Britain, France, Government, Russia, Syria, United Nations, United States

UN confirms ‘clear and convincing evidence’ chemicals were used in Syria on a ‘large scale’…

CHEMICAL ATTACKS IN SYRIA: AIDED WITH A RUSSIAN SIGNATURE

Missiles used in last month’s nerve gas attack in Syria had Russian writing on the side, United Nations weapons inspectors have said.

The long-awaited report said there was ‘clear and convincing evidence’ that deadly sarin gas was used in the attack on a Damascus suburb that killed more than 1,400 people, many of them children.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said the evidence suggested the incident was the world’s worst chemical weapons attack for 25 years.

‘This is a war crime and a grave violation of international law,’ Mr Ban said. ‘The results are overwhelming and indisputable. The facts speak for themselves.’

Foreign Secretary William Hague has described the report as ‘damning’ and ‘fully consistent’ with Britain’s assessment that government forces were behind the attack.

Presenting the report, which does not attribute any blame for the attacks, Mr Ban said the inspectors concluded chemical weapons ‘were used on a relatively large scale’ in the attack.

They had ‘collected clear and convincing evidence that surface-to-surface rockets containing the nerve agent sarin were used in the Ein Tarma, Moadamiyah and Zalmalka in the Ghouta area of Damascus’.

Mr Ban said: ‘The United Nations mission has now confirmed, unequivocally and objectively, that chemical weapons have been used in Syria.

‘The international community has a responsibility to hold the perpetrators accountable and to ensure that chemical weapons never re-emerge as an instrument of warfare.’

He called on the Security Council to ‘move quickly to consider and implement’ the plan for the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons through a ‘clear resolution’.

He said there ‘should be consequences for non-compliance’ by the Assad regime but also warned the international community not to be ‘blind’ to other widespread crimes committed by the Syrian government.

‘This is the most significant confirmed use of chemical weapons against civilians since Saddam Hussein used them in Halabja in 1988. The international community has pledged to prevent any such horror from recurring, yet it has happened again,’ he said.

‘This is a matter that truly affects international peace and security. After two and a half years of tragedy, now is the moment for the Security Council to uphold its political and moral responsibilities and demonstrate the political will to move forward in a decisive manner.

‘My hope is that this incident will serve as a wake-up call for more determined efforts to resolve the conflict and end the unbearable suffering of the Syrian people.

‘We need to do everything we can to bring the parties to the negotiating table. This is the only path to a durable solution.’

Although the team was not mandated to establish who used the banned weapons, Mr Ban said those responsible should be ‘brought to justice’.

He said: ‘As I have repeatedly said, those perpetrators who have used the chemical weapons or any other weapon of mass destruction in the future will have to be brought to justice. This is a firm principle of the UN.’

Mr Hague said the UN’s findings backed the West’s claims that Syrian government forces were behind the attack.

He said: ‘This report, which we are analysing in detail, is clearly very damning. It confirms that there was indeed a large-scale chemical weapons attack on the areas east of Damascus in the early hours of August 21.

‘It confirms that this was an attack against civilians, against children and a large number of people were killed and it is fully consistent with everything we have always argued about this attack – that sarin was used, that it was on a large scale.’

He added: ‘We have always believed that this was the work, the responsibility of the Assad regime and everything we can see in this report is fully consistent with that.’

Mr Hague said he was ‘hopeful’ of an international deal for Syria to give up its chemical weapons but warned it would be a hugely challenging process.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme this morning, he said it was clear that it was the Syrian regime that held the chemical weapons, and not the opposition.

He said the talks between Russia and America had finally forced Syria’s government to admit their possession of the deadly weapons.

He said: ‘He (Assad) has to declare the chemical weapons that he has previously denied possessing and hand them over.

‘These are in the regime, there’s no consideration being given to securing weapons from the opposition – even the Russians aren’t considering getting weapons from the opposition.’

He insisted that British military personnel would not be sent into the war-torn country.

‘We will not be sending British troops for this or anything else in Syria,’ Mr Hague said.

‘No boots on the ground, no boots will be deployed. I don’t think that will be a good way of providing security in Syria.’

The United States, Britain and France blame Assad’s forces for the attack and say it killed more than 1,400 people. The government, backed by Russia, denies the charge and blames opposition rebels.

The details of the report’s contents emerged as the western allies, meeting in Paris, warned Syria of ‘serious consequences’ if it stalls on handing over its chemical weapons.

Kickstarting a week of intense diplomatic activity in the wake of a weekend US-Russia deal on the proposed disarmament, the three powers also moved to bolster rebels fighting Assad’s regime and reiterated calls for the Syrian president to step down.

The tough tone triggered an immediate warning from Russia that western sabre-rattling could derail efforts to bring the regime and rebels to the table for negotiations aimed at ending a civil war that has raged for over two years and left more than 110,000 people dead.

US Secretary of State John Kerry said it was vital that the allies, who came to the brink of launching air strikes against Assad earlier this month, maintain the pressure on the regime.

‘If Assad fails to comply with the terms of this framework make no mistake we are all agreed, and that includes Russia, that there will be consequences,’ Kerry said.

‘If the Assad regime believes that this is not enforceable and we are not serious, they will play games.’

British Foreign Minister William Hague added: ‘The pressure is on them (the Syrians) to comply with this agreement in full. The world must be prepared to hold them to account if they don’t.’

The United States and Russia agreed in Geneva on Saturday that an ambitious accord aimed at eliminating Syria’s chemical weapons by mid-2014 be enshrined in a Security Council resolution backed up by the threat of unspecified sanctions in the event of non-compliance.

Russia has made it clear it will block any move to write an explicit authorisation for the use of military force into the resolution.

Lavrov said that kind of approach would scupper hopes of a resumption of suspended peace negotiations in Geneva.

‘If for someone it is more important to constantly threaten… that is another path to wrecking completely the chances of calling the Geneva-2 conference,’ Lavrov told journalists in Moscow.

The US-Russia deal agreed on Saturday gives Assad a week to hand over details of his chemical weapons stockpiles and calls for inspections of what the United States says are some 45 sites linked to the program, which is to be underway by November with the aim of neutralizing the country’s chemical capacity by mid-2014.

The deal was greeted with dismay by rebel leaders, who fear that the West’s willingness to do business with Assad will consolidate his grip on power and stall the momentum of moves to provide them with the arms they need to tilt the balance of the civil war in their favour.

Fabius and Kerry attempted to reassure the rebels that they had not been forgotten with the French minister announcing an international meeting with leaders of the Syrian National Coalition on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York next week.

‘We know that in order to negotiate a political solution, there has to be a strong opposition,’ Fabius said.

France has long championed the opposition coalition but there is concern in other western capitals about the prominent role that hardened Islamist fighters are playing in the fight against Assad’s forces.

Kerry also emphasized that Assad’s agreement to the chemical weapons handover did not give him any more right to remain in power.

‘Nothing in what we’ve done is meant to offer any notion to Assad … that he has some extended period as a leader, so-called,’ Kerry said.

In Geneva, the chairman of a U.N. war crimes panel today said it was investigating 14 suspected chemical attacks in Syria.

Commission chairman Paulo Sergio Pinheiro said the Geneva-based U.N. panel had not pinpointed the chemical used in the attacks and was awaiting evidence from the U.N. chemical weapons inspectors.

Mr Pinheiro told reporters the commission believes that both President Bashar Assad’s government and the rebels had committed war crimes.

But he said while Assad had committed crimes against humanity, rebel groups have not ‘because He said the commission had been investigating 14 alleged chemical attacks since September 2011, adding that they had so far been unable to assign blame. He said earlier they were awaiting details from today’s UN report.

Mr Pinheiro emphasised that the ‘vast majority’ of casualties in Syria’s civil wars is from conventional weapons like guns and mortars.

Last week, Mr Ban – who was apparently unaware that his comments were being broadcast on UN television – also said that the Assad regime had ‘committed many crimes against humanity.’

Promoting Britain’s stance against intervention, Mr Hague insisted the aim is to ‘bring about a peaceful end’ to the brutal civil war, now in its third year.

But he conceded that the ‘credible threat of military force’ was a key step in the bid to reach a resolution.

Mr Kerry said all the countries involved, including Russia, were agreed that if Assad fails to comply ‘there will be consequences’.

He said: ‘What we achieve in this agreement as we translate the Geneva agreement into a United Nations resolution has to be strong and it has to be forceful, it has to be real, it has to be accountable, it has to be transparent, it has to be timely.

‘All of those things are critical and it has to be enforced. If the Assad regime believes that this is not enforceable that we are not serious they will play games.’

He went on: ‘We will not tolerate avoidance or anything less than full compliance by the Assad regime to the core principles of what has been achieved here.

‘If Assad fails to comply with the terms of this framework, make no mistake, we are all agreed, and that includes Russia, that there will be consequences.’

The report confirmed there is 'clear and convincing evidence' that nerve agent sarin was used in the attacks

The report confirmed there is ‘clear and convincing evidence’ that nerve agent sarin was used in the attacks

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
Egypt, Foreign Affairs, Government, Middle East, Politics, Society

Egypt’s future hangs by a thread…

HOPE

The present situation in Egypt looks grim, both in the wider picture and in the detail.

Tensions in Cairo remain high following the deaths outside the Presidential Guard barracks on Monday, fatalities which included women and children among the dead. The prospect of any government being formed soon looks extremely remote.

Hazem el-Beblawi, the 76-year-old former finance minister, named last week as the interim Prime Minister, has struggled in his task to form a cabinet. That task has been made more difficult due to the issue of arrest warrants by the state prosecutor for senior figures in the Muslim Brotherhood.

Following the removal of Mohammad Morsi, Egypt’s deposed leader, it was suggested that the priority for the interim administration was to form a broad-based coalition government, and one that was reflective of Egypt’s political diversity. President Morsi had not sought allies beyond his immediate supporters, a crucial reason as to why he was removed following millions who had taken to the streets in protest. It can hardly have been helpful, then, that a slew of new arrest warrants was the best way to go about fostering peace and reconciliation. The Brotherhood’s political wing, the Freedom and Justice Party, had already refused to join a unity government – on the not so unreasonable grounds that it had led a democratically elected government that was unlawfully removed.

On Tuesday, the British Foreign Secretary’s statement in the House of Commons highlighted some of the difficulties. Mr Hague has urged Egyptians to move swiftly to hold free and fair elections, as well as working towards openness, democracy and economic reform. Whilst the sound-bites are sensible, they must ring pretty hollow to those Egyptians who thought they already had a freely elected government following the election of Mr Morsi 12-months ago.

Mr Hague also skirted around the uncomfortable fact that the army had seized power and the refusal by some, notably the United States, in referring to the takeover as a coup. The feeling that the Western world promotes and lauds democracy elsewhere, until it produces something they don’t want, will only have been reinforced with what is happening in Egypt.

In the short-to-medium term at least the situation in Egypt seems likely to remain highly problematic. In the unlikely event that all parties and vested interest groups can be persuaded to take part in amending the constitution, approving it in a government-run referendum will undoubtedly leave some to question the authority of any newly formed government – built as it will on the back of an army takeover.

Over the past week, Egypt’s democracy has not been strengthened. Following the carnage on Monday, descent into a Syria-style bloody civil war seemed inevitable. But whilst the confrontation at the Presidential Guard barracks, in which more than 50 people died and dozens of others were injured, it also seemed to shock all sides into stepping back from the brink. It is too soon to be abandoning hope.

Rather than issuing new arrest warrants, the authorities should be exploiting this pause to offer some kind of peace reconciliation – for example, by starting to release detainees.

Egypt’s compelling sense of national identity is a permanent and immovable asset. Unlike many states in the region, it has a common history going back millennia; it has borders that are well defined, and there are no serious challenges from ethnic minority groups. Egypt’s differences are invariably religious and political which, though it doesn’t make them any less sharp, does still leave Egypt’s national identity intact. The interim administration as well as any new government needs to capitalise on this and should provide a roadmap in helping Egypt to complete its revolution.

However untidy Egyptian society has become of late, the taste that many in Egypt have developed over the past two-and-a-half years for freedom and democracy can be a force for good as well as ill. As we have seen it veered all too easily when Mr Morsi was deposed a week ago, into a rule by a discontented mob. Such proof of political engagement, however, could also deter the military from the excesses to which it is prone.

There are slivers of hope for Egypt’s future, but hope is all that is currently on offer.

Standard