There are neo-Nazis in Ukraine’s new government. It’s not representative of the whole country – and it should accept autonomy for Crimea and pledge not to join the EU or NATO to avoid civil war or war with Russia

Summary: Putin’s talk of Ukraine’s transitional government as being entirely made up of neo-nazis who target Russians is an exaggeration, but there’s some truth in it. Ukraine’s new government includes neo-nazis of the Svoboda party and is not representative of the whole country.

EU sanctions are impossible as the EU relies on Russia for gas imports. Arming and funding western Ukrainian groups to fight Russia and its allies would only tip Ukraine into a Bosnian or Chechnyan style civil war. Russia will not back down on this issue as Ukraine was used as a base by its enemies in both World Wars and Chechnya was used as a base by terrorist groups far more recently.

Ukraine’s government should settle for granting Crimea, with its Russian majority, autonomy – and guaranteeing Ukraine will not join the EU or NATO in order to avoid such a war – and the US and EU should encourage them to make these concessions.

Most of the western media talk as though President Putin’s characterisation of the Ukrainian transitional government as neo-nazis who threaten the lives of Russians in Ukraine is purely propaganda.

There is some truth in Putin’s claims though, despite his exaggerations, and despite him being an authoritarian hard line nationalist himself, as well as a frequent propagandist.

The violent neo-Nazis in key posts in the transitional Ukrainian government

Photo: Oleh Tyahnybok, leader of the Svoboda or 'Freedom' party, gives a Nazi salute

The largest party in the transitional government , the ‘Fatherland’ party, are not neo-nazis, despite their name. However the ‘National Socialist’ Svoboda (‘Freedom’) party, notorious for its anti-semitism and hatred of Russians and other minorities in Ukraine, has four ministries in the transitional government including Defence and Deputy Prime Minister (1) – (5).  

Svoboda also has 37 seats in parliament, which approved the Interim Prime Minister and President (6). It won only 10% of the vote nationally in the last elections, but over 40% in parts of Western Ukraine, with the party with the largest share of the vote in the East being the now overthrown President Yanukovych’s Party of the Regions (7).

Svoboda’s four ministries in the transitional government are clearly representative of its support in western Ukraine and a huge over-representation relative to its support in the country as a whole.

Svoboda members and some of its MPs still publicly celebrate the Ukrainian SS unit recruited by the Nazis during World War Two and the Ukrainian nationalist Stephen Bandera who allied with the Nazis (8) – (9).

The Deputy Secretary of National Security is Dmitry Yarosh, former head of the paramilitary Ukrainian nationalist group Right Sector, whose members fought against Russian troops in Chechnya (10).

The opposition majority in the Ukrainian parliament voted after Yanukovych’s overthrow to revoke a law which allowed Ukraine’s regions to use official languages of minorities such as Russians, Hungarian, Romanian, Bulgarian and Tatar along with the Ukrainian language. Ukrainian was to become the only language which could be given official status (11).

Interim President Arseniy Yatsenyuk reversed this ruling. His party Batkivshchyna, or “Fatherland”, is the largest in the transitional government and parliament and luckily it is not as extreme as its name would suggest. Yatsenyuk is Jewish and comes from a family of mixed Romanian and Ukrainian descent (12) – (14).

Svoboda and other ultra-nationalist protesters included many armed with baseball bats, iron pipes and a few guns who still patrol Kiev. Medieval style trebuchet catapults were also used to fire rocks, bricks and petrol bombs at riot police. The last were mostly reported as being amusing, but would be quite capable of killing (15) – (18).

This violence by ultra-right militias may have led to the use of snipers by the government, if those were government snipers (various unsubstantiated rumours include that they were Russians, mercenaries hired by the opposition, or mercenaries hired by the US), though it certainly didn’t justify it.

Why Ukraine should grant the Crimea autonomy and pledge not to join the EU or NATO – and why the US and EU should not try to persuade them to do otherwise

Photo: Ukrainian Russians in Kiev protest against war over Crimea, one sign calling for Putin to protect her by withdrawing his troops

The transitional government is overwhelmingly made up of parties which want to join the EU. Russian actions in Crimea have been sending a message that, as Russian spokespeople put it, this is a “red line” for Russia.

The Ukraine has a large Russian speaking minority, Russian military bases, is right on the border of Russia, historically a close ally of Russia – and an invasion route for the French in the 19^th century and the Germans in the First and Second World Wars.

More recently secessionist republics trying to leave the Russian federation, including Chechnya, were used as bases by terrorist groups for attacks inside Russia (though Russian military torture and massacres in wars against the secessionists contributed greatly to recruitment by these Islamist groups).

President Putin’s popularity in Russia is based on nationalism , restoring Russia’s pride after the collapse of the Soviet Union and economic collapse under Yeltsin’s experiments in an absolute free market that led to chaos. It’s also based on him being seen as a “strong” leader who will stand up to pressure from the US and its allies.

Putin is certainly no democrat, but its hard to believe that any other Russian government would have reacted any differently to a US backed revolution in one of its closest neighbours and allies which also contains strategically important naval bases. The threat to Russians in Ukraine only adds to this.

 If there had been a Russian backed revolution in Canada or Mexico, in which ultra-nationalists threatened US citizens, the US wouldn’t have responded any differently.

If the Ukrainian transitional government attempts to join the EU the likely result will be either civil war in Ukraine with the Russians and Americans each providing arms and training to their proxies there, or else a Russian invasion to install its own client government and prevent US-backed paramilitaries using it as a base, or both. This would not be good for the people of the Ukraine – not even the ones who survived it.

Nor would risking direct military intervention of the kind advocated by the right in the US be good for anyone. It is not wise to suggest potential escalation to World War Three between two nuclear armed powers.

Sanctions on Russia would have little downside for the US, which could afford to play geopolitics with Russia in this way, but western Europe gets much of its gas for heating and electricity from Russia. Germany, the largest country in the EU, gets 25% of its gas imports from Russia.

While the Ukrainian parliament is elected, the transitional government is not. Only after new elections will there be a fully legitimate government representative of all Ukrainians.

The US government has repeatedly condemned changes to the consitutions of Honduras under Zelaya and Venezuela under Chavez when carried out by democratic referenda and elected constitutional assemblies. This leaves it looking more than a bit hypocritical when condemning the Russian government’s criticism of the transitional Ukrainian government as being in breach of Ukraine’s constitution.

The Russian majority in the Crimea voting by referendum to leave Ukraine would no more be against international law than Kosovo’s Albanian majority voting to leave Yugoslavia by referendum. The US government opposes the first and backed the second purely in order to expand its own influence and reduce Russia’s. It has no democratic principle behind its positions.

Minorities in Crimea justifiably fear repression under a Russian nationalist client regime, but the fears of Russians in Crimea of being ruled over by a government including Svoboda are just as real.

Given the massively greater military power of Russia and Russia’s fear of Ukraine being used as a base for its enemies, as it was in both world wars, the best deal the Ukrainian government is likely to get is to give up the Crimea in return for staying in power itself while agreeing not the join the EU.

(That’s before even taking into account Russian fears of Ukraine being used as a base for terrorist attacks into Russia, as Chechnya was by Islamic militants).

Giving western Ukrainians the false impression that the EU will use economic sanctions on Russia (which Putin might well choose to endure to maintain his strong man image and which would hurt the EU more than Russia) to tip the balance, would be misleading them and doing them no favours.

Ditto for pretending that the US will fight World War Three for them.

Arming and funding groups that include neo-nazis and so reducing their country to a Bosnian or Chechnyan style war in the name of “freedom” would be even worse.

There is no freedom for anyone except the killers in a civil war – and no freedom even when it ends if one side are Russian ultra-nationalist extremists and the other side Ukrainian neo-nazis.

(1) = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-Ukrainian_Union_Fatherland

(2) = Interfax Ukraine 27 Feb 2014 ‘Ukrainian parliament endorses new cabinet’,
http://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/193222.html

(3) = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yatsenyuk_Government#Composition

(4) = Channel 4 News (UK) 05 Mar 2014 ‘How the far-right took top posts in Ukraine's power vacuum’, http://www.channel4.com/news/svoboda-ministers-ukraine-new-government-far-right

(5) = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svoboda_(political_party)

(6) = Reuters 07 Mar 2014 ‘In Ukraine, nationalists gain influence - and scrutiny’,
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/07/us-ukraine-crisis-far-right-insight-idUSBREA2618B20140307?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

(7) = The Nation 06 Mar 2014 ‘The Dark Side of the Ukraine Revolt’,
http://www.thenation.com/blog/178716/dark-side-ukraine-revolt#

(8) = See (7) above

(9) = BBC News 07 Mar 2014 ‘Ukraine's revolution and the far right’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26468720 (see third photo down and text above and below it)

(10) = See (4)

(11) = IB Times 09 Mar 2014 ‘Watch Your Tongue: Language Controversy One Of Fundamental Conflicts In Ukraine’, http://www.ibtimes.com/watch-your-tongue-language-controversy-one-fundamental-conflicts-ukraine-1559069

(12) = See (11)

(13) = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arseniy_Yatsenyuk

(14) = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-Ukrainian_Union_Fatherland

(15) = BBC Newsnight 01 Mar 2014 ‘Ukraine: Far-right armed with bats patrol Kiev’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26394980

(16) = BBC News 01 Mar 2014 ‘Ukraine: The far-right groups patrolling Kiev’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26398112

(17) = ABC News ‘The Kiev Protests Look Apocalyptic’,
http://abcnews.go.com/International/photos/kiev-protests-starting-apocalyptic-22316896/image-pro-european-integration-protesters-build-catapult-throw-stones-22317002

(18) = http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUvrKv0pHNY (BBC news report)

The EU designation of Hezbollah as terrorists is hypocrisy when the British government which pushed for it is arming Syrian and Lebanese Sunni groups involved in terrorist attacks on civilians

The EU’s designation of Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation stinks of hypocrisy and propaganda (1).

Hezbollah didn’t claim responsibility for the bus bombing in Bulgaria which has been used to justify the designation. Al Qa’ida did (2). The Bulgarian government, a NATO member seeking US protection from Russia, has reversed its story twice on whether Hezbollah was responsible (3) – (6).

The US, British, French, Croatian Turkish, Saudi and Jordanian governments have co-operated to arm the nebulous ‘Free Syrian Army’ (FSA) and unspecified “more effective” groups who are supposedly “secular” (but then the British government claims the FSA is “secular” and anti-sectarian when the vast majority of its fighters are actually Islamist ; and some of them extreme sectarian Islamists) (7) – (19).

Many Syrian rebels, including FSA members, are responsible for car bombings and the assassination or torture and summary execution of civilians branded “collaborators” or who just aren’t Sunni Muslims (20) – (29).

Some of the arms NATO and the Saudis sent are already in the hand of Al Nusrah, the Syrian branch of Al Qa’ida, but not to worry the British government and the FSA says they guarantee they won’t let any more get to extremists when they send more and the FSA even promise to give all the weapons back after the war, despite its supposed commander having no control over his nominal officers,  many FSA fighters taking orders from no-one at all ; and some FSA brigades being fakes set up purely to get arms to sell on (30) – (35).

NATO governments claim Hezbollah has no business being in Syria, but it’s no secret that the aim of the NATO and Sunni Arab dictatorships arming Syrian rebels is to break the alliance between Iran and Hezbollah via Syria, leaving them vulnerable to being picked off separately (36).

The Sunni rebels in Syria also include many Lebanese Sunni Jihadist volunteers and militias who’ve been involved for many months and probably since the start of the rebellion (37) – (40).

While Syrian army artillery have hit villages inside Lebanon before due to Syrian rebels and Lebanese Sunni militias crossing the border, Syrian rebels and Lebanese Sunni militias have also attacked both Hezbollah and Shia civilians inside Lebanon repeatedly, even before Hezbollah became openly involved in Syria (41) – (45).

The New York Times quoted one Syrian “anti-government activist” claiming rocket attacks on Shia areas of Lebanon were justified as they would ‘turn “honest and free shi-ites” against Hezbollah”’ and ‘“we are defending ourselves”’ (46)

In May film and photos emerged of Lebanon’s most extreme sectarian Sunni cleric and militia leader, Sheikh Ahmad Al-Asir, meeting General Idris, the nominal head of the FSA, in Syria. Asir has repeatedly called for Lebanese Sunnis to fight in Syria, organised cross border attacks by Sunni militias into Syria ; and had his militia fight Hezbollah and the Lebanese army inside Lebanon. (47) – (51).

Asir has also threatened Lebanon’s Christian minority, accusing Christian politicians of siding with Hezbollah and using the army against Sunnis (52).

(The picture at the top of this post, copied from Brown Moses’ blog, is Aseer, not a Hezbollah cleric)

Lebanon’s Christian politicians are unlikely to oppose all Sunnis but are likely determined not to suffer the way Iraqi and Syrian Christians have. Sunni extremist militias and terrorist groups have run riot in Iraq since the invasion. There and in Syria since the uprising they’ve killed Iraqi and Syrian Christians and forced huge numbers to flee as refugees (53) – (54).

(1) = guardian.co.uk 22 Jul 2013 ‘EU puts Hezbollah armed wing on terrorist blacklists’,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/22/hezbollah-eu-terrorism-blacklist

(2) = Independent 04 Jun 2013 ‘UK bid to blacklist Hezbollah faces EU opposition’,
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/uk-bid-to-blacklist-hezbollah-faces-eu-opposition-8644603.html

(3) = NATO news 20 Jun 2013 ‘Bulgaria praised for its commitment to the Alliance’,
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/news_101540.htm

(4) = Haaretz 17 Jul 2013 ‘Bulgaria: New evidence in Burgas bombing implicates Hezbollah’,
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.536307

(5) = BBC News 05 Feb 2013 ‘Hezbollah linked to Burgas bus bombing in Bulgaria’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21342192

(6) = NYT 15 Jun 2013 ‘Bulgaria Pulls Back on Blame for Hezbollah’,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/06/world/europe/bulgaria-tempers-blame-for-hezbollah-in-bombing.html

(7) = NYT 25 Feb 2013 ‘Saudis Step Up Help for Rebels in Syria With Croatian Arms’,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/26/world/middleeast/in-shift-saudis-are-said-to-arm-rebels-in-syria.html

(8) = NYT 24 Mar 2013 ‘Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With Aid From C.I.A.’,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/25/world/middleeast/arms-airlift-to-syrian-rebels-expands-with-cia-aid.html?pagewanted=all

(9) = Guardian 14 Jun 2013 ‘US says it will arm Syrian rebels following chemical weapons tests’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/13/syria-chemical-weapons-us-confirm

(10) = WSJ 16 Jun 2013 ‘U.S. Begins Shipping Arms for Syrian Rebels’, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323419604578569830070537040.html

(11) = The American Conservative 19 Dec 2011 ‘NATO vs Syria’ by Phillip Giraldi (former CIA officer),
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/nato-vs-syria/

(12) = CBS News 28 Mar 2013 ‘AP: "Master plan" underway to help Syria rebels take Damascus with U.S.-approved airlifts of heavy weapons’ , http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57576722/ap-master-plan-underway-to-help-syria-rebels-take-damascus-with-u.s.-approved-airlifts-of-heavy-weapons/
(see 14^th paragraph ‘The Arab official, the diplomat and the military experts said the material was destined for "secular" fighters not necessarily linked to the Free Syrian Army, the nominal umbrella group for the rebels. Jordan and other Arabs have been critical of the FSA, which they accuse of having failed as an effective or credible force because its elements lack the fighting skills and military prowess.’)

(13) = ‘The FSA Doesn’t Exist’ by Professor Aron Lund of the Swedish Institute for International Affairs, http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/the-free-syrian-army-doesnt-exist/

(14) = BBC Democracy Live 11 Jul 2013 ‘MPs call for parliamentary consent before arming Syria’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/house-of-commons-23274091

(15) = On the FSA being overwhelmingly Sunni and Islamist go tothe blog post on this link and scroll down to sources (37) to (39) at the bottom of it

(16) = CBC News 07 Dec 2012 ‘Free Syrian Army an uneasy mix of religious extremes’
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/12/06/f-vp-bedard-syrian-rebels.html (scroll down to sub-heading ‘Abandoning Secularism’)

(17) = Syria Comment 03 Apr 2013 ‘Sorting out David Ignatius’, by Around Lund, http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/sorting-out-david-ignatius/

(18) = Swedish Institute of International Affairs UIBrief No.13 , Sep 2012, ‘Syrian Jihadism’, by Aron Lund, http://www.ui.se/upl/files/77409.pdf , pages 10 to 17

(19) = UNoCHA IRIN news 13 May 2013 ‘"Sometimes you cannot apply the rules" - Syrian rebels and IHL’, http://www.irinnews.org/printreport.aspx?reportid=98021

(20) = Reuters 23 Dec 2011 'Analysis: Syria bombings signal deadlier phase of revolt', http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/23/us-syria-bombings-idUSTRE7BM18T20111223 , 'Beirut-based commentator Rami Khouri said he doubted the government would have hit its own security targets, suggesting that the bombings could have been the work of armed rebels,....Hilal Khashan, political science professor at the American University of Beirut, also said he did not believe that the Syrian government was behind the bombings’

(21) = New York Times 10 May 2012 'Dozens Killed in Large Explosions in Syrian Capital', http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/11/world/middleeast/damascus-syria-explosions-intelligence-headquarters.html?pagewanted=all ; 'Twin suicide car bombs that targeted a notorious military intelligence compound shook the Syrian capital, Damascus… with the Health Ministry putting the toll at 55 dead and nearly 400 wounded — civilians and soldiers. '

(22) = Voice of America 22 Feb 2013 ‘Death Toll Rises in Damascus Blasts’,
http://www.voanews.com/content/death-toll-rises-in-damascus-blasts/1608600.html
‘A Syrian expatriate rights group says a series of bombings in Damascus has killed at least 83 people …Most of the victims are said to be civilians, including many children from a nearby school, with 17 of the dead reported to be members of the security forces.’

(23) = BBC News 11 Jun 2013 ‘Syria crisis: Damascus hit by double 'suicide bombing'’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22852237

(24) = USA Today 09 Jun 2013 ‘Large car bombs increasing in Syria’, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/06/09/syria-ieds-bombs-hezbollah/2401851/

(25) = AP 27 May 2013 ‘Pro-government Syrian journalist Yara Abbas killed in action’, http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57586279/pro-government-syrian-journalist-yara-abbas-killed-in-action/

(26) = Atlantic Wire 26 May 2012 ‘Pro-Regime Iranian Journalist Killed by Syrian Rebels’,
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2012/09/pro-regime-iranian-journalist-killed-syrian-rebels/57288/

(27) = BBC News 27 Jun 2012 ‘Gunmen 'kill seven' at Syrian pro-Assad Ikhbariya TV’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18606341

(28) = Human Rights Watch 20 Mar 2012 ‘Syria: Armed Opposition Groups Committing Abuses - End Kidnappings, Forced Confessions, and Executions’, http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/03/20/syria-armed-opposition-groups-committing-abuses (esp 1st para, 2^nd sentence ‘Abuses include kidnapping, detention, and torture of security force members, government supporters, and people identified as members of pro-government militias, called shabeeha…. executions by armed opposition groups of security force members and civilians.’ – also see under sub-heading ‘Torture’)

(29) = Amnesty International 14 Mar 2013 ‘Syria: Summary killings and other abuses by armed opposition groups’, http://www.amnesty.org/fr/library/asset/MDE24/008/2013/en/21461c90-3702-4892-aa3c-4974bba54689/mde240082013en.html

(30) = CBS News 28 Mar 2013 ‘AP: "Master plan" underway to help Syria rebels take Damascus with U.S.-approved airlifts of heavy weapons’ , http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57576722/ap-master-plan-underway-to-help-syria-rebels-take-damascus-with-u.s.-approved-airlifts-of-heavy-weapons/ ;
see 16^th and 17^th paragraphs which read ‘In spite of the U.S. coordination…there is little… evidence…that all the new, powerful weapons are going to groups which have been carefully vetted by the U.S….Many videos have appeared online showing militants from the various Islamic extremist rebel factions -- including Jabhat al-Nusra, which the U.S. has officially labeled a foreign terrorist group -- with such weapons in recent weeks.’

(31) = guardian.co.uk 17 Jun 2013 ‘Arms for Syrian rebels won't fall into extremist hands, says William Hague’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/17/arms-syrian-rebels-william-hague

(32) = Times 12 Jul 2013 ‘Syrian rebels will return arms at end of uprising, says minister’, http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3814566.ece

(33) = NYT 01 Mar 2013 ‘Syrian Rebel Leader Deals With Ties to Other Side’,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/02/world/middleeast/syrian-rebel-leader-deals-with-old-ties-to-other-side.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1& ; 26^th to 27^th paragraphs ; ‘Many rebel battalion commanders were civilians before the uprising. Having organized a brigade from men in their villages, they balk at taking orders and refuse to coordinate attacks…“They want everything from the chief of staff — weapons, ammunition, money,” General Idris said. “But if you ask them what did you do with the ammunition and weapons, and how did you spend the money, well, they don’t like any commander to ask them what they are doing. But we cannot work in this way.”’

(34) = CBC News 07 Dec 2012 ‘Free Syrian Army an uneasy mix of religious extremes’
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/12/06/f-vp-bedard-syrian-rebels.html ( once on the page scroll down to sub-heading ‘Abandoning Secularism’ ‘When probed about the FSA and how it operates, he asks, "Do you want the truth or the storyline?"…"The FSA and the coalition is only ink on paper," he says, elaborating that it's more of an image created to present a united front for foreign governments…Abu Mohammad wants to be clear that he takes orders from no one.’

(35) = NYT 24 Mar 2013 ‘Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With Aid From C.I.A.’,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/25/world/middleeast/arms-airlift-to-syrian-rebels-expands-with-cia-aid.html?pagewanted=all ; see 18^th and 19^th paragraphs ‘Two other commanders, Hassan Aboud of Soquor al-Sham and Abu Ayman of Ahrar al-Sham, another Islamist group, said that whoever was vetting which groups receive the weapons was doing an inadequate job...“There are fake Free Syrian Army brigades claiming to be revolutionaries, and when they get the weapons they sell them in trade,” Mr. Aboud said.’

(36) = Jerusalem Post / Reuters 14 Nov 2011 'Syria urges Arab League to reconsider suspension',http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=245466 ; see paragraphs 5,8 and 9
‘Gabriel Ben-Dor, director of national security studies at the University of Haifa…Ben-Dor said the decision should also be viewed within the context of Arab and Western attempts to contain an emboldened Iran believed to be pursuing nuclear weapons….“They’re hoping to dismantle the axis of Iran, Syria and Hezbollah, and to somehow weaken this entire coalition…The Arab bloc’s suspension, he added, “is an attempt to isolate Iran even more by depriving it of its only major ally in the Middle East.”

(37) = AP 02 Jun 2013 ‘Hezbollah, Syrian rebels in worst clash in Lebanon’,
http://news.yahoo.com/hezbollah-syrian-rebels-worst-clash-lebanon-194558471.html ;
8^th paragraph ‘From Saturday night into Sunday, Hezbollah encircled and ambushed Syrian rebels and allied Lebanese fighters whom they suspected of rocketing Baalbek, a Lebanese security official said.’

(38) = BBC News 18 Jun 2013 ‘Lebanese families drawn into Syrian conflict’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22938132 (scroll down to second bolded sub-heading ‘Spectre of civil war’)

(39) = NYT 09 Dec 2012 ‘Sectarian Conflict Kills at Least 17 in Northern Lebanon in Spillover of Syrian Civil War’, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/10/world/middleeast/syria-conflict-spills-over-to-northern-lebanon.html?_r=0 ; see 5^th paragraph, 1^st sentence ‘The latest conflict began after a number of Sunni fighters from northern Lebanon were killed in an ambush by pro-government forces as they tried to enter Syria to join opposition fighters.’

(40) = Independent 10 Jun 2013 ‘Robert Fisk: The Lebanese army fears rise of the Sunni Muslim Salafists’,
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-the-lebanese-army-fears-rise-of-the-sunni-muslim-salafists-8652931.html ; 2^nd paragraph, 1^st sentence ‘What the Lebanese army is not saying on the record – but which it acknowledges privately – is that large numbers of “Syrian” rebels are in fact Lebanese. They are being brought home to Lebanon to be buried’ ; 5^th paragraph, 3^rd & 4^th sentences ‘A Sunni anti-Assad rebel fighter from Baalbek, Hussein Dergham, for example, was killed in defence of Qusayr and has been brought home for burial. Three other Lebanese Sunni men from Baalbek were killed in a suburb of Qusayr’ ; also see 10^th paragraph on atrocities against civilians by Lebanese Sunni extremists in Syria

(41) = Independent 28 May 2013 ‘Robert Fisk: ‘We ran up to the roof. That was when the second missile killed Loulou’: Lebanon is counting the cost in human lives of the Syrian conflict’,
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/robert-fisk-we-ran-up-to-the-roof-that-was-when-the-second-missile-killed-loulou-lebanon-is-counting-the-cost-in-human-lives-of-the-syrian-conflict-8635204.html

(42) = AAP 28 May 2013 ‘Woman dies as Syria shells hit Lebanon’, http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/world/one-dead-as-syria-shells-hit-lebanon/story-e6frfkui-1226651796364

(43) = Bloomberg 23 Apr 2013 ‘Hezbollah Says Syrian Rebel Threat Creates a ‘Moral’ Duty’,
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-22/lebanon-defense-a-duty-after-army-failure-hezbollah-says.html ; 2^nd & 3^rd paragraphs ‘Nabil Qawooq’s remarks…a day after the Shiite border town of Hermel in Lebanon’s northeast came under rocket fire from Syria…without causing casualties, the Lebanese Army said in an April 21 statement…Prior to the attack, residents in the nearby village of al- Qasr received text messages warning that the Free Syria Army, …would bombard the two communities, the Daily Star reported.’

(44) = NYT 26 May 2013 ‘Hezbollah Areas in Beirut Are Hit’,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/27/world/middleeast/rockets-strike-hezbollahs-beirut-stronghold.html?ref=world

(45) = NYT 03 Jun 2013 ‘Hezbollah and Rebels of Syria in Border Fight’,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/03/world/middleeast/hezbollah-and-syria-rebels-clash-on-border.html ;
6^th to 8^th paragraphs ‘But in recent weeks, shells and rockets have fallen indiscriminately on Shiite areas of Lebanon, killing at least three people and suggesting that rebel groups were also willing to punish civilians in Hezbollah strongholds. On Friday, more than a dozen shells landed on the outskirts of Baalbek and gunmen fired on a Shiite shrine. On Saturday, a rocket landed in the Shiite-majority village of Hermel, according to Lebanon’s National News Agency…A Syrian antigovernment activist, Jad al-Yamani, speaking from the outskirts of the besieged Syrian city of Qusayr, defended the rebel attacks on Lebanon, saying that they were justified because they would turn what he called “honest and free Shiites” against Hezbollah…“We are defending ourselves here, and those who criticize us are not in our shoes,” he said.’

(46) = NYT 03 Jun 2013 ‘Hezbollah and Rebels of Syria in Border Fight’,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/03/world/middleeast/hezbollah-and-syria-rebels-clash-on-border.html ; 7^th to 8^th paragraphs ‘A Syrian antigovernment activist, Jad al-Yamani, speaking from the outskirts of the besieged Syrian city of Qusayr, defended the rebel attacks on Lebanon, saying that they were justified because they would turn what he called “honest and free Shiites” against Hezbollah…“We are defending ourselves here, and those who criticize us are not in our shoes,” he said.’

(47) = Brown Moses blog 01 May 2013 ‘Brigadier General Salim Idris And Lebanese Cleric Sheikh Ahmad Al-Aseer Take A Trip To Syria’, http://brown-moses.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/brigadier-general-salim-idris-and.html

(48) = Jamestown Foundation Terrorism Monitor Volume: 11 Issue: 10 , 17 May 2013,
‘Lebanese Salafist Cleric Organizes Militia Forays into Syria’, http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews[swords]=8fd5893941d69d0be3f378576261ae3e&tx_ttnews[any_of_the_words]=Zambelis&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=40891&tx_ttnews[backPid]=7&cHash=65e3faaedab7e0ec78e7a0b9352abdc2#.Ue6aKG3_G0g

(49) = AP 24 Jun 2013 ‘Lebanon: clashes between army and supporters of Sunni cleric continue’,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/24/lebanon-clashes-army-sunni-cleric

(50) = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheikh_Ahmad_Al-Aseer# and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheikh_Ahmad_Al-Aseer#Syrian_civil_war

(51) = AFP 25 Jun 2013 ‘Lebanon forces hunt Sunni cleric behind deadly clashes’,
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gwpiVclFpJa4QWD8JW_Yz6uApUzA?docId=CNG.083c6f49d45308df3a6fc7d8a720e4f3.801

(52) = Miami Herald 02 Jul 2013 ‘Sunni cleric warns Christians over Lebanese army’s cooperation with Hezbollah’, http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/07/02/3482070/sunni-cleric-warns-christians.html

(53) = New York Times 08 May 2007 'The assault on Assyrian Christians', http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/08/opinion/08iht-edisaac.1.5618504.html

(54) = Independent 02 Nov 2012 ‘The plight of Syria's Christians: 'We left Homs because they were trying to kill us'’, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/the-plight-of-syrias-christians-we-left-homs-because-they-were-trying-to-kill-us-8274710.html

Obama’s caution on Syria may show he doesn’t want Sunni extremists including Al Qa’ida winning the Syrian civil war any more than he wants Assad to win it. Cameron may foolishly disagree, but the majority of British MPs will stop him

While the amusingly named and poorly informed Marko Attila Hoare has joined Tony Blair and John McCain in calling for Libyan style regime change in Syria, President Obama does not seem enthusiastic, possibly realising that,  as it turned out in Libya, a complete victory for either side would be a bad thing not only for NATO government’s interests but for Syrians too.

The Obama administration has poured cold water on David Cameron’s proposal of a no-fly zone in Syria and said its only providing arms to get Assad to negotiate. Obama may well not want total victory for Syrian rebel Sunni Jihadists who include Al Qa’ida any more than for Assad (1) – (2).

A no-fly zone might not be a bad thing, if it was actually just a no-fly zone only used to stop Assad’s air-force attacking civilians and not used, as in Libya, to let NATO air-forces bomb in support of rebel offensives – and if Syria didn’t have relatively advanced Russian MIG fighters and anti-aircraft missile systems – and if Russia wasn’t hinting at World War Three breaking out if NATO tries it(3).

Obama likely knows that as soon as a no-fly zone is established the hawks (or head-bangers) like Cameron and McCain will then try to use it the way it was used in Libya though.

The US has already been co-operating with the Saudis, Turkey, France, Jordan, Britain and Croatia to arm the rebels by proxy since 2011 and greatly stepped up flights since late 2012, but they've not sent any heavy weapons or hand held anti-aircraft missiles because they know the rebels include Al Nusrah/Al Qa'ida and pretty much all the rebels are Sunni Islamists likely to be hostile to NATO governments if they do manage to overthrow Assad (4) – (6).

Much of the arms and training provided have been conditional on the groups receiving them using them against Al Nusrah and its Iraqi Al Qa'ida allies in Syria (7). While some of the weapons provided by the NATO-Saudi-Jordanian network have got into the hands of Al Nusrah (Al Qa’ida’s Syrian branch) this still suggests Obama is at least as concerned about defeating Al Qa’ida in Syria as defeating Assad (8).

The chances of “moderate” rebels (and that’s a very relative term in Syria) being able to win such a two front war are slim though.

Obama may have looked at the results of regime change in Iraq and then Libya - chaotic sectarian/racist civil wars in which Islamist militias and Al Qa'ida are running riot.

This may be why he opposed sending any direct US military aid until after the full of Qusayr Since then he has authorised only small arms excluding hand held surface to air missiles again.

This is treated by the media as a big change – since the Saudis were already providing small arms and anti-tank weapons with CIA co-ordination, it’s merely a symbolic change.

If he was foolish enough to send hand-held anti-aircraft weapons it wouldn’t be long before Al Qa’ida brought down a US passenger plane with one and the same Republicans (and Democrats) who’d called on him to provide the rebels with them were demanding to know why he had been so irresponsible as to let them get into the hands of Al Qaeda or other Sunni extremists.

It may be that Obama hopes to arm the less extreme rebels to try to defeat both Assad and Al Qa’ida/Nusrah simultaneously. Or it may be that he would prefer a bloody stalemate to either side winning. Or maybe he wants to force Assad to go by arming the rebels and through sanctions. Or he may mean exactly what he says – that he prefers a negotiated political settlement to either side winning by force.

Here in the UK Prime Minister David Cameron first proposed arming the rebels. He successfully prevented a continuation of the EU embargo on arms to either side in Syria.

However his own backbench MPs then demanded a parliamentary vote before any decision by the British government to arm the rebels. He was forced to promise this and it soon became clear that so many of his own Conservative party MPs would vote against it (along with most of the Liberal Democrats and Labour) that he would lose such a vote heavily. That may be why he’s so focused on a no-fly zone, but getting no encouragement from Obama (9).

(1) = VOA News 18 Jun 2013 ‘Obama Skeptical About Syria No-Fly Zone Potential’,
http://www.voanews.com/content/obama-skeptical-about-syria-nofly-zone-potential/1683803.html

(2) = NYT 14 Jun 2013 ‘Heavy Pressure Led to Decision by Obama on Syrian Arms’, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/15/us/politics/pressure-led-to-obamas-decision-on-syrian-arms.html?pagewanted=all

(3) = See (1)

(4) = NYT 25 Feb 2013 ‘Saudis Step Up Help for Rebels in Syria With Croatian Arms’, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/26/world/middleeast/in-shift-saudis-are-said-to-arm-rebels-in-syria.html

(5) = The American Conservative 19 Dec 2011 ‘NATO Vs Syria’,
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/nato-vs-syria/

(6) = NYT 24 Mar 2013 ‘Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With Aid From C.I.A.’, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/25/world/middleeast/arms-airlift-to-syrian-rebels-expands-with-cia-aid.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

(7) = Anti-War.com 08 May 2013 ‘US Asked Moderate Syrian Rebels to Fight Al-Nusra’,
http://antiwar.com/blog/2013/05/08/us-asked-moderate-syrian-rebels-to-fight-al-nusra/ (provides main stream sources)

(8) = CBS News /AP 28 Mar 2013 ‘AP: "Master plan" underway to help Syria rebels take Damascus with U.S.-approved airlifts of heavy weapons’, http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57576722/ap-master-plan-underway-to-help-syria-rebels-take-damascus-with-u.s.-approved-airlifts-of-heavy-weapons/

(9) = FT blogs – world 18 Jun 2013 ‘Why the UK is highly unlikely to arm Syrian rebels’ http://blogs.ft.com/the-world/2013/06/why-the-uk-is-highly-unlikely-to-arm-syrian-rebels/

The price of NATO membership for an independent Scotland would be being involved in unwinnable wars like Afghanistan ; and continuing to pay for Trident nuclear weapons and upgrades which we wouldn't need any more than Norway does ‏‏

First Minister Alex Salmond, writing in the Sunday Herald (‘Why we can ban nuclear weapons and stay in Nato’ Sunday Herald 14^th October) gives welcome assurances that an independent Scotland in NATO wouldn’t take military action without UN authorisation and a Scottish parliament vote, mentioning Iraq (1). He doesn’t mention NATO’s UN backed war in Afghanistan though. NATO membership could draw an independent Scotland into similar unwinnable wars, fought for dubious motives and with dubious methods, in future.

Nor does he explain how we could persuade the UK government, let alone the US, the most influential member of NATO, to allow us full membership while costing the UK a fortune to move it’s submarine bases, especially when Trident contracts are going to English and US based firms with (excessively) close links to the British and American governments.

Even UK Ministry of Defence base maintenance and submarine refit contract work on Trident submarines has gone to a British subsidiary of the US Defence firm Lockheed Martin, the English based company Babcock and AWE plc (based in Reading, England and two-thirds owned by US based Lockheed Martin and Jacobs Engineering, with the rest owned by the UK government and English based firm Serco (2) – (3).  The first £350 million of Trident upgrade contracts went to Lockheed Martin, English based Rolls-Royce and English based firm BAE, which also has a large arm in the US (4).  BAE is expected to get most of the rest of the upgrade contracts too (5).

The Campaign Against the Arms Trade in the UK has also shown dozens of instances of the revolving door between these arms manufacturers and the MoD, the British government and senior positions in the British military (6).

According to the MoD building another base suitable for the UK’s nuclear submarine fleet in England, Wales or Northern Ireland could take up to a decade (7).

So why would the remaining UK government support NATO membership for an Independent Scotland except on the condition that we allowed it to keep its nuclear submarine fleet and it’s only base capable of repairing, maintaining and refitting that fleet in Scotland?

A nuclear free independent Scotland might even result in the UK dropping it’s Trident upgrade altogether and going for a joint nuclear deterrent, or at the least temporary base sharing, with France, preliminary negotiations on which took place both under the last Labour government and under the current Conservative-Lib Dem Coalition (though the French government seems keener than the British) (8) – (9).

That would mean the UK’s military co-operation with France would become closer, reducing US influence with the UK. US firms would be likely to lose out even if this didn’t happen. Either way the US government would not be happy.

So a nuclear free Independent Scotland and NATO membership are simply not compatible with each other. We need to choose one or the other ; and if we want to avoid paying for maintenance , running costs and upgrades of the UK nuclear deterrent, we need to choose being nuclear weapons free.

Why NATO or Partnership for Peace membership could draw an Independent Scotland into more wars like Afghanistan
– and why the war is as ineffective in achieving it’s stated aims as it is morally dubious and unwinnable

Nor does the First Minister offer any guarantee of a referendum on any decision to go to war that would give the Scottish people the final decision on an issue of many lives and deaths ; nor any guarantee that backbenchers or the opposition in an independent Scottish parliament could  initiate a vote (or a vote to have a referendum) on withdrawing our troops from a war they had previously voted to approve sending troops to.

The Afghanistan war has pulled in the UK as a NATO member; and even those members of NATO (e.g Canada and Poland and even Norway which sent special forces to the initial US led invasion and then over 500 troops to the ISAF force which are only now leaving) and its joint-training associated arm Partnership for Peace (e.g Ukraine), ended up sending significant numbers of troops either to the initial invasion or as part of the UN approved but NATO (and effectively US) led ISAF force, or both.

Hundreds of British troops, including Scots, have been killed in the war, which has lasted over 11 years and counting, twice as long as World War One, coming up twice as long as World War Two; and over half way to being as long as the Vietnam war (10).

It has also involved not only the notorious killings and suicide bombing attacks on civilians by the Taliban, but also torture of Afghans by US, NATO and Afghan government forces, including civilians with no involvement in terrorism, sometimes to death; and many thousands of civilians killed by air strikes under Bush, as well as by air strikes and night raids (often targeting teenagers who turn out to be innocent) under Obama. Civilian deaths from US air strikes actually increased under Obama compared to under Bush and torture has continued at secret ‘black sites’ in Afghanistan under Obama (11) – (19).  

US intelligence estimate 90% of Afghan insurgents are neither Taliban nor motivated by religion, but by opposing foreign military presence, or revenge for the injury or deaths of members of their family, village or tribe by NATO forces (20). So this is not primarily a war against the Taliban at all, but one which turns the majority of Afghans against NATO countries and the Afghan government.

NATO says Pakistan’s military intelligence continue aiding the Afghan Taliban , despite now being at war with the Pakistani Taliban (21). Yet the US continues to provide financial aid to Pakistan, some of which will be passed on to the Taliban, because the shortest supply route for NATO forces in Afghanistan is through Pakistan (22) – (24). So NATO has to indirectly fund the Taliban in order to supply it’s troops in Afghanistan – a hopeless situation.

Wars are not effective against Al Qa’ida, a global terrorist organisation which can operate in any country in the world, the 9-11 hijackers having trained in the US and Germany (25) – (27). Intelligence, policing and Special Forces can be.

There are also ulterior motives for the war. The main ulterior motive was to try and get a Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan pipeline to export oil and gas from former Soviet republics like Kazakhstan (which has vast oil and gas reserves and where BP, Exxon, Halliburton have had contracts since the 1990s) , Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan (both have significant proven gas reserves). The advantage of this pipeline route would be that it would avoid passing through countries where Russia has significant influence and might be able to cut off exports at will (e.g Georgia – which is on the route of the western oil company AIOC group’s Baku-Ceyhan pipeline route – especially after the Russian-Georgian War in which Russia allowed a secessionist movement to succeed) and Iran. The pipeline route was the reason the US gave political backing to the Taliban at first and quietly approved the Saudis and Pakistanis funding, training and arming them. They couldn't get a deal between UNOCAL and the Taliban at a transit price per barrel that oil firms were willing to pay. (28) – (32)

After the invasionin 2002 the Presidents of Turkmenistan, Pakistan and Afghanistan signed a deal on the pipeline route and in 2010 a deal was made planning to extend it to India (33) – (34)

Salmond’s smooth moves to convince Scottish voters that Independence wouldn’t be a big change ignore the  high costs and risk of much of the Status Quo, including NATO membership

Would backbenchers in the Scottish parliament have the power to initiate a vote on withdrawing troops from wars parliament had previously approved by majority vote? Shouldn’t a referendum also be required before going to war to give everyone a say in a matter of life or death for thousands.

Alec Salmond is certainly making smooth moves by trying to make voters see independence as less of a big risk, by reassuring them that lots of things will remain unchanged – NATO membership, EU membership, our currency, the Queen as head of state, an open border with England etc.

However the status quo carries its own risks. In the case of continued NATO membership the risks are not only that we might be required to keep nuclear weapons on Scottish territory and continue to pay a proportion of the costs of running, maintaining, refitting and upgrading them as a condition of continued membership (despite the fact an independent Scotland would have no more need for a nuclear deterrent than Norway does), but also that we could be drawn by the alliance into more long, bloody, unwinnable wars fought mostly for the benefit of US and British oil and arms companies.

Sign the No to NATO Scotland statement and follow the campaign

You can sign an online statement opposing NATO membership for an independent Scotland on the No to NATO Scotland Coalition website on this link (scroll down the page till you see an orange button with 'Sign the Statement' on it on the right - click it, fill in details and enter them). There's also news and information, including on protests by the campaign that you can take part in, on the website.

Sources

 (1) = Sunday Herald 14^th October 2012 ‘Why we can ban nuclear weapons and stay in Nato’,
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/why-we-can-ban-nuclear-weapons-and-stay-in-nato.19134185

(2) = Ministry of Defence 27 Jul 2012 ‘MOD signs Trident support contract’,
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/DefencePolicyAndBusiness/ModSignsTridentSupportContract.htm

(3) = guardian.co.uk Trident 30 Jul 2012 ‘bases to be run by private companies’,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jul/30/trident-bases-run-private-companies

(4) = BBC News 22 May 2012 ‘Trident contracts worth £350m unveiled by MoD’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18155835

(5) = CAAT Revolving Door Log, http://www.caat.org.uk/issues/influence/revolving-door.php

(6) = Independent 22 May 2012 ‘Government awards contracts worth £350m for new Trident submarines’, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/government-awards-contracts-worth-350m-for-new-trident-submarines-7778161.html

(7) = Telegraph 26 Jan 2012 ‘Nuclear subs will stay in Scotland, Royal Navy chiefs decide’,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9043092/Nuclear-subs-will-stay-in-Scotland-Royal-Navy-chiefs-decide.html

(8) = guardian.co.uk 19 Mar 2010 ‘France offers to join forces with UK's nuclear submarine fleet’ , http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/19/france-britain-shared-nuclear-deterrent

(9) = Independent 30 Sep 2010 ‘Britain and France may share nuclear deterrent’,
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/britain-and-france-may-share-nuclear-deterrent-2093539.html

(10) = BBC News 24 Sep 2012 ‘UK military deaths in Afghanistan’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10629358 , (433 as of 24^th September, around 24 Scottish)

(11) Human Rights Watch World Report 2006 ‘Torture and Inhumane Treatment: A Deliberate U.S. Policy’, http://www.hrw.org/legacy/wr2k6/introduction/2.htm#_Toc121910421 ; ‘the abuse at Abu Ghraib paralleled similar if not worse abuse in Afghanistan, Guantánamo, elsewhere in Iraq, and in the chain of secret detention facilities where the U.S. government holds its “high value” detainees’

(12) = Human Rights Watch 20 May 2005 - ‘Afghanistan: Killing and Torture by U.S. Predate Abu Ghraib ' - http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/05/20/afghan10992.htm

(13) = NYT 20 May 2005 ‘In U.S. Report, Brutal Details of 2 Afghan Inmates' Deaths’,
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/20/international/asia/20abuse.html?ei=5088&en=4579c146cb14cfd6&ex=1274241600&pagewanted=all

(14) =  Wikipedia Civilian casualties in the War in Afghanistan (2001–present) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_in_the_War_in_Afghanistan_%282001%E2%80%93present%29#Aggregation_of_estimates (This provides estimates of civilian casualties caused by the various forces involved by various sources including Professor Marc Herold of the University of New Hampshire , the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan  (UNAMA) , Human Rights Watch and The Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission – whichever estimates you take, thousands have been killed by NATO forces before counting the thousands also killed by Taliban and other insurgents. The reports by the sources are also listed and linked to)

(15) = according to The Afghanistan Conflict Monitor of Simon Fraser University in Australia in 2011: “Estimates of the number of civilians killed vary widely and must be treated with caution. Systematic collection of civilian fatality data only began in 2007. The United Nations is creating a civilian casualty database, but is not publicly accessible. Periodic updates can be found in Reports of the Secretary-General on peace and security in Afghanistan. The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) is also collecting data, but the efforts of both agencies are hampered by insecurity and a lack of resources. As a result, figures released by these agencies likely represent a substantial undercount.”

(16) = See this blog post , scrolling down to sub-headings ‘‘Civilian and military deaths caused by both sides in the war – is it necessary or worth it?’ and ‘Night Raids and the El Salvador Option moving from Iraq to Afghanistan’ – as well as the sources listed for each section under the same headings further down the post (they include Human Rights Watch and Afghan Independent Human Rights Watch reports as well as BBC and Times newspaper reports among others ) http://inplaceoffear.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/one-more-push-for-what-in-afghanistan.html

(17) = See this blog post ‘Have NATO airstrikes killed fewer civilians in Afghanistan under Obama? And have they fallen under McChrystal?’ which is fully sourced with mainstream sources ; http://inplaceoffear.blogspot.co.uk/2009/11/have-nato-airstrikes-killed-less.html

(18) = For more details and sources on torture by US forces in Afghanistan under Bush see the page on this link  ; for torture under both Bush and Obama in Afghanistan see the blog post on this link, scrolling down to the bolded sub-heading ‘Guantanamo to Bagram : extra-ordinary rendition  (kidnapping) and torture’

(19) = Jennifer K Harbury (2005) ‘Truth, Torture and the American Way’, Beacon Press, Boston, 2005 ; Harbury, whose Guatemalan husband Everardo was tortured and then disappeared during CIA led operations by the Guatemalan military, provides masses of evidence that torture by US intelligence and military forces has always happened, even when it was illegal under US law, casting doubt on whether Obama’s formal ban on most forms of torture (except psychological torture and sleep deprivation) will be enough to end it

(20) = Boston Globe 09 Oct 2009 ‘Taliban not main Afghan enemy’, http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2009/10/09/most_insurgents_in_afghanistan_not_religiously_motivated_military_reports_say/?page=1

(21) = BBC News 01 Feb 2012 ‘Pakistan helping Afghan Taliban - Nato’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-16821218 , ‘The Taliban in Afghanistan are being directly assisted by Pakistani security services, according to a secret Nato report seen by the BBC… the report… exposes…the relationship between the ISI and the Taliban…. based on material from 27,000 interrogations with more than 4,000 captured Taliban, al-Qaeda and other foreign fighters and civilians.’

(22) = Reuters 22 May 2012 ‘U.S. senators vote to tie Pakistan aid to supply routes’,
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/23/us-pakistan-usa-aid-idUSBRE84M03Y20120523

(23) = CNN 04 Jul 2012 ‘Pakistan reopens NATO supply routes to Afghanistan’,
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/03/world/asia/us-pakistan-border-routes/index.html ,
‘Meanwhile, the U.S. military will now pay Pakistan $1.1 billion it owes as part of the deal struck to reopen the NATO supply lines …The money is part of a U.S. military program …which reimburses the Pakistani military for counterterrorism efforts.’

(24) = BBC 03 Jul 2012 ‘Pakistan to reopen supply lines to Nato Afghan forces’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-18691691 , ‘US officials say the existing charge of $250 (£160) per truck will not change - Washington had baulked at a Pakistani demand for $5,000 per container to let supplies flow again.’

(25) = Minneapolis Star Tribune 20 Dec 2001 ‘Eagan Flight Trainer Wouldn't Let Unease About Moussaoui Rest’, http://www.startribune.com/templates/Print_This_Story?sid=11642646

(26) = USA Today 28 May 2002 ‘Letter shifts heat to FBI’,
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/05/28/letter-fbi.htm

(27) = NYT 24 Feb 2004 ‘C.I.A. Was Given Data on Hijacker Long Before 9/11’, http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/24/politics/24TERR.html?ex=1225252800&en=ce51b8f44bd6a30c&ei=5070

(28) =  Also see this page on my website and sources in it

(29) = Rashid , Ahmed(2001) Taliban Tauris, London , paperback, 2001 – p167, 173

(30) = Guardian 24 Oct 2001, ‘Route to riches’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/waronterror/story/0,1361,579401,00.html (Afghanistan has huge strategic importance for the west as a corridor to the untapped fuel reserves in central Asia, reports Andy Rowell)

(31) = U.S. INTEREST IN CENTRAL ASIA:JOHN J. MARESCA , TESTIMONY BY JOHN J. MARESCA VICE PRESIDENT, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS UNOCAL CORPORATION TO HOUSE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC , FEBRUARY 12, 1998 WASHINGTON, D.C., http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa48119.000/hfa48119_0f.htm

(32) = Coll, Steve (2004) 'Ghost Wars : The secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan and Bin Laden' , Penguin paperback, London, 2004, pages 308, 313

(33) = BBC News 27 Dec 2002 , ‘Central Asia pipeline deal signed’, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2608713.stm

(34) = BBC News 11 Dec 2010 ‘Turkmen natural gas pipeline Tapi to cross Afghanistan’ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11977744