Posts Tagged ‘mediation’
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, August 10th, 2012
The mediation mission of Kofi Annan has turned into a hydra-headed monster that the United States, France and the United Kingdom do not seem to have the courage to slay as it begins to rise up again, out of the the smoldering ashes of Kofi Annan’s total defeat, his total failure, as U.N.-Arab Joint Special Envoy.
The mediation mission of Kofi Annan directly served the interests of the Russians and the Bashar al-Assad regime itself, by endlessly proposing empty rhetorical solutions to the Syrian conflict, “castles in the sky” which were beautiful indeed and elicited universal approval, but which were not accompanied by any practical steps or path for their achievement in reality. It was, as we observed, as if the nations of the world became ectstatic over the fact that they had achieved complete unity, on the proposition that all points on a circle are equidistant from the center.
But “Kofi Annan’s triumph”, the mediation mission and its oversized staff and budget, has acquired life and the kind of blind bureaucratic momentum that keeps new offices and missions moving in the U.N. without the intervention of human thought. It represents the creation of what amounts to a second secretary general’s office in Geneva charged with mediating in Syria, to be sure, but also keeping high-ranking diplomats employed, a total of some seventeen staff, at U.N. salary rates for an Undersecretary ($189,000 tax-free), two Assistant Secretaries ($172,000 each, tax-free) and other U.N. diplomats of high rank to assist these principal figures.
A successor to Kofi Annan, and this mighty staff based on Geneva, would help ensure that the U.N. Special Envoy and his operation will remain at the center of international decision-making on Syria, sucking up the world’s media attention as it did when Annan was leading the operation, to the exclusion even of coverage of events on the ground.
It represents Russia’s attempt to get back in the game, after blocking all efforts at effective Security Council action. Without the Joint Special Envoy and his operation, and UNSMIS, the Russians become largely irrelevant as the locus of decision making shifts away from the Security Council–for at least so long as al-Assad’s butchery continues.
We have seen how the Joint Special Envoy’s enterprise was used to do the Russians’ bidding, and to set loose unaccountable U.N. diplomats on an endless quest to, among other things, maintain their own salaries and positions, even if that involved attempting to drag Iran into the existing mess.
Kofi Annan failed. Absolutely. His mediation mission produced nothing. Absolutely nothing. It dragged out the period of time in which the world’s nations stood by, paralyzed by false promises and false hopes. Thousands, certainly over 10,000, were killed in Syria as a result.
Kofi Annan’s mission achieved one key objective for the Russians: it succeeded in forestalling any forceful military action by outside countries that might have actually brought al-Assad’s atrocities to a halt.
The mission was premised on the assumption that if Bashar al-Assad were to agree to a peace plan, or to anything for that matter, that agreement would have some value, that it would mean something. However, even in February, it was already quite clear from the failed Arab League peace mission in 2011 that this assumption was utterly flawed.
Kofi Annan’s greatest and most shameful failure was that after it had become manifest that al-Assad would not honor the 6-point peace plan to which he had agreed, Annan did not report back to the Security Council on the failure of his mission. Instead, he continued to negotiate, to waste time, to blind the world community with the beauty of his “palaces in the sky”, while al-Assad continued to use his tanks, his artillery, and his army to massacre the civilian population of Syria. Kofi Annan constantly held out the hope of some agreement, as he negotiated with a war criminal who was committing war crimes and crimes against humanity against his people every day.
As if this shame were not enough, Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon responded quickly to the Russian entreaties that a successor to Kofi Annan be named as soon as possible. The Russians pushed hard for this, while the Americans did not think clearly and did not strongly oppose this action, which today is reported to be imminent.
All of this is being done without any public discussion or analysis or apparent thought, other than to satisfy the demands of the Russians and the Chinese, whose interest in forestalling effective action by the Security Council–or by anyone else–has been demonstrated beyond the slightest doubt.
Ban Ki-Moon’s appointment of Kofi Annan as Joint Special Envoy was one of the greatest blunders in modern U.N. history. Now, this idea, which is based on the assumption that agreement with al-Assad on anything would have meaning, and the fundamentally flawed concept that it is OK to negotiate with a war criminal while he is committing war crimes and crimes against humanity, is on the verge of a second incarnation with the appointment of a new Joint Special Envoy.
We have spoken before of the folly of subsuming the voices of the Arab countries in the person of a Joint U.N.-Arab League Special Envoy. There is absolutely no objective benefit to be derived by dragging the Arab League into this appointment, which only gives the Arab League an excuse for doing nothing. The Arab countries that make up the League of Arab States have a role to play through that organization, as well as outside of it. Their voices should not be stifled again with another appointment of a “Joint Special Envoy”.
Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon is turning out to be a disaster in his leadership on the Syrian issue. Not only did he initially appoint Kofi Annan, as the outcome of a secretive process the details of which were never made clear, but he also dismissed General Robert Hood unceremoniously at the end of the first 90 days of his contract as commander of UNSMIS. This he did without a word of thanks that reached the world’s attention. Nor did he explain why Hood was fired (technically, he didn’t offer Hood an extension of his contract, without explanation, which amounted to the same thing).
We speculated earlier about the possibility that Hood was replaced for standing up too energetically for the security of his monitors, and ordering them to stand down because of both security concerns and the impossibility of monitoring a non-existent truce. Hood’s replacement, Lieutenant General Babacar Gaye, suddenly appeared on the scene in Damascus on July 30 together with Hervé Ladsous, U.N. Assistant Secretary for Peacekeeping, and promptly ordered patrols by the UNSMIS observers. He was never properly introduced, and details of his background and why he was chosen to replace Hood were never provided in a way that caught the attention of the world’s press.
See “In wake of field visit in Syria, head of UN observers voices concern over Aleppo,” UN News Centre, July 30, 2012.
Lieutenant General Babacar Gaye, Press conference in Damascus, July 30, 2012, Prepared Statement.
See also Executive Summary, “Report of the Independent Panel on the Safety and Security of the UN Personnel in Iraq,” 20 October 2003
The manner in which Ban Ki-Moon replaced General Robert Hood as head of UNSMIS, in view of his distinguished and courageous service, was shameful and scandalous. The way the Secretary General is now proceeding to appoint a successor to Kofi Annan without public discussion, without an open discussion in the Security Council, is equally scandalous.
Why the Obama administration would go along with this move, which is so clearly contrary to its interests and those of all the countries which are willing to act to halt the atrocities in Syria, is just one more of the foreign policy mysteries of Barack Obama.
It seems that the U.S. foreign policy decision-making apparatus is shut down for the summer, and possibly until after the U.S. elections in November. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has become the Peer Gynt of modern diplomacy, traveling the world with her entourage of high state department officials, far from the centers of decision making where policies and actions are in fact decided. President Barack Obama is lost in the campaign, and appears to have little interest in or attention for anything else. Leon Panetta, the Secretary of Defense, has in Clinton’s absence been pressed into service as a foreign policy spokesman for the administration, but not always with felicitous results. Tom Donilon, the National Security Adviser, is apparently holding down the fort, though even he was recently dispatched to Israel to carry Obama’s messages to Netanyahu. All in all, we are left with “the gang who couln’t shoot straight” as they continue their happy wandering through the unfocused foreign policy terrain of a president who is not minding the store.
Hillary Clinton has seized upon this time to see the many countries of the world, which is probably a much more pleasant place to be than to be in Washington, ignored.
If there remains a single foreign policy leader who is awake and alert, whether in Washington, Paris, or London, he or she should act with the utmost urgency to block any appointment of a successor to Annan, and to stop any continuation of his mission and the U.N. bureaucratic boondoggle of what amounts to a second secretary general’s office in Geneva to support it
The world has tried the Kofi Annan act, and experienced the massive loss of lives and the bitter disappointment and total defeat that it has brought.
We don’t need to go there again.
Anyone who thinks the Russians are acting out of any but the basest motives in seeking to resurrect this diplomatic instrument, which was so helpful to them over the last four months, should review with his colleagues the evidence that has accumulated over the last 17 months in relation to 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: and team, appointment of new Joint Special Envoy, Arab League, Ban Ki-Moon, Bashar al-Assad, blind bureaucratic momentus, castles in the sky, civil war in syria, Clinton Peer Gynt of diplomacy, commander, Crimes Against Humanity, failure of kofi annan plan, for Annan, foreign policy mysteries of Barack Obama, General Robert Hood, Hervé Ladsous, Hillary Clinton as Peer Gynt, hydra-headed monster, joint special envoy, kofi annan, Kofi Annan mission, kofi annan's failure, Kofi Annan's greatest and most shameful failure, Kofi Annan's shame, Kofi Annan's successor, Kofi Annan's triumph, League of Arab States, Lieutenant General Babacar Gaye, mediat attention, mediation, Obama's foreign policy juggernaut, Peer Gynt, president who is not minding the store, Robert Hood, Russia, Russia irrelevant, Russia's attempt to get back in the game, Russians, salaries for Joint Speical Envoy, second secretary general's office in Geneva, Secretarhy General, Secretary General, SG, Siria, struggle for democracy in syria, successor, syria, syria update, Syrie, Syrien, the gang who couldn't shoot straight, the Peer Gynt of modern deplomacy, the way forward in Syria, total failure, U.N. Assistant Secretary for Peacekeeping, unceremonious dismissal, united Nations and syria, UNSMIS, war crimes, world's
Posted in Azerbaijan, Barack Obama, China, CIA, Crimes Against Humanity, elections, extrajudicial execution, France, Germany, History, human rights, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Middle East, Portugal, Qatar, Russia, sanctions, Saudi Arabia, State Department, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, U.N. Security Council, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, united arab emirates, United Kingdom, United Nations Secretary General, United States, use of force, war crimes | No Comments »
Friday, March 23rd, 2012
Kofi Annan is not God
At first sight, it might appear that the international community, including the three Permanent Members of the Security Council that are not directly blocking any effective action by the Council, had some mystical belief in the divine powers of former U.N. Secretary Kofi Annan to somehow forge order and reason out of the daily hell the citizens of Syria face at the hands of the Syrian Dictator, Bashar al-Assad.
But Kofi Annan is not God.
While he seems to lull the Security Council into some kind of trance, in his lugubrious speech–at a rate which could not exceed 75 or at most 100 words a minute–he does not have divine powers to succeed where all others have failed before him.
He kept the peace plan proposal which he took to Damascus secret, until it was revealed when the “presidential statement” was issued by the Security Council. He asserted in a press conference that he should be the only person leading mediation of the conflict in Syria. Now, in the presidential statement issued by the Security Council on March 21, the Council pledges “to commit to appoint an empowered interlocutor when invited to do so by the Envoy.”
We poor chumps in the peanut galleries have no idea what “an empowered interlocutor” is or what his terms of reference will be.
Annan is now “the Envoy”. The Security Council will act, by appointing “an empowered interlocutor” when the Envoy invites them to do so. So, it is the Envoy who controls the pace of the negotiations, and the potential actions of the Security Council.
This sounds like the script from a bad Star Trek episode.
It is time to take the baton back from Kofi Annan. He is, in effect if not intention, helping the Russians play their cynical game of maintaining al-Assad in power at all costs. These costs include direct complicity in the war crimes and crimes against humanity al-Assad is committing every day. They are supplying the weapons and ammunition. They are supplying Russian military advisors on the ground in Syria to train al-Assad’s forces in the use of the weapons. These weapons are being used–every day–to commit war crimes, crimes against humanity, and widespread grave violations of fundamental human rights.
In the case of China, and the few other countries which have opposed U.N. action condemning Syria or abstained in votes in the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council, it seems that they are anxious to reserve the right to commit similar atrocities against their own people if they are “forced” to do so to retain their hold on power. In China’s case, Tibet comes immediately to mind.
We should take a close look at the interests of and human rights situations in these other countries which have voted against or abstained in votes on resolutions condemning Syria in the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council. Their votes tell us something important–extremely important–about the nature of their regimes and how they see their future.
The “mediation” of war crimes and crimes against humanity in the current U.N. process led by Kofi Annan has from the very beginning been based on a dangerous and fatally flawed concept. The international community should never “mediate” to bring to a halt war crimes and crimes against humanity. The cessation of these crimes is non-negotiable. Discussions regarding modalities of cessation may be necessary. But mediation of the conflict itself can begin only after the commission of these crimes has stopped.
A ceasefire is nowhere in sight. Each day Annan continues his mission, al-Assad kills more opponents. Annan has failed. His mission should be terminated.
Washington Post Editorial of March 22, 2012
The Washington Post, in an editorial on March 23, 2012, has also noted that Annan’s mission is ill-conceived and bound to fail. The Editorial stated,
AFTER THE U.N. Security Council endorsed a six-point diplomatic plan for Syria by former secretary general Kofi Annan on Wednesday, U.S. ambassador Susan Rice sounded almost jubilant. “Annan’s proposal,” she said, “is the best way to put an end to the violence, facilitate much-needed humanitarian assistance and advance a Syrian-led political transition.” We can only hope that the envoy does not take her own words too seriously.
In fact, there is virtually no possibility that the new initiative will accomplish any of those aims — as the Obama administration should know by now. Instead, it will likely provide time and cover for the regime of Bashar al-Assad to continue using tanks and artillery to assault Syrian cities and indiscriminately kill civilians. That’s exactly what the regime was doing Thursday — pounding the city of Hama, where at least 20 people have been reported killed in army attacks in the past two days.
The Annan plan won’t work because, like the Arab League plan before it, it calls for the Assad government to take steps that would lead to its swift collapse — and the regime has no intention of capitulating. It says that Syrian forces should stop using heavy weapons in cities, begin a pullback of troops, permit a daily “humanitarian pause” for the delivery of aid and accept a U.N.-supervised cease-fire, while allowing freedom of assembly and the free circulation of journalists. To buy time last year, the regime accepted nearly identical demands by the Arab League, admitted its monitors — and then proceeded to ignore its obligations completely.
…
What the Annan mission does not offer is “the best way to put an end to the violence.” It is just the opposite: a guarantee that the bloodshed will continue, and probably worsen. The fighting in Syria will end only when Mr. Assad is forced to stop — or he succeeds in killing his way to victory.
–Editorial Board, “The Post’s View: The U.N.’s unworkable plan for Syria,” Washington Post, March 22, 2012.
Human Rights Council Resolution of March 23, 2012
The U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva adopted a further resolution (A/HRC/19/L.38/Rev.1) condemning Syria today, March 23, 2012.
–Reuters, UN rights forum extends Syria investigators’ mandate; [Human Rights] Council adopts EU resolution on widespread crimes by Syrian forces, says perpetrators must be brought to justice; China and Russia vote against text; mediator Annan going to Moscow and Beijing this weekend”, The Jerusalem Post, March 23, 2012.
The vote tally or breakdown was as follows:
The result of the vote was as follows:
In favour (41): Angola, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, Congo, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Djibouti, Guatemala, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Italy, Jordan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, Poland, Qatar, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Spain, Switzerland, Thailand, United States and Uruguay.
Against (3): China, Cuba and Russian Federation.
Abstentions (2): Ecuador and Uganda.
A summary of the resolution and statements made before or after the vote are found here.
Developments on the Ground
See
“Mass protests and fresh violence in Syria; Mortar fire and clashes between security forces and opposition fighters as activists report mass rallies around country,” Al Jazeera, March 24, 2012 (04:10 h).
Rakan al-Fakih and Antoine Amrieh, “Thousands take part in anti-Syria protests across Lebanon,” The Daily Star, March 24, 2012 (01:52 AM).
Antonio Pampliega (Binnish) “Binnish será un infierno; La ciudad del norte de Siria aguarda el asalto de las tropas leales a Bachar el Asad, El País, 23 de marzo de 2012 (11:50 CET).
For an overview of the responsibility to protect since 2005, see Andreas Ross, “Pyrrhus-Durchbruch; Von Ruanda bis Syrien: Legitimiert die Schutzverantwortung auch Regimewechsel? Der designierte UN-Vizegeneralsekretär Eliasson hält etwa den Libyen-Einsatz weiterhin für richtig,” Frankfurter Allgemeine, den 23 März 2012.
Matthew Brunwasser, “Is Syria’s Idlib Like Srebrenica?” PRI’s The World, March 23, 2012.
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/HRC/l.38/rev.1, Andreas Ross, annan, Antoine Amrieh, Antonio Pampliega, bad star trek episode, Bashar al-Assad, binnish, China, Crimes Against Humanity, Cuba, Ecuador, editorial, editorial board, El País, empowered interlocutor, Franfurter Allgemeine, Human Rights Committee, Human Rights Council, jerasulem post, kofi annan, kofi annan is not god, mediation, military intervention, Rakan al-Fakih, Reuters, rusia, Russia, Russian Federation, script, security council vetoes, Siria, struggle for democaracy in Syria, struggle for democracy, Syrie, Syrien, The Daily Star, the envoy, Uganda, unworkable plan for Syria, war crimes, Washington Post
Posted in Barack Obama, China, Crimes Against Humanity, extrajudicial execution, History, human rights, internal supporters of human rights, NATO, Russia, State Department, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, Torture, U.N. Security Council, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, United States, use of force, war crimes | 1 Comment »
Friday, March 9th, 2012
The Daily Star (Beirut) has been one of the absolute best sources for reliable and up-to-date information on what is going on in Syria, and on the broader significance of events.
Today’s Editorial (March 9) is particularly honest and perceptive, and cuts to the essence of the factors at play now in Syria and in the international community. Extensive excerpts follow:
(T)he death toll is now reaching 8,000, according to estimates, and the Syrian government’s cleansing of towns continues.
Figures of more than 60 a day dead are now becoming commonplace. Yet in a year of massacres, attacks, bombardments and destructions of villages, towns and cities that dare to protest we have seen the international community become mere witnesses, recording events. They simply count the numbers of dead, highlighting the devastation that has been caused.
Their action is painfully limited. Kofi Annan is to travel to Damascus Saturday to confront the violence, but what he can bring to the table is a continuation of what the regime has listened to, and ignored, all year. The United States’, the West’s and the United Nations’ semantic exercises continue unabated, and so does the bloodshed enacted by the Syrian government.
We already know that the ultimate result of Annan’s visit will be further procrastination…
As long as independent foreign media and observers are not allowed in to witness the true scale of the chaos in Syria, it can be assumed that we will continue to face a fiasco, with an international reaction that not only does not help, but actually provides a respite for the regime to continue its campaign of destruction.
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, The Daily Star (Beirut), March 9, 2012
As the sad spectacle of Kofi Annan’s “mediation” of the conflict proceeds, and the world’s attention is turned to what Russia, or Annan, or the U.S. or other countries are saying in their interminable diplomatic dance, it is of utter importance that we all follow the example of The Daily Star and keep our attention riveted on what is happening on the ground.
Let us all, together, focus primarily on that, on events on the ground. As Kofi Annan prepares to travel to Damascus on Saturday, March 10, tanks are surrounding Idlib, soldiers have been bussed to the area, and the new onslaught has already begun as tanks overrun villages in outlying areas. In the meantime, tanks and artillery continue to attack civilian neighborhoods in Homs. Undoubtedly, they are also on the move in other parts of Syria.
For the latest reports, see
Lauren Williams, “Deaths mount in Syria on eve of Annan talks,” The Daily Star (Beirut), March 10, 2012 (02:04 AM local time).
Not only is Kofi Annan’s mission the wrong mission, but he has shown by essentially advancing the Russian position that he is not the right man for the job. Nor is it wise to place in a single individual the job of representing both the Arab League and the United Nations.
If Annan does not produce a complete ceasefire and withdrawal of tanks from cities within seven days, then his mission should be terminated by Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon. This goes against the the usual diplomatic inertia and courtesies and niceties, but it constitutes what is required if the killing in Syria is to be stopped.
The Trenchant Observer
observer@trenchantobserver.com
www.twitter/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: 60 dead a day, a fiasco, Adolf Hitler, AFP, al-Assad, al-assad accomplices, Allied Powers, allison, Annan Besuch, annan's greatest failure, anti-aircraft, apartment blocks, Arab League, Arab League monitors, artillery, Ascwitz, Assad, attack Iran, Bab Amr, Baba Amr, Ban Ki-Moon, Barack Obama, Bashar al-Assad, Beirut, best case scenario, best-case, Casablanca conference, chaos in Syria, China, congress, continue unabated, Crimes Against Humanity, Cuban Missile Crisis, Daily Star, Damascus, death toll, democracy and the rule of law, Deutschland Today, development favorable to al assad, diplomatic dance, disastrous situation, duty of the best journalists, editorial, El País, electoral logic, enough, enric gonzález, Essence of Decision, ethnic cleasing, Europe, excuse for inaction, failure to stop u.s. invasion of Iraq, function as a shield, fundamental human rights, Graham Allison, halt the killing, hell has come to syria, highly militarized, homes, Homs, House, I now seek sleep, Idlib, indiscriminate shelling, Iran, Iraq's air defenses, John D. Steinbruner, John McCain, John McCain speech, kofi annan, lack of moral courage, Lauren Williams, leaders too feckless to act, Lebanon, mass amnesia, means other than rational persuasion, mediation, merciless slaughter, mere witnesses, militarize the conflict, military force to stop the killing, military intervention, military intervention in Syria, military leadership, monitors, moral cowardice, Nazi war criminals, no principles left, not lacking, not lacking in self-esteem, November peace plan, Obama, obama doesn't care, obama's debacle in syria, one side is highly militarized, opponents of al-assad, opponents of assad, Philip Zelikow, Protest und Gewalt in Syrien, rational actor fallacy, real-time intelligence, recording events, round-ups, roundups, Russia, scenario, self-esteem, semantic exercises, senate, shield, Siria, sirie, so does the bloodshed, speak truth to power, startpage.com, steinbruner, struggle for democracy, struggle for democracy in syria, stuggle for democracy, syria, Syrien, tanks, targeted executions, targeted killings, the civilized world, The Cybernetic Theory of Decisioin, The Daily Star, the day after, the filer bubble, the filter bubble, the individual human beings who are being slaughtered, the only mediation process, u.n. mediation effort, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, United States, until the killing stops, unwilling to lift a finger, Valerie Amos, war crimes, we procrastinate, whether we care, widespread grave violations, will, women and children, World War II, worst -case, www.startpage.com
Posted in China, Crimes Against Humanity, Dictatorship, extrajudicial execution, France, History, human rights, internal supporters of human rights, International Law, Lebanon, State Department, State Department Legal Adviser, 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 »
Friday, March 9th, 2012
“There are times, such as when a man or a group of men are in the act of firing weapons to kill innocent civilians, when it is necessary to halt the killing through means other than rational persuasion.”
A central flaw in the approach of the U.S., the U.N., and many other countries to the conflict in Syria is the assumption that by exercising “pressures” on Bashar al-Assad, we can change his calculus as to whether to continue his brutal repression of the opposition by committing atrocities and widespread and grave violations of fundamental human rights. The corrolary of this assumption is another: that if we change the calculus of the “rational” decision-maker, the behavior of the Syrian troops and state security personnel will automicatically change, in this case to halt the killing. Together, these assumptions amount to what is known as “the rational actor fallacy”, the belief that the decisions and actions of a large and complicated organization–such as the government of a country–are taken by a unitary “mind” that perceives reality, makes decisions, and implements those decisions as if it were a single “rational actor”.
See the classic studies on the rational actor fallacy:
(1) Graham Allison and Philip Zelikov, Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis (2d ed. 1999); and
(2) John D. Steinbruner, The Cybernetic Theory of Decision: New Dimensions of Political Analysis (1974, 2nd paperback ed. with a new preface 2002)
It is worth noting, in passing, that the rational actor fallacy is prominently at work in current discussions about whether or not to attack Iran to halt or set back its nuclear weapons program.
There are various assumptions here. The first assumption is that al-Assad controls and directs the military and security forces which are committing the atrocities.
The second and related assumption is that he can stop the atrocities if he is persuaded, according to his own rational calculus, that it is more in his interest to halt the commission of these crimes than it is to allow them to proceed.
Acting on this assumption, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has sent Kofi Annan to try to “mediate” the conflict, the assumption being that if he can persuade al-Assad, the killing will stop.
There are several flaws in this reasoning. First, on the basis of public information, we don’t really know if Bashar al-Assad is in control of decision-making processes in Syria, or if rather others are in effect controlling him.
It is far from clear that Bashar al-Assad can stop the barbaric acts being committed under the leadership of military leaders, including his brother, who may view their mission as a struggle for survival and to preserve their own lives and families and, more broadly, the privileges of the Alawite minority that rules the country. They may feel that they have reached a point of no return.
Could an emissary from the United Nations, or even China and the Soviet Union, have persuaded Pol Pot and through him the Kmer Rouge to stop the genocide in Cambodia in 1975-1979?
Could an emissary from the Allied Powers have persuaded Adolph Hitler to halt his exterminations at Auschwitz and other camps in 1943 (before adoption of the goal of “unconditional surrender” at the Casablanca Conference in January, 1943), or to have surrendered in January, 1945?
We are faced with a situation of war, of civil war, in which artillery and tanks are firing at civilian neighborhoods, and smaller weapons and even knives are being used to kill those caught in dragnets in cities like Homs, and in neighborhoods like Baba Amr.
Under these circumstances, it is unlikely that persuasion alone will stop the killing. Even persuasion accompanied by robust military action, we may recall, did not stop Qadaffi and his military from fighting, long after any “rational” calculus would have determined it was time to stop.
Al-Assad may indeed have the leeway, under whatever constraints he may be operating, to negotiate with foreign diplomatic interlocutors as long as it gains him–and his military and state security apparatus–more time to pursue their efforts to annihilate the opposition.
In that context, he could in theory end up making some concessions, e.g., not to totally destroy Idlib like he did Baba Amr (in Homs), in order to forestall military action by the international community, or groups of states within that community. But given the pattern of the last 11 months, even this seems unlikely. Perhaps he could agree not to destroy the next city after Idlib.
The Fourth Armored Division of the Republican Guard, under the command of Bashar al-Assad’s brother, Maher al-Assad, is currently on the march toward Idlib, according to reports.
See Khalen Yacoub Oweis (Reuters), “Forças sírias matam 54 antes da chegada de Annan,” Estadão.com.br (O Estado de São Paulo), 9 de marzo de 2012.
Lourival Sant’Anna (O Estado de S.Paulo/Antakya, Turquia), “Tanques de Assad cercam Idlib e rebeldes sírios temem novo massacre,” Estadão.com.br, 9 de marzo de 2012.
Khaled Yacoub Oweis, “Syrian forces kill 54 ahead of Annan peace mission,” The Daily Star (Beirut), March 09, 2012.
There are times, such as when a man or a group of men are in the act of firing weapons to kill innocent civilians, when it is necessary to halt the killing through means other than rational persuasion.
We have come to such a moment in Syria.
Kofi Annan has announced his intention to initiate a political process which would involve participation by the opposition in negotiations over how to settle the conflict. The main opposition group has already declared its firm opposition to any such proposal. Annan’s proposals sound very similar to those of Russia. (China, to its credit, is now pushing for an immediate ceasefire and halt to the killing, at least according to public reports.)
Annan, whose greatest failure as Secretary General was to not stop the U.S. invasion of Iraq, appears determined to prevent the United States from taking any military action against al-Assad’s armed forces. He doesn’t seem to grasp the difference in circumstances between Iraq in 2003 and Syria today.
It would be a mistake to further militarize the conflict, Annan has asserted, ignoring the fact that one side in the conflict is highly militarized with all the weapons of the modern state, and is at this moment using those weapons against the Syrian opposition, including innocent civilians who have not joined the armed resistance.
Further militarization? By providing people with arms and other assistance so that they can defend themselves against the wanton commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity?
Sadly, Annan’s mission will only serve to give al-Assad further time to eliminate his opposition, and to offer multiple opportunities for him to play the various nations of the civilized world off against each other. This he did brilliantly with the Arab League in delaying its imposition of sanctions, with his immensely cynical “acceptance” of the Arab League monitors, when he had no intention of complying with the conditions for their deployment. And never did.
In short, the Annan mission, and further delay such as that being pushed by the United States, will under the best of circumstances, only serve to help al-Assad consolidate his regime, and his reign of terror.
After the “mediation”, after the negotiations, any solution that leaves al-Assad and his regime in place will also be a solution that allows his military and state security forces to hunt down and torture and execute opponents to the regime. That is the best-case scenario.
The worst-case scenario is a long and drawn-out civil war, which over time is likely to drag in other powers from the region, and beyond.
Another part of the worst-case scenario is that the civilized world will have to live with the “day after”–the “day after” it has looked the other way in the face of the ongoing commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The day after the international community, with full awareness–in real time–of the details of these acts of barbarism, has done nothing to effectively stop them.
It will be a different world, in which dictators everywhere can take heart in knowing that the international “responsibility to protect” is empty verbiage.
It will be a world in which such dictators will be emboldened to use all the instruments of terror, if necessary when faced by civil opposition, to retain their hold on power.
The Trenchant Observer
observer@trenchantobserver.com
www.twitter/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: Adolf Hitler, AFP, al-Assad, al-assad accomplices, Allied Powers, allison, Annan Besuch, annan's greatest failure, anti-aircraft, apartment blocks, Arab League, Arab League monitors, artillery, Ascwitz, Assad, attack Iran, Baba Amr, Barack Obama, best case scenario, best-case, Casablanca conference, China, congress, Crimes Against Humanity, Cuban Missile Crisis, Daily Star, democracy and the rule of law, Deutschland Today, development favorable to al assad, disastrous situation, El País, electoral logic, enough, enric gonzález, Essence of Decision, ethnic cleasing, Europe, excuse for inaction, failure to stop u.s. invasion of Iraq, fourth armored division, function as a shield, fundamental human rights, Graham Allison, halt the killing, hell has come to syria, highly militarized, homes, Homs, House, I now seek sleep, Idlib, indiscriminate shelling, Iran, Iraq's air defenses, John D. Steinbruner, John McCain, John McCain speech, kofi annan, lack of moral courage, leaders too feckless to act, Maher al-Assad, mass amnesia, means other than rational persuasion, mediation, merciless slaughter, militarize the conflict, military force to stop the killing, military intervention, military intervention in Syria, military leadership, monitors, moral cowardice, Nazi war criminals, no principles left, not lacking, not lacking in self-esteem, November peace plan, Obama, obama doesn't care, obama's debacle in syria, one side is highly militarized, opponents of al-assad, opponents of assad, Philip Zelikow, Protest und Gewalt in Syrien, rational actor fallacy, real-time intelligence, republican guard, round-ups, roundups, Russia, scenario, self-esteem, senate, shield, Siria, sirie, speak truth to power, startpage.com, steinbruner, struggle for democracy, struggle for democracy in syria, stuggle for democracy, syria, Syrien, tanks, targeted executions, targeted killings, the civilized world, The Cybernetic Theory of Decisioin, The Daily Star, the day after, the filter bubble, the individual human beings who are being slaughtered, the only mediation process, u.n. mediation effort, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, United States, until the killing stops, unwilling to lift a finger, war crimes, whether we care, widespread grave violations, will, women and children, World War II, worst -case
Posted in Barack Obama, China, Crimes Against Humanity, Deutschland, Dictatorship, extrajudicial execution, Germany, History, human rights, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Middle East, State Department, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, Torture, U.N. Charter, U.N. Security Council, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, United States, use of force, war crimes | No Comments »
Thursday, March 8th, 2012
For earlier articles on Syria by The Trenchant Observer, see the Articles on Syria page.
President Obama’s response to the terror and crimes against humanity underway in Syria, and that of his national security team and military leadership, bespeak a lack of moral courage at the highest levels.
It appears that Obama, as the Observer has noted for some time, can only be moved by the arguments of electoral politics, by factors that might affect his bid for reelection to the presidency in November, 2012.
This itself is an enormously sad statement. But it is the duty of the best journalists, and others including academics who write about public affairs–particularly those who live in free societies–to speak truth to power.
U.S. policy towards Syria has been described by Michael Young, the opinion editor of The Daily Star in Beirut, where citizens have direct experience living under Syrian occupation and a birds-eye view of current developments in neighboring Syria, as “pathetic”.
It is difficult to conclude otherwise.
What words other than “lack of moral courage” (or even “moral cowardice”) can be used to accurately describe decisions regarding Syria by the highest leaders of the U.S. government to not develop robust military options that are available to the president for immediate execution? At least up until now, when Senator McCain’s call for air attacks on Syrian forces raises the spectre of Syria becoming an issue in the fall elections.
How might one characterize decisions by the U.S. to not lead a drive within NATO to develop contingency plans for military intervention in Syria, to not move military assets to the Eastern Mediterranean, or to have U.S. military leaders publicly declare that military intervention is not an option?
Or to have our military leaders tell Congress that military intervention in Syria would be difficult, too hard, to tell Congress the U.S. could not intervene militarily until it knows more about the people who are being slaughtered in Syria, understands exactly what the costs would be, and knows what the outcome would be?
It appears that we now have a military leadership that will not act in any situation unless they know what it will cost and what the outcome will be. That is the military that fights the Taliban with drones, with executions of targets placed on “kill lists”, which seeks to ensure the security of the United States by deploying these same methods through the Middle East and Southwest Asia and the northern parts of Africa.
With these methods the casualties are known, for the drone operators working the night shift somewhere in the United States–or maybe even closer to the field of combat–do not have to risk their lives to fight their war. They can kill the enemy with no personal risk, by remote control.
To be sure, others do risk their lives, and they deserve the highest praise for their valor and courage in fighting for the objectives the U.S. political leadership has set for them. Even the drone operators in the employ of the U.S. military deserve our deep respect, for their work is certainly not risk-free in a psychological sense, as many may subsequently suffer deep psychological problems as a result of their work.
But now the country that would attack Iran, if it doesn’t halt its pursuit of nuclear weapons, offers to Congress as an excuse for inaction in Syria the fact that the country’s air defenses may be five times more difficult to take down than Libya’s were.
No comparison is made with Serbia, where the U.S. military performed admirably in defeating the air defenses of the Milosovic regime as it was committing crimes against humanity in Kosovo.
Have we forgotten also that the United States posseses an awesome arsenal of cruise missiles, which could undoubtedly give al-Assad a wake-up call if there were a firm commitment in the White House to stop the killing in Syria?
The latest arguments, just leaked to the press in the last few days, revolve around Syria’s possession of chemical and perhaps biological weapons. We don’t really know if there is any more substance to this argument than there was in 2003 when WMD was the rationale for taking down Sadam Hussein’s air defenses and invading Iraq. (Incidentally, the U.S. performed rather impressively in taking down Iraq’s air defenses.)
Moreover, this argument ignores the impact in Syria that active military intervention by the U.S. and coalition partners would be likely to have within the Syrian government and military leadership circles.
WMD may represent a risk, but does that mean than military action is forestalled? How is such an argument likely to affect Iran in deciding whether or not to acquire a nuclear weapons capability or nuclear weapons?
So, now that Senator McCain has called for military intervention with air strikes, the president begins to develop military options for dealing with Syria.
Unfortunately, we are now faced with a disastrous situation due to the U.S. administration’s presumed support of U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon’s decision to name Kofi Annan as a mediator on behalf on the U.N. and the Arab League, to mediate the cessation of the crimes against humanity and war crimes that are underway. Annan, who as former Secretary General cannot be viewed as lacking in self-esteem, has laid claim to being the mediator of the only mediation process with al-Assad and his murderous regime.
Now, today, Annan spoke out loudly against any military intervention.
One can hardly imagine developments more favorable to al-Assad. Kofi Annan and his mediation effort–for as long as it continues–function as a shield against military attack, dividing the leaders of the civilized world. It gives al-Assad control over the pace of the mediation efforts, and even if he reached an agreement–as he did with the Arab League in the fall–there would be further delay to ascertain whether or to what extent he had complied with it, and diplomatic consultations to determine how to react to violations, and what to do next.
During all of this time, the Syrian Dictator would be able to continue the commission of mass atrocities and the use of all the tools of a modern police state to hunt down each and every one of his opponents, and to summarily dispense with them.
Annan’s mission should be halted if it doesn’t produce a cessation of the killing by al-Assad’s forces within the next seven days. Such a cessation of hostilities should be its first and only aim, until the killing stops.
The U.S. response to events in Syria has been cynical and craven, and is indeed in Michael Young’s words “pathetic”.
Now, because Obama seems only able to respond to arguments with potential electoral impact, what is needed is some moral courage on the part of Democratic leaders in the Senate and the House.
It is time for them to speak out, loudly, to the President, to the American people, and to the world.
There may be leaders in the Democratic Party who abhor the lack of moral courage that has been evidenced to date on Syria, who will speak out, and who may even launch a challenge–within the Democratic Party or in a third party–to Obama’s reelection as president.
That would involve electoral logic. It could potentially move President Obama to act. It appears that nothing else will.
The Trenchant Observer
observer@trenchantobserver.com
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.
Tags: 2012, a troubled mind, academics who write about public affairs, al-Assad, al-assad accomplices, anti-aircraft, apartment blocks, Arab League, Arab League monitors, artillery, Assad, Barack Obama, biolaogical weapons, bombing of serbia, challenge to Obama, China, Christianity, comen and children indiscriminate shelling, congress, courage, craven, Crimes Against Humanity, cruise missiles, Daily Star, death toll, democracy and the rule of law, Democratic challenge to Obama, Democratic leaders, development favorable to al assad, disastrous situation, drones, dutch out front, duty of the best journalists, electoral logic, enough, ethnic cleasing, Europe, excuse for inaction, function as a shield, fundamental human rights, hell has come to syria, HItler, Holland, homes, House, I now seek sleep, in the wrong place at the wrong time, independent party, indiscriminate shelling, Iraq's air defenses, John McCain, John McCain speech, kill lists, kofi annan, kosovo, lack of moral courage, leaders too feckless to act, Libye, mass amnesia, mediation, men and boys, merciless slaughter, Michael Young, military force to stop the killing, military intervention, military intervention diffiuclt, military intervention in Syria, military leadership, monitors, moral cowardice, Nazi war criminals, Netherlands, no comparison with Serbia, no principles left, normandy invasion, not lacking, not lacking in self-esteem, November peace plan, Obama, obama doesn't care, obama's debacle in syria, opinion editor, opponents of al-assad, opponents of assad, pathetic, press coverage, real-time intelligence, robust military options, round-ups, roundups, Russia, self-esteem, senate, serbs, shield, Siria, sirie, slobodan milosovic, speak truth to power, struggle for democracy, struggle for democracy in syria, syria, syrian air defenses, Syrien, tanks, targeted assassinations, targeted executions, targeted killings, the civilized world, the country that would atack iran, the courage and the will, The Daily Star, the individual human beings who are being slaughtered, the Netherlands, the only mediation process, the world is adrift, third party, u.n. mediation effort, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, United States, until the killing stops, unwilling to lift a finger, wake-up call, wake-up call for assad, war crimes, we have no leaders, whether we care, widespread grave violations, will, WMD, women and children, World War II
Posted in Barack Obama, China, CIA, Crimes Against Humanity, Dictatorship, elections, History, human rights, Intelligence, internal supporters of human rights, International Law, Iraq, kosovo, Libya, Middle East, NATO, Russia, Serbia, State Department, syria, targeted assassinations, targeted killings, Torture, U.N. Security Council, U.S. Congress, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, United States, use of force, war crimes | No Comments »
Saturday, March 3rd, 2012
For earlier articles on Syria by The Trenchant Observer, see the Articles on Syria page.
A Hard Truth: Obama is a Weak Leader on Foreign Policy
The truth is hard to accept: President Obama is a very weak leader on foreign policy issues.
This is a painful admission, because like many others the Trenchant Observer had high hopes and expectations for Obama when he assumed office in January, 2009. He is still far and away superior to any of the candidates in the Republican primaries who could potentially challenge him for the presidency in 2012.
But he stumbled badly in Libya, and was saved only by the intitiative of France and England which led to him getting involved, “leading from the rear.” America’s “leading from the rear” resulted in great delay before military action was taken, and consequently the loss of many civilian lives in Libya.
Now, he is stumbling badly again–in Syria. Nicholas Sarkozy is consumed by the first-round presidential elections soon to be held in France, and has declared that France will only act militarily pursuant to Security Council authorization. David Cameron is unable to assume the mantle of leadership on his own.
So, in effect, following the Russian and Chinese vetoes of a mild U.N. Security Council resolution on February 4–which explicitly ruled out the use of force–and a General Assembly resolution on February 16 which harshly condemned the widespread commission of grave human rights abuses by the Syrian government.
China and Russia have burned their bridges in the Middle East, probably for a generation. Both have shamelessly vetoed the Security Council resolution on February 4 endorsing in part the Arab League’s peace plan–which ruled out the use of force. Both voted against a General Assembly Resolution on Frebruary 16 condemning al-Assad’s continuing butchery in Syria, and calling for its immediate halt. Amazingly, both China and Russia also voted against a Human Rights Council resolution on March 1 which concdemned the killing and called for access for humanitarian relief.
Now, on March 4, China proposes something very similar to what the February 4 Security Council provided for. Unfortunately, thousands have died since then, the butchery continues, and measures short of the authorization of military force or its use are unlikely to stop Bashar al-Assad’s raging commission of crimes against humanity and war crimes.
In a word, no forceful action has been taken to stop the killing in Syria, and none is yet in sight. Obama’s actions have been marked by their passivity, and by his absolute failure to deal in a serious way with the ongoing carnage on the ground in Syria. As in Libya, he has been a commander in chief notable primarily for his absence from the center of decision-making during a crisis of great importance to the United States and the world. He has not assumed the mantle of leadership, and even reportedly vetoed this last week proposals from within hhis administration for the use of force.
The World–Leaderless and Helpless Before the Ongoing Terror in Syria
The world stands leaderless and helpess before the ongoing terror and commission of crimes against humanity and war crimes by Bashar al-Assad and his government in Syria.
This week the U.N. official in charge of humanitarian assistance was refused entry to Syria. Al-Assad refuses to allow the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Red Crescent to enter Homs with humanitarian assistance and to remove the wounded. Having been promised access, they now begin their third day of waiting. Bombardments of Homs and other cities and towns continue.
U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has been reduced to an almost tragic figure, pleading publicly with Al-Assad to allow humanitarian aid in and to stop the killing. It is almost as if he expects that the Syrian Dictator might be swayed by appeals to reason and to humanitarian considerations–at this point in time, after all such previous appeals have failed spectacularly.
Leaders from civilized nations and their populations have trouble believing that true evil exists. They need to grasp that it does exist, now, in Syria. Hitler existed. Stalin existed. They were real. So is Al-Assad.
Ban Ki-Moon recently made a horrendous mistake when he appointed Kofi Annan to mediate the dispute in Syria, in effect to “mediate” the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity. How you can even negotiate with such a murderer without bringing to bear credible threats of the use of force is beyond the Observer’s understanding. The idea of mediating the commission of such crimes is a fundamentally flawed concept, and how it ever got out of the Secretary General’s office defies comprehension. It was an act born of desperation, a desperate ploy, it would seem.
In the event, as was to be expected, Kofi Annan has not even been able to get into to Syria to meet with al-Assad, who continues his commission of crimes against humanity and war crimes in Homs and elsewhere in the country.
It is a sad spectacle, when the world community faces the commission of such horrendous crimes without a leader, helpless.
Obama’s Dangerous Drift and Lack of Leadership on Syria and also on Israel and Iran
Obama should be that leader, but he seems driven only by factors that might affect his re-election in October. Instead of leading efforts to mobilize effective action against al-Assad, including military action if required, he is on the stump giving political speeches, even if they aren’t called that, fighting to win the daily news cycle as if he were in the last two weeks of the presidential campaign in October.
The world is leaderless, and Obama is stumbling on Syria, and also on Israel and Iran.
His talk of “all options are on the table” with respect to Iran has now become an oft-repeated mantra, whose force has become so weakened that the president himself feels constrained to assure the world that he is “not bluffing”. Once you have to tell people you are not bluffing, your credibility is already on very weak ground indeed.
His foreign policy attention is riveted on Netanyahu’s visit to the Washington next week, where the Israeli Prime Minister will meet with Obama and also with the leading Israeli lobby in the country. Netanyahu and Israel do have an impact on the elction, through their impact on American supporters and political contributors. That’s one reason why Obama is paying such close attention.
Yet the one nagging problem, far from the lights and noise of the political arena, remains. That problem is that Syria, and Israel and Iran are part of the real world, outside of U.S. electoral politics and the 24-hour news cycle in the U.S. Obama’s decisions will have far-reaching impacts on what happens on the ground in each of these countries, wholly aside from whatever impact they might have on the American presidential elections.
Obama’s Blind Spot: International Law
Obama seems to have it exactly backwards in terms of principle, talking of the option of Israel–with U.S. acquiescence or assistance–attacking Iran to put their nuclear weapons program out of business, at least for a while.
Under international law, there is no basis whatsoever for a military attack on Iran in the absence of Security Council authorization. To argue that Israel is acting in self-defense would stretch that concept (contained in Article 2(4) and Article 51 of the U.N. Charter) far past the breaking point.
Moreover, U.S. military assistance to Israel generally contains the condition that the weapons may only be used for self-defense. No argument that an attack on Iran was justified by self-defense could be made with a straight face, without completely eliminating the meaning of that term in domestic legislation (which applies to military assistance to many countries), not to speak of its lack of foundation under international law and the U.N. Charter.
At the same time, Obama should be aware that the Non-Proliferation Treaty to which Iran is a party contains a withdrawal clause that Iran might well invoke in order to withdraw from the NPT after an armed attack by Israel (with or without the acquiescence or support of the United States).
Article X(1) of the NPT provides:
Each Party shall in exercising its national sovereignty have the right to withdraw from the Treaty if it decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country. It shall give notice of such withdrawal to all other Parties to the Treaty and to the United Nations Security Council three months in advance. Such notice shall include a statement of the extraordinary events it regards as having jeopardized its supreme interests.
–For a short but insightful discussion of the withdrawal clause and its history, see Jenny Nielsen and John Simpson, “The NPT Withdrawal Clause and its Negotiating History,” in Mountbatten Centre for International Studies, MCICS NPT Review Issue (2004).
In sharp contrast, military action to relieve civilian populations from attacks by tanks, anti-aircraft guns and artillery in Syria, and the blocking of humanitarian relief, could probably be justified under international law, even without the authorization of the Security Council. This in effect was the position taken by the United States with the support of NATO and other countries when it bombed Serbia in 1999, to bring to a halt the crimes against humanity being committed in Kosovo.
In short, international law would arguably permit military action in Syria under the present extraordinary conditions that exist there, whereas an Israeli armed attack on Iran to halt its nuclear program would be a flagrant violation of the U.N. Charter, international law, and U.S. domestic legal restrictions on the use by Israel of weapons purchased from the U.S. or with U.S. funds. Moreover, an attack on Iran might well lead to Iranian withdrawal from the NPT, making resolution over the longer term of the Iranian nuclear question even more problematic.
The Consequences of Drift and Inaction in Syria, Israel, and Iran
Obama’s drift and lack of leadership are, in view of the foregoing, extremely consequential. By not leading the international community in efforts to halt al-Assad, by force if necessary, in accordance with international law, and by verbally allowing the possibility of an Israeli attack on Iran, in a manner which could actually lead the Israelis to think they might have a green light, he is in a position to cause an extraordinary reversal of fortunes for the United States, and a much broader war in the Middle East. Obama’s lack of strategic sense also makes it hard for him to see how opposing al-Assad could have the additional benefit of weakening Iran’s reach into Syria, Gaza (with Hamas) and Lebanon (with Hezbollah).
Al-Assad’s butchery could continue, while Israel attacks Iran, igniting a regional conflict. At that point it would not only be China and Russia excercising their vetoes in the Security Council to protect al-Assad and gain time for him to finish wiping out his opponents, but also the United States invoking its veto to avoid condemnation and action against Israel and the U.S. under Chapter VII of the Charter, for violation of the prohibition against the threat or use of force contained in Article 2 (4) of the U.N. Charter–the most important norm in the Charter. Come to think of it, President Obama might usefully reread that language, particularly the part about the “threat..of the use of force”.
Obama has paid little attention to international law. This is evident, to cite but a few examples, from his failure to apply the provisions of the Convention Against Torture to prosecute those responsible for crafting and implementing the Bush torture policy, in his support of targeted killings and failure to prosecute those responsible for extraordinary renderings, and finally through his adoption of an expansive military doctrine and practice of using drones to execute individuals put on a targets list. The latter has even included U.S. citizens, and the targeting of unknown individuals who meet certain “parameters” that indicate they belong to the Taliban, Al Queda or other terrorist groups.
He did not use the words “international law” in his Nobel Prize acceptance speech in Oslo, on December 10, 2009. We can now see, much better than we could at the time, how extremely significant that omission was.
Obama and administration officials speak of ”red lines” when they are telling other governments what actions might provoke a military response. Foreign officials have even begun to use the term of ”red lines”. This is the way states communicated with each other in the 19th century. Obama doesn’t use the language, grammar and vocabulary of international law, which has evolved into a highly developed form of precise communication built on the legitimacy and acceptance of the principles involved. He should.
As the Butchery Continues in Syria and Israel Threatens to Attack Iran, What is to be Done?
What is to be done?P
Leadership of the world must come from somewhere, if chaos is to be avoided. Preferably that leadership should come from the President of the United States of America, Barack Obama.
But if it doesn’t, if Obama falters, other states or groups of states must come forward, not only to lead military action in Syria if required to halt the killing, but also to prevent an Israeli attack–with or without U.S. backing–on Iran.
International peace and security hang in the balance.
The Trenchant Observer
observer@trenchantobswerver.com
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.
Tags: 19th century, acceptacne of the principles, Al Qaeda, al-Assad, an almost tragic figure, Article 2(4), Article 51, Article X(1), articles on syria page, Ban Ki-Moon, Bashar, before the ongoing terror, bominbing of Serbia, broader war, built on legitimacy, Convention Against Torture, crimenes contra a humanidade, crimenes contra la humanidad, crimenes de guerra, crimes contre l'humanité, David Cameron, Dcitator, Deputy Secretary Gneral for Humanitarian Affairs, did not use the words international law, difficulty believing true evil exists, expansive military doctrine and practice, extraordinary renderings, extraordinary reversal of fortunes, failure to apply, far from the lights and noise of the political arena, February 16, February 4, fighting to win, first-round presidential elections, Folter, form of precise communication, France, Gaza, General Assembly resolution, giving political speeches, grammar, green light, groups of states, Hamas, Hezbollah, Homs, humanitarian assistance, in Libya, in syria, included U.S. citizens, International Committee of the Red Cross, International Law, international peace and security hang in the balance, Iran, Israel, Israeli attack on Iran, Israeli lobby, Jenny Nielsen, John Simpson, kosovo, Kriegsverbrechen, lack of strategic sense, lack of strategic vision, language, leaderless and helpless world, leadership of the world, leading from the rear, Lebanon, lift siege. bombardments, little attention to international law, mediate, mediate crimes against humanity, mediate war crimes, mediation, Middle East, military intervention, military intervention in Syria, must come from somewhere, nagging problem, negotiate with a murderer, Netanyahu, Netanyahu visit to Wshington, Netanyahu's visit to Washington, Nicolas Sarkozy, no forceful action to stop the killing, Nobel Prize acceptance speech, Non-Proliferation Treaty, NPT, NPT withdrawal clause, nuclear program, Nuremberg, Nuremberg principles, Nürnberg, Nürnbergprincipien, Obama, Obama's blind spot, on a target list, on a targets list, on the stump, other state, parameters, passivity in the face of terror, preferably from the president, Red Crescent, red lines, Russian and Chinese vetoes, Secretary General, Siria, struggle for democracy, struggle for democracy in syria, stumbled badly, syria, Syrian dictator, Syrie, Syrien, Taliban, targeted killings, targeting of unknown individuals, terreur, territorial integrity, terror, the daily news cycle, The Trenchant Observer, threat of the use of force, threats, threats of war in Iran, to execute individuals, to lead military action in Syria, to prevent an Israeli attack on Iran, tragic figure, U.N., U.N. Charter, U.N. Charter Chapter VII, U.S. nuclear weapons program, U.S. position, United Nations, United States, using drones, Valerie Amos, Verbrechen gegen die Menschlichkeit, vocabulary, war, weak leader on foreign policy, What is to be done?, with or without the acquiescence or support, withdrawal clause
Posted in Barack Obama, China, CIA, Crimes Against Humanity, Culture and Communication, Dictatorship, extrajudicial execution, extraordinary rendering, extraordinary rendition, France, History, human rights, internal supporters of human rights, International Law, Iran, Israel, kosovo, Lebanon, Libya, Middle East, NATO, Nobel Lecture, Nobel Peace Prize, Nuclear Proliferation, Oslo, Russia, self-defense, Serbia, syria, Taliban, targeted assassinations, targeted killings, Torture, U.N. Charter, U.N. Convention Against Torture, U.N. Security Council, U.N. Torture Convention, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, United Kingdom, United States, use of force | No Comments »
Wednesday, February 29th, 2012
Revised March 1, 2012
For earlier articles on Syria by The Trenchant Observer, see the Articles on Syria page.
Syrian tank firing in Homs
“So, is the world helpless? Must we simply stand by and watch the slaughter, and accept a future world where we are comfortable with the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity, because we don’t have the will and the courage to use military force to stop it?”
Mediation with war criminals during ongoing commission of war crimes?
Francisco Goya, Saturn devouring his son
Look carefully at Goya’s painting of Saturn devouring his son. Feel the horror. That is the horror that exists today in Syria.
The Future for Opponents of the Al-Assad Regime
Human Rights Council Receives Special Commission Report; Adopts Resolution on Escalating Grave Human Rights Violations and Deteriorating Humanitarian Situation in Syria (March 1, 2012)
The commission of crimes against humanity, war crimes, and other grave violations of fundamental human rights continues in Homs and other cities and towns in Syria. See
Report of the Human Rights Council’s Commission of Inquiry on Syria, February 22, 2012.
–Alan Cowell and Steven Lee Myers, “U.N. Panel Accuses Syrian Government of Crimes Against Humanity,” New York Times, February 23, 2012.
For the full text of the 72-page report, see “Report of the independent international commission of inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/19/69 (22 February 2012).
Human Rights Council in Geneva
March 1, 2012 Human Rights Council Resolution
Beginning February 28, the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva debated a new resolution (A/HRC/19/L.1/Rev.1) on the the escalating grave human rights situation and deteriorating humanitarian situation in Syria. See
Statement by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay at The Urgent Debate on the Human Rights and Humanitarian Situation in the Syrian Arab Republic at the Human Rights Council 19th Session, February 28, 2012.
Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, “Council adopts resolution on escalating grave human rights violations and deteriorating humanitarian situation in Syria,” March 1, 2012.
The text of Resolution A/HRC/19/L.1/Rev.1 is found here.
The Resolution was approved on March 1 by a vote of 37 in favor, 3 against, with three abstentions. The vote tally or breakdown was as follows:
In Favor
Austria
Bangladesh
Belgium
Benin
Botswana
Cameroon
Chile
Congo
Costa Rica
Czech Republic
Djibouti
Guatemala
Hungary
Indonesia
Italy
Jordan
Kuwait
Libya
Malaysia
Maldives
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mexico
Nigeria
Norway
Peru
Poland
Qatar
Republic of Moldova
Romania
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Spain
Switzerland
Thailand
United States of America
Uruguay
Against
China
Cuba
Russian Federation
Abstentions
Ecuador
India
Philippines
Not voting, with explanation (absent from room)
Burkino Faso – would have voted in favor
Kyrgyzstan – would have voted in favor
Angola – would have abstained
Not Voting, without explanation
Uganda
The actual vote tally sheet is found here.
Obama: “We can’t stand on the sidelines” [but let me think it over while I have a latté]
Obama has reportedly vetoed a plan to take military action to set up a secure zone within Syria by the use of air power. See “Obama rules out military intervention in Syria, weighs humanitarian corridors,” DEBKAfile, February 29, 2012.
Secretary of State Hilary Clinton muses aloud, on camera, that if we call Al-Assad a war criminal, it may make it harder to get him to resign. Well, he is a war criminal, and is committing war crimes and crimes against humanity as we speak. The Nuremberg Charter was not about convenience. The dilemma is real. But that is no reason to hide in an Orwellian world in which the Secretary of State and the President are afraid to describe a horrific reality with real words.
See Richard Spencer, Syria: “Bashar al-Assad could be regarded as a war criminal, says Hillary Clinton; The Syrian president Bashar al-Assad could be regarded as a war criminal, Hillary Clinton suggested as the United Nations said 100 people were dying in his country every day,” The Telegraph, February 28, 2012.
How Many Will Die Before the International Community Stops Al-Assad–With Force if Required?
Meanwhile, United Nations Under Secretary General for Political Affairs, Lynn Pascoe, told the Security Council on Tuesday, February 28, that the U.N. now estimates that 7,500 civilians have died in Syria, up from 4,500 estimated in December.
The Urgency Is to Act Now, Today
Kofi Annan has been given a mandate to “mediate” with Al-Assad and others, and has demanded that his mediation process be the sole mediation process to resolve the dispute. This is a major mistake by U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon. Annan’s mission should be limited to a week, in the initial phase. Other mediation efforts should continue.
Annan is no Richard Holbrooke with the full military might of the United States standing behind him, which enabled Holbrooke to broker a peace in Dayton with Milosovic in 1995, after three years of devastating war in the former Yugoslovia. Then, as now in Syria, the international community didn’t want to get involved militarily.
There is absolutely no reason to expect that Annan will succeed where the Arab League and the major Western and Arab powers failed. This is Al-Assad’s game, which he played masterfully with the Arab League sanctions, which were postponed as a result of his acceptance of their November peace plan and the Arab League observer mission, gaining months of time, for months of repression. He never complied with the peace plan’s terms, and in retrospect appears never to have intended to.
He wants more time, more time to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity to eliminate his opponents in Homs, and everywhere else. He will always play for more time. The question is, “When will the international community, led by the U.S. or France, tell him that his time is up?”
He should not be given more time. He should be stopped, by force if necessary. In the next few days.
Obama must face the harsh realities in Syria. This is not a “kumbaya” moment in history. The Russians are willing to play for time so Al-Assad can finish killing off the opposition. They are providing munitions including weapons and ammunition, and probably intelligence, money and other support to assist him.
Obama must understand that the hour is now late. In the end, no U.N. resolution will, in and of itself, stop Al-Assad from slaughtering his opponents. At this point, only a resolution authorizing military action–and the ensuing military action–could do this. But such a resolution is not going to be approved by the Security Council any time soon.
So, is the world helpless? Must we simply stand by and watch the slaughter, and accept a future world where we are comfortable with the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity, because we don’t have the will and the courage to use military force to stop it?
The civilized world has stopped crimes against humanity before, without Security Council authorization, in Kosovo and Serbia. It is now time to act, militarily, to stop Al-Assad. There is no imaginable scenario whereby he can remain in power with a license to hunt down and execute his opponents, without other outside powers being drawn into an ever-widening civil war and regional conflict.
Iran is watching. This conflict is in important respects a conflict also with Iran. Obama has spoken of having all the options on the table with Iran if they don’t agree to stop the development of a nuclear weapons capability or nuclear weapons. He will have no credibility with Iran, and no credibility that he will in fact stop an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, if he does not show some decisiveness now. Netanyahu is coming to Washington next week, in all likelihood in an effort to get a green light to launch such an attack. Things are not going to get any easier for Obama as time goes by.
Obama is known for his words, and the fact that they are frequently not backed up by actions. In fact, in foreign policy, he is seen by many as lacking leadership skills and “resolve”.
Netanyahu defied him early on with respect to settlements, and Obama backed down. Obama gave the Russians their greatest objective in arms control talks, by withdrawing plans to base defensive missiles in Poland and Czechoslovakia–and got nothing in return. He didn’t even tell the Poles and the Czechs in advance. He did nothing to support the Green Revolution in Iran in 2009, which subsequently was crushed–like the Syrian opposition will be crushed if there is no outside help. The Iranians are advising Al-Assad. He stood on the sidelines in Egypt when the Arab Spring arrived, and even cut back on support of civil society programs through foreign assistance in the years leading up to those events. He was opposed to getting involved in Libya for a long, long time, and only got involved when pushed to do so by the French and the Bristish. He oversaw the disastrous failure of American diplomacy in failing to negotiate a status of forces agreement with Iraq, leading to the precipitous withdrawal of the U.S. in a manner that puts the entire Iraqi enterprise in doubt. His policies in Afghanistan have manifestly failed. Above all, he lacks any strategic vision. He doesn’t see a connection between halting Al-Assad’s butchery in Syria and halting Iran’s drive to obtain nuclear weapons. Outsiders have serious doubts he can stand up to Netanyahu and prevent an Israeli attack on Iran. The list could go on.
Nonetheless, despite these weaknesses and shortcomings, he must act now to lead the civilized world in halting the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Syria. He needs to put military action on the table as an option, and immediately take overt steps to put that option in place so that it can be executed on short notice.
That could help diplomacy produce the desired concrete results–an immediate cessation of hostilities–an immediate halt to the firing of tanks, anti-aircraft weapons, and artillery against civilian neighborhoods, and an immediate halt to the ground sweeps of opponents that are taken out and shot.
It goes without saying that attacks on medical personnel and facilities, which constitute war crimes, must immediately halt.
Humanitarian assistance must be allowed, but it will have no durable meaning if Al-Assad’s onslaught against his own civilian population is not stopped now.
The Trenchant Observer
observer@trenchantobserver.com
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.
Tags: 7500 civilians killed, A/HRC/19/L.1/Rev.1, al-Assad, Angola, Argentina, arms, Austria, Ban Ki-Moon, Bangladesh, Barack Obama, Bashar al-Assad, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, bote tally, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, China, Congo, Costa Rica, Crimes Against Humanity, Cuba, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, dilemma, diplomats founder, Djibouti, Ecuador, February 28, Folter in Syrien, Gabon, Guatemala, High Commissioner for Human Rights, Hilary Clinton, Human Rights Council, Human Rights Council Commission of Inquiry Into Syria, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Intelligence, Iran, irish times, is the world helpless?, Italy, Japan, Jordan, kofi annan, kosovo, kumbaya moment, kumbayah moment, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Libya, Luxembourg, Lynn Pascoe, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Mauritius, mediation, Mexico, military intervention, military intervention in Syria, more time to finish off his opposition, munitions, Navi Pillay, Nigeria, Norway, Obama vetoed military intervention, on-going commission, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Pinheiro report, Poland, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Richard Spencer, Romania, Russia providing, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Secretary General, Senegal, Serbia, Siria, Slovakia, Spain, struggle for democracy, struggle for democracy in syria, Switzerland, Syrie, Syrien, terreur en Syrie, terror en Siria, terror in Syria, Thailand, tHE tELEGRAPH, U.N., Under Secretary General for Political Affairs, united arab emirates, United Kingdom, United Nations, United States of America, urgency to act, urgency to act today, Uruguay, vote breakdown, wants more time, war crimes, war criminal
Posted in Barack Obama, Dictatorship, extrajudicial execution, France, Germany, human rights, human rights reports, Intelligence, internal supporters of human rights, International Law, Iran, Israel, kosovo, Russia, Serbia, State Department, syria, targeted assassinations, targeted killings, Torture, U.N. Charter, U.N. Security Council, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, United States, use of force | No Comments »