Monthly Archives: September 2013

Foreign Affairs, Government, Middle East, Politics, Russia, Syria, United Nations, United States

G20 and America’s defining moment…

WATERSHED MOMENT

The G20 summit that ended in St Petersburg yesterday failed to produce any kind of agreement on the Syrian crisis. The chasm and bridge separating the United States and Russia on Syria is as wide as it has ever been. Yet, few such gatherings in recent years have offered a truer picture of how and where the real balance of global power lies. A genuine watershed in international affairs may at last have arrived; replacing a vestige of what has been referred to of late as the ‘Arab Spring’ – a term synonymous with upheaval and chaos spreading through many Islamic states.

Related:

The two-day gathering in St Petersburg have confirmed many things. It underscored, for example, just how determined Vladimir Putin is in reasserting Russia on the world stage. It displayed quite clearly, too, that a mercantilist China will do nothing to unsettle its economic interests, and in the process laid bare Europe’s total inability to act on its own.

A senior Kremlin official was reported to have said that no one pays any attention to Britain, a ‘small island’. But could the same not be said of the rest of the EU? Germany, for instance, Europe’s economic powerhouse, is notable only for its deafening silence. France, eager to push a military agenda in punishing the Assad regime for its alleged use of chemical weapons, is unwilling to do so without America’s lead. Other G20 participants wring their hands in aghast and disbelief at what is happening in Syria, but most are keen to shriek away from any involvement. At a moment of high international drama, it leads us back – as it invariably does – to the United States and its role in the world.

It shouldn’t have required a Kremlin official to point out Britain’s diminished influence in the world; the empire ended more than half-a-century ago. But, like it or not, with the United Nations no more than a fractious and divided talking shop, the U.S. is the closest thing we have to a global policeman. No country, it has been argued, has the right to behave as such, and America’s actual ability to change history, for all its military might and superpower status, is sometimes exaggerated – not least by itself. We need to look no further than the sorry state of Iraq, a decade after George W Bush’s invasion, to provide clarity to the argument. In any major crisis, however, all eyes turn to Washington, as they are now in Syria as the regime is accused of violating a ban on the use of chemical weapons. Syria is a signatory against the banned use of such weapons, and yet here we have a paralysed UN Security Council that is powerless to enforce an international binding treaty.

With a vote in Congress on the use of U.S. military force in Syria to be held on the 9th September, the next few days will be decisive. Britain’s role on the world stage has been diminished given the veto in the House of Commons last week, but for President Obama the stakes are vastly higher. On Syria, Mr Obama’s approach has been feckless. First, he declared that Assad must go without saying how, and then laid down his ‘red lines’ over the use of chemical weapons. Later, he announced his decision to use force, and more recently has passed the buck to Congress on Capitol Hill. Deep down, many will suspect that he would prefer to stay well out of Syria given what has happened in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Syria is ablaze and arguably much more contentious than anything the United States has dealt with in the past 30-years. Mr Obama’s uncertainty in how to proceed in Syria is resonating in all corners of the world.

If present indications are anything to go on, the House of Representatives could well follow the House of Commons in opposing military action. If so, a definitive moment will have arrived. Unlike David Cameron, Obama will either defy his legislature and go ahead with strikes, or he will acquiesce, and there will be no military response. If military action is taken off the table, not only would Barack Obama’s presidency be gravely weakened at home, but in the eyes of the world so too would the credibility of America as a global policeman. Either way, a watershed is at hand.

Standard
Britain, Health, Medical, Research, Science

A simple surgical operation to cure high blood pressure…

CLINICAL TRIALS START FOR TREATING HYPERTENSION

British scientists believe they could cure millions of patients with hard-to-treat high blood pressure and hypertension.

A simple operation would involve removing a small cluster of nerves in the throat linked to blood pressure regulation.

Researchers from Bristol University are extremely hopeful the measures could help some 2.5 million individuals with hypertension that cannot be controlled by medication.

While scientists have already started a clinical trial on 20 people with high blood pressure – following successful laboratory tests on rats – if the trials prove to be successful and is given the go-ahead, the surgical procedure could be available within three years as a ‘relatively simple’ day treatment for adults. The novel approach successfully ‘cured’ the condition in laboratory rats.

The carotid body is one of the body’s smallest organs but acts as a sensor that detects changes in gas levels in the blood. Sometimes, however, it can become overactive.

The carotid body is one of the body’s smallest organs but acts as a sensor that detects changes in gas levels in the blood. Sometimes, however, it can become overactive.

Known as the silent killer, high blood pressure or hypertension affects a third of adults and significantly raises the odds of heart attacks, strokes and other potentially fatal conditions if left untreated.

At the moment, there is no effective remedy for individuals who do not respond to conventional drug therapies.

But scientists at Bristol’s School of Physiology and Pharmacology identified a key organ in the development of high blood pressure – the carotid body.

It consists of a tiny cluster of nerve cells that sit on the side of the two branches of the carotid artery in the neck, each the size of a grain of rice.

Despite being one of the body’s smallest organs, it has the highest blood flow of them all – reflecting its importance as an early warning device for the brain if there is any change to oxygen and carbon dioxide levels in the blood.

In some cases, it is thought the carotid body becomes overactive and sends a message to the brain to keep blood pressure high. Scientists involved in removing the organs in rats with hypertension found that blood pressure fell and remained low.

The study, which was funded by the British Heart Foundation, and first published in the journal Nature Communications, said the animals suffered no adverse side-effects either.

In human trials, only one carotid body would be removed in order to reduce blood pressure while maintaining the organ’s vital regulatory function.

Professor Julian Paton who is the lead researcher on the study, said:

… We know that these tiny organs behaved differently in conditions of hypertension, but had absolutely no idea that they contributed so massively to the generation of high blood pressure; this is really most exciting.

… It certainly has the potential to be a very novel interventional approach to drug-resistant hypertension (high blood pressure).

An estimated 16 million British adults have high blood pressure; a third of whom may be unaware they have the condition.

Patients are often at first advised to alter their lifestyle by taking more exercise, stopping smoking, cutting down on drinking and limiting the salt and fat in their diet.

GPs can also prescribe medication – often a combination of pills – but many patients skip doses because of the side-effects caused by most treatments. Up to 15 per cent of patients – 2.5 million people – also struggle to control their condition using drugs.

Professor Jeremy Pearson, associate medical director at the British Heart Foundation, said:

… This potential new treatment has real promise to help this hard-to-treat group of patients … Many patients can control their blood pressure adequately by lifestyle change and medication so they would not be offered this kind of treatment.

… It is therefore unlikely this treatment will ever be tested as an alternative to standard medication – only as an extra procedure when current drug treatment fails.

A consultant cardiologist at Sheffield Teaching Hospital referred to the breakthrough as an ‘exciting and innovative approach’ and added that current treatments for high blood pressure have serious drawbacks, such as no-one likes taking multiple tablets and that medics are often guilty of not explaining properly why treatment is needed and what benefits might be expected.

Standard
Britain, Foreign Affairs, Government, Middle East, Russia, Syria, United States

Syrian recriminations continue. Is the tide turning towards Russia?

FRATRICIDAL SYRIAN CIVIL WAR

The continued recriminations over Syria remain fast-paced, but there is one central fact that remains unchanged: neither the Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, nor his enemies have the strength to achieve outright victory. A fratricidal civil war of this scale – in which a third of the total Syrian population have now been displaced – can only end with a political settlement.

A key question is whether Britain’s parliamentary veto and abdication from military intervention (and America’s possible withdrawal under a similar scenario) will make the achievement of such a resolution of political will more or less likely? A case could be constructed either way.

The optimist might suggest that President Vladimir Putin, satisfied that his Western rivals will not tread the path that Moscow warned them most sternly against, could now become a more willing and amenable partner by delivering Assad to the negotiating table. From this stance, a combination of the G20 summit that opens in St Petersburg on Thursday, the humiliation of the British prime minister following last week’s Commons vote, and new doubts that are emerging by the day whether President Obama will execute his threatened punitive strike, all create something of a slender opportunity. If that is so, something good might yet come from the acrimony of the past few days.

Unfortunately, though, the pessimistic scenario looks more likely. Mr Putin now has the glee of satisfaction of watching Britain retreat from the Syria drama and America’s continued prevarication over whether to enforce its ‘red line’ over the use of chemical weapons. Putin is hardly the kind of leader ennobled for his munificence; instead of trying to find ground with his chastened and frustrated opponents, the Russian President is more inclined to press home his advantage and insist that he was right all along. Mr Putin is still angered over the West’s intervention in Libya, and has sought to make Syria an example in various ways.

Russia’s position has always been that the West must stay out of Syria and leave the problem to be resolved by the Kremlin. Some will baulk at that given Russia’s continued supply of arms and munitions to the Assad regime, but Vladimir Putin’s preferred solution is to help the regime in Damascus achieve a Carthaginian peace by crushing rebel units. As for the Syrian President, he is bound to feel emboldened by recent events and his acolytes hailing Mr Obama’s climbdown as the ‘beginning of the historic American retreat.’ If Assad feels that events are turning his way, what reason will he have to negotiate?

Mr Obama publicly declared that his mind was made up in using military force against Assad’s use of chemical weapons which claimed the lives of more than 1,400 civilians, more than a third of which were children. But, his insistence that he must now first ask Congress makes him look indecisive.

It is not inconceivable to believe that another attempt could be made by the British Parliament in the light of any new evidence that may emerge that action is necessary. Despite the setback of last week’s Commons vote, Britain should remain confident in itself as a nation with the will and the means to help shape a better world.

Standard