War crimes in Syria

Madaya, the Syrian town that has been under siege for more than six months, surrounded by government troops, is a symbol. As are the towns of Foah and Kefraya, in the Northern part of the country. They have also endured a very long siege, this time by rebel groups that are fighting the regime of President al-Assad.

In Madaya, around 40,000 people have been without food and medicines supplies. In the two government-controlled towns, the numbers are close to 20,000. All three are not only a reminder of the ferocity of the conflict that is consuming Syria since 2012, of the widespread human suffering, they are also an example of the many war crimes that every side is committing.

Indeed, starving masses of civilians to death, as it is the case in these towns, is a war crime, as defined by international law. But after so many atrocities, we are losing sight of the very serious violations of the law of the war that keep occurring in the country. That´s certainly not a very good approach to justice. The peace process, when it happens, has to take these matters into account as well. 

Syria: calling for a renewed diplomatic effort

John Kerry, the US State Secretary, and Sergei Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister met today in Vienna with their counterparts from Turkey and Saudi Arabia. The meeting was about the Syrian conflict and how to get it resolved, after almost five years of civil war and unimaginable suffering.

These four people represent countries that can play an important role in bringing peace back to Syria. Their countries are not the only ones that matter but in many ways they play a major role in the region and can for sure markedly influence the course of events. It is therefore encouraging to see them around the same table. And they should continue the consultations, even if their interests are very distinct, as it is time to see an end to the Syrian tragedy.

I have also noted that the EU was not part of the discussion. It should. The EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Federica Mogherini, has to claim a seat around this table. The EU´s potential role both during the peace negotiations and the reconstruction of Syria cannot be ignored.

The UN has also been side-lined. The Special Envoy of the Secretary-General, Staffan de Mistura, has disappeared from the radar. That needs to be changed immediately. The UN´s participation is critical for the credibility of the Secretary-General and to augment the legitimacy of the current efforts. Here, as in the case of the EU, there is a need to be strong and call for recognition.

More on the strategy against the terrorists of the Islamic State

We usually emphasise that each national crisis should have a political response and end up with an agreement between the parties. In the case of Syria, it would be, at this stage, a serious mistake to insist on a political solution. The situation has reached such a dramatic level that the only way forward, for the moment, is through a military approach. Politics and diplomacy have to wait. They will come later.

The goals to be achieved are clear: to destroy the self-proclaimed Islamic State and protect the civilian population from further violence. These objectives do call for a major allied armed offensive and also for a change of tactics when it comes to the Assad regime.

On the military side, my writing of yesterday is clear. I can only add that we just have to make sure that those who will take the decision to go for the force option have the support of the popular opinion in their countries. And then ask those leaders to move fast.

On Assad, it is time to make a difference between the man and his people. The headman will have to go. The key criminals that have directly supported him must be brought to justice as well. But we need to find ways of bringing his ethnic group, the Alawites, and all those who are around the administrative and security machineries on board, on our side, as long as they have no real crimes in their hands. They should be part of the solution. If they are not they will be, soon enough, because Assad´s collapse is getting closer, the next mass victims of the brutes that only conceive death as the appropriate punishment  for those who are different.

It is indeed time to think strategically. And be strong.

The leadership of the "Islamic State" should be destroyed as quickly as possible

The operation that killed a key leader of the terrorist organization called “Islamic State” (IS) should be underlined as a major development. It shows in many ways that there is a new game in town, if we can say it with these words. It takes the fight against these terrorists to a new level: the direct involvement of US Special Forces. We know almost nothing about these extremely specialised branch of the American military. But the fact that they are on the ground against IS, operating from Iraq but ready to go across the border into Syria, can make us believe that the leadership of that brutal organisation will be sooner or later seriously weakened. The targets of the Special Forces are the very important people on the other side of the fence. We can only hope they will be able to do the job fast and cut the head of the monster soon enough.  

Syria: failure and despair

Syria´s tragedy is spreading fast into the neighbouring countries, particularly in Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan. Chaos and human distress have reached new levels, as it is also the case regarding insecurity and instability. People are just desperate, after so many years of war. Those who can afford the fees are now paying large amounts to human traffickers to take them across the sea into Europe. Even at this time of the year, when the seas are rough and the weather threatening. This is no time for hazardous crossings but the anxiety is so high that people just try to sail through. Everything is better than staying behind.

Their sense of urgency is not matched, on our side, by anything similar. We seem to have accepted that there is no solution to the Syrian crisis. The Security Council cannot agree on any meaningful approach to the resolution of the crisis. Now, Russia is preparing a conference – another so-called high level meeting! It will take place in a couple of weeks but nobody knows what for. It is not even clear if the UN Special Envoy will be given any significant role in that meeting. It could be just another excuse for the lack of substantive action. But, as things stand, it´s OK to go for it. At least it will allow a number of voices, here and there, to recall that the Syrian crisis is a major failure of today´s world. 

To neutralise Islamic State terrorists is a priority

It is urgent to pull together an international response to the Islamic State terrorists. This is no time for further hesitation, for soul-searching strategies, for non-critical political considerations.

The key move at this stage is to form a coalition of like-minded states – that excludes Assad´s government and Iran – and agree on what needs to be done to neutralise the threat. Among other things, it is important to share intelligence on key IS leaders, on convoys and deployments, on depots, and make a much greater use of offensive drones. To contain and destroy should be the key objectives. 

Syria

Syria´s crisis has now disappeared from the screens. It has joined the dramatic roll that lists all the long-lasting tragedies that the world can´t resolve and therefore got accustomed to. We are very good at accepting “as normal” situations that are well beyond what should be morally accepted. The point here is to say no to that aptitude. And bring Syria back to the forefront of the international agenda. Lest we forget, as they say. 

Putin's writings

President Putin’s opinion text in the New York Times is worth the reading. First, it is well written. Second, it says a few things that make sense, including the reference to the “exceptionalism” the US claim. Third, it keeps the door open for dialogue.

But it is also an extraordinary piece of cynicism. Many of the accusations he implies against the US can also be made towards Russia, including an extreme form of Russian nationalism that is not far from the American exceptionalism.

The wise thing to do is to take the good points he makes and engage the Russians on them. That’s why the meeting that is taking place in Geneva between Secretary Kerry and Minister Lavrov is of great importance. It has, however, to produce concrete results. Time is of the essence. Agreements and action plans, and above all a UN Security Council Resolution on the destruction of Syria’s chemical arsenal, need to be out and running soonest.

Furthermore, besides addressing the chemical weapons issue it is also critical to bring to justice the perpetrators of the 21 August massacres. A Resolution on this matter is also necessary.

With all this in mind, Syria’s case remains the priority number one in the global lists of issues. The daily death toll and the incredible number of refugees and internally displaced people are a reminder of that. A painful reminder, a dramatic reality for millions of people. 

A very good gaffe

John Kerry’s remark on the international control of Syrian chemical weapons might have been a blunder. But thanks to Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister, the blunder has become a tiny window of opportunity. And in a world that is tired of wars and abominates state-sponsored violence, as well as all types of violent conflict, the blunder is now a powerful argument against one-sided strikes.

History is so often built on blunders. And historical blunders have led to so many disasters. Maybe this time we will have a positive development coming out of a gaffe. 

EU, Syria, ICC and imagination

International law and moral principles are against collective punishment. One cannot punish the people for the crimes perpetrated by some of their leaders. Even in matters of war crimes and related offenses, the responsibility cannot be attributed to a group of leaders. It has to be linked to the individual responsibilities of each one of them, taking into account that there are different degrees of responsibility that call for different types of sentences. That’s why I think it is important to underline the following paragraph in Baroness Ashton’s statement of yesterday on the situation in Syria:

“The EU recalls the individual responsibility of the perpetrators of attacks of this type, who must be held accountable, and the role of the ICC in investigating and judging such acts.”

I wrote something similar in my weekly column of Visao, two or three days ago. But I went further. The UN Security Council has the duty to refer the chemical attacks to the International Criminal Court for investigation. It will be the Court that will decide on who should be in the list of suspects and then proceed against each one of them.

This is the way forward. 

It can, of course, be combined with a political process. And it should.

They are both missing. The ICC and the political process.

Some of us continue to prefer action to justice and imagination. Yes, imagination, because a political process in the case of Syria is above all an exercise extremely demanding in terms of creativity. 

A very complex environment around President Obama's choice

As we reach the end of today, we notice that the President Obama’s military option is losing momentum in the US House of Representatives and also in the American and European public opinions. It is become a tough call for the President.

In addition, Pope Francis's letter to the G20 leaders cannot be easily dismissed. The Pope reminds all of us that there is no alternative to the crisis but through dialogue and that a military intervention will make things much more difficult.

All this is creating an environment that will be deeply against the strikes once they take place. President Obama – and François  Hollande as well – will have to deal with the consequences in and around Syria, plus with the citizens’ views in their respective countries. This will transform  any military action into a political challenge of great complexity. It will open many unknown avenues.

Lottery and Assad

Now we know the Damascus official explanation. It runs basically along the following lines:

•           Saudi Arabia and Western intelligence agencies have given chemical weapons to their friends the rebels;
•         The point was for the rebels to make use of them the day the UN inspectors were to start their visit and get the blame on the Assad government;
•          The fellows tried to shoot them from the suburbs they controlled but they were so inept - amateurs, the government said - that they could not send them across to the regime soldiers and to the areas under government control;
•           They kept trying, those amateur rebels, and the more they tried the more they failed and people around them, women and children, not only men, just kept dying in droves.

You believe this and you are ready to talk to Father Christmas about your forthcoming lottery win.

Kerry on Syria

US State Secretary John Kerry’s statement on Syria was an excellent piece of work. Brilliant, well thought through and properly grounded. It is also, in many ways, a seminal moment in terms of foreign policy doctrine. It will be often quoted in the future.

But, for now, it deserves, above all, unqualified support. 

No time for a greater crisis in the Middle East

Very quietly but very clearly, the big international business bosses and their friends in the academic and media worlds here in the EU have been sending the message that a major security crisis in the Middle East at this time, when the European economies are starting a timid recovery, would be an extremely bad idea. It is not just the vast and uncontrollable uncertainty that it will create, not just the impact on oil prices, not just the fact that existing crisis around the Suez Canal is threatening enough, to mention only a few of current hot spots. It is all that combined plus the fact that some of the Middle East countries remain major clients and investors in the EU economies. It is no time to destabilize them, as well. International commerce does not want any adventure at this moment. 

Syria's hell

As things stand, we can expect over the weekend some cruise missiles to be launched on Syria from war vessels sailing in the Mediterranean Sea or in the Indian Ocean. In many ways, the rhetoric in Washington, Paris and London has gone too far. The accusations against Assad on the gas deaths of last week leave little room for any other option but action by those who publicly made them. The UN Security Council is being dealt with by the British. In the international division of labour, they got the assignment. Once it becomes clear that the Council is not prepared to authorise the use of force by rejecting the British draft resolution, the unilateral approach will be more palatable to the Western public opinion.

There are many problems related to military action, in any case. Even if approved by the Security Council. Once it starts, it opens a new phase and a box of unintended consequences. This is particularly true in a corner of the world that is like a tinderbox. Therefore, those who decide to go for it should be ready for hell. And they should also have a clear end-game alternative. Unfortunately, experience has shown that we think small and never prepare for the big and complex situation that will follow. 

Assad is a war criminal

The gas attack against civilians in the suburbs of Damascus simply reveals how little respect Assad and his circle have for the international community and in particular for the United Nations.  They all know that the UN is divided and that the just launched international inspection is a mere tooth-less tiger. The many deaths caused by this unacceptable chemical massacre only serve to remind all of us that Assad has long become a war criminal with powerful godfathers.   

The losing side

The true message that came out of today’s Friends of Syria meeting is that the many rebellions are losing the war. That’s the actual trend on the ground. New weapons for a divided, weakened opposition are just a way of effectively playing on Assad’s hand. He will have a justification to continue the military option, which has given him a new breath of life, and an excuse to postpone any negotiated solution. In the end, the Syrian population will be the real loser. 

Obama's red line on Syria

The US Administration has now found evidence that the Syrian army made use – “limited use” – of chemical weapons.

This is, for the Americans, the crossing of a red line. Washington has therefore decided to provide military assistance to the rebels' Supreme Military Council (SMC) and Syrian Opposition Coalition.

It is yet unclear what that type of assistance the new development entails. Things will become much clearer in the next days. What is clear today is that the rebellions are under serious pressure from the Assad troops. Only massive and urgent aid from the outside world might be able to save them. Or, I do not thing that President Obama is thinking of anything that might be massive and urgent. In that case, any low-grade military assistance at this stage will not change the current trend on the ground. 

Syria's opposition is too divided

The extreme fragmentation of the Syrian opposition has become their most critical weakness.  Just in the area next to the Golan Heights, a very small part of the territory, there are about nine independent armed groups, if we can believe a generally well-informed intelligence service operating in the neighbourhood. In this circumstance, it is quite clear that it is not in the interest of the Assad regime to negotiate with the rebels. The regime believes they can gradually crush each armed group, one by one, as they did today in the strategically important city of Al-Qusayr. Therefore, the official doctrine in Damascus is to bet on a military solution. What is the Western response to this? And the Security Council's?