Syria and Diplomacy 2917


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.

 

 

 


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

2,917 thoughts on “Syria and Diplomacy

1 12 13 14 15 16 98
  • BrianFujisan

    Fred… @ 11;44

    Some more on the international Laws you were Referring to –

    War Crimes in Libya and Terrorism in Syria : Open letter to David Cameron –

    Dear Mr. Prime Minister,

    After the involvement of the United Kingdom as part of the FUKUS-Axis (France, UK, US, Israel) in the travesty of international law (*), the murderous terrorist attack on the people of the Libyan Jamahiriya and after similar involvement in terrorist activities in Syria, there are certain questions that the members of the international community deserve to ask and to which we consider we deserve a reply, unless, of course, you think that is your prerogative to ride roughshod over international law, break norms of diplomacy and act like a boorish, arrogant, pig-headed brat and remain unaccountable.

    That not being the case, thank you for your time and here are the questions.

    1. Did your country liaise with the group LIFG in Libya during the hostilities in this country during 2011 and was this group on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office list of proscribed terrorist groups during the time that the UK was aiding it in armed conflict? This being the case, would you admit that the FCO was actually breaking UK law and as such your Foreign Secretary is liable for prosecution? Why, then, has be not been prosecuted?

    16. Would you agree that you are in part responsible for the actions being carried out by the groups your country has armed in both Libya and Syria and are you aware of the atrocities they have committed? If you deny they have committed atrocities then perhaps you would like the same sort of actions to happen to your family, since you can see no wrong? And if you do admit that the terrorists the UK supported in Libya sliced off women’s breasts in the streets, slit the throats of black Libyans because they are racists, raped young girls because they are rapists, torched buildings, attacked police stations, murdered, looted and stole private and public property then you admit that in arming and financing such groups, you stand accountable?

    notice that I have jumped from Question 1.…To the last Question -16
    All Questions worth a wee scan….and here is the Link –

    http://libyanfreepress.wordpress.com/2012/03/10/war-crimes-in-libya-and-terrorism-in-syria-open-letter-to-david-cameron/

    see also this long list of Nato crimes in Libya @

    http://libyasos.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/operation-unified-protector-nato-in.html

    Lastly …

    The Law case of the Century –

    NATO: Indictment for breach of international law in the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. The military and political leaders of NATO are hereby accused of the following crimes committed in the Libyan campaign of 2011, in which the systematic breaches of international law are underlined.

    Understanding that international law exists and that it is systematically broken by certain powers with impunity, understanding that such a situation is unacceptable and that the same set of laws should apply to all, equally, with the same sets of weights and measures employed in upholding it, I hereby accuse NATO and the below-mentioned individuals, party to its acts in the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya from February to September (ongoing) 2011, of breach of international law;

    1. Accusation: NATO war crimes, crimes against humanity, breach of UN Charter, Breach of UNSC Resolutions, breach of Geneva Conventions, occasioning murder, attempted murder, actions occasioning grievous and actual bodily harm, destruction of private and public property.

    2. Accused:…..there follows a list of 31 accused individuals, and more detail of the crimes. @

    http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/06-11-2011/119534-indictment_nato-0/

    Guano
    i forgive you….No harm done eh.. anger is everywhere these days… many people on Craig’s Blog…are reading of things that the MSM… keep well hidden from joe Public…and that is yet another crime – Propaganda For the Gov.com…. suppressing of truth for us

  • A Node

    Oh! Oh!….

    “We will stand with the people of Ukraine,” said US Secretary of State John Kerry at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
    Kerry added that the United States is coordinating with its allies in efforts to resolve the situation peacefully.
    “We are working with our partners to press the government of Ukraine to forego violence, to address the concerns of peaceful protesters, to foster dialogue, promote the freedom of assembly and expression,” he said.

    Sound familiar?

  • Jives

    It’s so obvious Kerry is really just a NWO lackey and more like a Republican than a Republican.

  • A Node

    The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) will be relieved to have it confirmed that they have lost none of their influence in New York now that their ‘special friend’ Michael Bloomberg has been replaced as Mayor of New York by Bill de Blasio.

    De Blasio has been embarrassed by the revelation that shortly after he was elected, he failed to inform the media of his attendance at an AIPAC conference. Luckily, someone has released a secret recording of his speech. You can listen to it here:
    http://desertpeace.wordpress.com/2014/01/25/new-yorks-liberal-mayor-speaks-at-aipac/

    As a taster, here’s a couple of snippets that caught my ear:

    “New York has a special obligation, and I feel a part of my job description [as Mayor of New York] is to be a defender of Israel.”

    ….and….

    “As Mayor of New York City, I want you to know you have a friend and an ally at City Hall, that City Hall will always be open to AIPAC, that when you need me to stand by you in Washington or anywhere, I will answer the call and I’ll answer it happily, because that’s my job”

    Perhaps one of our regular Israel defenders could suggest why this normally outspoken self-publicist was reluctant to share with his electorate the promises he made in their name.

  • guano

    BrianFujisan

    Can we link the present turmoil in Syria with historical examples of coalition between the four parties, Western States, Zionism, Client rulers of Muslim countries and AlQaida and conclude that Blair was a participating agent of the perversion of faith he criticises in Syria?

    For example, Western States use Zionist commercial companies to outsource sensitive State functions. Assad was directly involved with extraordinary rendition by the UK. Al Qaida was directly involved with the Western overthrow of Gaddafi. So can we conclude that the situation in Syria is in fact orchestrated by all three parties consensually?

    I have always assumed that Zionism was telling the other three what to do by various forms of financial blackmail. But what if the military power, spying power, judicial power, media power are consensual and shared collectively by the leaders of business, government, religion, military etc. ? Their target is us the world’s resources and means to fulfill their ambition to monitor the slightest sign of organised resistance by the people by 24/7 monitoring of the private lives of people?

    As I read somewhere recently, if there is any resistance it will have been organised by the themselves as a sop to the people’s frustration.

    If all these powers are colluding against us we have to expose their actions equally. We are constrained by etiquettes of good behaviour from reporting the fascist tendencies of the things around us out of our control. Or is that what they want? for us to drop the etiquettes of good behaviour and allow ourselves to fall into the same nihilistic control-freak trap of West/Zio/Client/Qaida ?

    They and their refusal to submit to God’s control over everything are bound collectively for Hell/Jahannam. Patience preserve us from going there.

    Do not go gentle into that good night,
    Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
    Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

  • BrianFujisan

    Guano

    I do respect some ( very few ) religions But certainly NOT those of T BLIAR…AND G Fkn Bush…And Snotty nosed Elite cameron…FUCKING Multi-Millionaires these shits you want help from..not government but each individual..all of them ….Guano… be careful that you don’t sell you’re soul..by inviting help from these cunts… MY religion is Nature.. and in Natives… ie the first peoples before conquest…. i don’t know where you live… but believe it or not even in Scotland we have had it….Highland Clearances…Wars ect

    P.s thank you for peaceable Debate..long may it last..at this rate, we can keep Craig’s blog open

  • Mary

    Some jeering at Edward Snowden on Radio 4 Today earlier between the presenter Justin Webb and the BBC German reporter, Steve Evans.

    They were amused at his ‘paranoia’ about having a bullet being put into his head or being poisoned. He is justified in having such fears I should say.

    They also speculated on his future plans once his Russian visa expires this Summer and whether or not he would choose to go to Germany where he is ‘extremely popular’. As if he would go there with extradition to the US a certainty.

    The BBC bastards were having another one of their cosy chats which is a disguise for their propaganda.

    0639
    US intelligence leaker Edward Snowden has alleged the National Security Agency engaged in industrial espionage. The BBC’s Steve Evans discovers more.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03s6mdp/live

    PS The espionage referred to is by the NSA on Siemens.

  • Mary

    What really goes on. It’s rather long but full of detail.

    NSA, Israel, GVEs, Hasbara, and Gun Massacres in the USA and Beyond
    by Michael Gillespie / January 25th, 2014

    Why would US leaders, lawmakers, intelligence and law enforcement agency administrators allow foreign intelligence and espionage agencies and their front companies unfettered, unexamined, long-term access to vast audiences of American children and young adults? And does not that question represent legitimate and vital concerns regarding privacy, public health, public safety, and national security?

    It is a matter of public record that, through its intelligence agencies and their spin-offs and many front companies, Israel is actively and deeply involved with the NSA in collecting and organizing data on Americans. The information thus collected by the NSA is shared with Britain, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand as well as Israel, but Israel is the major threat to legitimate US interests. Israel’s equivalent of the NSA, Unit 8200, or Israel SIGINT National Unit (ISNU), is notorious for its spin-off companies that become private intelligence gathering and espionage operations under Israeli control, in much the same way that Mossad has long been known to use front companies for its operations. In 2010, the investigation of a Mossad assassination team that used fraudulently obtained and falsified European and Australian passports and funding provided via US-issued bank cards revealed that the corporation that arranged the funding of the kidon team, Payoneer, was itself funded by venture capital firms linked to Israeli intelligence organizations.

    One of the firms, Greylock Partners, founded in 1965, “operates in a number of global centers of innovation, including Boston, China (Beijing), India (Bangalore), Israel (Herzliya) and Silicon Valley. … Current Greylock portfolio companies include Data Robotics, Digg, Facebook, Imperva, LinkedIn, Palo Alto Networks, Pandora, Picarro, Redfin, Workday and ZipCar,” according to the firm’s website. Greylock’s investment activities in Israel were launched in 2002 by partner Moshe Mor, who “served six years in the Israeli Army as a Captain in the Military Intelligence branch.” Unlike the CIA, which has an unfortunate history of ineffective and failed business operation covers, Mossad- and Unit 8200-controlled business operations are known for lucrative success.
    [..]
    The single greatest danger in restricting the ability of the National Security Administration (NSA) to collect information broadly is that no foreign intelligence agency will necessarily be similarly impacted by such restrictions. Foreign intelligence agencies, especially Israeli intelligence and espionage agencies and their front companies, may well find their ability to act against the USA and its interests, and to act with impunity, substantially enhanced by restrictions placed on US intelligence agencies.

    /..
    http://dissidentvoice.org/2014/01/nsa-israel-gves-hasbara-and-gun-massacres-in-the-usa-and-beyond/

  • guano

    BrianFujisan

    Nature is made by God. I don’t know much about your area of Fogistan. Only joking.

  • guano

    Mary

    Too much muck. Slow down. I used to read my children the story about Nogbad’s marrow – which was a green and yellow painted balloon. As is,I suspect, David Cameron’s.
    Vomit, I had to switch the radio off this morning.

  • Clark

    Mary, 8:49 am:

    “The espionage referred to is by the NSA on Siemens”

    Does anyone have dates for this? It could be how details of the Siemens industrial controller software were obtained, for the Stuxnet malware attack against the Iranian uranium enrichment centrifuges.

  • doug scorgie

    A Node
    27 Jan, 2014 – 12:08 am

    “We will stand with the people of Ukraine,” said US Secretary of State John Kerry…”

    “Sound familiar?”

    Yes…another regime change but not a Muslim country this time

  • Herbie

    Dunno if this has been posted yet, but it provides a detailed backgrounder and who’s who on the various alliances squaring up in the ME.

    You won’t see the BBC explaining this background to the slaughter in Syria:

    “Syrian Foreign Minister: “The West Publicly Claims to Be Fighting Terrorism, Whilst It Is Covertly Nourishing It.””

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/geneva-ii-syrian-foreign-minister-the-west-publicly-claims-to-be-fighting-terrorism-whilst-it-is-covertly-nourishing-it/5365833

  • Herbie

    The Syrian foreign minister above points out that Erdogan’s support for Western terrorism against Syria has backfired on him, and here whistleblower Sibel Edmonds explains how Erdogan went from goodie to baddie in western eyes:

    http://www.corbettreport.com/interview-809-sibel-edmonds-explains-erdogans-fall-from-grace/

    Remember too that Assad himself went from goodie to baddie when he didn’t do what the West wanted and of course Saddam before him. Gadaffi went from goodie to baddie then from baddie to goodie and then goodie to baddie again.

    Mostly the West wants these leaders to impoverish their countries, allowing Western corporations to steal resources cheaply, so if the West considers a leader a baddie then he’s more likely a goodie for his people, or at least for his country’s national interest.

    It’s always worth catching up with Sibel’s coverage. She knows the region intimately and is very knowledgable on the various actors, alliances and shifts etc and of course she’s been an insider herself.

    http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/

  • mark golding

    Stuxnet – good thinkin Clark – meanwhile…

    ‘Russia committed to destroying al-Qaeda and terrorism’

    ‘The West is concerned that a democratic government in Saudi Arabia could serve the Saudis, rather than its interests. This is while Russia, China and many other countries believe that the continued presence of the Al Saud dynasty in Saudi Arabia means the continuation of al-Qaeda and their terror operations and to target the core of this crisis, the Al Saud dynasty should be overthrown.’

    I myself believe Prince Bandar was instrumental in the logistics of supplying the terrorist facet in America in 2001.

    http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/01/13/345443/russia-committed-to-destroying-alqaeda/

  • Mary

    Uneasy and troublous times John. Reminiscent of pre WW11 days especially with the current rise of fascism.

  • John Goss

    True Mary. Who knows what the madmen in control are going to dream up next? I cannot see economies of the world surviving in their current state. When the demise comes the working-class, if that term still exists, must ensure that those in control now are not left in control in the future. It will be a unique opportunity. At my age it does not matter too much but I would like to see a more equitable world before I pop my clogs.

  • mark golding

    I find this interesting Clark:

    In 2004 the BBC Governors approved a deal to outsource the BBC’s IT, telephony and broadcast technology (which had previously been run by the corporation’s internal BBC Technology division) to the German engineering and electronics company Siemens IT Solutions and Services (SIS). It was claimed that the sale of BBC Technology would deliver over £30 million of savings to the BBC.[26] In June 2007 a report published by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee was critical of the deal, claiming that BBC management had omitted £60 million’ worth of hidden costs in its application to the Board of Governors and that the profits to Siemens had not been taken into account. Recorded savings to the BBC had amounted to £22m, 38% lower than the BBC’s original forecast.[27][28]

    The BBC’s partnership with Siemens underwent some high-profile difficulties, including issues with the corporation-wide switchover to a IP telephony system in 2009;[29] a major outage of the BBC website in 2011;[30] and Siemens was the original technology partner in the Digital Media Initiative until its contract was terminated in 2009 (see below).[31] In December 2010, SIS was acquired from Siemens by the French company Atos and BBC IT, broadcast and website systems are now managed by Atos.[32][33]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_controversies

1 12 13 14 15 16 98

Comments are closed.