The problem with the Geneva Communique from the first Geneva round on Syria is that the government of Syria never subscribed to it. It was jointly chaired by the League of Arab States for Syria, whatever that may mean. Another problem is that it is, as so many diplomatic documents are, highly ambiguous. It plainly advocates a power sharing executive formed by some of the current government plus the opposition to oversee a transition to democracy. But it does not state which elements of the current government, and it does not mention which elements of the opposition, nor does it make plain if President Assad himself is eligible to be part of, or to head, the power-sharing executive, and whether he is eligible to be a candidate in future democratic elections.
Doubtless the British, for example, would argue that the term transition implies that he will go. The Russians will argue there is no such implication and the text does not exclude anybody from the process. Doubtless also diplomats on all sides were fully aware of these differing interpretations and the ambiguity is quite deliberate to enable an agreed text. I would say that the text tends much more to the “western” side, and that this reflects the apparently weak military position of the Assad regime at that time and the then extant threat of western military intervention. There has been a radical shift in those factors against the western side in the interim. Expect Russian interpretations now to get more hardline.
Given the extreme ambiguity of the text, Iran has, as it frequently does, shot itself in the foot diplomatically by refusing to accept the communique as the basis of talks and thus getting excluded from Geneva. Iran should have accepted the communique, and then at Geneva issued its own interpretation of it.
But that is a minor point. The farcical thing about the Geneva conference is that it is attempting to promote into power-sharing in Syria “opposition” members who have no democratic credentials and represent a scarcely significant portion of those actually fighting the Assad regime in Syria. What the West are trying to achieve is what the CIA and Mossad have now achieved in Egypt; replacing the head of the Mubarak regime while keeping all its power structures in place. The West don’t really want democracy in Syria, they just want a less pro-Russian leader of the power structures.
The inability of the British left to understand the Middle East is pathetic. I recall arguing with commenters on this blog who supported the overthrow of the elected President of Egypt Morsi on the grounds that his overthrow was supporting secularism, judicial independence (missing the entirely obvious fact the Egyptian judiciary are almost all puppets of the military) and would lead to a left wing revolutionary outcome. Similarly the demonstrations against Erdogan in Istanbul, orchestrated by very similar pro-military forces to those now in charge in Egypt, were also hailed by commenters here. The word “secularist” seems to obviate all sins when it comes to the Middle East.
Qatar will be present at Geneva, and Qatar has just launched a pre-emptive media offensive by launching a dossier on torture and murder of detainees by the Assad regime, which is being given first headline treatment by the BBC all morning
There would be a good dossier to be issued on torture in detention in Qatar, and the lives of slave workers there, but that is another question.
I do not doubt at all that atrocities have been committed and are being committed by the Assad regime. It is a very unpleasant regime indeed. The fact that atrocities are also being committed by various rebel groups does not make Syrian government atrocities any better.
But whether 11,000 people really were murdered in a single detainee camp I am unsure. What I do know is that the BBC presentation of today’s report has been a disgrace. The report was commissioned by the government of Qatar who commissioned Carter Ruck to do it. Both those organisations are infamous suppressors of free speech. What is reprehensible is that the BBC are presenting the report as though it were produced by neutral experts, whereas the opposite is the case. It is produced not by anti torture campaigners or by human rights activists, but by lawyers who are doing it purely and simply because they are being paid to do it.
The BBC are showing enormous deference to Sir Desmond De Silva, who is introduced as a former UN war crimes prosecutor. He is indeed that, but it is not the capacity in which he is now acting. He is acting as a barrister in private practice. Before he was a UN prosecutor, he was for decades a criminal defence lawyer and has defended many murderers. He has since acted to suppress the truth being published about many celebrities, including John Terry.
If the Assad regime and not the government of Qatar had instructed him and paid him, he would now be on our screens arguing the opposite case to that he is putting. That is his job. He probably regards that as not reprehensible. What is reprehensible is that the BBC do not make it plain, but introduce him as a UN war crimes prosecutor as though he were acting in that capacity or out of concern for human rights. I can find no evidence of his having an especial love for human rights in the abstract, when he is not being paid for it. He produced an official UK government report into the murder of Pat Finucane, a murder organised by British authorities, which Pat Finucane’s widow described as a “sham”. He was also put in charge of quietly sweeping the Israeli murders on the Gaza flotilla under the carpet at the UN.
The question any decent journalist should be asking him is “Sir Desmond De Silva, how much did the government of Qatar pay you for your part in preparing this report? How much did it pay the other experts? Does your fee from the Government of Qatar include this TV interview, or are you charging separately for your time in giving this interview? In short how much are you being paid to say this?”
That is what any decent journalist would ask. Which is why you will never hear those questions on the BBC.
http://www.killick1.plus.com/map.jpg
Note the absence of US military bases in Syria. And Iran.
Easy rule: in the Middle East, if a country has US bases, we hear little criticism of it. If it hasn’t, we’re repeatedly told how bad it is.
Just a coincidence, shurely.
Oldmark
low tech version of ‘shock and awe’.
Low tech version of shock and awe…
was not there a second shock n awe… Libya
and a third averted thus far… Syria….
if you have some Links for info…we could all look into it
Thanks Brian. Omitted is the vile rhetoric and lies from Kerry. Can you possibly find a transcript?
Then the little USUKIsNATO stooge, Mr Ban, tried to shut Mr al-Moallem up.
Aim Here. What you say is completely credible and unsurprising. Terrestrial news channels and Sky News are megaphones for those in power.
Snowden to hold Q & A
Live Q&A with Edward Snowden: Thursday 23rd January, 8pm GMT, 3pm EST
Edward Snowden will be answering questions submitted by the public on his official support site, freesnowden.is, this Thursday 23 January at 8pm GMT, 3pm EST. The support site is run by The Courage Foundation and is the only endorsed Snowden Defence Fund.
This is the first Snowden live chat since June 2013 and will last for an hour starting at 8pm GMT, 3pm EST. Questions can be submitted on twitter on the day of the event using the #AskSnowden hashtag. Edward Snowden’s responses will appear at http://www.freesnowden.is/asksnowden
The live chat comes exactly a week after US President Barack Obama gave an address in response to the public concerns raised by Edward Snowden’s revelations about US surveillance practices. In the live chat, Edward Snowden is expected to give his first reaction to the President’s speech.
Courage (formerly the Journalistic Source Protection Defence Fund) is a trust, audited by accountants Derek Rothera & Company in the UK, for the purpose of providing legal defence and campaign aid to journalistic sources. It is overseen by an unremunerated committee of trustees. Edward Snowden is its first recipient.
freesnowden.is was commissioned by the trustees of Courage to provide information on the threats Edward Snowden faces and what can be done to support him, and details all revelations made to date in a convenient central archive.
Hat tip to Margo Medialens
Pepe Escobar
Syria and the Geneva 2 charade
http://rt.com/op-edge/syria-geneva-two-charade-015/
‘This past Sunday, it seemed that UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon had decided to spring out of his trademark vegetable slumber, inviting Iran to Geneva 2. The invitation lasted less than 24 hours; after the requisite ‘pressure’ by Washington – instigated by those sterling democrats of the House of Saud – it was duly rescinded.
Thus we had Ban Ki-moon parroting the US State Department, according to which Tehran had not agreed to the principles of the Geneva 1 communiqué, which called for a sustained cessation of armed violence. Iranian diplomats strongly begged to differ, stressing how Tehran understands that the basis of the talks is the full implementation of the previous, June 2012 conference, even if Iran was not part of it.
Ban Ki-moon also invited the Holy See, as well as Australia, Luxembourg, Mexico and the Republic of Korea, among others, to Montreux; as if these actors had any clue about what’s going on in Syria.
But the apex of the farce is that Iran cannot go, while Saudi Arabia and Qatar – who continue to weaponize every Syrian ‘rebel’ in sight, from young adrenaline seekers to Western-supported Takfiris and beheaders – can. And will.’
[..]
He ends
‘Still, Geneva 2 won’t ‘solve’ anything. Iran and Russia will keep supporting Damascus. The desert wasteland from Syria to Iraq will keep being occupied by Bandar Bush-supported and Gulf-supported hardcore sectarian jihadis.
The war will keep spreading deeper into Lebanon. The government in Damascus won’t collapse. The refugee crisis will soar. And the West will keep striking a pose of being concerned with ‘terror’.
All that non-jazz in Montreux will come to nothing. And then some bureaucrat will call for a Geneva 3.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.’
“This is partially off topic (in that it’s about BBC bias in Scotland, not Syria), but Craig has spoken about this before, and I reckon it’s of interest to you guys here.”
Two questions: Why is the BBC asking for a copy of the raw data unreasonable and in what way is sending a copy of the request to the Rector intimidating?
Essentially, we’ve moved into the post-democratic era in the leading western coutries. Sure, the trappings and rituals of old-fashioned, liberal democracy remain, only without real content or vitality. One can go further an argue that it’s post-politics too, as the political parties have merged around some mythical middle-ground and the differences between them are ones of rhetoric, style, and factional, rather than substantive or ideological. So, I suppose politics has now become post-ideological as well. Does this mean that we actually live in what could be described as a one-party state? Yes, probably, as our politics increasingly resembles the United States. A one-party democracy? How does that add up? Can one have democracy under such a system, where real choice and alternatives are virtually non-existant? Liberals and what used to be the Left have a lot to answer for here as they have passively watched while a totalitarian form of democracy has emerged since 9/11, a totalitarian form welded to aggressive warfare and a neo-conservative, neo-imperialist agenda, a desparate lurch towards militarism and a grab for economic and strategic advantage over potential rivals for world domination, and in this foul and bloody game Syria is just another square on the chessboard.
Now even the MOD admits multiculture Britain has had enough of foreign conflicts.Especially disastrous,fake and pointless ones such as Iraq and Afghanistan.
No shit Sherlock.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/22/multicultural-britain-foreign-conflict-mod
And the woefully biased,inept and war drum beating BBC were probably more interested in covering up Savile’s horrific abuse of over 1000 children to report fairly on any disastrous wars.
Why did so many at the BBC who knew of Savile’s activities stay silent ?
Never trust anything the BBC says.
Ian Duncan-Smith details UK’s ‘ghetto reality’ and claims his welfare reforms can make Britain ‘great’ again…
Great for who Ian? The 500,000 at food banks or your gangster bankster chums?
This is a man whose grasp of facts snd reality is so tenuous he couldnt remember what university he went to…thats putting it kindly..
Warning in link: horrific smug bastard photo of IDS.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/22/duncan-smith-benefits-street-shock
The nauseating hypocrisy of the US and UK pointing fingers at ANYONE over torture claims is truly disturbing.
Interesting debates.
No one here seem to give a toss about the fact that current Assad has inherited the throne from his farther and that the family has been running whole country like their private firm for the last 43 years. Yes, 43 years it is longer than some of royal dynasties in European history.
What is more interesting is that no one seem to care that al-Assads put in charge their relative and kinsman Alawities and rule the country where over 80% of population are Sunni Muslims. And when this 80% of population suddenly decided to take matter of their lives into their own hands, and al-Assads started smashing them with Russian tanks, bomb them with Russian airplanes and shoot them with Russian bullets, most of contributors on this blog still make Putin a good guy and thank Russia for what is has done.
Interesting moral standing of many here indeed.
Despite the predicable & obvious guff from the usual suspects, the informed commentary of most posters here,make this Blog worth visting, and makes you appreciate the severity of the recent two months closing of comments; what’s the news regarding moderation now, or is it as before ?
@Uzbek in the UK, all that may be true, but does that mean we should join in right now, with the demonising of the Assads, by the humanitarian bombing supporters, so that our Governments feel free to have their way, to actually increase the bloodbath in Syria, by turning it into another Iraq or Libya ?
Speech by Syria at Geneva:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/geneva-ii-syrian-foreign-minister-the-west-publicly-claims-to-be-fighting-terrorism-whilst-it-is-covertly-nourishing-it/5365833
“Police chiefs say water cannon are needed because ‘austerity measures are likely to lead to continued protest’”
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/22/police-home-secretary-approve-use-water-cannon-austerity-protest
Good to see you back Macky. I think it is now ‘Moderation Lite’ but who knows as we haven’t heard from Jon. Craig has removed a post or two.
Wonder where Sofia is? 🙂
Ideally… I’d prefer Syria to be a beacon of anarchist, de-centralized, democracy, where everyone was wedded to the principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity, and superstitious religion was withering away, and a lot of other things too as Syria moved towards an anarchist utopia, showing the world what could be done once the people were freed from the shackles of the marketplace, regligion, sectarianism, militarism, and the state… in the meantime, that’ll have to wait as the country is under attack from what increasingly looks like a foreign mercenary army, trained, armed, financed, and given diplomatic cover by the West that’s determined to topple the Syrian regime, regardless of the costs to the Syrian people, who are mere pawns in the game.
It’s bizarre and grotesque listening to Kerry pontificate about human rights, freedom, and democracy. The hypocricy, double-standards, and self-righteousness are astounding, even for an American politician. The US is using Islamists and al-Queda terrorists as its army in this war to topple Assad, how odd, and these people, who we are bombing in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and are supposed to be our deadly enemy, are on our payroll, and supposedly going to introduce democracy to Syria! Is Kerry fantasizing, or is he on drugs? Look at Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, countries we destroyed over the last thirty years as we sent our bombers and legions to help them attain democracy. All these countries were infinitely better off before we attacked them and gave them the gift of democracy. If smashing them to pieces, destroying their infrastructure, killing them in the millions, is the nobel price for democracy, democracy western-style, then, frankly, you can keep it, bring back the strongmen and stability.
But of course it’s nonsense. Our leaders don’t give a damn about ordinary people in these countries, whether they live or die. They are just pawns in the game. Going way back, when the long war began, the Americans saw the military takeover in Afghanistan, a secular, nationalist, westernized, take-over, as a golden opportunity to drag the Russians into the mire and bleed them dry, give them a version of Vietnam. So the Americans using Pakistan and a proxy army of Islamic fighters began to attack the military regime in Afghanistan, knowing that the Russians would be forced to intervene, as the Russians are paranoid about Islamists on their borders and the threat of them spreading further. So the Russians marched into Afghanistan and were in the American trap, so the blood really began to flow as the Americans poured money and weapons into Afghanistan along with Saudi Arabia and the tiny gulf states. The Americans didn’t do this because they loved the Afghans, they did it because they hated the Russians and wanted to see them bleed big time. That hundreds of thousands of Afghans died was irrelevant, they didn’t matter, mere pawns in the game, as long as thousands of Russians died as well. And this has been the pattern repeated endlessly for the last forty years. The Americans using al-Queda and Islamists as their shock troops and private terrorist gangs to attack their enemies and gain advantage. Ordinary people slaughtered in a ghastly and cynical blood-game between great power rivals. Did ordinary Afghans get anything positive out of all this destruction and killing as the great powers played with them? Of course not, nobody cares about them, who bothers about pawns in a game of chess?
‘Essentially, we’ve moved into the post-democratic era in the leading western countries……’ {Writeon}
Did democracy ever have real power, or was it always subverted by vested interests? Whatever, the power now lies with hedge funds, to which even banks defer, and which finance the amalgamation of productive and useful industries into commercial monopolies.
Think of them as lilies:
‘They toil not, neither do they spin, but Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.’
@Mary, thanks, a quick read through tells me nothing has changed, so the enforced close-down was indeed quite pointless.
@Writeon, I couldn’t agree more with your posts, but I do think that religion does provide an important beneficial function in most socities.
Macky
There is no simple answer to this and many other conflicts of the past. It was (I think) Bismark who said that there was no conflict in Europe (at that time) on which Austria did not warm up its Austrian soup. This can easily be applied to the great powers today and to the US specifically. The best (ideal) solution would be if there were no conflicts. If there were good governments all over the world which respects rights of their citizens. If borders of many post-colonial nations were not drawn thousands miles away in European capitals without smallest consideration of people these borders are mixing or dividing. But unfortunately this is not the case in case of many nations. So how do we go from here? Wait and see how many more people are slaughtered in there? Side with one against another to help one to slaughter another? Wait and see how others (not us) help one to slaughter others (in there)? Any OTHER options (which past and present system of world order is not aware of)?
I bet many on this blog would prefer first option as it at least free us from moral responsibility of slaughter. Who (be honest) gives a toss of people slaughtered here and there, as long as we are not involved (for whatever motive). This is general criticism of left liberal within liberals. Left liberals are not satisfied with the current state of affair but western involvement makes things worse (which is true in most cases). Yes, fair enough it is understandable approach. But non-involvement does not make things better either. Especially when siding with others (non west) who still gets involved and take part in the slaughter, especially on the side of those who have least moral standing in this (slaughter).
Macky. You are correct. I was being a bit harsh on religion. Which is ironic as I have lots of religious friends who I get along with splendidly.
The vile stuff that came out of Kerry’s mouth yesterday.
http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/2014/01/20140122291401.html#axzz2rDopjUjS
We have ‘spoken’ before of these Israeli oil grabs in land that does not belong to them nor under the coastal waters.
Craig has this piece on Information Clearing House.
Israel Grants Oil Rights in Syria to Murdoch and Rothschild
By Craig Murray
January 22, 2014 “Information Clearing House – Israel has granted oil exploration rights inside Syria, in the occupied Golan Heights, to Genie Energy. Major shareholders of Genie Energy – which also has interests in shale gas in the United States and shale oil in Israel – include Rupert Murdoch and Lord Jacob Rothschild. This from a 2010 Genie Energy press release:
Claude Pupkin, CEO of Genie Oil and Gas, commented, “Genie’s success will ultimately depend, in part, on access to the expertise of the oil and gas industry and to the financial markets. Jacob Rothschild and Rupert Murdoch are extremely well regarded by and connected to leaders in these sectors. Their guidance and participation will prove invaluable.”
“I am grateful to Howard Jonas and IDT for the opportunity to invest in this important initiative,” Lord Rothschild said. “Rupert Murdoch’s extraordinary achievements speak for themselves and we are very pleased he has agreed to be our partner. Genie Energy is making good technological progress to tap the world’s substantial oil shale deposits which could transform the future prospects of Israel, the Middle East and our allies around the world.”
/..
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37438.htm
Mary
What was vile with that speech please?
Almost all of it apart from the opening para.
Mary
The man who composed the Hockey Cokey caused problems for the undertakers on his death.
They put his left leg in; his left leg out; in out in out; they shook it all about…
Sorry
“Obviously will be a tough and complicated negotions”
How to create a
Civil society the American way!
How many American abortions a year?
Growth of what?
1. House prices.
2. Food prices.
3. Rentals
4. Food banks
5. Penises
From the horses mouth; its about regime change and always was.
“US state department spokeswoman Marie Harf said it [the report on Syrian 11,000 dead detainees] “underscores that it makes it even more important that we make progress [at Geneva II].
The situation on the ground is so horrific that we need to get a political transition in place, and we need to get the Assad regime out of power.”
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37435.htm