Showing posts with label Russia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Russia. Show all posts

Sunday, March 09, 2014

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 19th 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)

Monday, June 24, 2013

Peace through negotiations in Syria? Or chasing the illusion of victory at any cost in lives? Which will the Syrian sides and foreign governments choose? It can’t be both

The Syrian government, the armed rebels and foreign governments involved in Syria are deceiving themselves in believing that what they want is what’s best for everyone, in believing that a complete military victory over the other side is possible, and in believing that such a victory would benefit even their own side.

The US and British governments are as fond of saying that Assad, Russia and Iran are destabilising Syria and the Middle East as Assad and the Russian and Iranian governments are of saying that NATO and its Arab allies arming the rebels is doing the same. They are each deceiving themselves in the commonest ways possible, assuming that what they want and what’s good for everyone else is the same thing; and that what they want themselves and what’s good for them is the same thing too.

This is not an unusual fault, but in this situation its one that’s killing a lot of people who would otherwise still be alive and leaving a lot of families mourning who wouldn’t be otherwise.

In fact a military victory for either side is likely to lead to more atrocities against the losers and civilians known or suspected of supporting them ; and each side stepping up training, arms and money supplies to their proxies may just result in a long bloody civil war in which civilians suffer most and the most extreme groups like Al Qa’ida grow stronger.

(“Stability” here obviously means, as Chomsky points out, not stability at all but “our influence or control there”).

In focusing on overthrowing Assad to weaken the Iran-Syria-Hezbollah alliance NATO governments and the Sunni ruled dictatorships of the Gulf Co-operation Council are handing another country as a base to Al Qa’ida and similar extreme Islamists, just as in Iraq and Libya. This is in no-one’s real interests. Al Qa’ida is a far more dangerous and extremist enemy than Iran (1).

The Assad regime and the rebels are also deceiving themselves, believing that they can achieve peace and justice through civil war, through crushing their enemies totally and without compromise. The factions in Lebanon did the same for 15 bloody years, from 1975 to 1990, before they finally realised that none of them were ever going to win a complete victor over the others and agreed to share power instead. Will the Syrian factions spend 15 years and tens of thousands more lives before they face up to the same reality?

It’s easy also to deceive ourselves into seeing one side or the other in Syria as the villains and the other as all basically decent, and so believe that victory for one or the other will set everything right.

 

Rebel fanatic terrorists Vs sane secular Assad government?

Some say all the rebels are crazy religious fanatics who want to murder everyone who doesn’t share their beliefs, while Assad’s secular government is sane and defending itself against extremist terrorists. There is some truth in that. Al Qa’ida / Al Nusrah are among the rebels and the vast majority of the rebels are Sunni Islamists of varying degrees of sectarianism or non-sectarianism, extremism or moderation. There have been some massacres of Shia and Alawites and ethnic cleansing of Christians on a large scale. Al Qa’ida have even executed a 15 year old boy who for supposed blasphemy in mentioning Mohammed in an argument over the price of coffee he was selling (2).

This is not the whole truth though. Secular governments can be brutal, extremist dictatorships, like Stalin’s, Pol Pot’s, Hitler’s, Saddam’s or Assad’s. Assad’s forces have carried out a campaign of rape, torture and murder against civilians, including children (3) – (7).

Many rebels say they have become Islamists because of their revulsion at these atrocities by the secular government (8).

We only know about the 15 year old executed by Al Qa’ida only because the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, an anti-Assad exile group, reported it as a crime. While many other rebels, including much of the FSA, have fought alongside Al Nusrah and Al Qa’ida some of them have fought against both those groups as well as against and Assad (9) – (12).

While many of the conscripts who have defected to the rebels are Sunnis, the vast majority of the Syrian professional military are Alawites, of the same religion as Assad.

Some of the most notorious rebels, like Abu Sakkar, the Sunni rebel leader who had himself filmed eating the lungs of a dead soldier and saying he and his men would kill and eat the hearts and livers of the Alawites, started out as peaceful anti-sectarian protesters, but decided after seeing other unarmed protesters killed around them by government soldiers and women in their family raped by government soldiers, that taking up arms was their only option. Such people are not necessarily monsters (13).

They may be decent people disfigured by atrocities and war. I would never mutilate anyone’s body, but who could say that if they had seen their peaceful protest met with death, rape and torture they might not have decided that fighting to the death was the only option? Who can say that if people they loved were murdered, raped or tortured by their government that they wouldn’t want revenge at all costs? Not me.

There are also claims that polls show the majority of Syrians support Assad. Apart from the virtual impossibility of carrying out a poll during a civil war, the only poll reported by any reliable source, supposedly showing 55% of Syrians supporting Assad, was an online poll of Arab countries in which only 97 of the respondents were Syrian. Even if online polls were reliable (and they’re not) 97 is far too few to judge anything from (14).

 

Brutal murderous Assad dictatorship Vs Rebels forced to fight to defend themselves?

Others say that Assad is a brutal sectarian, murdering, torturing dictator who responded to peaceful protests with bullets and torture, and that only overthrowing him and his regime will bring peace, justice and democracy. Again, this is part of the truth, but not the whole truth.

Assad’s regime, like his father’s, has been a dictatorship based on hereditary rule and the dominance of one religion as much as the Saudi monarchy’s. Peaceful protests were met with sniper fire, jailings, torture and rape.

However many Syrian Alawites, Shia Muslims, Druze and Christians fear sectarian Sunni Muslim rebels far, far more than they fear Assad, with good reason. Assad’s forces attack those who they know or suspect of opposing him, while Sunni religious fanatics among the rebels want to kill or expel anyone who is not a Sunni Muslim, just for not being a Sunni. Large numbers of the refugees fleeing Syria are Christians fleeing the rebels, or people who support neither side and just want to escape the fighting (15) – (19).

The practice of kidnapping and torturing people just to extract money from their families, practiced by militias on both sides of the Iraqi civil war and by the US trained Iraqi Police Commandos today too, has also been adopted by many of the Sunni rebels in Syria including some of the FSA , criminal gangs, and Assad’s Shabiha too (the Shabiha and many of the rebels, like militias in the civil wars of the former Yugoslavia are partly in the war for money and loot and as in Yugoslavia US sanctions plus civil war have made war and kidnapping into businesses) (20) – (22).

Not all Sunnis oppose Assad either. Some of his air force pilots are among the minority of Sunnis in the professional military. Two of the most senior Sunni clerics in Syria spoke out to support Assad and condemn the rebels as not true Muslims. One of them was assassinated by the rebels in a suicide bombing attack on a mosque which also killed many others praying there (23) – (24).

We can speculate on whether these Sunnis support Assad out of fear of him or out of opposition to the fanaticism and extremism of many of the rebels, but it’s as likely to be the latter as the former.

There are also many wealthy Sunni businessmen who have deals with Assad and pay Shahiba militias to attack Sunni rebel areas in order to protect their business interests (25).

While the majority of the pro-Assad Shabiha militias are made up of Alawites, there are some are Sunnis, for instance in Aleppo (26) – (27).

Some Syrian government soldiers and police have tried to stop Shabiha murders of civilians and been killed for trying (28).

Assad’s forces are not the only ones torturing people or murdering civilians. Amnesty and Human Rights Watch have reported on the torture and execution of prisoners of the rebels, civilian and combatant alike. They have also carried out sectarian murders and massacres and many terrorist car bombings.

Assad also scrapped the single party state in Syria last year and held the first multi-party parliamentary elections, though some of the opposition boycotted them (29). This makes his government less undemocratic than the pro-Syrian-rebel Saudi Arabia, where the only elected officials are local councillors and they are only there for show, complaining that they have no power to do anything.

Assad and his supporters also fear that they, their communities, their supporters and their families may be massacred, tortured to death or made refugees by their opponents and Sunni extremists. This is not an irrational fear, many already have been, whether for supporting Assad or just being the wrong religion (30).

Why many Syrians say negotiations are a more realistic solution
than fighting or arming each side

Both sides believe they are protecting their communities against murdering fanatics.

The question both sides have to ask themselves is “How will more civil war protect me and my family and friends and community?”. The answer is that it won’t. Every revenge killing, every act of torture against the other side puts your side’s people at greater risk and makes it more likely the war will go on longer. You may never achieve victory either. It may all turn out be pointless, as it was for 15 years for Lebanon, as it has been for 13 years in Iraq. You may have to accept that sharing power with your enemies and making peace with them is the only way out. So why not do it now before more of the people you love are hurt or dead?

Syrian rebels may say they tried peaceful protest and it was met with bullets. True, but Assad will sooner or later have to face up to the fact that he can’t win outright given the NATO and Arab governments’ arms, training and funding for the rebels along with the Muslim Brotherhood’s. He has already had to concede an end to the one party state and parliamentary elections. In negotiations he will have to concede more.

And if you overthrow Assad by force, what then? Al Nusrah and its allies will keep fighting against their opponents and rivals among the rebels. Many of the rebel fighters take no orders from anyone but themselves. Al Nusrah and its allies might well win such a war.

The Syrian governments’ supporters may say their enemies include fanatics and terrorists who can’t be allowed to win. That’s true. The rebels can’t be entirely defeated either though – and every attempt to crush such movements has failed, only making them stronger, whether in Iraq or Afghanistan – and not all the opposition are violent and not all the armed ones are extremists. Sharing power with the opposition will strengthen those among the opposition who are against civil war and violence ; and reduce the influence of the armed rebels and the most extreme among them, like Al Nusrah. If Al Nusrah try to fight on they will be isolated.

Many Syrians say they don’t care who the government is, so long as the fighting and killing ends and that’s been the case for a long time with much of the opposition to Assad both in Syria and in exile also opposing a civil war to overthrow his government. (31) – (34).

When will those in power listen and learn?

As one Syrian professor stuck in the middle of the fighting in Damascus said recently “Stop the killing! The more killing takes place, the more hatred is sown, and the more difficult it will be to rebuild.”  (35)

Similar warnings have been made in other wars before. After the September 11th  attacks killed her husband Craig Amundsen, Amber Amundsen said “We cannot solve violence with violence. Revenge is a self-perpetuating cycle. Gandhi said, ‘An eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind.’ ….I ask our nation's leaders not to take the path that leads to more widespread hatreds — that make my husband's death just one more in an unending spiral of killing. I call on our national leaders to find the courage to respond to this incomprehensible tragedy by breaking the cycle of violence.” (36)

Her government did not listen. Twelve years, thousands of NATO troops and tens of thousands of dead Afghan civilians later, they are negotiating with the Taliban. So why not start the negotiations in Syria now instead of losing thousands more lives in another decade of pointless fighting?

After the invasion of Iraq in 2004 Adnan Pachachi of the Iraqi governing council warned the US government and military not to take revenge for the killing of 4 American Blackwater military contractors and the mutilation of their bodies by attacking the entire city of Falluja. “More violence will cause more violence and this will be an endless spiral.” he warned (37).

They did not listen, killing 600 civilians including 300 women and children in revenge, by firing indiscriminately on anyone they saw including civilians, ambulances, medics and the wounded (38) – (39). Six years later the US withdrew from Iraq with over 3,000 US troops and over 100,000 Iraqi civilians dead. It did not end terrorist attacks on the US or its allies. Al Qa’ida has grown strong in Iraq and set up its Syrian branch Al Nusrah.

The professor in Damascus has warned us again. Will enough people listen to him this time?

This may seem idealistic or unrealistic to some, but is a civil war in which there is no justice for anyone, only suffering and death and grieving and atrocities by both sides, and extremists gaining ground every day,  a more realistic solution? The people of Lebanon didn’t think so after 15 years of it – and many of the people of Syria don’t think so 2 years into theirs.

There are already some small scale local ceasefires
, like one organised by the head of a Sunni tribe in the city of Talakakh (40). A power sharing agreement could make them solid across the whole country.

So what will everyone involved do, Syrians and foreign governments? Is it victory at any cost in Syrian lives, including thousands of civilians and children? At any cost in strengthening Al Qa’ida? Or will they do what’s really best for Syrians and really best for other countries and persuade the factions they back to negotiate a compromise instead?

(1) = Reuters 14 Nov 2011 ‘Syria urges Arab League to reconsider suspension’,
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=245466  ; ‘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.…“They’re hoping to dismantle the axis of Iran, Syria and Hezbollah... to isolate Iran even more by depriving it of its only major ally in the Middle East.”’

(2) = Al Jazeera 09 Jun 2013 ‘Syrian rebels 'execute teenager' in Aleppo’, http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/06/201369175918244221.html

(3) = Human Rights Watch 15 Jun 2012 ‘Syria: Sexual Assault in Detention - Security Forces Also Attacked Women and Girls in Raids on Homes’,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/06/15/syria-sexual-assault-detention

(4) = BBC News 25 Sep 2012 ‘Syria ex-detainees allege ordeals of rape and sex abuse’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19718075

(5) = Human Rights Watch 17 May 2013 ‘Syria: Visit Reveals Torture Chambers’,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/05/16/syria-visit-reveals-torture-chambers

(6) = Human Rights Watch 10 Apr 2012 ‘In Cold Blood - Summary Executions by Syrian Security Forces and Pro-Government Militias’, http://www.hrw.org/reports/2012/04/09/cold-blood-0

(7) = Human Rights Watch World Report 2013 – Syria ,
http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2013/country-chapters/syria?page=1

(8) = 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’)

(9) = See (2) above

(10) = Guardian 30 Jul 2012 ‘Al-Qaida turns tide for rebels in battle for eastern Syria’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/30/al-qaida-rebels-battle-syria

(11) = Independent 15 May 2003 ‘Syrian civil war: The day I met the organ eating cannibal rebel Abu Sakkar's fearsome followers’,
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syrian-civil-war-the-day-i-met-the-organ-eating-cannibal-rebel-abu-sakkars-fearsome-followers-8617828.html (says Sakkar led his men to kill a more extreme group who had kidnapped a British photographer)

(12) = Time 26 Mar 2013 ‘In Syria, the Rebels Have Begun to Fight Among Themselves’, http://world.time.com/2013/03/26/in-syria-the-rebels-have-begun-to-fight-among-themselves/

(13) = See (11) above

(14) = BBC News 25 Feb 2012 ‘Do 55% of Syrians really want President Assad to stay?’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17155349

(15) = Independent 18 Feb 2012 'Syrians flee their homes amid fears of ethnic cleansing',http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syrians-flee-their-homes-amid-fears-of-ethnic-cleansing-7079802.html ; 'Members of Syria's minority Alawite community are fleeing their homes and going into hiding, terrified that avenging rebels will hunt them down as more areas of the country come under the control of fighters trying to topple President Bashar al-Assad. '

(16) = Independent 02 Aug 2012 ‘'What will happen to us?': Loyalists fear rebel attacks’, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/what-will-happen-to-us-loyalists-fear-rebel-attacks-7999495.html

(17) = NYT 19 Jun 2013 ‘The Price of Loyalty in Syria’,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/23/magazine/the-price-of-loyalty-in-syria.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

(18) = Los Angeles Times 07 Mar 2012 'Syria Christians fear life after Assad', http://articles.latimes.com/2012/mar/07/world/la-fg-syria-christians-20120307

(19) = 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

(20) = BBC News ‘Syrians live in fear as kidnappings increase’,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22263331

(21) = Telegraph 07 Sep 2012 ‘Epidemic of kidnappings breaks out in Syria’, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9528698/Epidemic-of-kidnappings-breaks-out-in-Syria.html

(22) = Syria Deeply 06 Jun 2013 ‘In Syria, Kidnapping Becomes a ‘Big-Money Business’, interview with Peter N. Bouckaert of Human Rights Watch,
http://beta.syriadeeply.org/2013/06/syria-kidnapping-big-money-business/#.UceMX5zK47I

(23) = LA Times 13 Mar 2013 ‘Syria denies mass conscription, says military remains strong’,
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/mar/13/world/la-fg-wn-syria-military-conscription-20130313

(24) = Wall Street Journal 21 Mar 2013 ‘Top Cleric Killed, With Dozens More, at Syrian Mosque’, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324103504578374580724798360.html

(25) = Guardian.co.uk 31 May 2012 ‘Ghosts of Syria: diehard militias who kill in the name of Assad’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/31/ghosts-syria-regime-shabiha-militias

(26) = Time 11 Jun 2012 ‘The Wrath of the Shabiha: The Assad Regime’s Brutal Enforcers’, http://world.time.com/2012/06/11/the-wrath-of-the-shabiha-the-assad-regimes-brutal-enforcers/

(27) = Reuters 03 Feb 2012 ‘Uprising finally hits Syria's "Silk Road" city’, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/03/us-syria-aleppo-idUSTRE81213720120203

(28) = BBC News 29 May 2012 ‘Syria unrest: Who are the shabiha?’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14482968

(29) = BBC News 16 May 2012 ‘Syria election results show support for reforms, says Assad’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18084827  3rd paragraph ‘The election commission said on Tuesday that turnout was 51% for the polls, which the opposition said were a farce.’ 18th paragraph…The polls were the first held under a new constitution adopted in February, which dropped an article giving the Baath Party unique status as the "leader of the state and society" in Syria. It also allowed new parties to be formed, albeit those not based on religious, tribal, regional, denominational or professional affiliation, nor those based abroad.

(30) = See (16) above

(31) = Independent 20 Jun 2013 ‘‘We don’t care who rules us, we just want to live’: After a year of fighting, most Damascans are simply weary of the battle for Syria’,
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/we-dont-care-who-rules-us-we-just-want-to-live-after-a-year-of-fighting-most-damascans-are-simply-weary-of-the-battle-for-syria-8667561

(32) = guardian.co.uk 20 Aug 2012 ‘Pursued by violence, pawns in Syrian conflict await an endgame’ , http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/20/pawns-syrian-conflict-await-endgame

(33) = Guardian 22 Jun 2012 ‘Syria's opposition has been led astray by violence’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/22/syria-opposition-led-astray-by-violence

(34) = Guardian 18 Dec 2012 ‘Syria: after Assad falls, what then?’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/18/after-assad-falls-what-then

(35) = Independent 20 Jun 2013 ‘Letters: Let’s not fuel the flames in Syria’, http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/letters-lets-not-fuel-the-flames-in-syria-8666958.html

(36) = PBS Now 02 Jan 2002 ‘Amber Amundson's Letters’,
http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_amberletters2.html

(37) = Guardian 08 Apr 2004 ‘Battles rage from North to South’,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/apr/08/iraq.ewenmacaskill1

(38) = Iraq Body Count 26 Oct 2004 ‘No Longer Unknowable: Falluja's April Civilian Toll is 600’, http://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/reference/press-releases/9/

(39) = BBC News 23 Apr 2004 ‘Picture emerges of Falluja siege’, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3653223.stm

(40) = Guardian.co.uk 18 Feb 2013 ‘In a small corner of Syria, rebels attempt to reconcile’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/feb/18/syrian-city-truce-sheikh

Wednesday, June 19, 2013

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/

Wednesday, February 08, 2012

Power sharing in Syria could avoid Libyan revenge and civil war – but it and ending Assad’s crimes require a deal with Russia

Assad's government and military in Syria are definitely guilty of torturing and killing civilians, including children, as well as targeting the wounded and doctors. That’s sickening and it needs to be stopped (1) – (4). Accounts by Syrian opposition activists of the killing of whole families are painful to read (5).

That has to be stopped – the question is how to stop it without creating a longer civil war or mass revenge killings and torture of the kind going on in Libya.

We should be wary of believing every claim made by the Syrian opposition. Some of the claims made by the Libyan opposition of Gaddafi ordering his troops to rape women and anti-aircraft guns being used on demonstrators turned out to be false (6).

A look at the results of a rebel victory in Libya or the situation in “liberated” Iraq should throw some serious doubt on the idea that the overthrow of Assad through Arab League and Western government arming and training of the rebels would guarantee an end to torture and murder. It might, as in Libya, lead to fighting among different rebel factions and the torture and murder by them of people even suspected (often wrongly) of having supported the dictatorship. NATO and Arab governments will only care about removing Assad as an ally of Iran, just as they lost all interest in torture and killings in Libya once Gaddafi was overthrown and his enemies were responsible for the crimes. As in Libya though, they are the only source of military support that the opposition have to turn to. However the Russian military presence in Syria (their fleet is allowed to use Syrian ports) would make any direct NATO involvement risk World War Three, which is probably why the US and it’s allies have ruled out direct military involvement – if they intervene it is likely to be covertly by arming and training the rebels with Special Forces, as in Libya. In Syria even that could risk war with Russia though.

A power sharing agreement of the kind suggested in the UN Resolution that the Chinese and Russian governments vetoed may be less bad than a Libyan or Lebanese style civil war – but that would first require an end to the government forces’ attacks on civilians – and then there would be the problem there is how to achieve a balance of power which results in compromise and a transition to democracy rather than a long civil war which neither side can win.

Many minorities in Syria including Kurds and Christians also fear being targeted by Sunni Muslim fundamentalists among the opposition if Assad is overthrown by force, just as black Libyans and African immigrant workers have been lynched and tortured in Libya and Assyrian Christians and other minorities have been killed and ethnically cleansed in Iraq. The Assad family are from the Alawite minority sect of the Shia Muslim religion.

Achieving peace is a lot harder than just overthrowing Assad, which would achieve the aims of the US government and it’s allies without ending the fighting or the torture and killing, just as with overthrowing Gaddafi in Libya. As in Libya it might reduce the scale of the torture and killing, but at the risk of civil war continuing indefinitely.

Getting that agreement will be hard as the sides now have plenty of reasons to hate and distrust one another ; and getting each to make real concessions requires convincing them that they have enough power to force the other to make real concessions to them, but not enough that they can be sure the other won’t defeat them in a fight to the end.

In Libya there are over 8,500 people held without trial by the rebel factions including women and children, many of them tortured using the same methods Gaddafi's forces used, some to death. It's so bad that Medicines Sans Frontieres have pulled out as they were being given hundreds of prisoners to keep them alive in between torture sessions so they could be tortured again. (7) – (10).

The rebel militias have been fighting one another in Tripoli ever since Gaddafi's death right up to present (in one case over control of the airport as NATO flew in planeloads of released Libyan funds in bales of cash - much of which will likely end up disappearing 'unaccounted for' just as with the billions of dollars of Iraqi Oil for Food funds that went missing under Bremer in Iraq ) and creating revolts against their rule by arresting and large numbers of people on suspicion of being Gaddafi supporters, with no trials and torturing or killing many of them (i.e behaving exactly like Gaddafi's forces did towards anyone they suspected of not supporting Gaddafi) (11) – (15).

In Iraq the torture and death squad methods used by Saddam continue to be used by the US trained police commandos and counter-terrorist units - who also kidnap and torture people just in order to extort money from their families (16) – (21).

The Arab League, which backed the UN motions on Libya and Syria is mostly made up of dictatorships that torture and kill their own civilians themselves (the Saudi monarchy, Bahraini monarchy both last year and last month, the Yemeni dictatorship, the Egyptian military) and which the NATO governments continue to back despite this. The Saudis, who have backed the brutal repression in Bahrain which has included shooting unarmed protesters, torturing protesters to death and targeting ambulances, ambulance crews and hospital staff, are the main supporters of the Syrian rebels as part of a US and NATO alliance with Sunni dictatorships against Iran and Shia Muslims. The Saudi and Qatari monarchies, along with the Egyptian military, also provided arms, funding and Special Forces to aid the rebels in Libya. None of them are democracies so promoting democracy is not likely to be their main motive (22) – (30).

The motives for intervention among the Arab League and western governments are as much about their own power in the Middle East, rather than democracy or human rights, as the Russian and Chinese governments’ are. Syria provides Russia with a naval base in the Mediterranean, while Bahrain provides the US with a naval base in the Persian Gulf, the main export route for Middle Eastern oil to the net oil importing NATO governments. That’s why Russia had blocked intervention to stop the massacres in Syria and has even sent arms shipments to Syrian forces as they commit these crimes; and why the US and it’s allies did nothing about the massacres in Bahrain (except for the Saudis, who sent troops to ensure it would continue and prevent any concessions to the protesters from the king of Bahrain) (31).

Amnesty International have now found that the Obama administration have begun arms sales to Bahrain again while killings of protesters and their deaths by torture after arrest continue (32) – (34).

Having seen what happened in Libya, i am sickened by what Assad's forces are doing, but a complete rebel victory might lead to similar brutality against anyone known or suspected to have supported Assad. The Libyan rebels may not be killing as many civilians as Gaddafi’s forces were, but they’re still torturing and murdering plenty of people on suspicion of being Gaddafi supporters.

What's needed is a balance of power between the two sides so neither feels it can torture and murder the supporters of the other.

The UN Resolution that the Arab League backed was a good peace plan for power sharing and reconciliation before elections and is still the best plan despite the Russian and Chinese vetoes.

Unless the US and it’s allies want to risk ending up at war with Russia any peace deal will require a deal between the US and it’s allies and the Russians and theirs.

After Iraq and Libya it's not hard to see why Russia and China, apart from their own self-interest, didn't trust NATO governments to not go much further than the Resolution allowed them to, but that doesn't make the main parts of the plan in the Resolution they vetoed any less valid.

The problem is that the Syrian government has to fear foreign sanctions and/or support for the rebels enough to make a real deal with the rebels, but the rebels have to fear losing enough to be willing to compromise with a government that they have very good reasons to hate; and both have to believe they’re strong enough that the other side will be forced to make genuine compromises, but not so strong that they could defeat it completely. That will be a very difficult balance to achieve. The sad truth is that whatever governments outside Syria do now, there is a high risk of a long civil war. Ending the current civil war without either creating a longer one or letting whoever wins take brutal revenge on anyone suspected of having supported the losing side should be the aim now.

That first requires an end to the massacre in Homs though – which requires Assad’s regime to fear intervention by outside powers - and it’s hard to see how that can be done at all, since direct military intervention on the side of the rebels could lead to all out war with Russia. The Assad-Russian side may have a point that attacks by rebels would also have to end for any ceasefire and power sharing deal to happen, but no-one can believe their claims that all violence is the result of attacks by armed enemies of Assad’s government any more.


(1) = Amnesty International UK  24 Oct 2011 ‘Syria: Hospital patients subjected to torture and ill-treatment - New report’, http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=19770

(2) = Amnesty International 01 Feb 2012 ‘Security Council: Russia must not block efforts to end atrocities in Syria ’, http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/security-council-russia-must-not-block-efforts-end-atrocities-syria-2012-02-01

(3) = Human Rights Watch 03 Feb 2012 ‘Syria: Stop Torture of Children’, http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/02/03/syria-stop-torture-children

(4) = Medicines Sans Frontieres 08 Feb 2012 ‘Syria: medicine used as a weapon of persecution’, http://www.msf.org.uk/Syria_repression_20120208.news

(5) = guardian.co.uk 07 Feb 2012 ‘Syrian siege of Homs is genocidal, say trapped residents’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/feb/07/syrian-homs-siege-genocidal-say-residents

(6) =  Independent 24 Jun 2011 ‘Amnesty questions claim that Gaddafi ordered rape as weapon of war’, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/amnesty-questions-claim-that-gaddafi-ordered-rape-as-weapon-of-war-2302037.html

(7) = Guardian 24 Nov 2011 ‘Libyan rebels detaining thousands illegally, Ban Ki-moon reports’ , http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/24/libya-illegal-detentions-un-report , ‘Libya's former rebels have illegally detained thousands of people, including women and children, according to the United Nations secretary general….Many of the 7,000 prisoners have been tortured, with some black Africans mistreated because of their skin colour, women being held under male supervision and children locked up alongside adults, the report by Ban Ki-moon found.’

(8) = BBC News 26 Jan 2012 ‘Libyan detainees die after torture, says Amnesty International’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-16741937 , ‘More than 8,500 detainees, most of them accused of being loyal to former Libyan leader Col Muammar Gaddafi, are being held by militia groups in about 60 centres, according to UN human rights chief Navi Pillay.’

(9) = Independent 27 Jan 2012 ‘Free' Libya shamed by new torture claims’,http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/free-libya-shamed-by-new-torture-claims-6295394.html

(10) = Amnesty International 26 Jan 2012 ‘Libya: Deaths of detainees amid widespread torture’, http://www.amnesty.org/zh-hant/node/29388

(11) = Reuters 01 Feb 2012 ‘Rival Libyan militias fight gunbattle in capital’,http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/01/us-libya-tripoli-battle-idUSTRE81029420120201 ; ‘Rival militias fought a two-hour gunbattle over a luxury beach house being used as a barracks in the Libyan capital Wednesday…Militias have carved up Tripoli and the rest of Libya into competing fiefdoms, each holding out for the share of power they say they are owed.’

(12) = guardian.co.uk 17 Dec 2011 ‘Libyan scramble for £100bn in assets fractures the peace at Tripoli airport’,  http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/17/libya-tripoli-airport-assets-un

(13) = CNN 31 Aug 2005 ‘Audit: U.S. lost track of $9 billion in Iraq funds’, http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/01/30/iraq.audit/

(14) = Reuters 24 Jan 2012 ‘Anger, chaos but no revolt after Libya violence’, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/24/libya-idUSL5E8CO2HB20120124 , ‘elders in the desert city…dismissed accusations they wanted to restore the late dictator's family to power or had any ambitions beyond their local area…."When men from Tripoli come into your house and harass women, what are we to do?" said Fati Hassan, a 28-year-old Bani Walid resident who described the men of May 28th as a mixture of local men and outsiders, former anti-Gaddafi rebels who had turned into oppressors when given control over the town….."They were arresting people from the first day after liberation. People are still missing. I am a revolutionary and I have friends in The May 28th Brigade," said Hassan, who said he urged them to ease off. "The war is over now."….."On Friday, the May 28th Brigade arrested a man from Bani Walid. After Bani Walid residents lodged a protest, he was finally released. But he had been tortured…."This caused an argument that escalated to arms.’

(15) = BBC News 24 Jan 2012 ‘Libya: Competing claims over Bani Walid fighting ’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-16702044 , A source within the Libyan government, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the BBC the fighting broke out after a group of former rebel fighters, the 28 May Brigade, arrested one person.

The fighting was "more a clash between local people regarding a difference of who this [arrested] person was," the source said. "But of course now other people seem to be involved as well. The situation is not very clear who is who. It's still confused."

(16) = NYT magazine 01 May 2005 ‘the way of the commandos’, http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/01/magazine/01ARMY.html

(17) = The Nation 22 Jun 2009 ‘Iraq's New Death Squad’, http://www.thenation.com/article/iraqs-new-death-squad

(18) = BBC News 27 Jan 2005 'Salvador Option' mooted for Iraq’, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/4209595.stm

(19) = Times 08 Aug 2005 ‘West turns blind eye as police put Saddam's torturers back to work’, http://www.infowars.com/articles/iraq/west_turns_blind_eye_saddams_torturers_at_work.htm

(20) = Amnesty International Annual Report 2011 – Iran,http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/iran/report-2011#section-64-6

(21) = Guardian 16 Jan 2012 ‘Corruption in Iraq: 'Your son is being tortured. He will die if you don't pay'’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan

(22) = BBC News 13 Jan 2012 ‘ Shia protester 'shot dead' in Saudi Arabia’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16543013 ‘At least one person has been killed and three others injured in clashes between security forces and Shia protesters in eastern Saudi Arabia, activists say.Issam Mohammed, 22, reportedly died when troops fired live ammunition after demonstrators threw stones at them in al-Awamiya, a town in the Qatif region.’

(23) = Amnesty International Annual Report 2011 – Saudi Arabia, http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/saudi-arabia/report-2011#section-121-5 and http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/saudi-arabia/report-2011#section-121-11

(24) = CNN 27 Jan 2012 ‘4 killed in protests in Bahrain, opposition group says’, http://articles.cnn.com/2012-01-27/middleeast/world_meast_bahrain-unrest_1_bahrain-center-bahraini-police-wefaq?_s=PM:MIDDLEEAST

(25) = See sources listed and linked to in this post and this one on Egypt, Bahrain, Saudi and Yemen

(26) = CNN 04 Feb 2012 ‘Death toll climbs after Egypt soccer protests’, http://edition.cnn.com/2012/02/04/world/africa/egypt-soccer-deaths/index.html

(27) = Independent 07 Mar 2011 ‘America's secret plan to arm Libya's rebels  - Obama asks Saudis to airlift weapons into Benghazi ’, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/americas-secret-plan-to-arm-libyas-rebels-2234227.html

(28) = Al Jazeera 03 Apr 2011 ‘Libyan rebels 'receive foreign training'’,http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/04/201142172443133798.html ; US and Egyptian special forces have reportedly been providing covert training to rebel fighters in the battle for Libya, Al Jazeera has been told….An unnamed rebel source related how he had undergone training in military techniques at a "secret facility" in eastern Libya.

(29) = Guardian.co.uk 23 Aug 2011 ‘Libya: battle for Tripoli – live blog – 5.50pm’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/middle-east-live/2011/aug/23/libya-battle-for-tripoli-live-blog#block-11 ; ‘Defence expert Robert Fox is telling the BBC special forces from Qatar and the UAE, with US, British and French training, are responsible for the successful attack on Tripoli. "It has been a genuine Arab coalition ... I think it was the Qataris that led them through the breach." He said William Hague was "dissembling" in his comments just now.’ ;

(30) = Go to the post on this link and see sources 7 to 14 on it

(31) = Amnesty International 01 Feb 2012 ‘Security Council: Russia must not block efforts to end atrocities in Syria ’, http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/security-council-russia-must-not-block-efforts-end-atrocities-syria-2012-02-01

(32) = Amnesty USA blog 30 Jan 2012 ‘U.S. Arms Sales to Bahrain: 4 Questions for the Obama Administration’, http://blog.amnestyusa.org/middle-east/u-s-arms-sales-to-bahrain-4-questions-for-the-obama-administration/

(33) = Amnesty International 26 Jan 2012 ‘Bahrain’s use of tear gas against protesters increasingly deadly’, http://www.amnesty.org/zh-hant/node/29403 ; ‘A Bahraini human rights group has reported at least 13 deaths resulting from the security forces’ use of tear gas against peaceful protesters as well as inside people’s homes since February 2011, with a rise in such deaths in recent months.

“The rise in fatalities and eyewitness accounts suggest that tear gas is being used inappropriately by Bahraini security forces, including in people’s homes and other confined spaces,” said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa Deputy Director.’

(34) = CNN 27 Jan 2012 ‘4 killed in protests in Bahrain, opposition group says’, http://articles.cnn.com/2012-01-27/middleeast/world_meast_bahrain-unrest_1_bahrain-center-bahraini-police-wefaq?_s=PM:MIDDLEEAST