Posts Tagged ‘presidential elections’
Wednesday, July 11th, 2012
Originally published May 29, 2012
With talk of orchestrating a Yemen-style transition in Syria through agreement between Russia and the United States, it may be useful to address the question of what the legitimate goals of the international community in Syria should be.
To start the discussion, the following goals are suggested:
1. Immediately halt the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity;
2. Ensure that any transitional regime fully respects the international “responsibility to protect” as set forth in U.N. Security Council Resolution 1674 (2006).
3. Establish an interim government committed to immediately respecting the fundamental human rights of the citizens of Syria, of all sects including Alawites, Christians and other minorities.
These fundamental human rights are set forth in the U.N. Declaration on Human Rights, and further articulated in the U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the U.N Convention Against Torture, and other international human rights treaties.
(The Security Council, through adoption of a mandatory resolution under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter, could provide that even those of these norms that have not become customary international law will be binding on Syria.)
4. Within this context of the interim government’s guarantee of respect for fundamental human rights, provide for the organization of political parties, the election of a constituent assembly to draft a constitution, and the subsequent holding of elections to a National Assembly followed by presidential elections to select a new, legitimate government to replace the interim transitional government.
5. Establish a Truth and Reconciliation process through which those responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity will be held morally, and potentially legally, responsible for the crimes they have committed. This process could involve creation of a National Truth and Reconciliation Commission, with optional referral to domestic judicial authorities or to the International Criminal Court, depending on the whether the individual concerned cooperated fully with the Commission and acknowledged the crimes he or she may have committed. (The South African and Argentine models might be taken into account in designing the appropriate truth and reconciliation process.)
6. Establish a United Nations Authority in Syria with a mandate to assist Syria in developing mechanisms designed to ensure observance of “the responsibility to protect”, and with residual powers to ensure compliance with the goals set forth in paragraphs 1-5 above.
7. Establish a United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Syria for an interim period of 1-2 years to ensure the safety and security of all citizens of Syria, incuding in particular the members of all ethnic and religious groups in Syria.
Any discussion of a possible Yemen-style “solution” to the situation in Syria should be measured against the 21st century goals set forth above.
The outcome of the actual negotiated, transitional “solution” in Yemen is far from evident, with al-Qaeda operating through large portions of the country’s territory and a revival of earlier civil wars between diferent regions of the country remaining a realistic threat.
Moreover, Syria obviously represents an entirely different political and social reality than Yemen, with a recent history of barbarism on a wholly different order of magnitude than anything done by the Saleh regime in Yemen.
The goals of the international community do not include maintenance of Russian control of the port of Tartus, just as they do not include agreement with the U.S. that it can conduct drone strikes on targets in Syria. These issues can only be decided by the interim government and then the elected government of Syria.
Instead of giving al-Assad more time to commit atrocities against his opponents as diplomatic negotiations continue, and to help focus his mind and those of his inner circle on what is to come, it will be essential to develop and if necessary undertake vigorous military actions to halt the crimes referred to in paragraphs 1-3 of the list of suggested goals above.
These options should be developed–and if necessary exercised–even in the absence of Security Council authorization. Russia must not be allowed to use negotiations as a cover for supporting al-Assad’s continued commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
It is time for the international community to act on an urgent basis to halt the atrocities in Syria, and to commence the transitional process that will lead to a future government based on respect for fundamental human rights, implementation of the “responsibility to protect”, and the establishment of a process that will lead to a government that reflects the aspirations and desires of the Syrian people.
The Trenchant Observer
observer@trenchantobserver.com
www.twitter.com/trenchantobserv
For links to other articles by The Trenchant Observer, click on the title at the top of this page to go to the home page, and then consult the information in the bottom right hand corner of the home page. The Articles on Syria page can also be found here.
Tags: Alawis, Alawite, Barack Obama, Chapter VII, Christian, committed to immediately respecting fundamental human rights, constituent assembly elections, crimenes contra a humanidade, crimenes contra la humanidad, crimenes de guerra, crimens de guerra, Crimes Against Humanity, crimes contr l'hamanité, crimes de guerre, customary international law, dimtri medvedev, ensure respect for the responsibility to protect, fundamental human rights, fundamental human rights of all sects, goals for a transitional regime in Syria, goals of the international community, halt the commission of crimes against humanity, halt the commission of war crimes, human rights treaties, in syria, interim government, interim transitional government, Kriegsverbrechen, legitimate goals of the international community in syria, military intervention, national assembly elections, other minorities, presidential elections, responsibility, Responsibility to Protect, struggle for democracy in syria, suria, suriah, syria, Syrie, syrien siria, transition in Syria, transitional process, U>N. Peacekeeping Force in Syria, U.N. Charter, U.N. Convention Against Torture, U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, U.N. Security Council, U.S.-Russian agreement, United Nations Authority in Syria, United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Syria, United nations peacekeeping mission in syria, Universal declaration on human rights, Verbrech Wider der Menschlichkeit, vladimir putin, war crimes, yemen-style transition, yemeni, yemeni-style, yen-style
Posted in CIA, Crimes Against Humanity, extrajudicial execution, France, Germany, human rights, internal supporters of human rights, International Law, Iran, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Middle East, NATO, Qatar, religious belief, Russia, Saudi Arabia, State Department, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, Torture, Turkey, U.N. Charter, U.N. Convention Against Torture, U.N. Security Council, U.N. Torture Convention, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, united arab emirates, United Kingdom, United States, use of force, war crimes, Yemen | No Comments »
Tuesday, May 29th, 2012
With talk of orchestrating a Yemen-style transition in Syria through agreement between Russia and the United States, it may be useful to address the question of what the legitimate goals of the international community in Syria should be.
To start the discussion, the following goals are suggested:
1. Immediately halt the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity;
2. Ensure that any transitional regime fully respects the international “responsibility to protect” as set forth in U.N. Security Council Resolution 1674 (2006).
3. Establish an interim government committed to immediately respecting the fundamental human rights of the citizens of Syria, of all sects including Alawites, Christians and other minorities.
These fundamental human rights are set forth in the U.N. Declaration on Human Rights, and further articulated in the U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the U.N Convention Against Torture, and other international human rights treaties.
(The Security Council, through adoption of a mandatory resolution under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter, could provide that even those of these norms that have not become customary international law will be binding on Syria.)
4. Within this context of the interim government’s guarantee of respect for fundamental human rights, provide for the organization of political parties, the election of a constituent assembly to draft a constitution, and the subsequent holding of elections to a National Assembly followed by presidential elections to select a new, legitimate government to replace the interim transitional government.
5. Establish a Truth and Reconciliation process through which those responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity will be held morally, and potentially legally, responsible for the crimes they have committed. This process could involve creation of a National Truth and Reconciliation Commission, with optional referral to domestic judicial authorities or to the International Criminal Court, depending on the whether the individual concerned cooperated fully with the Commission and acknowledged the crimes he or she may have committed. (The South African and Argentine models might be taken into account in designing the appropriate truth and reconciliation process.)
6. Establish a United Nations Authority in Syria with a mandate to assist Syria in developing mechanisms designed to ensure observance of “the responsibility to protect”, and with residual powers to ensure compliance with the goals set forth in paragraphs 1-5 above.
7. Establish a United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Syria for an interim period of 1-2 years to ensure the safety and security of all citizens of Syria, incuding in particular the members of all ethnic and religious groups in Syria.
Any discussion of a possible Yemen-style “solution” to the situation in Syria should be measured against the 21st century goals set forth above.
The outcome of the actual negotiated, transitional “solution” in Yemen is far from evident, with al-Qaeda operating through large portions of the country’s territory and a revival of earlier civil wars between diferent regions of the country remaining a realistic threat.
Moreover, Syria obviously represents an entirely different political and social reality than Yemen, with a recent history of barbarism on a wholly different order of magnitude than anything done by the Saleh regime in Yemen.
The goals of the international community do not include maintenance of Russian control of the port of Tartus, just as they do not include agreement with the U.S. that it can conduct drone strikes on targets in Syria. These issues can only be decided by the interim government and then the elected government of Syria.
Instead of giving al-Assad more time to commit atrocities against his opponents as diplomatic negotiations continue, and to help focus his mind and those of his inner circle on what is to come, it will be essential to develop and if necessary undertake vigorous military actions to halt the crimes referred to in paragraphs 1-3 of the list of suggested goals above.
These options should be developed–and if necessary exercised–even in the absence of Security Council authorization. Russia must not be allowed to use negotiations as a cover for supporting al-Assad’s continued commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
It is time for the international community to act on an urgent basis to halt the atrocities in Syria, and to commence the transitional process that will lead to a future government based on respect for fundamental human rights, implementation of the “responsibility to protect”, and the establishment of a process that will lead to a government that reflects the aspirations and desires of the Syrian people.
The Trenchant Observer
observer@trenchantobserver.com
www.twitter.com/trenchantobserv
For links to other articles by The Trenchant Observer, click on the title at the top of this page to go to the home page, and then consult the information in the bottom right hand corner of the home page. The Articles on Syria page can also be found here.
Tags: Alawis, Alawite, Barack Obama, Chapter VII, Christian, committed to immediately respecting fundamental human rights, constituent assembly elections, crimenes contra a humanidade, crimenes contra la humanidad, crimenes de guerra, crimens de guerra, Crimes Against Humanity, crimes contr l'hamanité, crimes de guerre, customary international law, dimtri medvedev, ensure respect for the responsibility to protect, fundamental human rights, fundamental human rights of all sects, goals for a transitional regime in Syria, goals of the international community, halt the commission of crimes against humanity, halt the commission of war crimes, human rights treaties, in syria, interim government, interim transitional government, Kriegsverbrechen, legitimate goals of the international community in syria, military intervention, national assembly elections, other minorities, presidential elections, responsibility, Responsibility to Protect, struggle for democracy in syria, suria, suriah, syria, Syrie, syrien siria, transition in Syria, transitional process, U>N. Peacekeeping Force in Syria, U.N. Charter, U.N. Convention Against Torture, U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, U.N. Security Council, U.S.-Russian agreement, United Nations Authority in Syria, United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Syria, United nations peacekeeping mission in syria, Universal declaration on human rights, Verbrech Wider der Menschlichkeit, vladimir putin, war crimes, yemen-style transition, yemeni, yemeni-style, yen-style
Posted in Barack Obama, China, CIA, corruption, Crimes Against Humanity, extrajudicial execution, France, Germany, human rights, internal supporters of human rights, International Law, Iran, Lebanon, Libya, Middle East, NATO, Qatar, religious belief, Russia, State Department, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, targeted assassinations, targeted killings, Torture, Turkey, U.N. Charter, U.N. Convention Against Torture, U.N. Security Council, U.N. Torture Convention, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, united arab emirates, United Kingdom, United States, use of force, war crimes, Yemen | No Comments »
Friday, March 30th, 2012
Latest News Reports and Opinion
Reuters reports from Beirut,
(Reuters) – Syrian artillery hit parts of Homs city and at least 37 people were killed in clashes around Syria on Friday, opposition activists said, as peace envoy Kofi Annan told President Bashar al-Assad his forces must be first to cease fire and withdraw.
–Erika Solomon and Douglas Hamilton (Beirut), “Syrian army must pull back first under Annan plan, Reuters, March 30, 2012 (2:15pm EDT).
The Syria conflict and the United States’ failure to develop and execute an effective policy to deal with the atrocities in Syria is likely to spill over into international efforts to halt the development of a nuclear weapons capability in Iran, as suggested by Turkish Prime Minister’s reported statements to Khamanei in Tehran.
See Elad Benari. “Khamenei: Syria’s Anti-Israel, So We’ll Defend It; Ayatollah Ali Khamenei tells Turkish PM Erdogan: Iran will defend the Syrian regime due to its anti-Israeli stance, Arutz Sheva (7), March 30, 2012 (www.israelinationalnews.com).
The Telegraph provides an overview of the situation at the end of the day in London:
Ruth Sherlock (Beirut), “Syria activists lose hope that they will unseat Bashar al-Assad; Syrian activists were losing hope of unseating President Bashar al-Assad from power as regime troops continued to attack dwindling rebel strongholds, ignoring international demands for a ceasefire,” The Telegraph, March 30, 2012 (7:39PM BST).
Der Spiegel, which has consistently provided up-to-date and comprehensive reporting on events on the ground in Syria, describes the impact of “Annan’s deadly peace plan” including its fatal flaws and its effects on the ground:
See Ulrike Putz (Beirut), “Annans tödlicher Friedensplan; Syriens Rebellen toben, Experten sind entsetzt: Der Uno-Friedensplan von Kofi Annan bringt dem Assad-Regime vor allem jede Menge Zeit, um im Land weiter zu morden und zu foltern. Am Ende könnte der Diktator sogar im Amt bleiben – die Opposition will das mit Gewalt verhindern, ” 30 März 2012.
Regarding Obama’s posture toward Russia as revealed in Seoul, see Charles Krauthammer, “The ‘flexibility’ doctrine,” The Washington Post, March 29, 2012. Krauthammer quotes the audio picked up at the open microphone incident, as follows:
“On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him [Vladimir Putin] to give me space. . . . This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.”
— Barack Obama to Dmitry Medvedev, open mike, March 26
Analysis
What can be added to what has been written before? See the Articles on Syria page.
Obama is determined not to get involved in Syria in an election year, “regardless of the consequences”.
He is not moved, not moved to action, by seeing thousands of Syrians killed by al-Assad’s forces, with dozens and sometimes hundreds of new victims added to the list each day.
He supported the Kofi Annan plan, which in effect prevented potential pressures on the ground against al-Assad, while providing a smokescreen behind which the United States could hide its feckless failure to act to halt the killing. Worse than that, the Annan plan thwarted the efforts of others–Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, in particular–from providing arms to Syrian citizens with which they could defend themselves against the onslaught of a modern army and state security apparatus, and from establishing a safety zone inside Syria to which they could retreat to escape the killing.
The response of the U.S. and others to events in Syria is worse than Srebrenice, because the events have unfolded in slow motion and the United States has had plenty of time to think, to react, and to act to stop the killing.
Now the world can draw its own conclusions about the current leadership of the United States, which as we have pointed out has a foreign policy without a moral core.
The saddest thing is that we can now also draw our conclusions about Barack Obama, and the kind of foreign policy “leader” he really is.
He has bungled our exit from Iraq, and further embroiled us in a hopeless war to uphold a corrupt dictator and political elite in Afghanistan, a narco-state.
He has also thrown international law to the wind as he pursues the defense of the United States by enhancing and using the capabilities of drones and special operations forces to simply kill our perceived enemies, throughout many countries in the world.
In doing so, with no vision of peace and no credibility in appealing for the support of the populations of allied countries to undertake joint endeavors based on shared moral values and principles, including those embodied in international law, he has given the world a prospect of endless war–without the moderating force of law.
He is who he is.
And we are who we are. In the United States, we have a vote in the upcoming presidential elections. For some of us, who find the domestic programs of the Democrats far more sensible than those put forward by Republican candidates in the presidential primaries, and who are gravely concerned about the future composition of the Supreme Court, the presidential elections in November, 2012 are shaping up to present a wrenching choice.
In the meantime, we–and the Syrians demonstrating and fighting for a democratic government which guarantees the protection of their fundamental human rights–must look elsewhere for leadership to halt the commission of crimes against humanity, war crimes, and other grave violations of human rights in Syria.
The Trenchant Observer
observer@trenchantobserver.com
www.twitter.com/trenchantobserv
For links to other articles by The Trenchant Observer on this topic, and others, click on the title at the top of this page to go to the home page, and then consult the information in the bottom right hand corner of the home page. The Articles on Syria page can also be found here.
Tags: 6-Punkte Friedensinitiative, a wrenching choice, adrian blomfeld, Ahmet Davutoğlu, al-Assad, Ambassador, ambassador to morocco, arab spring, articles on syria page, avoids confrontation like the plague, Bill Clinbton, bill clinton, bosnia-style policy vacuum, chances for re-election, charles krauthammer, China, Christoph Sydow, circa 1995, close if unofficial advisor, composition of supreme court, crimenes de guerra, crimens contra a humanidade, Crimes Against Humanity, crimes contre l'humanité, crimes de guerre, crimines contra la humanidad, Democrats, der spiegel, dimitri medvedev, domestic programs, Douglas Hamilton, elad benari arutz sheva, electoral politics, erdogan, Erika Solomon, events drive policy, feckless failure, foreign policy, fundamental human rights, hans christian andersen, Hillary Clinton, Hu Jintao, husband, into the abyss, Iran, israelinationalnews.com, khamanei, kofi annan, Kofi Annan's Friedensinitiative, Kriegsverbrechen, kryptonite, marc ginsberg, Mededev, medvedev, microphone incident, missile defense, no moral core, november 2012, nowlebanon.com, nuclear conference, Obama, obama's foreign policy has no moral core, presidential elections, Qatar, re-election in 2012, regardless of the consequences, Republicans, reset, Reuters, Russia, Ruth Sherlock, Saudi Arabia, Secretary of State, seoul, Siria, Srebreice, State Department, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, syria's fate, Syrie, Syrien, Telegraph, the emperor has no clothes, the emperor's new clothes, the flexibility doctrine, tHE tELEGRAPH, Tony Badran, Turkey, Turkish Foreign Minister, U.S. relations with Russia, Ulrike Putz, un peace plan, Verbrechen gegen di Menschlichkeit, war crimes, Washington Post, Washington's fecklessness, worse than srebrenice
Posted in Barack Obama, China, corruption, Crimes Against Humanity, Dictatorship, elections, extrajudicial execution, History, human rights, Intelligence, internal supporters of human rights, International Law, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, Middle East, NATO, Nuclear Proliferation, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, self-defense, State Department, State Department Human Rights Country Reports, State Department Legal Adviser, syria, targeted assassinations, targeted killings, Torture, Turkey, U.N. Charter, U.N. Security Council, U.S Foreign Relations, U.S. Intervention, U.S. Military, united arab emirates, United States, vision of peace, war crimes | 1 Comment »
Thursday, August 19th, 2010
Senator John Kerry (D-MA) traveled to Kabul on August 17 to deliver the Obama administration’s warning to Hamid Karzai that he must clean up corruption in his government if he wants the United States to continue sending its treasure and troops to Afghanistan.
News reports recall that Kerry traveled to Kabul in November, 2009 to urge him to respect the findings of the Electoral Complaints Commission that Karzai had not won a majority of the votes in the first-round elections for president on August 20, and that consequently a second-round election should be held.
Karzai acceded to this immediate request. However he refused to respond to the demand of his rival in the presidential runoff, Abdullah Abdullah, that the Independent Electoral Commission’s members be replaced in order for there to be a real chance for a fair second-round election. The Independent Electoral Commission had been deeply involved in the massive fraud in Karzai’s favor in the first-round elections, and had officially sanctioned that fraud. Only the Electoral Complaints Commission, which at that time had a majority of “international” members, prevented that fraud from being directly consummated, by ruling that Karzai had not achieved a majority of the votes.
In view of Karzai’s failure to replace members of the Independent Electoral Commission who had sanctioned the fraud, Abdullah withdrew from the second-round elections before they could be scheduled to be held. Under the electoral law, the candidate who finished third should have advanced to the second-round runoff. This did not occur.
From these facts, news organizations began to repeat the canard that Senator Kerry had, through his personal “rapport” with Karzai, succeeded in persuading the Afghan president to honor the official results of the first-round election, accepting that a second round would have to be held.
In an apparent bow to the demands of Pakistan’s military and as part of the price of a deal for their help in negotiating with the Taliban, the U.S. stopped pressuring Karzai to enter a national unity government in talks with Abdullah, effectively pulling the rug out from under the latter.
Given Karzai’s failure to respond to his demands and the likelihood of massive fraud in the second-round elections, Abdullah withdrew from the elections. The United States immediately accepted this outcome, and began trumpeting to the world that Karzai was the legitimate and democratically-elected president of Afghanistan.
Senator Kerry’s Fundamental Conflict of Interest
Senator Kerry, as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has a duty to oversee the actions of the executive branch in conducting the foreign policy of the United States. He and his Committee are responsible for advising the Senate as to the wisdom and coherence of that foreign policy, and whether to approve legislation to finance its implementation.
Yet by acting in an executive branch capacity to directly assist the President in his achievement of foreign policy objectives, Kerry has entered—perhaps unintentionally and with the best of motives—into a realm where his efforts on behalf of the executive involve a direct conflict of interest with his responsibilities as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. For he cannot be expected to exercise the independent judgment required in conducting Senate oversight responsibilities of foreign policy actions in which he himself has directly taken part.
Senator Kerry may indeed have important diplomatic skills that might be employed in service to the nation. If Hillary Clinton were to resign, he would certainly be a strong candidate to become Secretary of State.
But he cannot undertake executive functions and responsibilities without entering into a fundamental conflict of interest with his legislative mandate and duties as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Only the Executive, under our constitution, can conduct the foreign policy of the United States. Statements by Senator Kerry that he is in Kabul in his capacity as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee should be dismissed as the fig leaf that they are. It appears beyond doubt that, as a result of Karzai’s interference with the work of anti-corruption bodies established in Afghanistan, the Obama administration found itself in an impasse with Karzai and called upon Kerry to help break it.
This is implementing foreign policy, not gathering information that might be useful in making legislative judgments. However well-intentioned such conduct may be, it is constitutionally inappropriate.
We need Senator Kerry in his constitutional role as Senator and Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, delivering absolutely independent, objective, and critical judgments on the wisdom and conduct of U.S. foreign policy in Afghanistan.
Given the importance of the position he holds in the Senate, his judgment must at all times avoid even the appearance of impropriety. In the ninth year of the war in Afghanistan, we need his independent and critical judgment more than ever.
The Trenchant Observer
www.trenchantobserver.com
E-mail: observer@trenchantobserver.com
Twitter: www.twitter.com/trenchantobserv
Comments are invited.
Tags: 2009, Abdullah, Abdullah Abdullah, Afghan, Afghanistan, anti-corruption body, August 20 elections, Barack Obama, bodies, chairman, conflict of interest, constitutional duty, corruption, David Petraeus, Dion Nissenbaum, Electoral Complaints Comission, electoral law, first-round elections, Hamid Karzai, Hillary Clinton, impasse, Independent Electoral Commission, international members, internationals, John Kerry, Joshua Partlow, Karl Eikenberry, Karzai, McClatchey Newspapers, presidential elections, rapport with Karzai, second round elections, Secretary of State, senate foreign relations committee, Senator, Washington Post
Posted in Abdoulah, Abdullah, Afghanistan, elections, Hamid Karzai, Pakistan, Pakistan military, State Department, U.S. news coverage, United States | Comments Off