Category Archives: Britain

Britain, France, Government, Middle East, Politics, Russia, Syria, United Nations, United States

The U.S. holds fire by giving a Russian-backed proposal a chance over Syria…

SYRIA

The diplomatic momentum over Syria in the last 24 hours has surpassed all expectations and has been quite breath-taking. Events may have unfolded through an inopportune comment made by the U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry, during his visit to London at the beginning of this week.

A week in politics is a long time, or so it’s said. No more is this evident than in America where, one minute, President Obama was preparing to tour the US talk shows to appeal for Congressional and public support for air strikes; the next, he was actually on those talk shows, airing qualified support for a Russian proposal to place Syria’s chemical weapons stocks under international control and supervision. The Congressional vote, which was widely seen as a make-or-break for Mr Obama, has been shelved, and France has been working hard in delivering a draft UN Security Council resolution that aims to put the Russian proposal into effect.

Startling, because, in just 24 hours, we have gone from the tense threshold of unilateral U.S. military action and a Cold War-style US-Russia rift to a proposal on which almost everyone can agree – the exception being possibly Syria’s anti-Assad opposition.

The French draft resolution is said to provide not only for the weapons stocks to be controlled, but destroyed, and for any breach to be met with ‘extremely serious consequences’.

If those consequences are assumed to include military action, if non-compliance was forthcoming, there is a risk that the resolution will attract a new Russian veto. The West should be wary of Moscow’s proposal that may have been conjured up to head-off U.S. air strikes, by merely serving as a delaying tactic. An apt tactic some may say, presaging months of Iraq-style disputes about access and monitoring.

But from another perspective it hardly matters why the international appetite for a military response is so small – however limited in intent and however heinous the crime that inspired it.  That could be put down to the ‘war weariness’ of campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, much of which still colours the political debate. But it may also be due to the difficult geopolitics surrounding Syria, a conflict recognised as being far too complex for punitive resolution.

If democratically leaders cannot convince their electorate on something as grave as peace and war, it will be time for them to pause and consider whether another answer might be found.

Any solution that deters outside military intervention, while removing the insidious threat of chemical weapons, would surely benefit everyone, no more so than the escalating numbers of Syrian civilians who find themselves in the middle of a war zone.

Any UN-sponsored agreement along the lines of a credible Russian proposal could help to open the way for wider talks. While this may be premature by jumping ahead to soon, the priority must be to ensure that the diplomatic process is not written off at a whim before it has been given a real chance to start.

The off-the-cuff remark by John Kerry in London does appear to have opened the door to a diplomatic resolution of the stand-off over Syria’s deployment of chemical weapons. In what was deemed a half-hearted suggestion by Mr Kerry that Bashar al-Assad’s arsenal be placed under international control and destroyed, the response was so swift that it is inconceivable not to see some choreography at work (or else just sheer relief).

Vladimir Putin picked up on the idea, and immediately pressed the Assad regime to agree. Washington said that if Syria did comply it would put on hold plans for a military strike in retaliation to the atrocity in Damascus last month. The United States, Britain and France have now tabled a resolution in the UN Security Council.

Nonetheless, sceptics are entitled to be suspicious. Why, for example, has Mr Putin, for so long the barrier to any action against Assad, turned peacemaker? Is this a delaying tactic to protect his Syrian ally, or one that is aimed in further undermining the already weak public support in the West for military strikes?

And, how will it be possible to logistically verify the destruction of the chemical weapons while civil war rages on in Syria? Will Assad call a ceasefire to allow inspectors to do their work, and if so will the rebels agree to one? The highly complex process of confirming whether Syria has complied would be fraught with difficulty, and could take several years to complete.

Standard
Britain, Foreign Affairs, Government, Politics, Syria, United States

Britain’s global standing could be diminished…

NOT THE VOTE THE GOVERNMENT SOUGHT SAYS THE BRITISH FOREIGN SECRETARY

The British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, has warned that Britain’s standing in the world could be ‘diminished’ following Parliament’s rejection of military action against Syria.

Mr Hague said he and the prime minister were working to ensure that Britain does not ‘matter less’ in the wake of the unprecedented vote, which effectively ruled out British involvement in any attack on the Syrian regime.

The Foreign Secretary said that it wasn’t the outcome the Government had sought and added: ‘We have to make sure that Britain isn’t diminished’. Mr Hague, who today held talks with U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry, in London, insisted ministers were not ‘gung ho’ about military action.

But he said he remained convinced that the Syrian regime’s use of chemical weapons should be met with a military response – and it would be ‘alarming’ if the U.S. Congress also voted against retaliatory strikes.

Warning that the violent fallout from the Arab Spring could last for years, the Foreign Secretary said that if it is decided in the various parliaments of the world that no-one will stand up to the use of chemical weapons and take any action about that, that would amount to a very alarming moment in the affairs of the world.

Mr Hague said:

… The real fear is of these processes going on a long time, of revolutions that take decades – throwing up a lot of turbulence, civil wars along the way, sometimes bringing intervention.

But he added:

… We mustn’t be put off by that from keeping faith with millions of people in the Arab world who want the dignity and freedom that we have in our own country. We have to keep faith with them and not think that they’re all evil or they’re all fanatics because actually, yes, sometimes these countries have those people … but the great majority of people are not like that.

Mr Hague acknowledged that atrocities carried out by the Syrian opposition had made it harder for the public and MPs to support intervention. But he said Britain had a duty to ensure more moderate elements in the opposition were not ‘eliminated’.

Mr Hague insisted that the Government had no plans for a second Commons Vote on Syria, but added: ‘If circumstances change dramatically, then of course everybody would be looking at things in a different light.’

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