Syria

[El Pibe]

Peter Harling, Director at the Iraq, Lebanon and Syria, International Crisis Group talks about his experiences and conlusions in Syria.

http://www.cfr.org/syria/syrias-bloody-stalemate/p28265

[El Pibe]

Excellent article on the repurcussions of the Syrian rebellion in Lebanon

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/05/15/lebanon_s_little_syria?page=full

[El Pibe]

Terrible news from Syria. Aside from the truly evil details of the massacre itself, it underlines that the cautious optimism was misplaced.

THis is drawing a line in the sand, getting the shabiha AND the army complicit in these massacres is ensuring that those shoring up the regime are intrinsically implicated in the crimes of the state, making this from here on in an existential fight for them.

THe Russsian statement saying the rebels are partly responsible is one part 'duh', 9 parts an abusive husband blaming his wife for her beatings.

THe one silver lining is that international opinion is hardening and consolidating and the Russians have gone public in stating that it's not Assad himself they're backing, perhaps giving a nod and wink to any potential coup plotters.

Or perhaps I'm just unable to let go my hope that this wont descend into a vicious and protracted civil war.

[Huguenot]

I note that Tahrir Square is full once more with angry young men of violent intent who have decided that democracy's not for them when neither of the two run-off candidates are sufficiently appealing.

Shocking mess in Syria - driven mainly by the fact that no external power can envisage an attractive solution.

Mayhem suits a lot of people.

[El Pibe]

Marc Lynch did a couple of artikces in the run up to and aftermath of the elections that are worth a quick peruse.

As for Syria, that's a bit unfair Huguenot. I wouldn't say its driven by that. It's driven by a murderous intransigent regime and a deepening sectarian conflict that has already spilled its borders.

THe international community are not making things better. It feels more and more like Bosnia everyday in fact, especially given that the recent massacre was according to one survivor committed by a militia consisting of Alawites from nearby villages.

Britain's publical insistence in refusing to [allow anybody to] consider any form of intervention in Bosnia certainly gave the Serbs a green light to continue their murderous policies and kept the conflict going longer than it needed to.

I guess this time it's, as you say, a lack of any decent options. There is no equivalent of Croatia to arm and train to end the conflict which ironically is the role Syria played in finally ending the conflict in Lebanon, swings and roundabouts eh.

What would you suggest?

I hoped that dialogue might work and an Egyptian rocky road to Democracy could happen, but there is no turning back without a coup sooner rather than later. Sadly I can just see a replaying of the Iraq civil war 2005-8, or worse still given the multi ethnic, religious and sectarian nature of Syria, a replay of the Lebanon conflict.

[El Pibe]

"There is no equivalent of Croatia to arm and train to end the conflict"

Actually the Kurds could fulfil that role (Assad has been very careful to keep them out of the conflict thus far, and they in turn seem to be sitting on the fence), especially given their more or less autonomous status over the border in Iraq, but the pay off would almost certainly be the setting up of a defacto Kurdistan with an eye to making it official, something Turkey would never allow.

[Huguenot]

I agree with you EP.

'Driving' was probably the wrong word, I meant that since the rest of the world don't know what their preferred solution is in Syria, they're not in a position to either suggest it or support the outcome.

All they've really done is to voice disapproval at atrocities - a fairly limp wristed exercise at best.

I fear for a coherent outcome mainly because opposition factions aren't united and the objects of their wrath are unpredictable. If the two key motivations for any human behaviour are opportunity to gain and fear of loss, then all sides seem to think that they have nothing to gain from rapprochement, and that they've lost so much already that a few more bodies are incidental.

The international community's responsibility should be to create that carrot for them, but all they've really done is ring-fenced it hoping they'll all get bored - not something that communities obsessed with bloodlines and vendetta are famous for.

I also agree with Lynch about Egypt. I have business partners in Egypt, and their response to the situation has mainly been surprise that democracy doesn't mean their candidate wins. They're quite cross about it.

[New Nexus]

"I don't think Russia and China believe they are paying any price at all, nothing at all, for standing up on behalf of the Assad regime," she said. "The only way that will change is if every nation represented here directly and urgently makes it clear that Russia and China will pay a price. Because they are holding up progress, blockading it. That is no longer tolerable."

Hillary Clinton, ?friends? of Syria meeting 6th July 2012

That?s it Hillary Clinton, threaten Russia and China that will make things better.

[El Pibe]

Russia and China are simply preserving the principle that it's ok to kill your own citizens.

Grozny was shelled with an intensity not seen since the second world war with civilian deaths estimated at up to 50,000 mostly ethnic Russians. Homs is a picnic compared to that and we all know about China's penchant for a bit of internal repression backed up by heavy weapons.

In effect she's saying that it's no longer acceptable in a more enlightened world where we have things like 'responsibility to protect'.

In order to achieve that we need to demolish the post war set-up of the united nations, abolishing permanent member status and vetoes for the big five and having the big military nations prepared to back up the UN to give it real teeth.

This of course won't happen any time soon, so it's effectively posturing not threatening, hence why we get lots of talk about wrong side of history and so on.

We have slid into civil war in Syria, but if you ask me the signs are that Assad is indeed on the wrong side and won't survive this. The insurgency seems to be getting bolder and better organised, we have an increase in defections both from the grunts and at the top levels of the regime.

Of course I could be wrong, the military in Algeria managed to cling on to power using the sorts of tactics we've seen Assad use via his militias, and that rather gives the lie about history being somehow determinist towards the new narrative of the Arab spring.

I hope it won't be protracted and bloody but sadly popular insurgencies tend to be both, and Libya certainly shows us that victory against.

Terrible regime doesn't suddenly usher in democracy and social justice for all.

Poor sods are definitely cursed with living in interesting times!!

[New Nexus]

U.S. got what it setout to get in Libya - destabilization

U.S. got what it setout to get in Egypt - destabilization

U.S. got what it setout to get in Syria - destabilization

U.S. got what it setout to get in Iraq - destabilization

U.S. got what it setout to get in Afghanistan ? destabilization, occupation plus a little sideline of drug running.

And on and on.

The sovereign state of Syria is and has for the past 18 months been under attack from the U.S. and Israel with help from their lackeys in the region.

Syria is the backdoor to the Iran war.

Israel cannot wait to start bombing Iran?s alleged ?WMD?s? (sound familiar)

Israel and U.S. has already attacked Iran by producing and deploying Stuxnet & Flame virus/malware to attack Iran?s civil nuclear program.

Footnote:

Shame no one could get hold of one of those Siemens controllers from Fukushima before they got fried.

[El Pibe]

The soveriegn state of Syria is shelling it's own citizens and cutting the throats of children.

Your US-centric conspiracy world view seems to be blinding you to the simple truth of that. The sovereign state of Syria is not victim to some AIPAC manipulation, to think so makes you one of the few to fall for the pathetic propaganda coming out of the Assad regime.

Were you equally vociferous about the rights of the soveriegn Rwandan regime to solve its own internal issues?

I mean let's face it the government was toppled by foreign backed Tutsis so I guess you think they were right to preempt these external attempts at destabilisation with a little bit of murder?

[El Pibe]

ANd can you justify any of your statements?

U.S. got what it setout to get in Libya - destabilization

Intervention was sought by France and the UK seeking a muscular role and leadership in the area.

The US funded and supported the large majority of the effort whilst the european powers got the glory (whilst exposing their operational weaknesses and dependence on the US), for which Obama has been roundly criticised for 'leadership from behind'.

The goal was ultimately regime change and this was achieved. There is nothing to gain from destabilisation, the sooner a government with a ruling mandate and centralised power is achieved the quicker the oil flows and the quicker the oil contracts come to the west.

U.S. got what it setout to get in Egypt - destabilization

So let me see, a nice regime allied to Israel, policing Israel's borders with incredibly close ties between the Egyptian military and US military was undermined by a US/Israeli conspiracy to errrr get a Muslim Brotherhood President installed and tank the economy with the resultant increase in popular demand for an end to the ties with Israel making it a less secure place.

CAn you remind me why the CIA and mossad did this?

U.S. got what it setout to get in Syria - destabilization

No friend of Israel but they certainly felt more comfortable with the devil they knew.

Admittedly getting rid of the Assad regime might mean a distancing of the new regime from Russia, but of course it might not.

Destablisation achieves what though?

U.S. got what it setout to get in Iraq - destabilization

I think it set out to topple Saddam then didn't think too deeply about what followed.

I know you like to think the SAS and co did black ops to foster a civil war, but I never got an explanation from you as to why this is a good thing, especially as it's in the USs interest to maintain good relations and keep the government strong as a potential bulwark against Iran.

U.S. got what it setout to get in Afghanistan ? destabilization, occupation plus a little sideline of drug running.

The least stable country on the planet didn't really need destablising did it. It is now a more stable country than it was though god knows everyone is just waiting for the troops to go before all the sides either come to some accomodation or yet another civil war breaks out.

If occupation was the goal why are they leaving, and just what makes you think it's the US that is doing the drug running, it's the same old afgahn warlords, their Pakistani allies (and possibly the ISI on the side) who are making the money. None of whom are friends to the US, well apart from the ones in the government.

Not that I expect an answer from you.

I await your next non sequitur however.

[El Pibe]

Well, Libya hold successful elections and nary a byline in any of or newspapers or auntie Beeb's site.

Not exactly good news for people who love bad news is it!!

Looks like Libya might actually be making good progress towards normal statehood.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jul/11/libya-elections-step-stability

http://lynch.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/07/08/libyas_election_editors_reader

If destablisation was the goal then where were all those sas folk dressed as arabs shooting people at the polling stations, and why is the oil flowing at "near pre war levels"?

[angelica fernandes]

The Syrian regime will fall, so says a Western diplomat to Syria, according to a June 16 Reuters article. Another Syrian-based diplomat states that the protest movement is broad-based and growing; in fact, according to the Jerusalem Post, they are widespread. The Syrian government is losing control and is running out of money. Thus, it may not be long until the realization of the predicted fall of the regime is achieved. In fact, on Thursday, a pillar of Syria's leadership was forced to step aside. Rami Makhlouf, a confidant of President Bashar al-Assad and the most powerful businessman in Syria, was forced out due to monetary pressure on the regime.

[bsand]

Robert Fisk as ever gets to the hub of the matter and the gross hypocrisy of the issue....

Why, only a few years ago, the Bush administration was sending Muslims to Damascus for Bashar's torturers to tear their fingernails out for information, imprisoned at the US government's request in the very hell-hole which Syrian rebels blew to bits last week. Western embassies dutifully supplied the prisoners' tormentors with questions for the victims. Bashar, you see, was our baby.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-syrian-war-of-lies-and-hypocrisy-7985012.html

[El Pibe]

I do like old Fisky, he's entertaing, often asks important questions and has often got straight to the heart of the matter as a campaigning journalist.

When he went to Lokheed Martin with the clearly identifiable shrapnel of one of their missiles that had hit a lebanese ambulance full of civilians dead or wounded in Israel's hideous little war of collective punsihment, armed with photos of the dead young girl exposing the brutish reality of so-called push-button warm, that was as good as it gets.

He is however possessed of enormous ego, a tendency to blustering rhetoric, often loses perspective and does himself no favours with weird inaccuracies and surreal claims.

I have to say that article was defintely in the latter camp.

Whilst torture was most certainly and shamefully outsourced that's hardly news, these things we already know (and yes I'd love to see somebody in the west answer for those crimes). There is as yet no evidence (that I know, happy to stand corrected) specifically linking rendition and black prisons with the Syrian regime; though I admit it's at least likely in the scheme of things, he shouldn't be presenting it as fact.

Also Syria and the Assads have most assuredly never been 'our baby' far far from it in fact.

I actually think this article is hugely insulting those who have bravely stood up against tyrants for freedom for that is what the civil war is about*.

There is nothing about this war that is about Iran, it's about a people toppling a bloody dictator.

But of course all intersted powers are factoring their relationships with other middle eastern states and the interests of the balance of power in the region into their responses to the war, (that's us, the US, the Russians, Chinese, French, Germans etc etc etc) they'd be idiots not to

So ultimately he's saying the obvious, littering it with irrelevant rhetoric and adding innaccuracies into the bargain. 2/10 Robert.

*though the longer it goes on the more it'll be about the Syria that comes after it, there is a danger that the more it becomes a target for salifists and wahabists that like Iran an autocratic theocracy will be born of an struggle for democracy I fear.

[New Nexus]

http://worldmathaba.net/items/1337-syria-real-news-august-1-round-up

[silverfox]

I see Kofi's done a runner.

will he repay his salary for his futile effort?

[El Pibe]

In all fairness I don't think you can blame him for failing to secure peace, at least he suggested something workable unlike a certain other middle east peace envoy.

I think that responsibility lies with Assad and his cronies who decided to murder citizens rather than let them have a say in the running of the country.

Something tells me Bashar won't be getting a pension when he retires.

Interestingly I went to uni with his son Kojo who later made a headline or two...

[New Nexus]

Someone should remind Mr Hague that funding terrorist is a crime.

?U.K. Foreign Secretary William Hague pledged an extra 5 million pounds ($7.8 million) in ?non- lethal? assistance to Syrian rebels possibly including medical supplies, communications equipment and body armor.?

bloomberg

[Huguenot]

I can't make up my mind what's bugging you NN.

Do you think that all of the popular uprisings were terrorists? Or just this one?

Or do you think anything at all?

Do you just go 'hur hur hur' when you think someone says something anti-government and then copy and paste it on here because you think it'll increase your opportunities of getting laid?

[El Pibe]

interesting article analysing the rebellion in terms of classic maoist strategy.

[Huguenot]

There's something about that analysis that smacks of post rationalisation. I'm sure I'm entirely wrong.

[El Pibe]

Given the dearth of really solid information about what's going on you can probably say just about anything you want and make it sound convincing.

That said, it certainly has a ring of plausibility about it.

[Huguenot]

Yeah, I'm wondering about cause and effect.

The Maoist interpretation speaks to Chinese myths of centralised control, but given the dislocation of the Syrian rebel movement this seems unlikely.

Petty tribal knock and run strategies would have the same effect, and sporadic attacks on high value targets may speak to the ebb and flow of the 'broken window syndrome' confidence of isolated mobs. Geography and population density will deliver that regardless.

It doesn't require an organised holistic strategy to achieve the effects ascribed to individual acts of disruption.

Whatever the guiding principle that Mao claimed in hindsight, the Chinese state isn't centralised in the way that European and Anglo Saxon social structures are.

China was and is a federation of local political structures who share cultural conviction and see benefit in collaboration but not in obsequience to central doctrine. The idea that Mao had that degree of strategic control is at odds with the legacy of the country.

China remains difficult to deal with not because it's decisions are at odds with international cooperation, but because it doesn't have a structure to enable national distribution of risk and responsibility. China doesn't interfere internationally not because it won't benefit, but because like the EU it can't obtain agreement.

So if China can't do it, then Maoist asymmetrical warfare strategies are a sham, and the likelihood is that without a precedent the Syrian 'revolution' is too.