Hope for Peace in Syria?

Well things are progressing in Syria. The destruction of the Chemical Weapons continues. But more importantly we now have the January 22nd date for Geneva 2 which is exciting. Especially exciting if initial signals that the Iranians are willing to dump Bashar and the Saudis are ready to minimise their demands to the mere dumping of Bashar prove to be genuine. Do we at last have the beginning of the end of the Syrian war. Time for prayer I guess.

US to destroy Syria stockpile at sea   

---

Arab News - 01 December, 2013

The US will destroy the most dangerous of Syria's chemical weapon stockpile on a ship at sea, the world's chemical watchdog said on Saturday.

“The neutralization operations will be conducted on a US vessel at sea using hydrolysis,” the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons said in a statement.

TO VIEW FULL STORY CLICK HERE

Syria meet wants no Assad role in future govt: Hague

Talk about stating the obvious - William Hague is such a pompous waste of space. We need action not words and we need Geneva 2 to role forward as a serious discussion - with or without the dysfunctional Syria national Coalition. There are plenty of other Syrian opposition groups ready to negotiate if they are too prissy. They have little or no relevance or support within the Syrian opposition on the ground in Syria in any case.

Arab News - 23 October, 2013
Western and Arab powers meeting with Syrian opposition leaders in London agreed Tuesday that President Bashar Assad could play no role in any future government, British Foreign Secretary William Hague said.

The so-called Friends of Syria leaders were meeting with rebel chiefs including the head of the Syrian National Coalition to persuade them to attend a major peace conference in Geneva next month.

FOR FULL ARTICLE CLICK HERE

Damascus, Tehran warn US against Syria intervention

THIS HAS JUST COME IN FROM CONFLICTS FORUM:

Conflicts Forum distributes articles and reports that we think might be of interest ­ in doing so, CF is not endorsing the content of the articles or papers, nor do they reflect any corporate view of CF. They are articles, reports, papers, etc. that we think might be of interest.

Damascus, Tehran warn US against Syria intervention

Al-Akhbar English, August 25, 2013

http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/iran-warns-us-against-syria-intervention 

Updated 1:30 pm: Syria and its ally Iran separately warned the United States against any military action over a suspected chemical weapons attack in Ghouta, shortly after the US defense secretary hinted on Sunday of possible strikes against the Damascus government.

"US military intervention will create a very serious fallout and a ball of fire that will inflame the Middle East," Syrian Information Minister Omran Zoabi was quoted by state news agency SANA as saying to Lebanon-based al-Mayadeen TV.

And in remarks carried by Tehran's state agency, a top Iranian military leader warned Washington, its western allies and Israel against playing with "fire."

"If the United States crosses this red line, there will be harsh consequences for the White House," armed forces deputy chief of staff Massoud Jazayeri was quoted as saying.

A team of United Nations inspectors are waiting in a hotel in Damascus a few miles from the site of an alleged chemical weapons attack in Ghouta, but Syria suggested they would not be allowed to visit as it was not on a list agreed in July of alleged chemical attacks this year.

US President Barack Obama met his top military and national security advisers on Saturday to debate options. US naval forces have been taken up positions in the Mediterranean to give Obama the option of an armed strike.

"The terrorist war underway in Syria was planned by the United States and reactionary countries in the region against the resistance front (against Israel)," Fars quoted Jazayeri as saying.

"Despite this, the government and people of Syria have achieved huge successes. ... Those who add fire to the oil will not escape the vengeance of the people," added Jazayeri.

Syrian opposition accounts that between 500 and well over 1,000 civilians were killed this week by gas in munitions fired by pro-government forces.

In the most authoritative account so far, the medical charity Medecins Sans Frontieres said three hospitals near Damascus had reported 355 deaths in the space of three hours out of about 3,600 admissions with nerve gas-type symptoms.

Major world powers, including Syria's ally Russia, have urged the Syrian leader to cooperate with UN chemical weapons inspectors already in Damascus to pursue earlier allegations.

But Russia said the rebels were impeding an inquiry and that Damascus would have no interest in using poison gas for fear of foreign intervention.

A senior UN official arrived in Damascus on Saturday to seek access for inspectors to the site of last Wednesday's attack but Syria reiterated on Sunday that it had not yet agreed on access to the site.

Information Minister Zoabi said Syria and the UN had previously agreed on inspections of certain sites around Syria from before Wednesday's allegations and will not allow any "inspection that will prejudice national sovereignty."

The minister said Syria would cooperate "significantly and transparently" with prior agreed inspection sites. But he went on to suggest that UN inspectors would not be allowed to visit the site of Wednesday's attack.

Zoabi said Syria "will not allow the existence of inspection committees under any pretext, and this position is final because it is clear to the (UN) inspectors to investigate particular incidents ... in accordance with the agreement between Syria and the United Nations."

Iranian Commander Refutes US Defense Secretary’s Remarks on Syria

FARS Iranian news agency, 25 August 2013

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13920603000637

TEHRAN (FNA)- Deputy Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces for Cultural Affairs and Defense Publicity Brigadier General Massoud Jazayeri condemned the US officials’ statements that Washington is reviewing the military option for Syria, and warned that military intervention in the Muslim country will have grave consequences for Washington.

His remarks came after US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel claimed that the White House is studying different military options against Syria.

“The US knows Syria’s redline and crossing over this line will have dire consequences for the White House,” Brigadier General Jazayeri said on Sunday.

He pointed to the developments in the confrontation between the Syrian nation and government with Takfiri, Salafi and foreign-backed terrorists, and said, “Now the Syrian resistance has reached such a level of maturity that the arrogant front cannot defeat it.”

“Each of the US and Zionist regime’s accomplices in the terrorist war against Syria have faced problems and those who add fuel to this fire will not be immune from the nations’ revenge,” he added, and warned against any move or remarks fueling tension in the region.

Hagel suggested Saturday the Pentagon is moving forces into place ahead of possible military action against Syria, even as President Barack Obama voiced caution.

The conflict in Syria started in March 2011, when sporadic pro-reform protests turned into a massive insurgency following the intervention of western and regional states.

The unrest, which took in terrorist groups from across Europe, the Middle-East and North Africa, has transpired as one of the bloodiest conflicts in recent history.

As the foreign-backed insurgency in Syria continues without an end in sight, the US government has boosted its political and military support to Takfiri extremists.

Washington has remained indifferent to warnings by Russia and other world powers about the consequences of arming militant groups.

Former Iranian Envoy Warns US, Israel of Dire Consequences of War against Syria

   

FARS Iranian news agency, 25 August 2013

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13920603000504

   

TEHRAN (FNA)- Former Iranian Ambassador to Jordan Mohammad Irani warned the US and Israel against the dire consequences of military intervention in Syria, and said a war on Syria would spill over into the entire Middle-East.

"Now the conditions aren’t ripe for the US military intervention (in Syria)," Irani told FNA on Sunday.

Asked about media reports on coordination between Washington and Tel Aviv for launching an invasion of Syria, he said, "Carrying out new operations by Israel is not unlikely, but Tel Aviv should consider the fact that it is more vulnerable than the US and other western states which may enter the Syrian crisis with their naval fleets."

Irani underlined that Israel should be aware of the vital consequences of waging war on Syria and realize that Damascus and its allies will retaliate against foreign aggressions, which will eventually exacerbate the crises in the Middle-East.

His remarks came after US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel claimed that the White House is studying different military options against Syria.

Hagel suggested Saturday the Pentagon is moving forces into place ahead of possible military action against Syria, even as President Barack Obama voiced caution.

The Pentagon was apparently hard at work coming up with these new plans and new targets, even though Joint Chiefs chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey had only two days prior warned against military involvement, and now has the cruise missiles ready to go, just waiting for presidential approval to launch the attack.

Now officials seem closer than ever to starting a war, and though President Obama did insist there would be "no rush" to attack Syria, there seems to be a renewed Congressional push to get the jump on Syria by not waiting for any pesky evidence to support their claims and just attacking outright.

With NATO allies France and Turkey already on the bandwagon and the Pentagon now having cruise missiles ready to go at a moment notice, it will be awfully easy for the administration to start attacking and argue that it was a "compromise" compared to some other, even bigger attack.

The case for that already seems to be getting laid out by the White House, which insists that they don’t envision "boots on the ground" during any potential military intervention.

What sort of attack that would mean remains to be seen, but officials have often discussed setting up "buffer zones," nominally for humanitarian reasons but primarily to give Syrian rebel factions a place from which to launch attacks with impunity.

At the same time, any military intervention that seriously changes the situation on the ground will run into the same problem that has repeatedly been pointed to, that of the rebels’ dominance by Al-Qaeda allies. This means that any attack that harms the Assad government too much risks bringing a jihadist faction into power that will be even more hostile toward the US.

Iranian MP: West Using Chemical Weapons as Pretext for War on Syria

FARS Iranian news agency, 25 August 2013

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13920603001000

TEHRAN (FNA)- The US and its western allies are seeking to start an all-out war on Syria under the pretext of the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government, a senior Iranian lawmaker said.

Member of the Iranian Parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Mehdi Davatgari said that the US and its allies are the main cause of such threats against other countries, exactly similar to something that happened in Iraq in 2003 when the US decided to attack that country during the term of former president George W. Bush.

The world has realized now that using chemical weapons is the option of western states, said the lawmaker.

US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel suggested Saturday the Pentagon is moving forces into place ahead of possible military action against Syria, even as President Barack Obama voiced caution, AFP reported.

Officials continue hyping Wednesday’s allegations of a chemical weapons strike, saying that they believe such an attack probably happened even though they don’t have any actual proof to back that up.

The Pentagon was apparently hard at work coming up with these new plans and new targets, even though Joint Chiefs chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey had only two days prior warned against military involvement, and now has the cruise missiles ready to go, just waiting for presidential approval to launch the attack, Antiwar.com reported Friday.

Now officials seem closer than ever to starting a war, and though President Obama did insist there would be "no rush" to attack Syria, there seems to be a renewed Congressional push to get the jump on Syria by not waiting for any pesky evidence to support their claims and just attacking outright.

With NATO allies France and Turkey already on the bandwagon and the Pentagon now having cruise missiles ready to go at a moment notice, it will be awfully easy for the administration to start attacking and argue that it was a "compromise" compared to some other, even bigger attack.

The case for that already seems to be getting laid out by the White House, which insists that they don’t envision "boots on the ground" during any potential military intervention.

What sort of attack that would mean remains to be seen, but officials have often discussed setting up "buffer zones," nominally for humanitarian reasons but primarily to give Syrian rebel factions a place from which to launch attacks with impunity.

At the same time, any military intervention that seriously changes the situation on the ground will run into the same problem that has repeatedly been pointed to, that of the rebels’ dominance by Al-Qaeda allies. This means that any attack that harms the Assad government too much risks bringing a jihadist faction into power that will be even more hostile toward the US.

Siwar Al-Assad Conference talks about the Syrian Conflict at ILERI

Take a look at this link:

Assassination of three PKK activists in Paris

On the evening of January 9, three Kurdish activists were murdered inside the Kurdish Information Centre in North Paris. This comes a day after reports the Turkish government had come to an agreement on a peace plan with Abdullah Öcalan, the jailed leader of the Kurdish independence party the PKK.

One of the victims, Sakine Cansiz, helped found the PKK in 1978. Initially a guerrilla, she spent 12 years in a Turkish jail where she alleged she was tortured along with other political prisoners.  Dispatched to Paris by the PKK’s acting leader Murat Karayılan, she was in charge of the group’s civil affairs in Europe. She was killed alongside Fidan Doğan, the Paris representative of the Brussels-based Kurdistan National Congress, and a young activist, Leyla Soylemez.

Despite widespread protests calling the Turkish intelligence service MIT to account, the French authorities said it was unclear who was behind the attacks. They proposed two theories: one, that the assassination was arranged by a political party opposing Kurdish Independence or two, that it was the outcome of internal feuding between different factions of the PKK.

Tahsin Burcuoğlu, the Turkish ambassador to Paris released a statement claiming the evidence suggested an ‘inside job’: he alleged the building was secured by a coded lock meaning the perpetrator would have had to have been let in by the victims. This has prompted suspicions that the victims knew their killer.

De-facto PKK leader Murat Karayılan has long refuted accusations his group’s $140 million annual military budget is bolstered by Syria’s embattled leader Bashar al-Assad. His position has been considerably weakened by leftist factions of the PKK since he assumed leadership, and he is reported to have had problems with one of his guerrilla commanders, the Syrian Bahoz Erdal, in particular. The Turkish authorities suspect the latter to be the leader of the Kurdistan freedom Falcon’s, a terrorist group that splintered off from the PKK after becoming dissatisfied with its tactics. Furthermore, the Turkish news outlet Today’s Zaman reported in July that a senior PKK commander acting under the name “Bahoz Erdal and his team” are controlling the activities of the PYD who have been left by Assad to rule Syrian Kurdistan. 

This raises a number of questions. Given the cooperation of PKK leaders with Ankara, an assassination on the part of the Turkish authorities would seem to be if not unlikely, self-defeating, especially since the talks were well received by the public. It seems more probable that the murder was organised by parties hoping to derail the peace talks in which Karayilan has been cooperating; that the target Sakine Cansiz was a close ally of his suggests the perpetrator to have been from a faction dissatisfied by Karayilan’s leadership specifically. If links between Erdal, the Kurdistan freedom Falcons and the Syrian PYD are proved, along with evidence of the door being opened from the inside, accusations that internal fighting in the PKK emanating from Syria is responsible for the death of the three women in Paris could be strengthened.

That said, as it stands no one can say for certain who is responsible. Despite the recent rapprochement between the government and PKK, Prime Minister Erdogan has taken a hard line against the dissidents over the past year, (imprisoning many on flimsy charges for example), prompting fears of human rights abuses. It is, however, the first assassination of such a high profile to be seen outside Turkey’s borders, and, as the BBC has reported, a tacit agreement was made between both parties that high-profile attacks would not be made against either.  The only other possible case scenario is that this was an assassination orchestrated by the Turkish secret services to make the PKK’s foundations look weak. Regardless, the result has led to public empathy and popular support for the banned party for now.

A Saudi perspective on Syria

This article by Tariq al Humayed the Editor in Chief of Sharq Al Awsat gives a Saudi view of what's going on in Syria. It is interesting and (if you read between the lines) goes some way toward explaining the double game the Saudis are playing in supporting the Moslem Brotherhood.

Global Arab Network - The repeated question: who is in charge in Syria? Is it the President [Bashar al-Assad], or his brother [Republican Guard commander Maher al-Assad], or the political old guard? Everybody is asking this question. There are those asking out of skepticism or suspicion, and those asking out of mere curiosity, whilst others are asking this with a view to questioning whether it is logical for a young, well-educated president to act in the same manner that Bashar al-Assad is acting today against his own people, with shells striking the city of Hama every 10 seconds?

FOR FULL ARTICLE CLICK HERE

Assad state of affairs

President Assad’s attempts to present himself as a man of reform appear to be all talk and no trousers.

Earlier this month, Syria said it was withdrawing troops and tanks from some cities and offering a “national dialogue” with opposition figures. Giving details of the proposed dialogue, Information Minister Mahmoud said President Assad would meet with “popular delegations” from around the country and listen to “their opinions, demands, and visions about what has currently been taking place in Syria”. The offer has been rejected by Local Coordination Committees who say the government must stop shooting protesters and free political prisoners first; the responses to demands have unearthed the emptiness behind President Assad’s words.

Although Syrian authorities have indeed freed several dissidents - including opposition figure Riad Seif and human rights lawyer Anwar al-Bunni - the promise of troop withdrawal has been undermined by reports of renewed violence that came just one day after the proposal, with security forces shelling towns and opening fire on civilians. Thousands of Syrians have fled to seek refuge in Lebanon and yet have not been able to escape the unrest; Syrian tanks have been deployed at Lebanon’s border crossing.

Increasing the pressure to end Syria’s violent crackdown, the EU, the US and Canada have imposed sanctions - including travel bans, asset freezes, and arms embargoes - on President Assad and other high-ranking members of his regime. The effectiveness of these actions is questionable. Arguably, these individuals are powerful enough and rich enough to be relatively unaffected by the sanctions – except perhaps in terms of emotional aggravation. In a show of unashamed spite, Foreign Minister Walid Mouallem said that Syria would respond to the sanctions by strengthening its relationship with Russia, China, and Latin America - to prove to the West that the world consists of more than Europe and North America. Not only are the sanctions apparently ineffective, they have the potential to exacerbate the situation. If sanctions do not work then the next logical step for the West would be a more extreme measure of external intervention. Yet there have been no calls from Arab countries for international assistance; in fact, its voice on Syria’s uprising is worryingly silent. If we are to avoid the mistakes of the past, it is essential that the West acquires a request from the Arab League before any intervention goes ahead.