Human Rights Country Reports, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, Torture, Turkey, U.N. Charter, U.N. Security Council, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, united arab emirates, United States, use of force, war crimes | No Comments »
Friday, March 30th, 2012
Latest News Reports and Opinion
Reuters reports from Beirut,
(Reuters) – Syrian artillery hit parts of Homs city and at least 37 people were killed in clashes around Syria on Friday, opposition activists said, as peace envoy Kofi Annan told President Bashar al-Assad his forces must be first to cease fire and withdraw.
–Erika Solomon and Douglas Hamilton (Beirut), “Syrian army must pull back first under Annan plan, Reuters, March 30, 2012 (2:15pm EDT).
The Syria conflict and the United States’ failure to develop and execute an effective policy to deal with the atrocities in Syria is likely to spill over into international efforts to halt the development of a nuclear weapons capability in Iran, as suggested by Turkish Prime Minister’s reported statements to Khamanei in Tehran.
See Elad Benari. “Khamenei: Syria’s Anti-Israel, So We’ll Defend It; Ayatollah Ali Khamenei tells Turkish PM Erdogan: Iran will defend the Syrian regime due to its anti-Israeli stance, Arutz Sheva (7), March 30, 2012 (www.israelinationalnews.com).
The Telegraph provides an overview of the situation at the end of the day in London:
Ruth Sherlock (Beirut), “Syria activists lose hope that they will unseat Bashar al-Assad; Syrian activists were losing hope of unseating President Bashar al-Assad from power as regime troops continued to attack dwindling rebel strongholds, ignoring international demands for a ceasefire,” The Telegraph, March 30, 2012 (7:39PM BST).
Der Spiegel, which has consistently provided up-to-date and comprehensive reporting on events on the ground in Syria, describes the impact of “Annan’s deadly peace plan” including its fatal flaws and its effects on the ground:
See Ulrike Putz (Beirut), “Annans tödlicher Friedensplan; Syriens Rebellen toben, Experten sind entsetzt: Der Uno-Friedensplan von Kofi Annan bringt dem Assad-Regime vor allem jede Menge Zeit, um im Land weiter zu morden und zu foltern. Am Ende könnte der Diktator sogar im Amt bleiben – die Opposition will das mit Gewalt verhindern, ” 30 März 2012.
Regarding Obama’s posture toward Russia as revealed in Seoul, see Charles Krauthammer, “The ‘flexibility’ doctrine,” The Washington Post, March 29, 2012. Krauthammer quotes the audio picked up at the open microphone incident, as follows:
“On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him [Vladimir Putin] to give me space. . . . This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.”
— Barack Obama to Dmitry Medvedev, open mike, March 26
Analysis
What can be added to what has been written before? See the Articles on Syria page.
Obama is determined not to get involved in Syria in an election year, “regardless of the consequences”.
He is not moved, not moved to action, by seeing thousands of Syrians killed by al-Assad’s forces, with dozens and sometimes hundreds of new victims added to the list each day.
He supported the Kofi Annan plan, which in effect prevented potential pressures on the ground against al-Assad, while providing a smokescreen behind which the United States could hide its feckless failure to act to halt the killing. Worse than that, the Annan plan thwarted the efforts of others–Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, in particular–from providing arms to Syrian citizens with which they could defend themselves against the onslaught of a modern army and state security apparatus, and from establishing a safety zone inside Syria to which they could retreat to escape the killing.
The response of the U.S. and others to events in Syria is worse than Srebrenice, because the events have unfolded in slow motion and the United States has had plenty of time to think, to react, and to act to stop the killing.
Now the world can draw its own conclusions about the current leadership of the United States, which as we have pointed out has a foreign policy without a moral core.
The saddest thing is that we can now also draw our conclusions about Barack Obama, and the kind of foreign policy “leader” he really is.
He has bungled our exit from Iraq, and further embroiled us in a hopeless war to uphold a corrupt dictator and political elite in Afghanistan, a narco-state.
He has also thrown international law to the wind as he pursues the defense of the United States by enhancing and using the capabilities of drones and special operations forces to simply kill our perceived enemies, throughout many countries in the world.
In doing so, with no vision of peace and no credibility in appealing for the support of the populations of allied countries to undertake joint endeavors based on shared moral values and principles, including those embodied in international law, he has given the world a prospect of endless war–without the moderating force of law.
He is who he is.
And we are who we are. In the United States, we have a vote in the upcoming presidential elections. For some of us, who find the domestic programs of the Democrats far more sensible than those put forward by Republican candidates in the presidential primaries, and who are gravely concerned about the future composition of the Supreme Court, the presidential elections in November, 2012 are shaping up to present a wrenching choice.
In the meantime, we–and the Syrians demonstrating and fighting for a democratic government which guarantees the protection of their fundamental human rights–must look elsewhere for leadership to halt the commission of crimes against humanity, war crimes, and other grave violations of human rights in Syria.
The Trenchant Observer
observer@trenchantobserver.com
www.twitter.com/trenchantobserv
For links to other articles by The Trenchant Observer on this topic, and others, click on the title at the top of this page to go to the home page, and then consult the information in the bottom right hand corner of the home page. The Articles on Syria page can also be found here.
Tags: 6-Punkte Friedensinitiative, a wrenching choice, adrian blomfeld, Ahmet Davutoğlu, al-Assad, Ambassador, ambassador to morocco, arab spring, articles on syria page, avoids confrontation like the plague, Bill Clinbton, bill clinton, bosnia-style policy vacuum, chances for re-election, charles krauthammer, China, Christoph Sydow, circa 1995, close if unofficial advisor, composition of supreme court, crimenes de guerra, crimens contra a humanidade, Crimes Against Humanity, crimes contre l'humanité, crimes de guerre, crimines contra la humanidad, Democrats, der spiegel, dimitri medvedev, domestic programs, Douglas Hamilton, elad benari arutz sheva, electoral politics, erdogan, Erika Solomon, events drive policy, feckless failure, foreign policy, fundamental human rights, hans christian andersen, Hillary Clinton, Hu Jintao, husband, into the abyss, Iran, israelinationalnews.com, khamanei, kofi annan, Kofi Annan's Friedensinitiative, Kriegsverbrechen, kryptonite, marc ginsberg, Mededev, medvedev, microphone incident, missile defense, no moral core, november 2012, nowlebanon.com, nuclear conference, Obama, obama's foreign policy has no moral core, presidential elections, Qatar, re-election in 2012, regardless of the consequences, Republicans, reset, Reuters, Russia, Ruth Sherlock, Saudi Arabia, Secretary of State, seoul, Siria, Srebreice, State Department, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, syria's fate, Syrie, Syrien, Telegraph, the emperor has no clothes, the emperor's new clothes, the flexibility doctrine, tHE tELEGRAPH, Tony Badran, Turkey, Turkish Foreign Minister, U.S. relations with Russia, Ulrike Putz, un peace plan, Verbrechen gegen di Menschlichkeit, war crimes, Washington Post, Washington's fecklessness, worse than srebrenice
Posted in Barack Obama, China, corruption, Crimes Against Humanity, Dictatorship, elections, extrajudicial execution, History, human rights, Intelligence, internal supporters of human rights, International Law, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, Middle East, NATO, Nuclear Proliferation, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, self-defense, State Department, State Department Human Rights Country Reports, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, targeted assassinations, targeted killings, Torture, Turkey, U.N. Charter, U.N. Security Council, U.S Foreign Relations, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, united arab emirates, United States, vision of peace, war crimes | 1 Comment »