Category Archives: United Nations

Britain, Foreign Affairs, Government, Syria, United Nations

Syrian refugees in need of much better support…

Intro: With Syria’s troubled neighbours being forced to cope with unprecedented levels of refugees crossing their borders, the time has come for the West to do more

The sheer scale and numbers of people fleeing Syria’s civil war is an exodus that requires repeating.

Estimates of refugee movements vary, perhaps for obvious reasons, but many more than two million people have left the country since the conflict began.

Many in the West often assume that it is our countries that routinely absorb the largest numbers of refugees, but a glimpse of the facts reveals a far different reality. Undoubtedly, it is Syria’s closet neighbours that have borne the greatest burden – countries that, politically, already have enough problems to deal with.

Consider Lebanon, for example. It has taken more than 800,000 refugees displaced as a result of the civil war, a figure that is almost a fifth of its entire population. In relative terms, that’s the equivalent of the UK experiencing 12 million starving and impoverished people – men, women and children – flowing across its borders. Jordan, Turkey, Egypt and Iraq (including the autonomous Kurdish region in the north) have taken substantial numbers, too. To date, the most generous destination for Syrian expatriates has been Sweden, with more than 15,000 given safe haven.

The UN’s plea that the West accommodates an additional 30,000 has to be seen in the context of this vast and escalating humanitarian catastrophe. Anyone who has read the first-hand accounts, or seen media pictures of these desperately beleaguered people seeking to find shelter, and the basic necessities of life, will come to understand the scale of the tragedy that has affected so many families and individuals.

Estimated refugee movements in Syria.

Estimated refugee movements in Syria.

Aid agencies and charities working in the field have written to the British Government asking that the UK accept a proportion of the refugees. The plea clearly has a moral underpinning that is overwhelming. Though families in the UK may well be feeling the effects of austerity, most would find the suffering that many of these innocent civilians have undergone difficult to comprehend. Taking in our fair share would only amount to a small proportion of the total. More important, however, has to be the provision of fuel, food, water, shelter and sanitation to those tens of thousands struggling to survive in camps across the near east.

As we have come to realise there are many arguments, both for and against, about international aid. In the recent past, for example, there has been the issue over the Indian space programme and the substantial amount of British taxpayers’ money that goes towards it. Resisting that has been the vocal minority of Conservative MPs who would like to see aid given to that project drastically cut. Yet, both the Prime Minister and Chancellor have resolutely stood firm against the instincts of those on the Tory backbenches.

But we have an opportunity now for them to once again to show moral leadership by impressing on the country and international community. By demonstrating magnanimity of outlook and common humanity, the British Government should be forthcoming and welcome a fair quota of Syrian refugees who are in desperate need of help and assistance. It should also consider allocating more funds for the requisitioning of necessities for the refugee camps, as part of a co-ordinated international effort.

As peace talks over Syria will be held this week in Geneva, the Western partners at these talks should surely be able to collaborate and agree on such a plan of action. It is unlikely the war being waged by Bashar al-Assad on his own people will end anytime soon.

Like the conflict that prevailed in Lebanon, the bloodshed in Syria could drag on for many more years. The desperate plight of many Syrians needs to be supported for as long as it takes.

Standard
Government, Middle East, Syria, United Nations

The suffering in Syria continues unabated…

SYRIA

Amidst the raging chaos and devastation of civil war in Syria, the people of Syria are enduring some of the worst winter weather experienced in the Middle East for many years.

The full-scale of this developing disaster is hard to comprehend. The misery of conflict, now almost into its fourth year, coupled with the added problem of the despair of cold and hunger, is truly amounting to a catastrophe of biblical proportions. In the land of the Old Testament, seven million people have now fled their homes, and more than two million have left the country having been displaced through the ravages of war. Tens of thousands of Syrian refugees are crossing the border each day into neighbouring Lebanon in pursuit of safe haven and shelter.

Relief agencies operating within the country are reporting that vast swathes of people are starving and in desperate need of help. The difficult weather is making it hard of getting vital food, medical and aid supplies to the besieged areas. The compounding effects of war and the climate are severely hampering the logistics involved of delivering emergency supplies to many people now in desperate humanitarian need.

This week, the United Nations launched its biggest ever appeal for foreign aid, requesting nearly £4 billion from the international community to help the humanitarian effort, both in Syria and in neighbouring countries struggling to deal with the crisis and mass movement of people. Syrian refugees now make up 25 per cent of the population in Lebanon alone.

Since the ill-fated and doomed Western flirtation with military intervention over the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons in Aleppo, there has been a tendency to think that nothing else can be done. Further confusion has occurred because the West has suspended logistical help to the rebels to stop equipment and supplies falling into the hands of Islamist groups linked to Al-Qaeda. As difficult as it is, though, it must be possible to help the Syrian people in some way without interceding in the conflict itself – the choice cannot simply be between bombs or bread.

Lady Amos, the UN emergency relief coordinator, has said that the Syrian people feel they have been totally abandoned. With governments in a seemingly precarious position and unable to agree a relief strategy, there is no-doubt that citizens of the Western world would want to see their governments acting by relieving the hardships being endured by so many. The UK has been generous and at the forefront of providing humanitarian assistance, both through privately pledged donations and state funding. But in alleviating genuine suffering other countries need to show a higher level of altruism and spirit of giving. What, for example, of Syria’s oil-rich fellow Arabs? Apart from Kuwait, no Arabian state has given anything like the amount they could afford.

Within Syria itself, greater international pressure should be exerted on Bashar al-Assad to allow humanitarian corridors to be established that would allow access to the hardest-hit areas. Alarmingly, a recent UN resolution to this effect was recently opposed by Russia. If Vladimir Putin’s resolutely dogged approach in support of the Assad regime does not change tack by bringing his influence to bear on Damascus, then he must stand accused of letting the regime use the starvation of innocent civilians as a weapon of war.

Standard
Britain, Government, Iran, United Nations, United States

The Iranian deal exposes concerns but it’s worth the risk…

GENEVA AGREEMENT

Whilst the initial period of the Geneva agreement lasts only six months, and much of what has been agreed is based on trust, there is no doubt that Iran could have been in a position to assemble a nuclear device by next summer. Even a modest hiatus in its atomic preparations should be embraced as it pretty much ensures Israel will take no precipitate action.

Related:

The interim agreement is a good way of testing if Iran can be trusted to keep its word. Tehran has agreed to give UN and IAEA inspectors’ better access to its reprocessing facilities, a promise that will be difficult to fudge or renege on without exposing bad faith or some covert hidden agenda. Critics are right in their assertions that the accord does nothing to dismantle Tehran’s capability to process weapons grade uranium whenever it wants, but securing the right to inspect the regime’s nuclear plants is a necessary and vital concession. This establishes a clear diplomatic tripwire that Tehran crosses at its peril.

There is, though, still much to worry about in this deal. The Iranian economy has been brought to its knees by western sanctions and the regime has been more than desperate to win a respite to mollify internal dissent and unrest. In many ways, President Hassan Rouhani has achieved that objective at comparatively modest cost, and has subsequently strengthened the grip of Iran’s religious dictatorship.

Israeli fears are well known in letting Iran off the hook. But others, too, notably Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, have greeted the Geneva agreement with stony silence. They fear that a diplomatic win for Tehran will strengthen the resolve even further of President Assad in Syria, Iran’s client state and political ally.

On the balance of things, the Geneva deal should be deemed a worthy risk. Tehran has felt the full throttle of western sanctions and the sharpness of its teeth. It must also realise that having offered Iran diplomatic concessions and held Israel in check, President Obama will have no option but to take punitive military action if Iran reneges on its nuclear promises.

The onus in turning this interim deal into something permanent is now on Barack Obama and William Hague, Britain’s Foreign Secretary. Their job will be to tame and dismantle Tehran’s nuclear threat once and for all. Any final agreement must see Iran disband its tens of thousands of uranium processing centrifuges – far more than is needed for any purely civilian atomic energy programme. Iran’s plant for making plutonium – which can only have a military intent – must also be dismantled. It would also make sense for Tehran to dispose of the excessive amounts of low enriched uranium it already possesses – enough to make at least six atomic bombs if those stocks were sufficiently enriched to weapons grade material.

Standard