Archives: Articles

US efforts to bring down the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria focus on collusion with Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP).

Turkey is the only regional power that could successfully front a proxy war with Syria, behind which Washington could call the shots. The AKP is also viewed as the best political force to head a Sunni-based regional alliance movement incorporating Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

The US has worked to coordinate the military operation in Syria through the Syrian National Council (SNC) and the Free Syrian Army (FSA), which is controlled by Ankara and made up of most of the forces the US would seek to impose as a post-Assad client regime. This includes not just its own long-time assets, drawn from ex-members of the Baathist regime and its nominally liberal bourgeois opponents, but above all the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Brotherhood has already formed regimes that the Obama administration is working with in Tunisia and Egypt to secure US regional interests in the aftermath of the fall of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and Hosni Mubarak.

Along with these layers, the US also relies on Al Qaeda elements from Iraq, Libya and elsewhere to act as shock troops, funded and armed by the Saudi and Qatari governments.

The FSA, no less than the Al Qaeda-linked groups, operates as a Sunni sectarian force. But a command structure based in Turkey and the presence of a few trusted “liberal” figures in its ranks has been used by Washington in a concerted propaganda effort to conceal the sectarian character of the opposition and its ties to Al Qaeda elements.

However, the growing role of Salafist forces has proven politically embarrassing to the US. Thus, for weeks, US officials have been placing reports in the media stressing that it has CIA operatives working to control the supply of arms to the insurgency—which the New York Times described as being “funnelled mostly across the Turkish border by way of a shadowy network of intermediaries including Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood and paid for by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.…”

US secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s visit to Istanbul on Saturday aimed to strengthen US/Turkey cooperation and reinforce US operational control of the insurgency. Clinton made her most significant statement when she raised the possibility of establishing a no-fly zone, but her remarks also referenced “very intensive operational planning” by military and intelligence officials that aims to “get into the real details.”

Washington’s broader regional ambitions were underscored that weekend by coordinated announcements by the Treasury and State Department, accusing Iran and Hezbollah of training Syrian army forces. A Treasury statement cited Hezbollah’s secretary general, Hassan Nasrallah, as personally overseeing the operation.

Turkey has made repeated indications that it is ready to mount a military incursion into Syria, citing the threat posed by the control established by Kurdish groups over border areas. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has warned, “We have three brigades along the border currently conducting manoeuvres there…. It is out of question for us to tolerate a structure of the terrorist organisation in the north of Syria….”

On August 7, Erdogan made an incendiary attack on Assad, asking, “Can we even say that he is a Muslim?”

Citing the danger of a Kurdish insurrection is not just a device for justifying a military assault on Syria. Erdogan indeed faces the threat of mounting unrest among Turkey’s 20 million Kurds and the prospect of a separatist movement emerging in Syria’s northeastern border area.

Syrian border regions are under the de-facto control of the Democratic Union Party (PYD) and the Kurdish National Council (KNC). The PYD is the more substantial force and is affiliated with Turkey’s Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK).

Erdogan has attempted to counter the PKK’s influence by seeking an accommodation with Massoud Barzani, the president of Iraqi Kurdistan. These efforts have been far from successful, with Barzani lending his support for the effort at establishing a Syrian Kurdish enclave. Moreover, the attempt to cultivate Barzani has angered the Sunni-dominated central government in Iraq, particularly a deal to set up a pipeline to carry oil and gas from Kirkuk to Ceyhan and developing trade worth billions of dollars.

Kirkuk is a disputed city that the Kurds want to incorporate into their region. Turkey’s foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, this month made a provocative visit to Kurdistan that included a visit to Kirkuk.

Iraqi prime minister Nuri al-Maliki said in a statement Saturday that Turkey is “dealing with the [Kurdistan] region as an independent state, and this is rejected by us.”

Total of France has also been told it will be required to sell its minority stake in the Halfaya oilfield in Iraq unless it cancels a deal acquiring licences controlled by the Kurdistan Regional Government.

Writing in Middle East Online, James M. Dorsey notes that the potential fallout from the proxy war in Syria “ranges from the exodus of many of its 2.1 million Christians from what they fear will be a Sunni-dominated post-Assad Syria, to the emergence of Kurdish areas in Syria as a new flashpoint in Turkey’s intermittent war against Kurdish insurgents. It also risks a greater assertiveness of Turkey’s Alevis, a Shiite sect akin to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s Alawites that account for 20 percent of its population.”

For this reason, Erdogan’s Syrian policy has aroused significant opposition within Turkey. In Milliyet, for example, Metin Munir denounced the government for “seeking to gain points through its pro-Sunni and anti-Jewish policies…. Syria is being divided, which poses an extreme threat to Turkey.”

Erdogan has described Kemal Kilicdaroglu, leader of the main opposition Republican People’s Party as being “just like” the Baath Party in Syria.

The PKK calculates that it will succeed in establishing an autonomous or independent region in Syria and can strike its own deal with the US and other imperialist powers. The August 13 edition of Rudaw, produced in Erbil, the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan, interviews a prominent former member of the PKK leadership council, Nizamaddin Taj.

He states that a “Syrian Kurdistan” can be created, just as “the Kurds of Iraq benefited from the American invasion of Iraq,” providing only that Barzani does not compete with the PKK “due to pressure from Turkey or a goal of seizing power quickly in Syrian Kurdistan.”

“The Muslim Brotherhood in Syria is the only party that can seize power after the collapse of Assad, but Israel, the US and Europe are very worried about the Muslim Brotherhood of Syria and believe that they are different than the Muslim Brotherhood groups of Egypt and Tunisia,” he surmises. “The world needs a player in Syria that could rival the Sunnis in Syria. The Alawites cannot play this role. Therefore, the Kurds in Syria will become an important partner in the new Syrian state.”

Under such incendiary conditions, Erdogan’s operations on Syria’s border can become not only the occasion for a direct assault on Damascus and Aleppo, in alliance with Washington, but for a conflict that would also be waged on the soil of Iraq and Turkey itself.

By Chris Marsden

16 August, 2012

@ WSWS.org

A leaked memo that surfaced Wednesday provides a detailed blueprint for an unprovoked Israeli war against Iran. The publication of the memo coincides with multiple Israeli media reports indicating that such an attack may be imminent.

The memo was first published by US blogger and journalist Richard Silverstein and was subsequently picked up by the BBC and other media. Silverstein said that the document had been passed by a member of the Israel Defense Forces to a politician, and then on to him. He said it had been prepared for the eight-member Israeli Security Council as part of a bid by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak to convince other members of the government to support an early and unilateral Israeli strike.

The memo posted on Silverstein’s blog, Tikun Olam, states: “The Israeli attack will open with a coordinated strike, including an unprecedented cyber-attack which will totally paralyze the Iranian regime.” The aim is to shut down all communications between the Iranian government and military, leaving the country’s leadership in the dark about what is happening at key installations and bases. Carbon fiber munitions would be employed to shut down the country’s electrical grid.

Meanwhile, “A barrage of tens of ballistic missiles would be launched from Israel toward Iran,” the memo states. These would be fired by Israeli submarines from the Persian Gulf region against Iranian nuclear facilities at Arak, Isfahan, Fordo and elsewhere. They would be supplemented by “a barrage of hundreds of cruise missiles” aimed at destroying the regime’s command and control capacity and decapitating Iran’s nuclear and missile development program, targeting the “residences of senior personnel.”

These attacks would be followed up by Israeli Air Force warplanes carrying out air strikes against “targets which require further assault.”

Clearly, such an assault would inflict massive civilian casualties while plunging the entire region into chaos.

The memo is only the latest in a number of reports over the past week indicating that Netanyahu and Barak are making a concerted push for war, having publicly declared that the stalemated international negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program are a failure and that economic sanctions have not swayed Tehran to abandon the program. The Iranian government insists that its nuclear activities are for peaceful purposes.

Matan Vilnai, who is leaving his post as Israel’s “home front” defense minister to become the Zionist state’s ambassador to China, gave an interview published in the Israeli daily Maariv Wednesday in which he spelled out the government’s projections for the domestic impact of a war on Iran.

Vilnai told Maariv that “the home front is ready as never before” for a war with Iran. “There is no room for hysteria” he said, estimating that approximately 500 people within Israel would probably be killed in retaliatory strikes. “There might be fewer dead, or more, perhaps… but this is the scenario for which we are preparing, in accordance with the best expert advice.”

Israelis had no choice but to accept such a death toll, Vilnai suggested. “Just as the citizens of Japan have to realize they can have earthquakes, so the citizens of Israel have to realize that if they live here, they have to be prepared to expect missiles on the home front. It’s not pleasant for the home front, but decisions have to be made and we have to be ready.” Recent polls have indicated continued strong public opposition to a war with Iran.

The war, Vilnai said, “will last 30 days on several fronts,” according to the government’s assessments. The implication is that Israel would be involved in hostilities not only with Iran, but also with the Lebanese Shia movement Hezbollah as well Palestinian fighters in the Gaza Strip.

Vilnai is being replaced in his “home front” post by Avi Dichter, the former director of Israel’s internal security agency, Shin Bet, Netanyahu announced on Tuesday. The appointment of Dichter, who resigned from the opposition Kadima party to take the post, was widely seen as part of the war preparations as well as a move to bolster support for an attack within the government.

As director of Israel’s General Security Service (GSS) from 2000 to 2005, Dichter was responsible for choosing the targets of Israel’s so-called “targeted assassinations,” the Zionist regime’s response to the second Palestinian intifada. These extra-judicial executions claimed some 724 lives, including those of at least 228 civilian bystanders, of whom 77 were children.

New civil defense measures are being taken in preparation for war, including the rolling out of a text message system for warning the population against incoming missiles, the distribution of more gas masks, and the organization of air raid drills at schools in the north of Israel when they open next month

An indication of the seriousness with which the war threats are being taken internationally is their impact on Israel’s economy. Fears of an Israeli attack have sent the shekel to its lowest level in nearly 15 months, while the Tel Aviv stock market hit a three-week low on August 13. Meanwhile, the cost of insuring Israeli debt has risen steadily—what traders are calling a “saber-rattling” premium.

There have been multiple reports indicating that the stepped-up threats of war against Iran are driven not so much by new intelligence about the Iranian nuclear program as by the US election calendar. Yedioth Ahronoth, Israel’s largest circulation daily, published a report by two of its senior journalists last Friday stating, “Insofar as it depends on Binyamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, an Israeli military strike on the nuclear facilities in Iran will take place in these coming autumn months, before the US elections in November.”

On Tuesday, the daily Ma’ariv reported that Netanyahu and Barak have set a September 25 deadline for US President Barack Obama to make a commitment that the US will take military action against Iran. The date coincides with the opening of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, which Netanyahu is scheduled to attend.

Israel’s Channel 10 News reported Tuesday that US and Israeli officials are seeking to set up a meeting between Netanyahu and Obama around that date. At that time, the sources said, Obama will supposedly commit to using military force against Iran by June 2013 if Tehran has not submitted by then to Western demands that it scrap its nuclear program.

Netanyahu’s calculation appears to be that launching a war before the November election in the US would force the Obama administration to join Israel in attacking Iran out of fear of being out-flanked on the right by Republican nominee Mitt Romney, who recently visited Israel and declared that the US should support the Israeli regime if it launches a unilateral war.

According to military analysts, Israel does not have the military capacity to wipe out Iran’s nuclear program, but could set it back at least two years through air strikes. Drawing the US into an attack holds the prospect of inflicting far more extensive damage as well as the potential for an all-out war for regime-change.

Much has been made in the Israeli media of opposition from within the top ranks of Israel’s military and its intelligence apparatus to launching a unilateral attack. A number of former military and spy chiefs have spoken publicly in opposition to Tel Aviv carrying out an imminent war. These divisions, however, are of a tactical character, involving different calculations as to how best to prepare a war that would bring in the US military.

Speaking at a Pentagon press conference Tuesday, US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta voiced the view that the Israeli regime had yet to make a decision as to “whether or not they will go in and attack Iran at this time.” He stressed that Israel is an “independent… sovereign country” and would act “based on what they think is in their national security interest.”

Panetta went on to make his own provocative attack on Iran in relation to the unfolding civil war in Syria. Presenting no evidence, he claimed that Iran was “trying to train a militia within Syria to be able to fight on behalf of the regime.” The defense secretary said that Iran’s role was “dangerous” and was “adding to the killing that’s going on.” He added, “The Syrian people ought to determine their future, not Iran.”

These remarks reek of hypocrisy. The reality is that it is Israel, not Iran, that is armed with hundreds of nuclear weapons. Meanwhile, in Syria, the US and its allies, particularly the reactionary monarchies in Saudi Arabia and Qatar as well as the government in Turkey, are deeply involved in organizing, arming and training the sectarian militias that are waging a terror campaign to topple the Assad regime. The unsubstantiated charge against Iran that it is assisting its ally Syria with the training of a pro-government militia is yet another threat against Tehran and one more indication that the intervention in Syria is directed at preparing a far more dangerous war against Iran itself.

Under conditions in which the US military has deployed a massive force in the Persian Gulf, including two aircraft carrier battle groups and extensive air power, bolstered by a squadron of the most advanced F-22 fighter planes, the threats and provocations from both Washington and Tel Aviv have ratcheted up tensions to a level in which the outbreak of a full-scale war is on a hair trigger.

By Bill Van Auken

16 August, 2012

@ WSWS.org

“Naturally, the common people don’t want war, neither in Russia nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country that determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship… All you have to do is to tell them that they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”

Herman Goering, interviewed in Spandau Prison

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” H.L. Menken

Owners of night-clubs in modern cities are sometimes visited by gangsters who offer them “protection”, and demand a fee for this service. The owners usually pay up. They know what will happen if they don’t.

One is reminded of the feudal system of the Middle Ages, in which industrious peasants paid for “protection” with a large fraction of their produce. Their gangster-like protectors, the knights and barons, did no useful work. All they did was to fight with each other.

How much is it exactly that we pay today for “protection”? The total world military budgets cost us 1.7 trillion dollars each year ¨C that is to say, 1,700,000,000,000 dollars, an amount of money almost too large to be imagined. What do we get for this? We do not get anything useful. We get war, a universal source of poverty, destruction of infrastructure, and human suffering.

The people of the world do not want war. Even Hermann Goering knew this. The military-industrial complexes throughout the world want war ¨C they live on it ¨C without it they would wither. Governments make war, contrary to the will of their peoples, because they are controlled by a great river of money from the world’s military-industrial complexes. This huge torrent of money drives the war machine ¨C the devil’s dynamo ¨C the protection racket – making slaves of our politicians.

Today the latest means of “alarming the populace” (in Menkin’s words) is “terrorism”. We have to be “protected from terrorism”. This goal has the highest priority, although the total number of people killed by terrorist actions is vanishingly small when compared to the number of children who die of starvation each year, and even vanishingly small compared to the number of people killed in traffic accidents. Nevertheless, we are constantly reminded of terrorism by checks at airports, whose main purpose is undoubtedly to make us conscious of the danger of terrorism.

But must we really be driven like sheep by false threats? Can we not see through the protection racket and free ourselves from it?

By John Scales Avery

21 August, 2012

@ Countercurrents.org

John Avery received a B.Sc. in theoretical physics from MIT and an M.Sc. from the University of Chicago. He later studied theoretical chemistry at the University of London, and was awarded a Ph.D. there in 1965. He is now Lektor Emeritus, Associate Professor, at the Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen. Fellowships, memberships in societies: Since 1990 he has been the Contact Person in Denmark for Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs. In 1995, this group received the Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts. He was the Member of the Danish Peace Commission of 1998. Technical Advisor, World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe (1988- 1997). Chairman of the Danish Peace Academy, April 2004. http://www.fredsakademiet.dk/ordbog/aord/a220.htm

The German military and related intelligence agencies are playing a far greater role in supporting anti-Assad forces in Syria than previously reported. On Sunday the Bildzeitung published a report on German army and Federal Intelligence Service (BND) operations on the Syrian border, where they are providing military aid to the Free Syrian Army (FSA).

The paper reported that a German reconnaissance ship was stationed off the coast of Syria, employing the latest BND technology to monitor the country. On the same day a spokesperson for the German Defence Ministry confirmed the report. It is “true that a ship is currently on a several month deployment in the region”, he said.

Although the Ministry declined to designate the ship as a “spy boat”, it admits that the ship in question is the Oker, part of the German navy’s fleet of “early warning, communications and reconnaissance units”.

The spokesperson refused to confirm whether BND technology was on board, saying that no operational details of the current use of the ship would be issued. A member of the parliamentary control committee (PKG), Fritz-Rudolf Körper (Social Democratic Party) confirmed, however, that BND technology was being used.

According to the Bildzeitung, the ship’s instruments can observe troop movements up to 600 kilometers inside Syria. This data is then shared with the United States and Britain, as well as with Syrian rebels.

The newspaper also pointed out that BND agents were stationed at the Turkish NATO post of Adana, monitoring telephone and radio communications in Syria. The German operation also involves maintaining informal contact with sources in the immediate vicinity of the Assad regime. According to an anonymous US intelligence official, “No Western intelligence has such good sources in Syria as the BND”.

Under German law the deployment of the Oker requires a mandate from the German parliament. The ship is part of the ongoing UNIFIL mission in the region, but has no mandate to carry out its mission of military intelligence. So far, however, all measures have been carried out in secret and without a vote in the German parliament.

German military and intelligence assistance to the rebels joins a long list of similar maneuvers that have come to the attention of the German public piecemeal in recent weeks.

In July the weekly newspaper Die Zeit revealed that the German government set up a secret think tank in Berlin at the start of this year. Its aim is to provide support to Syrian rebels for the “day after”—i.e., for the period after the toppling of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. To this end the organization has flown in up to 50 Syrian “rebels.”

Together with the United Arab Emirates, Germany is also fronting the “Economic Reconstruction and Development” working group as part of the “Group of Friends of the Syrian people”. The working group is tasked with developing plans for the mass privatization of state enterprises and the introduction of a market economy after Assad’s overthrow.

Both projects are supported directly and indirectly with millions of euros from the federal government. In addition German navy vessels are patrolling the coast of Lebanon where large shipments of arms to the Syrian rebels take place. Although the official job of the navy is to prevent arms smuggling, no delivery to the rebels has so far been intercepted.

In early August the German Foreign Office set up a cross-departmental “Task Force Syria” aiming, in the words of Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, to “co-ordinate even more intensively the numerous tasks of the federal government.” This working group will be led by the Middle East representative of the Foreign Ministry, Boris Ruge, who previously claimed that the main problem in the region was the growing influence of Iran and Hezbollah.

The latest revelations on the activities of the German armed forces make it clear that the remit of the Task Force includes working closely with the FSA to impose regime change in Damascus.

Regime change in Syria would be a direct preparation for destabilizing Iran. Regarding Israeli preparations for war against Iran, German Chancellor Angela Merkel told the Knesset in 2008: “As German chancellor I regard the security of Israel as non-negotiable—and this means that we cannot respond with mere words in the hour of danger.”

This doctrine has been put into action, with the delivery of submarines largely funded by the federal government to Israel. A report in the news magazine Der Spiegel reveals that upon arriving in Israel, the submarines can be equipped with nuclear cruise missiles that could then be used against Iran.

All of these military operations are deeply unpopular with the German population. A recent survey found that only 12 percent of the population agrees with German military intervention in Syria. Just 13 percent favor military and financial support for the anti-Assad forces.

This opposition, however, finds no echo amount in the political establishment. While individual members of the Greens and the Left Party have called for a parliamentary vote on the deployment of the Oker, both parties support the actions of the German government and refuse to organize any opposition.

Former Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer (Green Party) even advocated setting up a no-fly zone over Syria like that established in Libya, as a pretext for direct military intervention.

“A major humanitarian disaster is looming there,” he argued. “That’s why I’m generally in favor of setting up a no-fly zone.”

The Green Party parliamentary leader in the Bundestag, Jürgen Trittin, also complained that the UN observer mission was unable to prevent massacres in Hula and the mission should therefore be “strengthened”. He did not say what such “strengthening” would entail.

In a few statements, the Left Party expresses its opposition to arms shipments to the rebels as well as to the Assad regime. But at the same time they demand all means be used to support the country’s opposition to bring about regime change.

During the Iraq war and the occupation of Afghanistan, some limited opposition was organized by Germany’s peace movement. Today, however, most of its representatives have shifted completely into the camp of imperialism. Rather than condemning the warmongering of the Western powers, one prominent initiative—Friedenskooperative—is active collecting money for the rebels as part of its “adopt a revolution” campaign.

The standpoint of these groups shifts according to the orientation of German foreign policy, which is assuming an increasingly aggressive form. They are bound with multiple ties to the government and official opposition and share their basic interests.

By Christoph Dreier

21 August, 2012

@ WSWS.org

Ramadan is supposed to be a month of charity. Instead, it has become a month of gluttony and ostentation. The rich compete to show off their fancy buffets and restaurants attract customers with their extravagant menus. Politicians host lavish iftars only to impress potential voters and supporters. The poor, however, are never prominent on the agendas of governments or opposition movements alike.

No one speaks of the poor anymore; not in the West and not in the East. Western socialist parties have been transformed into liberal capitalist parties willing to tear down the welfare state in return for votes from middle class people who have been inculcated with hatred for the poor. Socialist parties in the West are merely (since the successful political example of Bill Clinton) mild versions of the right-wing parties.

In the Arab world, the Left is in a state of decline and leftist parties have often been either hostile to the poor or totally oblivious about their presence. There is no war on poverty in any Arab or Islamic state: and if one was to be declared, the World Bank would intervene to end it, as it did in Brazil when it fought the anti-poverty program of then president Lula.

Islamist parties, like the Muslim Brotherhood, are parties for the middle classes, regardless of all reputation to the contrary in the Western media. Muhammad was mocked by his pagan enemies in Mecca about the poverty of his supporters and he is reputed to have answered: fakhri faqri (my poverty is my pride). There is no such championing of the poor among present-day Islamists of the various kinds. Hezbollah sat and watched as Rafik Hariri pushed through a most aggressive and cruel neo-liberal agenda in Lebanon. The party remains silent on the socio-economic injustices in Lebanon and its former Minister of Electric Power, Mohammad Fneish, supported the privatization of electric power, which won him praise from the Hariri family.

The Arab poor are invisible yet they are everywhere. They are in the streets as beggars and as homeless people, and they are in tent cities and cemeteries. The poor are the obscenity in the age of gulf oil and gas extravagance. The current Saudi King admitted that there are poor in the land of plenty but did nothing about it. The gifts that the Arab royals bestow on Western rulers and royalties would be enough to eradicate Arab poverty. But bowing to the white man is in the genes of Arab royals.

Arab socialist movements used to speak about the poor, but such movements are long gone, and some have reached power (in Syria and Iraq under the Baath) and their socialism turned into a grotesque form of Kleptocracy. The Syrian uprising started as a revolt by the rural poor against the wealthy royal families of the center.

The poor, however, are woefully disorganized and promises of heaven for them – as Nasser famously warned – don’t suffice. Not in the slightest.

By As’ad AbuKhalil

8 August 2012

@ Angry Corner

The Middle East is facing an acute danger of war, with unpredictable and potentially devastating consequences for the states and populations of the region. A ‘shadow war’ is already being waged — by Israel and the United States against Iran; by a coalition of countries against Syria; and by the great powers against each other. A mere spark could set this tinder alight.

The threat of a hot war is coming from three main directions: first, from Israel’s relentless and increasingly hysterical war-mongering against Iran; second, from America’s geopolitical ambitions in the oil-rich Gulf and its complicity in Israel’s anti-Iranian campaign; and third, from the naked hostility of some Sunni Arab States towards Iran — and towards Shi‘is and Alawis in general.

These Arab states are apparently unaware that they are playing into the hands of Israeli and American hawks who dream of re-modelling the region in order to subject it to their will. This same neo-con ambition drove the United States to invade and destroy Iraq in the hope of permanently enfeebling it.

The current Israeli war fever rests on a blatant falsehood: that Iran poses an ‘existential threat’ to the Jewish people. What a joke! The only threat Iran poses is this: Were it to develop the means and skills to build an atomic weapon — without actually doing so — it would thereby acquire a limited deterrent capability. That is to say, Israel might hesitate to attack it. Israel’s freedom to attack its other neighbours would also be restricted — a freedom it has enjoyed for decades, as may be seen from its numerous wars and assaults on the Palestinians, Iraq, Lebanon and Syria.

Israel wants unfettered military supremacy. This is what the fuss is all about. It wants the freedom to hit Iran and any other country that dares raise its head, without the risk of being hit back. It does not want any Middle East state or movement to be able to protect itself — hence its bitter animus against resistance movements such as Hizballah and Hamas, which have survived Israeli attempts to destroy them, and refuse to be cowed.

Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defence Minister Ehud Barak are evidently itching to bring down the regime in Tehran — and indeed the whole so-called ‘resistance axis’ of Iran, Syria and Hizballah, which in recent years has been the only credible barrier to Israeli and American ambitions. But the Arabs should reflect that the destruction of this barrier will mean abandoning the Palestinians to their tragic fate and exposing the Gulf States themselves to future Israeli and American pressures and possible assaults.

Israel would, of course, prefer the United States to bring down the Iranian regime by itself — much as it brought down Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq. Netanyahu may be tempted to strike first, but only if he is sure that President Barack Obama will join in the attack or be compelled to do so, because of his alleged need to win Jewish votes in November’s presidential elections. Obama desperately wants to avoid being dragged into another war. To head off an Israeli attack, he has, in the words of his spokesman, imposed on Iran “the most stringent sanctions ever imposed on any country.”

A solution to the crisis lies in the hands of the two major regional powers, Saudi Arabia and Iran. Although they are often seen as rivals, they could also be partners, since they share a strong interest in the peace and security of the Gulf. There are small but promising signs that they are reaching out to each other. It is striking that the recent preparatory meeting in Tehran for the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit, due later this month, reached much the same conclusions regarding the civil war in Syria as last week’s gathering in Riyadh of members of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC). Participants at both meetings stressed the need for a ceasefire to stop the bloodshed, followed by political negotiations and the formation of a national unity government. A hopeful sign was the presence of Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the OIC summit in Riyadh.

Disastrous as it is, the Syrian civil war is only a sub-plot in a far wider contest. Whether President Bashar al-Asad remains temporarily at the head of the regime in Damascus, or is persuaded to quit the scene, is far from being the main issue. Those pressing for war do not care about who rules in Damascus. They simply want Syria enfeebled, preferably dismembered, and its allies crippled.

Issues of profound importance for the Arabs are at stake in this ferocious test of wills. Will the existing pattern of Arab nation states survive the crisis or will it fracture? Can Sunnis and Shi‘is learn to live together in harmony under the banner of Islam or are they doomed to fight each other for another thousand years? Can the security of ethnic and religious minorities, which have contributed for centuries to the rich diversity of the region, be guaranteed? And what will be the outcome for Arab independence itself?

We are witnessing today the latest phase of the struggle for Arab independence. It began a century ago when the Arabs sought to throw off Ottoman rule. But when the Ottoman Empire collapsed in the First World War, the Arabs fell instead under the control of Britain and France who divided the Arab world between them. And when these colonial powers were finally forced out, the Arabs were confronted by the even deadlier threat of an aggressive and expansionist Israel.

American influence over the region has long been predominant, especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union a generation ago. Today, as the United States wrestles with economic problems and the legacy of catastrophic wars, it is also being challenged by new emergent powers. A further handicap for the United States is that it has allowed Israel to dictate its Middle East policy. The Arabs should reflect that a regional war, driven by Israel, risks robbing them of the little real independence they have so far managed to secure.

Can war be prevented? King Abdallah bin Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia is one of the wisest leaders on the international stage. He alone has the political weight, the resources, and the influence with both the United States and the Muslim rebels in Syria to check the region’s downward rush to disaster. He seems torn between his understandable distaste for some Iranian policies and his instinctive understanding of the need for better Saudi-Iranian relations. Several Gulf officials, in turn, are torn between their fear of a powerful Iran and their understanding that members of the Gulf Cooperation Council share many commercial and strategic interests with the Islamic Republic.

Instead of siding with the United States and Israel in the destruction of Iran and Syria, Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies should join with Iran in building a new security system for the region free from external meddling. If they act together, they can spare the region the devastation of war. But they must act soon because time is running out.

By Patrick Seale

14 August 2012

@ Agence Global

Patrick Seale is a leading British writer on the Middle East. His latest book is The Struggle for Arab Independence: Riad el-Solh and the Makers of the Modern Middle East (Cambridge University Press).

Al-Ikhbariya TV Team Released from the Terrorist Groups

Aug 16, 2012

DAMASCUS, (SANA)- The armed forces freed in a “qualitative operation” the team of the Syrian al-Ikhbariya satellite channel who were kidnapped by an armed terrorist group seven days ago in al-Tal area in Damascus Countryside.

The released colleagues are Yara Saleh, Abdullah Tabreh and Hussam Imad.

A number of journalists and workers at the Syrian channels gathered early Thursday to receive the freed journalists, stressing that the Syrian media will remain stronger than terrorism and the terrorists and the word of right will always be high.

Minister of Information Omran al-Zoubi was among the first to congratulate the released journalists over their safety.

“The Syrian media is targeted in the war on Syria because it is the beacon of truth which the enemies want to obliterate,” said the freed journalist Yara Saleh in a statement to the Syrian TV.

She wished that the team was released with all its members, expressing condolences over the martyrdom of her and al-Ikhbariya TV cadres’ colleague Hatem Abu Yehya, whom she said was “hideously snatched by the armed groups’ terrorism and criminality.”

In a statement to SANA, the freed journalist Yara Saleh described her happiness when she saw men in army uniforms heading to her and knew that they are members from the Syrian army.

Saleh talked about the inhuman practices and verbal assault of the armed terrorists groups against her and her colleagues, not to mention beating them and executing the cameraman Hatem Abu Yehya in such criminal and brutal way.

She added that they were force to make false statement on the air that the cameraman Abu Yehya was killed in an operation by the Syrian army.

Journalist Saleh said that “their killing and kidnapping acts will not terrify us, rather they will enhance our strength,” expressing gratitude for the Syrian army members who rescued them.

For his part, the photographer Abdullah Tabreh said the party which kidnapped them was marked by a very vicious criminal nature that has nothing to do with the true nature of the Syrians “who are characterized by loyalty to the homeland.”

Tabreh expressed relief as he heard the voice of the Syrian army members, greeting the armed forces who sacrifice themselves to protect Syrians and preserve the safety of the homeland.

He said that a small group of the heroic Syrian army defeated 300 terrorists and mercenary gunmen who were transporting us from one place to another.

Tabreh offered deep condolences to the family of the martyr Abu Yehya.

Driver Hussam Imad, who was kidnapped along with his colleagues by armed terrorist groups, described how those groups interrogated and tortured them with sticks and electricity.

He said that “these armed groups kidnapped al-Ikhbariya TV team, stole our car and equipment forcing us to convey a distorted image about the reality and accuse the army forces of what they commit of sabotage and terrorists acts.”

“However, thanks to the will and strength of our heroic army, we are freed now from the hands of the criminal gangs,” Imad said with pride.

Eng. Toni Kamel Hajal expressed happiness over the safe return of his nephew, the cameraman Tabreh, appreciating the Syrian army’s sacrifices to safeguard the homeland.

He stressed that Syria will remain strong thanks to the unity of the Syrian people and the leadership of President Bashar al-Assad.

Hajal called upon those who became tools for killing at the hands of western, Arab and regional countries to return to the right path and reject violence.

Information Ministry: Soul of Martyr Yehya Will Remain a Torch

Information Ministry expressed, on behalf of all the journalists and workers at the Syrian media institutions and on its own behalf, gratitude to the armed forces and the Syrian army for their great efforts and sacrifices exerted to free al-Ikhbariya TV kidnapped team.

In a statement issued on Thursday, the Ministry stressed that the soul of the martyr Hatem Abu Yehya, who was among the 4-member team kidnapped and later killed by the terrorist groups, will remain for the Ministry and its cadres “a torch that lights up their roads towards conveying the facts and reality far from falsification and distortion.”

The Ministry added that the national media will remain the fortress of right, credibility and transparency and will never be shaken by “the entities of black terrorism”, stressing that victory is definitely coming.

Team of UN Observer mission meets al-Ikhbariya TV released team

A team of the UN Observer mission in Syria on Thursday met al-Ikhbariya TV team which was released by the Syrian Arab Army in a qualitative operation today after being abducted by an armed terrorist group in al-Tal area 7 days ago.

Members of the Ikhbariya team underlined that the Syrian media will remain stronger than terrorism and terrorists, saying that the word of this media will remain high because it relays the Right.

Director of al-Ikhbariya TV Imad Sara said in a statement to the press that the armed groups aim to affect the moral spirit of the citizens and the journalists to combat this national media or preventing it from fulfilling its duties, adding this was clearly shown through targeting the building of al-Ikhbariya TV and later the Syrian TV.

President al-Assad Issues Two Decrees Nominating 3 Ministers, Appointing Mohammad Waheed Aqqad as Aleppo Governor

Aug 16, 2012

DAMASCUS, (SANA)_ President Bashar al-Assad on Thursday issued Decree No. 309 for 2012 nominating Dr. Adnan Abdo al-Sukhni as Minister of Industry, Najm hamad al-Ahmad as Minister of Justice and Saa’d Abdel-Salam al-Nayef as Minister of Health.

Minister Sukhni was born in Aleppo in 1961. He holds PhD in electrical engineering from the University of Charles in the Republic of Czech.

He was elected as a member in the People’s Assembly in the seventh, eighth and ninth legislative terms, and he has been the Governor of Raqqa province since 2010. He is married with three children.

Minister of Justice Najm hamad al-Ahmad was born in Aleppo in 1969. He got a degree in law in 1991 and three diplomas in general law, administrative law and administrative sciences from the University of Damascus and the University of Ain Shams in Egypt. He holds a PhD in law from the University of Ain Shams.

He chaired the judicial reform committee which was formed on May 17th, 2011 with the aim of drafting an integrated strategy to reform jurisdiction.

He also chaired the committee which was formed on May 5th, 2011 aimed at drafting a resolution on general elections.

Minister of Health Saa’d Abdel-Salam al-Nayef was born in Alepo in 1959. He graduated from the Faculty of Medicine of Aleppo University in 1982. He got the colloquium certificate in 1986 as a specialist doctor.

He is married with three children

President al-Assad also issued Decree No. 310 for 2012 on appointing Mohammad Waheed Aqqad as Governor of Aleppo.

President al-Assad Sends Letter to Chinese Counterpart on the Situation in Syria

Aug 16, 2012

BEIJING, (SANA)_President Bashar al-Assad sent a letter to the Chinese President Hu Jintao on the developments in Syria and the region, delivered by the Presidential Political and Media Advisor, Dr. Bouthaina Shaaban, to Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi.

Dr. Shaaban briefed minister Jiechi on the situation in Syria and the efforts exerted by the Syrian government to get out of the crisis through a political national dialogue, away from foreign interference, stressing Syria’s interest in cooperation with friendly countries and international organizations and its commitment to Annan’s six-point plan.

Dr. Shaaban thanked China for its balanced and principled stance in support of the Syrian sovereignty, stressing the importance that all countries follow the lead of Russia and China in their accurate approach of the way out of the crisis.

For his part, the Chinese minister expressed his country’s unswerving rejection of imposing solutions on the Syrian people and foreign interference.

Terrorists Suffer Heavy Losses in Aleppo and Homs, 9 Citizens Released in Damascus Countryside

Aug 17, 2012

PROVINCES, (SANA) – The security authorities on Thursday repelled an armed terrorist group which tried to enter al-Sabaa Bahrat area from al-Atmeh Souq in the city of Aleppo.

The authorities clashed with the group leaving its members dead or injured.

Armed Forces Destroy 11 Pick-up Vehicles Equipped with DShK Machineguns in Aleppo, Carry out Qualitative Operations in Bab al-Neirab

Armed forces destroyed 11 pick-up vehicles equipped with DShK machineguns and arrested 3 terrorists near al-Jandoul Roundabout and Castillo crossroad in Aleppo.

Units from the armed forces carried out an operation in al-Marjeh neighborhood in the area of Bab al-Neirab in the city.

SANA reporter quoted a source in the province as saying that the operation resulted in the death and injury of a number of terrorists.

A unit from the armed forces clashed with terrorists at the entrance of Saif al-Dawleh in Aleppo inflicting heavy losses upon them.

Armed forces killed and wounded dozens of terrorists in qualitative operations in al-Bab city in Aleppo countryside.

In Masakin Hanano, a unit from the armed forces targeted a group of armed terrorists and killed a large number of them.

Three 40-kg Explosive Devices Dismantled in Aleppo

The engineering units on Thursday dismantled an explosive device planted by an armed group near a mosque at the Meridian area in Aleppo.

A source in the province told SANA reporter that the device weighed 40 kg.

The engineering units also dismantled two 40-kg explosive devices that contain high-explosive materials and iron splinters planted near Amer Sarmini School and in Saif al-Dawleh area in Aleppo.

The engineering units also seized Molotov cocktails in a basement which was a command center for terrorists.

Army units pursue mercenaries in al-Bab , Masaken Hananou and Saif al-Dawla in Aleppo

A unit of the Syrian Arab Army targeted in two qualitative operations a number of terrorists positioned at the Post Office and the Justice Palace in al-Bab, Aleppo countryside.

A Source in Aleppo told SANA that the two operations led to the killing and inuring of a big number of terrorist mercenaries, while others escaped and threw their weapons.

Other Army units pursued the mercenaries who were positioned at the cultural center of Masaken Hananou, Bostan al-Basha, Said al-Dawla, inflicting heavy losses among the terrorists.

Scores of the terrorists were killed during the cleaning operations of the Army in Aleppo, among them one of al-Qaeda leaders.

Armed Forces Release 9 Citizens after Clash with Terrorists in al-Tal in Damascus Countryside

A unit from the Syrian armed forces clashed with terrorists in al-Tal area in Damascus Countryside, killing dozens of them and releasing 9 citizens who were kidnapped earlier.

An official source told SANA reporter that the freed citizens are Mohammad Hamadiyeh from Ein Mnin in Damascus Countryside, Deeb Mohammad from Ekweer in Damascus Countrysdie, Selman Razzouq from Idleb, Mohammad Baddour from Homs, Alaa Hussein from al-Salamiyeh in Hama, Fadi Neddeh from Tartous, Osama Yousef from Jableh, Manhal Baddour from Lattakia and Alaa Ammar Dawood from Jableh.

Authorities Inflict Heavy Losses upon Terrorists in Homs

Authorities on Thursday morning clashed with armed terrorist groups in al-Nizariyeh and al-Zeraa villages in the countryside of al-Qseir in Homs, killing and wounding a number of terrorists.

A source in the province told SANA reporter that the authorities, in cooperation with the inhabitants, carried out a tactical maneuver and ambushed the terrorist groups’ members which resulted in the killing and wounding a number of them.

The authorities also stormed a number of terrorists’ hideouts in Deir Baalbeh to the east of Homs.

The operations resulted in killing and wounding an number of terrorists, in addition to arresting others.

Authorities Destroy Two Cars Loaded with Weapons in the Countryside of Lattakia

Authorities clashed with an armed terrorist group in two double-cabin pick-ups loaded with ammunition and weapons in Kefr Delbeh in the countryside of Lattakia and destroy the two cars with terrorists inside.

Authorities Storm Terrorists’ Hideouts in Idleb, Kill Dangerous Terrorist Saeed Taleb

Authorities in Idleb stormed a hideout of an armed terrorist group on Salqeen-Isqat road whose members used to cut off roads and fire on passing cars.

An official source told SANA reporter that the clash resulted in killing and wounding a number of terrorists, in addition to seizing their weapons.

The authorities raided the house of terrorist Saeed Taleb, nicknamed as al-Zalt, who leads an armed terrorist group in the city and killed him.

Al-Moallem: OIC Decision to Suspend Syria Membership a Violation of the Organization’s Charter.. the US Leads Conspiracy against Syria

Aug 16, 2012

DAMASCUS, (SANA)-Deputy Prime Minister, Foreign and Expatriates Minister Walid al-Moallem said that suspending Syria’s membership at the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is a violation of the organization’s charter as its decisions are taken unanimously, indicating that several countries have informed him of their rejection of the decision.

In a special interview with the Syrian TV broadcast on Thursday, al-Moallem said that the Arab League and OIC have not only suspended Syria’s membership, but also conspired against it, adding that they are responsible for the bloodshed in Syria.

Al-Moallem indicated that they sent private planes to bring the leaders who were hesitant to attend Mecca meeting, describing them as hypocrites.

“The Syrian people had no interest in the summit which was held in Mecca, because an invitation was not sent to Syria, in another violation of the Organization’s charter.. Mecca is free from them because it will ask them what did you do for the occupied Jerusalem, al-Moallem said.

He added that they had no wish to invite Syria because they feared to hear the word of Right, and that might affect the mentality of some leaders whom they brought for this meeting.

On his meeting with Valery Amos, the UN Under Secretary General for the Humanitarian Affairs, al-Moallem said, ”During my meeting with Amos yesterday, I asked her about the countries who offered donations to the Syrian people, saying that there are four countries and not one dollar came from the Arabs.”

Al-Moallem stressed that the conspiracy against Syria is spearheaded by the US, while Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia are but tools, stressing that they wanted to pass their conspiracy by all means, but the Syrian people stood firm thanks to their faith in their independent decision and secular state.

“They are hypocrites because they pay the money for the terrorist gangs in order to kill the Syrians, destruct their infrastructure, force them to leave homes and take them as human shields,” al-Moallem said.

He added that all states are obliged to implement resolutions issued by the UN Security Council to combat terrorism, adding that following the 9/11 events in New York, the US headed this act and mobilized the world public opinion towards combating terrorism.

“But regarding Syria, the US supports terrorists in a clear contradiction with the UN resolutions and the US commitment itself which disregarded this for a simple reason; as it leads the conspiracy against Syria, while Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia are tools,” al-Moallem said.

Al-Moallem referred that the UN committed mistakes the same as made by the Arab League which took a decision to send an observer mission and after two months it decided to withdraw it as it recorded a report which admitted a presence of armed terrorist groups which cause violence and destruction in the country, and this contradicts with the conspiracy which they had plotted.

“The Arab League has taken the issue to the UN which decided to send a special envoy; Kofi Annan.. Syria has cooperated with the UN and Mr. Annan.. Syria has always asked him about the commitment of the other party and the neighboring countries.. but he had no ability to get any commitment for his plan from them,” the Foreign Minister said.

Al-Moallem added “We also asked him about the coming of mercenaries from Arab and non-Arab countries to fight in Syria.. he ( Annan) was saying: I admit that there is a third party, we were asking: is it al-Qaeda.. he was answering: I don’t want to respond.”

Al-Moallem went on to say that they appointed Annan and he resigned because he had no ability to get commitments from those states, the armed sides and the opposition inside and outside.. it was natural that this man would resign because he has his dignity.

He underlined that Syria welcomed the possibility of appointing Lakhdar al-Ibramimi as a new envoy, but the UN didn’t take a final decision yet.

“Syria wants to keep the presence of the UN as a good intention.. but we defy the UN to bring a side, whether from the opposition or from the armed terrorist groups, that accepts to stop violence,” al-Moallem said.

He added that Syria is committed to Annan’s six-point plan, but this is not enough and needs another party to conduct a national dialogue.

“We tried to do so on April 12th when we withdrew the army and the heavy weapon from the center of the cities, but the armed groups captured new regions and the victims between the civilians and the army members became triple than what were before,” al-Moallem said.

Iranian President Criticizes Some Regional Leaders’ Conduct towards Syria

Aug 16, 2012

TEHRAN, (SANA)- President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran stressed that the best way for implementing reforms cannot be through encouraging violence, killing and destruction.

Iranian media reported on Thursday that President Ahmadinejad criticized the conduct of some leaders towards Syria, during his meeting with his Turkish counterpart, Abdullah Gul, on the sidelines of the Islamic countries summit held in Mecca, Saudi Arabia.

The Iranian President wondered how some kings criticize Syria while they themselves are rejected by their people.

He said that peoples always call for justice, freedom and respect, but victory cannot be achieved by means of force, adding that a rule which is won by violence and force cannot preserve its independence.

Salehi: Suspension of Syria’s OIC Membership Is Unfair and Contradicts OIC Charter

Iranian Foreign Minister, Ali Akbar Salehi, on Thursday stressed that the decision on suspending Syria’s membership of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is an “unfair move” which contradicts the Organization’s Charter.

In a statement to the Iranian IRNA news agency, Salehi said that Iran has opposed the suspension of Syria’s membership of the OIC because it contradicts its Charter, stressing that it was supposed to invite the Syrian government to attend the OIC meeting and for the member states to listen to its official stance before such a decision could be taken.

The Iranian Foreign Minister reiterated that Syria should have been invited to the meeting so as to propose a mechanism with the Syrian government and opposition to help get Syria out of the crisis and solve the problems it is currently suffering from.

Salehi voiced at the meeting of the foreign ministers of the OIC member countries Iran’s opposition to suspending Syria’s membership.

Boroujerdi: Suspending Syria’s Membership at OIC Politicized Decision

Chairman of the Iranian Shura Council’s Committee for Foreign Policy and National Security Alaeddin Boroujerdi stressed his country’s rejection of suspending Syria’s membership of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) as it is a politicized, unacceptable and unwise decision.

In a statement to the Iranian News Agency (IRNA) on Thursday, Boroujerdi said that the decision of suspending Syria’s membership as an Islamic country at the OIC has been taken under the influence of Saudi Arabia.

He stressed that Syria is an Arab and Islamic country and such decision lacks legitimacy and cannot be justified.

Amos: It is Important Humanitarian Aid Not Be Politicized … All Syrian Parties Should Exert more Efforts to Protect Civilians

Aug 16, 2012

DAMASCUS, (SANA) – The UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, Valery Amos, called upon all parties in Syria to exert more efforts for the protection of civilians, particularly after what she said the escalation of violence.

Speaking in a press conference at the Four Seasons Hotel, Amos underlined the impact of the crisis on the economy and the livelihood of the people in Syria as there are large numbers of people who need urgent humanitarian aid.

Concluding its visit to Damascus, the UN official added that during her visit to the people who are temporarily staying in some public buildings and schools in Damascus she found that these families need more health and food assistance, calling for finding appropriate solutions so as to allow schools to open their doors normally in September.

Amos said that the aid provided by the UN and its partners are not enough, indicating the decline in funding. She noted that there are 8 international humanitarian organizations currently working on the Syrian territories and providing their humanitarian aid after having obtained the approval of the Syrian government.

She added that there are other humanitarian organizations which are ready to provide aid and are waiting for the permission of the Syrian government to establish offices in Syria.

Answering the journalists, Amos said that the talks with the Syrian government focused on a number of issues regarding increasing the capabilities of the UN organizations on the ground, the government’s procedures to meet the citizens’ needs, particularly the displaced.

She added that the discussion also focused on the impact of violence on the infrastructure in the country, the measure taken by the government to rehabilitate damaged infrastructures and the difficulties facing delivering aid to insecure areas.

Amos said that it is very important that the humanitarian aid not be politicized and any help be provided independently, stressing the need to deliver aid to everybody anywhere on the Syrian territories.

She highlighted the Syrian government’s fears that the humanitarian aid might end up in the hands of the armed terrorist groups.

Gatilov: UN Withdrawal from Syria Threatens the Entire Region

Aug 16, 2012

MOSCOW, (SANA) – Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov said that the withdrawal of the UN from Syria threatens the entire region with negative repercussions.

During his meeting with the US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, Gatilov underlined the importance of preserving the UN presence in the country.

He stressed the need that all Syrian parties and foreign players implement the Security Council resolutions and the decisions included in the final document of the action group meeting on Syria.

Gatilov said it is important to activate the work of this group with the aim of coordinating steps to launch a political settlement to the crisis in Syria.

Political Analyst Joseph Abu Fadel Injured by Gunmen’s Fire on His Way to Damascus

Aug 16, 2012

BEIRUT, (SANA) – The Lebanese analyst and journalist Joseph Abu Fadel was injured by the gunfire of gunmen belonging to the militia of the so-called the free army while he was heading to Damascus on al-Masnaa-Ber Elias road.

In a phone call with SANA reporter in Beirut, Abu Fadel said that he was injured in the hand, adding that he did not obey the terrorist gunmen’s orders to stop and returned back to Chtaura despite his injury.

Patriarch al-Rai: International Community Should Exert Efforts to Find Political Solution to Crisis in Syria through Dialogue

Aug 16, 2012

BEIRUT, (SANA) – Lebanon’s Maronite Patriarch Beshara Al-Rai called upon the international community for sparing no effort to find an appropriate political solution to the crisis in Syria through dialogue and reconciliation.

Visitng Akkar region on Thursday, Patriarch al-Rai said that we join the call made by the Pope Benedict XVI as we call for exerting efforts to achieve peace in Syria through dialogue and reconciliation to find an appropriate political solution to the crisis in the country.

In Jerusalem- Seven Israeli teenagers were in custody on Monday, accused of what a police official and several witnesses described as an attempted lynching of several Palestinian youths, laying bare the undercurrent of tension in this ethnically mixed but politically divided city. A 15-year-old suspect standing outside court said, “For my part he can die, he’s an Arab.”

The police said that scores of Jewish youths were involved in the attack late Thursday in West Jerusalem’s Zion Square, leaving one 17-year-old unconscious and hospitalized. Hundreds of bystanders watched the mob beating, the police said — and no one intervened.

Two of the suspects were girls, the youngest 13, adding to the soul-searching and acknowledgment that the poisoned political environment around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has affected the moral compass of youths growing up within it.

“If it was up to me, I’d have murdered him,” the 15-year-old suspect told reporters outside court on Monday. “He cursed my mother.” The young man who was beaten unconscious, Jamal Julani, remained in the hospital.

The mob beating came on the same day that a Palestinian taxi on the West Bank was firebombed, apparently by Jewish extremists, though there have been no arrests. The two episodes, along with a new report by the United States State Department labeling attacks by Jews on Palestinians as terrorism, have opened a stark national conversation about racism, violence, and how Israeli society could have come to this point.

“There appears to be a worryingly high level of tolerance — whether explicit or implicit — for such despicable acts of violence,” The Jerusalem Post editorialized on Monday. “A clear distinction must be made between legitimate acts of self-defense aimed at protecting Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, and pointless, immoral acts of violence.”

In the popular Yediot Aharonot newspaper, a commentator asked of the 13-year-old suspect, “Where on earth does a bar-mitzvah-age child find so much evil in himself?” The article said parents should be held responsible.

But on Channel 1 news Monday night, Nimrod Aloni, the head of the Institute for Educational Thought at a Tel Aviv teachers college, said, “this cannot just be an expression of something he has heard at home.”

“This is directly tied to national fundamentalism that is the same as the rhetoric of neo-Nazis, Taliban and K.K.K.,” Mr. Aloni said. “This comes from an entire culture that has been escalating toward an open and blunt language based on us being the chosen people who are allowed to do whatever we like.”

The police said Thursday’s beating of Mr. Julani, who regained consciousness in the hospital on Sunday, resulted from a brawl after a girl in a crowd of Israeli youths complained that she had been harassed by an Arab. Micky Rosenfeld, a police spokesman, said the girl had spurred the crowd to seek vengeance, though her lawyer denied that on Israel Radio on Monday. The crowd then arbitrarily focused on Mr. Julani and his friends, Mr. Rosenfeld said, beating Mr. Julani until he lost consciousness.

“According to those questioned, there was a fight, there was cursing,” Mr. Rosenfeld said. “One thing led to another.”

Mr. Julani, a youth of slender build with fashionably short hair from the predominantly Palestinian East Jerusalem neighborhood of Ras al-Amud, said in an interview from his hospital bed on Monday that he had no memory of what had happened — or even of being downtown on Thursday. But relatives at his bedside, including a cousin who was with him at the time of the assault, said the attack had been unprovoked.

The cousin, Muhammad Mujahid, 17, said he and four friends were walking in the square and suddenly found themselves being chased by a group of youths. “They were shouting ‘Arabs, death to Arabs,’ ” he said. “I saw about 50 people chasing us. We ran, but about 10 of them caught Jamal.”

Asked whether he would return to West Jerusalem at night, Mr. Mujahid said: “I don’t want to go back there. I’ve learned.”

Mr. Julani’s mother, Nariman, described the attackers as “terrorists, fanatics.”

“We have no ideas about politics,” said Mrs. Julani, 44. “We brought our children up to study, to be good and to love their homeland.”

One floor above Mr. Julani, in the new wing of the Hadassah University Hospital-Ein Kerem in southwest Jerusalem, lay the driver whose taxi was hit by a firebomb on Thursday outside the West Bank settlement of Bat Ayin. He and his five passengers, all members of the Abu Jayada family from the West Bank village of Nahalin, suffered burns; one remained in intensive care on Monday.

The prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, strongly condemned the firebombing of the taxi and promised the Palestinian leadership that all efforts would be made to arrest the perpetrators.

Mark Regev, a spokesman for Mr. Netanyahu, said of the beating, “We unequivocally condemn racist violence and urge the police and law enforcement community to act expeditiously to bring the perpetrators to justice.”

Some commentators connected the violence against Palestinians with other racial issues pervading Israeli society. The latest attacks came after a summer of simmering resentment and some violent protests against the swelling number of African migrants and asylum seekers in Tel Aviv. The outburst of popular rage, fanned by provocative statements by some rightist politicians, led to a government crackdown to stem the influx.

Gavriel Salomon, a professor of educational psychology at Haifa University, told Israel Radio on Monday that the attacks could be attributed to increasing racism in Israeli society, increased levels of violence in general and an atmosphere of “legitimacy.”

“Suddenly it’s not so terrible to burn Arabs inside a taxi,” he said.

One of those who came to the hospital where Mr. Julani was recovering on Monday was Zohar Eitan, 57, a Tel Aviv University lecturer in musicology. He said he had come as “an ordinary citizen” to show solidarity and called the attack “very sad but unfortunately not shocking. It is the result of the indoctrination that these kids get.”

Jerusalem is home to about 500,000 Jews and some 300,000 Palestinians, who mostly coexist peacefully though with a constant undertone of political and religious tension.

Most of the Palestinians, who chose not to be Israeli citizens but carry Jerusalem residency cards, live in the eastern sector of the city that was captured by Israel from Jordan in the 1967 war and later annexed in a move that has not been internationally recognized. The Palestinians demand that East Jerusalem, which contains Jewish holy sites as well as Muslim and Christian shrines, be the capital of a future state.

While the Jewish and Arab residents of the city mingle freely in the parks and shopping malls of West Jerusalem, there is less and less meaningful interaction between the two populations, other than some at workplaces.

The western side bears small monuments to the suicide bombings that killed scores here on buses and in cafes after the outbreak of the second Palestinian uprising in 2000. In some of the tenser predominantly Arab neighborhoods, Israeli cars and buses are frequently stoned.

By Isabel Kershner

Palestine Update Edition 2 Number 37

Mr. Julani’s relatives said they were not involved in politics and, when asked about the future of their city, seemed at a loss for answers. His father, Subhi Julani, who works in construction, said he had many Jewish friends, including employers.

“Jamal is lucky; we are lucky that he is still among us,” Mr. Julani, 50, said of his son, who is studying for his matriculation exams and also does home renovations for a Jewish boss. “I do not know why they did this.”

The threat by the UK’s Conservative-Liberal Democrat government to storm the Ecuadorean embassy to arrest WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange shows contempt for international law and a colonial-style disregard for Ecuadorean sovereignty.

It marks a new stage in the British ruling class’ descent into criminality, aiming to silence a man who has helped expose many of its innumerable crimes and those of the United States and other imperialist powers.

Thursday saw the much-anticipated announcement by Ecuador that it will grant political asylum to Assange, based upon the probability that his extradition to Sweden would be followed by his transfer to the United States and a trial for treason. A government spokesman said that Ecuador had sought assurances from Sweden that Assange would not be transferred to the US, but the Swedish authorities had refused to do so.

The case against Assange is a transparent politically motivated frame-up, utilising trumped-up accusations of sexual assault in Sweden. Ecuador offered to allow Swedish prosecutors the opportunity to question Assange at the embassy, in person or via videoconference. But this was rejected.

On Wednesday night, police officers began to gather around the embassy in anticipation of the expected announcement by Ecuador. Assange entered the embassy on June 19, requesting diplomatic sanctuary and political asylum under the United Nations Human Rights Declaration. This followed the ruling by the UK’s Supreme Court rejecting Assange’s final appeal against his extradition to Sweden.

In its letter that day to the Ecuadorean government, the British government stated that the embassy will be given a weeks’ notice of a raid by the police, should it grant asylum. On Thursday morning, police vans were stationed along roads next to the building. A number of those protesting to demand Assange’s freedom were forcibly moved from in front of the embassy to a pen set up across the road. Arrests of protesters were made, including one who was filming a live feed for the Occupy News Network.

Demonstrators chanted “Hands off Assange”, “Hands off Ecuador”, and “There’s only one decision—No Extradition”.

On Wednesday Ecuador Foreign Minister Ricardo Patiño announced in a news conference the receipt of the letter from the UK government, via the British Embassy.

“Ecuador rejects in the most emphatic terms the explicit threat of the British official communication,” he said, denouncing the threat as “improper of a democratic, civilised and law-abiding country.”

“If the measure announced in the British official communication is enacted, it will be interpreted by Ecuador as an unacceptable, unfriendly and hostile act and as an attempt against our sovereignty,” he warned. “It would force us to respond. We are not a British colony.”

The letter from the UK Foreign Office was couched in language befitting Britain’s role as an imperialist aggressor. Claiming the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987 provides for actions to be taken “in order to arrest Mr Assange in the current premises of the embassy,” it continued: “We need to reiterate that we consider the continued use of the diplomatic premises in this way incompatible with the Vienna convention and unsustainable and we have made clear the serious implications that this has for our diplomatic relations.”

On Thursday a UK government spokesman issued a statement saying a decision by Ecuador’s government to grant Assange the right to political asylum would be disregarded. “Giving asylum doesn’t fundamentally change anything,” the spokesman said.

The hypocrisy and cynicism of the British government in its claim that Ecuador is acting in breach of the Vienna convention knows no bounds.

It is they who are overturning fundamental precepts of international law, including the Vienna Convention, in an attempt to railroad Assange to trial. International law specifically defines foreign embassies as sovereign space, and such diplomatic posts are considered as territory of the foreign nation.

Commenting on the dire consequences of threat to seize Assange, Geoffrey Robertson, an internationally recognized human rights lawyer who has represented Assange, said: “It’s very clear from the Vienna Convention and indeed from our own Diplomatic Privileges Act from 1964 that the diplomatic premises and consular premises are what we call inviolable.

“And the local police can only enter them with the consent of the head of the mission.”

The British government cited the Diplomatic & Consular Premises Act of 1987 as providing the basis for withdrawing recognition of the Ecuadorean embassy. However, the Act is specific in stating, “The Secretary of State shall only give or withdraw consent or withdraw acceptance if he is satisfied that to do so is permissible under international law.”

Were the British police to be sent into the embassy without consent to arrest Assange, this would be a clear violation of international law, specifically Article 22 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.

Opposing Ecuador’s request to allow Assange the freedom to leave Britain, UK Foreign Secretary William Hague declared bluntly: “We will not allow Mr Assange safe passage out of the United Kingdom, nor is there any legal basis for us to do so. The United Kingdom does not recognise the principle of diplomatic asylum.”

In a statement, Assange thanked the Ecuadorean government for granting the right to asylum, adding, “While today is a historic victory, our struggles have just begun. The unprecedented US investigation against WikiLeaks must be stopped.

“While today much of the focus will be on the decision of the Ecuadorean government, it is just as important that we remember Bradley Manning [the US soldier accused to leaking information to WikiLeaks] has been detained without trial for over 800 days.

“The task of protecting WikiLeaks, its staff, its supporters and its alleged sources continues.”

The descent of British diplomacy into threats and police thuggery against another sovereign nation is of a piece with the naked criminality being defended. The ruling class and its political representatives, including the former Labour governments of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have over the last decade planned and waged illegal wars of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are now supporting the US-coordinated covert war against Syria, aimed at replacing the government of Bashar al-Assad and paving the way for war with Iran.

The targeting of Assange is also being conducted in collusion with the Obama administration in the United States, Britain’s partner in crime.

By Robert Stevens

17 August, 2012

@ WSWS.org

Two days short of Egyptian leader Hosni Mubarak’s resignation, Al Jazeera published an article, headlined “A Kingdom of Silence,” that contended an uprising was unlikely in Syria. The article cited the country’s “popular president, dreaded security forces, and religious diversity” as reasons that the regime of Bashar al-Assad would not be challenged, despite the chaos and leadership changes already wrought by the so-called Arab Spring. Less than one month later, security forces arrested a group of schoolchildren in the Syrian city of Dara’a, the country’s southern agricultural hub, for scrawling anti-government slogans on city walls. Subsequent protests illustrated the chasm between the regime’s public image — encapsulated in the slogan “Unity, Freedom and Socialism” — and a reality of widespread public disillusion with Assad and his economic policies.

Among the many historical, political, and economic factors contributing to the Syrian uprising, one has been devastating to Syria, yet remains largely unnoticed by the outside world. That factor is the complex and subtle, yet powerful role that climate change has played in affecting the stability and longevity of the state.

The land now encompassed by Syria is widely credited as being the place where humans first experimented with agriculture and cattle herding, some 12,000 years ago. Today, the World Bank predicts the area will experience alarming effects of climate change, with the annual precipitation level shifting toward a permanently drier condition, increasing the severity and frequency of drought.

From 1900 until 2005, there were six droughts of significance in Syria; the average monthly level of winter precipitation during these dry periods was approximately one-third of normal. All but one of these droughts lasted only one season; the exception lasted two. Farming communities were thus able to withstand dry periods by falling back on government subsidies and secondary water resources. This most recent, the seventh drought, however, lasted from 2006 to 2010, an astounding four seasons — a true anomaly in the past century. Furthermore, the average level of precipitation in these four years was the lowest of any drought-ridden period in the last century.

While impossible to deem one instance of drought as a direct result of anthropogenic climate change, a 2011 report from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration regarding this recent Syrian drought states: “Climate change from greenhouse gases explained roughly half the increased dryness of 1902-2010.” Martin Hoerling, the lead researcher of the study, explains: “The magnitude and frequency of the drying that has occurred is too great to be explained by natural variability alone. This is not encouraging news for a region that already experiences water stress, because it implies natural variability alone is unlikely to return the region’s climate to normal.” The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that global warming will induce droughts even more severe in this region in the coming decades.

It is estimated that the Syrian drought has displaced more than 1.5 million people; entire families of agricultural workers and small-scale farmers moved from the country’s breadbasket region in the northeast to urban peripheries of the south. The drought tipped the scale of an unbalanced agricultural system that was already feeling the weight of policy mismanagement and unsustainable environmental practices. Further, lack of contingency planning contributed to the inability of the system to cope with the aftermath of the drought. Decades of poorly planned agricultural policies now haunt Syria’s al-Assad regime.

An unsustainable history. Hafez al-Assad — the father of the current president, Bashar al-Assad — ruled Syria for three decades in a fairly non-religious and paradoxical way. To some degree, he modernized the nation’s economy and opened it to the outside world; at the same time, his regime was infamous for repression and the murder of citizens. The elder al-Assad relied on support from the rural masses to maintain his authority, and during his rule, the agricultural sector became one of the most important pillars of the economy. In a 1980 address to the nation, he said: “I am first and last — and of this I hope every Syrian citizen and every Arab outside of Syria will take cognizance — a peasant and the son of a peasant. To lie amidst the spikes of grain or on the threshing floor is, in my eyes, worth all the palaces in the world.” Hafez al-Assad assured the Syrian people of their right to food security and economic stability, granting subsidies to reduce the price of food, oil, and water. The regime emphasized food self-sufficiency, first achieved with wheat in the 1980s. Cotton, a water-intensive crop requiring irrigation, was heavily promoted as a “strategic crop,” at one point becoming Syria’s second-largest export, after oil. As agricultural production swelled, little to no attention was paid to the environmental effects of such short-term, unsustainable agricultural goals.

With a steadfast emphasis on quick agricultural and industrial advancements, the Baathist regime did little to promote the sustainable use of water. As Francesco Femia and Caitlin Werrell state: “The al-Assad regime has, by most accounts except their own, criminally combined mismanagement and neglect of Syria’s natural resources, which have contributed to water shortages and land desertification.” In the two decades before the current drought, the state invested heavily in irrigation systems — yet they remain underdeveloped, extremely inefficient, and insufficient. The majority of irrigation systems use groundwater as their main source, because the amount of water from rivers is inadequate. As of 2005, the government began requiring licenses to dig agricultural wells. There are claims that the regime wishes to keep the Kurdish-majority region in the northeast of the country underdeveloped and has denied licenses to some farmers in the region. Whatever the reasons, well licenses are generally difficult to obtain; as a result, more than half the country’s wells are dug illegally and are therefore unregulated. Groundwater reserves in the years leading up to the drought were rapidly depleted.

Unheeded warnings. In 2001, the World Bank warned, “The (Syrian) Government will need to recognize that achieving food security with respect to wheat and other cereals in the short-term as well as the encouragement of water-intensive cotton appear to be undermining Syria’s security over the long-term by depleting available groundwater resources.” With energy and water heavily subsidized by the state, farmers were further encouraged to increase production rather than set sustainable goals.

The price of wheat skyrocketed in 2005, and an overconfident Syrian government sold much of its emergency wheat reserve. In 2008, due to the drought, the Syrian government was forced to concede that its policy of self-sufficiency had failed, and for the first time in two decades it began importing wheat. Meanwhile, nearly 90 percent of the barley crop failed, doubling the price of animal feed in the first year of the drought alone. Small livestock herders in the northeast have lost 70 percent and more of their herds, and many have been forced to migrate. According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, one-fourth of the country’s herds were lost as a result of the drought.

In recent years, Assad’s promises of food security have vanished; the United Nations reports that the diet of 80 percent of those severely affected by the drought now consists largely of bread and sugared tea. For those who have remained in the nearly deserted rural communities of Syria’s northeast, food prices have skyrocketed, and 80 percent of residents in the drought-stricken regions are living under the poverty threshold. In 2003, agriculture accounted for one-fourth of Syria’s gross domestic product; in 2008, a year into the drought, that fraction was just 17 percent. The government’s drought management has been reactive, untimely, poorly coordinated, and poorly targeted, according to the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction.

The chaotic result. Since the drought began, temporary settlements composed largely of displaced rural people have formed on the outskirts of Damascus, Hama, Homs, Aleppo, and Dara’a — the latter city being the site of the first significant protest in the country in March 2011. This migration has exacerbated economic strains already caused by nearly two million refugees from neighboring Iraq and Palestine. A confidential cable from the American embassy in Damascus to the US State Department, written shortly after the drought began, warned of the unraveling social and economic fabric of Syria’s rural farming communities due to the drought. It noted that the mass migration “could act as a multiplier on social and economic pressures already at play and undermine stability in Syria.” Reporting during the uprising in late 2011, the late New York Times correspondent Anthony Shadid recounts: “There’s that sense of corruption in the society itself, that the society itself is falling apart, being pulled apart; that the countryside is miserable; that there’s nothing being done to make lives better there.” Reports show that the earliest points of unrest were those that were most economically devastated by the drought and served as migratory settlement points.

“The regime’s failure to put in place economic measures to alleviate the effects of drought was a critical driver in propelling such massive mobilizations of dissent,” concludes Suzanne Saleeby, a contributor to Jadaliyya, a digital magazine produced by the Arab Studies Institute. “In these recent months, Syrian cities have served as junctures where the grievances of displaced rural migrants and disenfranchised urban residents meet and come to question the very nature and distribution of power.”

The considerations that impel an individual to protest in streets that are known to be lined by armed security forces extend beyond an abstract desire for democracy. Only a sense of extreme desperation and hopelessness can constitute the need — rather than a mere desire — to bring change to a country’s economic, political, and social systems. A combination of stress factors resulting from policies of economic liberalization — including growing income disparities and the geographic limitations of the economic reforms — shattered the Syrian regime’s projected image of stability. Even if it was not the leading cause of the Syrian rebellion, the drought and resulting migration played an important role in triggering the civil unrest now underway in Syria.

The drought in Syria is one of the first modern events in which a climactic anomaly resulted in mass migration and contributed to state instability. This is a lesson and a warning for the greater catalyst that climate change will become in a region already under the strains of cultural polarity, political repression, and economic inequity.

By Shahrzad Mohtadi

16 August 2012

@ Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

Editor’s note: This article was modified on August 19, 2012.

Copyright © 2012 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. All Rights Reserved.

Source URL (retrieved on 08/22/2012 – 03:39): http://thebulletin.org/node/9280