Jump to content

SYRIA: a primer


Guest BROWNer

Recommended Posts

Guest BROWNer

A Syria Primer

Stephen Zunes, _April 15, 2003

 

Recent statements by top Bush administration officials have accused the Syrian government of aiding senior Iraqi officials to escape, possessing chemical weapons, and committing "hostile acts" against the U.S. by allegedly supplying military equipment, such as night-vision goggles, to the Iraqis. On April 10th, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz told Congress, "The Syrians are behaving badly. They need to be reminded of that, and if they continue, then we need to think about what our policy is with respect to a country that harbors terrorists or harbors war criminals, or was in recent times shipping things to Iraq." People should keep in mind the following points in response to administration claims:

 

Syria, despite being ruled by the Baath Party, has historically been a major rival of Iraq's Baath regime. Syria was the only Arab country to back Iran during the Iran-Iraq War. It was one of the only non-monarchical Arab states to have backed the United States against Iraq during the first Gulf War. Iraq and Syria backed rival factions in Lebanon's civil war. As a member of the United Nations Security Council, Syria voted this past November in favor of the U.S.-backed resolution 1441 that demanded full cooperation by the Baghdad government with United Nations inspectors, with the threat of severe consequences if it failed to do so. However, Syria--like most countries in the world--has strongly opposed the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

 

Syria's long, porous border with Iraq has been the entry point of hundreds of volunteers from around the Arab world, many of whom are Iraqi exiles, who have come to fight what they see as the conquest of an Arab country by a Western power. There is no evidence that the Syrian government has been directly sending mercenaries or other soldiers into Iraq to fight U.S. forces. Allowing armed individuals to assist a neighboring state against an invading army is considered legitimate under international law.

 

There is no evidence that Iraq has moved any weapons of mass destruction or related technology and raw materials into Syria. With open deserts, mostly cloudless days, and detailed surveillance by satellites and aircraft, the movement of such material would likely have been detected. The United Nations Monitoring and Verification Commission (UNMOVIC), empowered by the United Nations Security Council to verify the destruction of Iraq's WMD programs, disputes Bush administration claims that such proscribed materials have made their way out of the country.

 

There is no evidence that Syria has developed chemical weapons of its own. While it certainly cannot be ruled out, Syria is no more likely to possess such weapons than Turkey, Israel, Egypt, and other regional powers, underscoring the need for a multilateral approach to arms control by the international community. Syria has never used--nor has it ever threatened to use--chemical weapons or other weapons of mass destruction.

 

The Bush administration has not presented clear evidence that large numbers of Iraqi leaders have escaped to Syria. Even if they have, Syria has no legal obligation to hand them over to U.S. authorities, given that the U.S. occupation of Iraq has not been recognized by the international community. Until an internationally recognized authority in Baghdad, the International Criminal Court, or other duly-constituted body makes such an extradition request, Syria is not obliged to turn over any suspects from the former Iraqi government. Syria, with less than half of Iraq's population and only a tiny fraction of Iraq's oil resources, was never as powerful militarily as was Iraq during the height of Baghdad's military prowess in the 1980s. Syria's military strength has declined since that period, as a result of the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, which had supplied the Damascus regime with large-scale military aid, including armaments, training, and other military assistance. According to U.S. State Department officials, the Syrian government has not been directly involved in any acts of international terrorism since the 1980s. Damascus has been the home base of a number of small and largely moribund radical Palestinian exile groups, some of which engaged in terrorism in the 1970s and 1980s.

 

The United States initially supported Syria's 1976 invasion of Lebanon, which was authorized by the Arab League as a means of preventing victory by the radical Lebanese National Movement and its Palestinian allies in the civil war. Syrian forces have remained in Lebanon ever since and Syria exerts enormous political leverage over the Lebanese government, particularly regarding the country's foreign affairs. During much of Lebanon's civil war, Syria actively supported Amal, a militia based in the country's Shiite community that engaged in military campaigns against the Palestinian Al-Fatah militia, the Iranian-backed Hizbollah militia, and the Maronite Phalangist militia, among others. Since the end of the civil war in 1990, the Syrians have provided limited support to Hizbollah in its ultimately successful campaign to force Israeli occupation forces out of southern Lebanon, and is believed to continue to back the radical Shiite group's scaled-down militia today. There is still some periodic fighting between Hizbollah militiamen and Israeli occupation forces in the disputed Shebaa Farms area on the border between Lebanon and the Israeli-occupied section of southwestern Syria.

 

Syria has agreed to grant full diplomatic relations with Israel, demilitarize border areas, allow for international peacekeepers, and provide other security guarantees to Israel, as part of a peace agreement where Israel would withdraw from Syrian territory seized by Israeli forces in the 1967 war. A peace agreement between Israel and Syria based upon this formula came close to fruition in the late 1990s until talks broke down over a relatively minor dispute on the actual placement of the border resulting from conflicting demarcation maps from the colonial era. Since then, a right-wing Israeli government has come to power and has rejected such a peace treaty, refusing to resume negotiations.

 

Syria has an authoritarian government that has been charged by reputable human rights organizations with widespread and systematic human rights violations. The government has liberalized somewhat in recent years, however, both economically and politically. While still denying its people basic democratic rights, the current level of repression by the Damascus government is less than it has been in previous decades, less than that of Saddam Hussein's Iraq, and less than that of Saudi Arabia and other American allies.

 

 

(These talking points were compiled by Stephen Zunes, Middle East editor for Foreign Policy In Focus, associate professor of politics at the University of San Francisco, and author of Tinderbox: U.S. Middle East Policy and the Roots of Terrorism (Common Courage Press).)-www.fpif.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.

it's funny, the people we should liberate, we ignore, and the people we should leave the fuck alone, we jump all over in the name of freedom.

 

i still think we should liberate them with some bunker busters. maybe we could bring out the daisy cutters as well. those sound pretty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest imported_Tesseract

i like how, one week ago, it was the russians that were suposed to supply the iraqi's with night vision and other stuff like that...

 

Anyway, i guess any arabic country that is anti-israel is a target and i think that syria is the last one that is open about that...4..3..2..1... damaskus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest imported_Tesseract

Dude, arabs are about 250 million people, they're all-pretty much- against israel, jesus they could just all pee and drown them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest imported_Tesseract

Its been 35 years since the 7 day war and it still havent ended, and theres no coalition backing up for syria, so yeah..you're not going to

and i wont get my feelings hurt.

anyway, how you been

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BROWNer

Published on Monday, April 14, 2003 by the lndependent/UK_

 

US Warns Syria Not to Provide Haven for Wanted Iraqis

 

by Ben Russell

 

Syria faced renewed warnings from America not to provide safe haven for senior figures in Saddam Hussein's regime.

 

----------

 

Colin Powell, the Secretary of State, increased the diplomatic pressure on Damascus while Donald Rumsfeld, the Secretary of Defense, extended his rhetoric against the Syrians, insisting that "there's no question" that some senior Iraqi leaders had fled to Syria. "We certainly are hopeful Syria will not become a haven for war criminals or terrorists," Mr Rumsfeld said.

 

President George Bush added to the pressure, saying: "Syria just needs to co-operate with the United States and our coalition partners, not harbor any Baathists, any military officials, any people who need to be held to account."

 

Speaking to reporters later, he appeared to threaten Syria with possible military action, by pointedly saying that Damascus held chemical weapons, and that the Iraq war showed that "we're serious about stopping weapons of mass destruction".

 

Asked by a reporter whether Syria could face military action if it did not turn over Iraqi leaders, Mr Bush said: "They just need to co-operate."

 

On Saturday a gunman who shot dead an American Marine guarding a hospital in Baghdad was found to have a Syrian identification card by US military officials. Marines shot and killed him.

 

Dominique de Villepin, the French Foreign Minister, who is visiting Lebanon, said the international community should focus on rebuilding Iraq and reviving Middle East peace efforts. Asked about American accusations against Damascus, he said: "The time is not correct. The time is to work together."

 

His comments coincided with visits by Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, and Mike O'Brien, a Foreign Office minister, to Iraq's neighbors to discuss the future of the region.

 

Hawks in the Bush team have raised the prospect of action against Syria. Mr Rumsfeld warned that Syria would be "held to account" if it provided military equipment to Iraq.

 

General Powell, considered a moderate within the administration, joined the chorus of disapproval despite concern over deteriorating relations between Syria and the West. He said: "We think it would be very unwise ... if suddenly Syria becomes a haven for all these people who should be brought to justice who are trying to get out of Baghdad ... nor do I know why Syria would become a place of haven for people who should be subject to the justice of the Iraqi people."

 

General Powell told the BBC's Breakfast with Frost: "Syria has been a concern for a long period of time. We have designated Syria for years as a state that sponsors terrorism.

 

"We are concerned that materials have flowed through Syria to the Iraqi regime over the years. We are making this point clearly and in a very direct manner to the Syrians."

 

Mr O'Brien, who visited Tehran, the Iranian capital, yesterday, will raise the Allies' concerns with the Syrian authorities today. Mr Straw was visiting Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia to discuss the reconstruction of Iraq.

 

Lawrence Eagleburger, who was US Secretary of State under George Bush Sr., told the BBC: "If George Bush [Jr.] decided he was going to turn the troops loose on Syria and Iran after that he would last in office for about 15 minutes. In fact if President Bush were to try that now even I would think that he ought to be impeached. You can't get away with that sort of thing in this democracy."

 

© 2003 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BROWNer

India Mulls 'Pre-Emptive' Pakistan Strike..

 

more nuttiness...

 

India Mulls 'Pre-Emptive' Pakistan Strike, Cites U.S. Iraq War Precedent

Agence France Presse

 

Friday 11 April 2003

 

JODHPUR, India - Defence Minister George Fernandes reiterated Indian warnings that Pakistan was a prime case for pre-emptive strikes.

 

"There are enough reasons to launch such strikes against Pakistan, but I cannot make public statements on whatever action that may be taken," Fernandes told a meeting of ex-soldiers in this northern Indian desert city on Friday.

 

The renewed warning came just hours after US Secretary of State Colin Powell said Washington would strive to cool tensions between nuclear enemies Pakistan and India, who have fought three wars since 1947.

 

Fernandes said he endorsed Foreign Minister Yashwant Sinha's recent comments that India had "a much better case to go for pre-emptive action against Pakistan than the United States has in Iraq."

 

Sinha also argued that Pakistan was "a fit case" for US military action, because it had weapons of mass destruction and terrorists.

 

Fernandes also rejected Pakistani allegations that India had breached United Nations Security Council resolutions from 1948 to 1957 which call for a plebiscite among Kashmiris to choose rule by India or Pakistan.

 

"Pakistan has a habit of lying and the issue of cross-border terrorism is a serious issue," Fernandes said.

 

India accuses Pakistan of arming and training Muslim militants in Kashmir. Islamabad denies the charge but says it offers moral and political support to what it describes as Kashmiris' legitimate struggle for self-expression.

 

Around 38,000 people have died in Kashmir, India's only Muslim-majority state, since the launch of the armed insurgency by Islamic guerrillas in 1989 in the Himalayan territory.

 

Pakistan and India both claim the scenic region, which is divided between them by a ceasefire line known as the Line of Control, with Pakistan controlling the northern part and India the south.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah, but see... Syria and Iraq are not friends... they have been partners in crime, as obvioused by the illegal pipelines but, the Syrians never liked or trusted Sadaam, so... While they are likely to provide lesser intel objects refuge in Lebanon for a nominal charge, they aren't gonna hide anyone 'Top Notch" and they aren't going to stir up too much shit...

 

Watch, the anti-Americanism will rise to a crtain level and then will go no higher, because the Syrian govt. will REGULATE on that shit...

 

 

And then with India and the Pakis... damn, those guys are arguing over ownership of a state that has REPEATEDLY declared it's independence... Where are all the anti-war protesters here? Isn't this a more egregious invasion of rights than freeing an oppressed populace? Oh. sorry, it's not America so they all get a pass...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BROWNer
Originally posted by Smart

yeah, but see... Syria and Iraq are not friends... they have been partners in crime, as obvioused by the illegal pipelines but, the Syrians never liked or trusted Sadaam, so... While they are likely to provide lesser intel objects refuge in Lebanon for a nominal charge, they aren't gonna hide anyone 'Top Notch" and they aren't going to stir up too much shit...

 

Watch, the anti-Americanism will rise to a crtain level and then will go no higher, because the Syrian govt. will REGULATE on that shit...

 

 

And then with India and the Pakis... damn, those guys are arguing over ownership of a state that has REPEATEDLY declared it's independence... Where are all the anti-war protesters here? Isn't this a more egregious invasion of rights than freeing an oppressed populace? Oh. sorry, it's not America so they all get a pass...

 

first paragraph..i agree. still..you're taking a slightly provincial view of it...

just remember, there are more than 2 'states' involved..

second miniparagraph...sure..

third paragraph...i also agree somewhat.

besides anti-war protestors, where is the press? 2 years ago when these two

were 'on the brink', i was surprised by the coverage......secondary status...now it seems this latest news its barely on the radar..

america has had numerous opportunities to mediate the kashmir dispute,

pakistan and india have both made high level diplomatic trips to washington

for 'help' on this issue...the result? basically NOTHING. should they figure out their

own bullshit? of course. will that happen exclusively? probably not.

america will never get a free pass bro, and it has nothing to do with a bunch

of people standing in the rain with 'bush=hitler' signs.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

U.S. won't invade Syria

 

I don't think the U.S. will invade Syria. We're just jocking them to let them know we aren't going to tolerate a lot of fucking around. If anything, they'll talk shit in public to save face, then cut a deal with us under the table to pull the fangs on the terrorist groups operating against Israel. The U.S. needs a reliable Arab ally with whom we can negotiate. The Saudis have fucked us for the last time, I think.

 

The Arab-American groups in the U.S. are striving hard to counter-balance the Jewish-American pro-Israel lobby. They are probably over in Syria trying to convince the Syrian government to stop being such a diplomatic problem, and be amenable to some peace negotiations.

 

The biggest wild card in the Middle East, in my opinion, are the formerly Russian "Jews" that immigrated to Israel in the last days of the Soviet Union. I think that they may be a big constituency in Israel for reform and a loosening of the relatively rigid attitudes of most of the population. A good example: they want to be able to eat pork without any hassle. Pork is a mainstay in the Russian diet, and the Russian Jews are as adamant about eating pork as they are about drinking vodka to excess. Won't endear them to the Muslims, though. The Russian Jewish immigrant comunity in Israel sticks out as being "European" in a big way, and annoy the shit out of the Orthodox Jews. (I know, I know, most of Russia is in Asia.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...