13/09/12

Reuters) - U.N.-Arab League mediator Lakhdar Brahimi arrived in Syria on Thursday, his first trip to the country since taking up his post, a statement said.

Brahimi, a veteran Algerian diplomat who replaced former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan as envoy on September 1, will meet Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem on Thursday and is due to meet President Bashar al-Assad for talks aimed at addressing the conflict.

“During his visit to Syria, Mr. Brahimi will hold talks with the government and with representatives of the Syrian opposition and civil society,” his spokesman Ahmad Fawzi said in a statement.

(Reporting by Marwan Makdesi; Editing by Janet Lawrence)

Diplomat Lakhdar Brahimi speaks with former U.S. President Jimmy Carter (not pictured) during a joint news conference in Khartoum in this May 27, 2012 file photo. (REUTERS/Mohamed Nureldin Abdallah)

11/08/2012

The less time spent discussing the news that a replacement for Kofi Annan is going to be made, the better.

But for now, the media will be obliged to deal with the news that Algerian diplomat Lakhdar Brahimi is being considered for the post, and then likely cover the official announcement of the appointment.

The “news,” as such, boils down to this: Annan’s mandate as the United Nations-Arab League envoy to Syria will elapse on the 20th of this month, so if Brahimi is actually selected, he will only serve for a short interval – much more pressing is the question of whether the post itself is renewed.

The move to actually consider appointing a successor to Annan appears to be designed to appease Moscow, and it’s another sign of the failure of the U.N. and the international community. The world’s leading powers are searching for a way to avoid coming up with a solution, if asking Brahimi to step in is what’s on the table.

People will inevitably use shorthand to refer to Brahimi as a veteran diplomat, with a track record of being selected to handle various “hot spots,” such as Haiti, Iraq and Afghanistan, for example. But would a special envoy ever be named to a place that isn’t a hot spot?

In fact, Brahimi’s record is one of disappointment. He’s the perfect public servant, as he is adept in standing before microphones and making upbeat statements that usually bear little relation to reality.

He has never been particularly creative or energetic in his missions, instead preferring to tell each side what it wants to hear, as his shuttle trips continue, along with the crisis in question.

The Lebanese have their own special memory of Brahimi during the final phases of the Civil War. He had excellent contacts with all sides, and spent his time shuttling between East and West Beirut, never managing to bring about the elusive cease-fire. The Taif Accord was not a Brahimi initiative; he was just the messenger for the arrangement that finally ended the war.

If experience in moving from one waste of time to another is the qualification for continuing Annan’s mission in Syria, Brahimi is perfectly suited for the job.

Annan’s mission died because every side’s stance was well known, and held no hope of a solution for the Syrian crisis. Since the U.N. envoy was named, several thousand people have been killed, and the Syrian public has become certain that the U.N. does not intend to take any serious action to end the bloodshed.

Neither side should welcome Brahimi, if he is tasked with picking up where Annan left off, unless someone, somewhere, makes it clear that the international community believes the crisis in Syria must be solved, and immediately. Otherwise, Brahimi will only have a rising body count to remember from his tenure.

Lakhdar Brahimi has served as a UN special envoy in Iraq after the US invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein [Reuters]

10/08/2012

Diplomats have said  Lakhdar Brahimi, a former Algerian foreign affairs minister, is a strong candidate to replace Kofi Annan as the United Nations’ peace envoy to Syria.

Brahimi’s possible appointment could be announced as early as next week, but the diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said late on Thursday that there could be last-minute changes if a key government has concerns about the choice.

The former Algerian foreign affairs minister has a long history as a diplomatic troubleshooter, and will if appointed face tough challenges in Syria, where President Bashar al-Assad is using his security forces to try to crush a 17-month-old uprising.

Brahimi, 78, has served as a UN special envoy in a series of challenging circumstances, including in Iraq after the US invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein, and in Afghanistan both before and after the end of Taliban rule. He was posted in South Africa as it emerged from the apartheid era.

Syria, however, may present an unusually vexing assignment, in part because international action to try to end the violence has been stymied by the disagreements between the five veto-holding permanent members of the UN Security Council.

While the security council united in April to approve the deployment of 300 monitors to Syria to observe a failed ceasefire as part of Annan’s peace plan, Russia and China vetoed three other resolutions that criticized Syria and threatened sanctions against Damascus.

‘Finger-pointing’ 

Annan, a former UN secretary-general and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, said last week he would step down as the special envoy because he was unable to do his job with the UN Security Council hopelessly deadlocked over Syria.

In announcing his resignation, Annan explicitly blamed “finger-pointing and name-calling” at the Security Council for his decision to quit, but suggested his successor may have better luck.

In accepting Annan’s resignation, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon thanked him for having taken on “this most difficult and potentially thankless of assignments”.

A spokesman for Ban, who is expected to formally name Annan’s successor, was not immediately available for comment.

Jacquelyn Martin/AP - U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, left, meets with Ghana’s President John Dramani Mahama, at his residence in Accra, Ghana, on Aug. 9, 2012. On Saturday, Clinton will make her way to Istanbul for meetins on Syria’s enduring conflict.

10/08/2012

#Syria rebels forced from key Aleppo district

Rebels admit tactical retreat from southern Salaheddin neighbourhood, as UK announces $7.8m aid boost for opposition.

10/08/2012

Syrian rebels have been pushed out of a strategic district in the commercial capital of Aleppo, but fighting has continued in other parts of the city.

Hossam Abu Mohammed, a rebel commander, said that his men were still fighting in parts of Salaheddin district on Friday, after most fled under heavy bombing and advancing troops.

“We will not let Salaheddin go,” the Free Syrian Army’s Abu Mohammed told AFP  news agency by telephone as the third day of a government offensive to take the city raged.

Rebels said clashes continued in the district and that, while the government had at least 80 tanks stationed in various parts of Aleppo, the military appeared reluctant to engage in close combat, preferring to use helicopters and fighter jets.

Sheikh Tawfiq, commander of the Nur al-Din Zinky brigade based on 15th street in Salaheddin, said the army’s formidable weaponry was offset by apparently faltering morale.

“At the 10th street front line we are face-to-face with the army and can hear them make orders on their radios. We hear their commanders give orders to soldiers to advance and they keep urging them to, but the soldiers don’t and are hesitant.”

State television said: “Our special forces have cleansed Salaheddin district of terrorists.”
  
State media reported that the government offensive in Aleppo had taken place on several fronts, including a neighbourhood near the airport in southeast Aleppo, several eastern districts, and a town on Aleppo’s northwestern outskirts, state media said.

Despite the violence, the Red Cross delivered food and medical supplies to Aleppo, the first time one of its aid convoys managed to enter the city in several weeks.

Kassem Saadeddine, a spokesperson for the Free Syrian Army, said that the rebel withdrawal “does not mean we are leaving Aleppo. We have military plans to fight in the city, but we cannot reveal them”.

‘New Syria envoy’

Diplomats at the United Nations, meanwhile, indicated on Thursday that Lakhdar Brahimi, a veteran Algerian diplomat, could be named next week to replace Kofi Annan as the joint UN-Arab League envoy to Syria.

Also on Thursday, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad appointed Wael al-Halki, the country’s health minister, as Syria’s new prime minister. Halki replaces Riad Hijab, who fled to Jordan and defected to the opposition earlier his week.

As the battle for Aleppo raged, Iran called on Thursday for “serious and inclusive” negotiations between the Syrian government and opposition. Iran made the appeal after a gathering of diplomats from like-minded states in Tehran for talks on the conflict.

“There will be no winner in Syria,” UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said in a statement read by a UN representative to the conference in Tehran.

“Now, we face the grim possibility of long-term civil war destroying Syria’s rich tapestry of interwoven communities.”

On Friday, the United Nations said that the number of registered Syrian refugees had topped 150,000 since the conflict began in March 2011. The total includes 50,227 in Turkey, where more than 6,000 Syrians arrived this week alone.

There are also 45,869 refuguees registered in Jordan, with 36,841 more in Lebanon and 13,587 in Iraq. The number of refugees in Iraq does not include the return of 23,228 Iraqis, who had fled the US invasion in 2003, from Syria.

Smaller numbers of refugees have also fled o Algeria, Egypt, Morocco and Greece, the UN says. 

UK increases opposition support

William Hague, the British foreign minister, on Friday announced that his country was offering $7.8 million in aid to the Syrian rebels. He said that none of the money would be used for weapons.

The UK will also be intensifying its contacts with Syrian opposition political figures as well as with the Free Syrian Army, he said.

The aid was likely to include mobile phones, satellite phones and radios to warn civilians of governmen assaults and 
“overcome the regime’s communications blockade and ensure their message gets to the outside world”, Hague said.

“I have also agreed in principle that our assistance should include lifesaving protective equipment for civilians to help those carrying out vital work in the crossfire, and this could for instance include body armour,” he said.

Britain would also supply medical equipment including paramedic trauma kits, surgical equipment, field dressings, antibiotics, painkillers and water purification kits, the foreign minister said.

Diplomats at the UN, meanwhile, indicated on Thursday that the official announcement regarding the appointment of Brahimi as the UN-Arab League envoy would be made early next week.

Brahimi was the UN envoy in Afghanistan after the September 11, 2001 attacks and in Iraq after the 2003 US-led invasion.

Kofi Annan, a former UN secretary-general, said he was leaving the post because of the lack of international support for his efforts to end the 17-month Syria conflict, in which rebels say more than 20,000 people have been killed.

Annan is staying in his post until August 31.

Reuters/Mohamed Azakir

08/08/2012

Sana/Handout/European Pressphoto Agency

Iran’s Saeed Jalili (left) met President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus on Tuesday.

08/08/2012

LONDON — Before rushing to judgment on Iran’s latest expression of solidarity with the embattled regime in Syria, it is worth considering how the conflict looks from Tehran.

In the 33-year history of Iran’s Islamic Republic, Syria is the only state to have consistently stood by it while hostile neighbors and outside powers conspired to bring about its downfall.

Small wonder then that Saeed Jalili, Iran’s visiting head of national security, assured President Bashar al-Assad on Tuesday, “Iran will not tolerate, in any form, the breaking of the axis of the resistance, of which Syria is an intrinsic part.”

Neither is it surprising that Tehran should view the internal conflict in Syria as part of a wider international war — with Iran as the ultimate target.

To understand the roots of Iranian paranoia, just look at the map. Iran has been steadily encircled by a network of U.S. military bases in the decades since the Iranian revolution of 1979.

Its situation was exacerbated by the collapse of the Soviet Union, a development that meant Iran’s leaders could no longer play one superpower against the other and that opened the former Soviet republics across Iran’s northern border to Western influence.

The departure of U.S. forces from Iraq has given Tehran a strategic benefit on its western frontier but that would be outweighed by the emergence of a potentially hostile regime in Damascus.

Iran’s opponents would argue that it has only itself to blame for its present isolation. Decades of hostile rhetoric towards the West and towards Israel have fostered an equally hostile response.

If Iran now faces a possible military assault to destroy its alleged nuclear weapons installations, it is because it has persistently defied international demands to come clean on its nuclear program.

However, Iranian leaders might consider that, in a region where two local powers — Israel and Pakistan — have the bomb, possession of the ultimate weapon is the best way to stay safe.

There have been opportunities over the years to break the cycle of hostility between Iran and the West, but these have invariably foundered, to the benefit of hardliners in Tehran.

Kofi Annan, the outgoing international peace envoy, wanted to bring Iran into discussions on Syria and make it part of the solution, given its historic ties with the regime. The idea was firmly slapped down by the Western powers.

A decade ago in Afghanistan, Iran cooperated with the U.S. in its post-9/11 assault on the Taliban regime. (Tehran had identified the threat posed by the Taliban much earlier than the West). But Washington took the opportunity for rapprochement no further.

Iran could be a natural ally in the war against Sunni fundamentalists such as those of Al Qaeda, who regard the Iranian Shia as heretics. But the West’s key allies in the region are Sunni states that are deeply suspicious of the Shia.

That innate suspicion has been further fueled by Iran’s attempts to portray itself as spiritual godfather of an “Islamic” Arab Spring (after the Tehran regime quashed its own domestic revolt in 2009).

The impact of regime change in the Arab World has in fact been largely negative from Tehran’s perspective. The Muslim Brotherhood leadership in Egypt is closer to Saudi Arabia than it is to Iran. If the Alawite-dominated regime in Damascus were to fall, it would mean the loss of a non-Sunni ally.

So, how far will Iran go towards protecting its long-term partner? It will not be happy if Mr. Assad goes. But beyond cash and supplies and the loan of military advisers, there is not much Tehran can do to determine the outcome.

Its best hope might be the emergence of a post-Assad regime that is not openly hostile to its interests, reserving the option of trying to destabilize a successor regime that was.

Indeed, Mr. Jalili’s assurances to Mr. Assad were ambivalent.

The only solution to the turmoil in Syria is democracy and respect for the choice of the people, he said.

In a sideswipe at Saudi Arabia and Qatar, which are widely reported to be arming the rebels, he said, “How can those who have never held an election in their country be advocates of democracy?”

His conclusion, which could have been penned by the White House or the United Nations, was: “We believe that a new path should be followed, through which the crisis can be resolved based on national and domestic dialogue.”

Support of a kind, but scarcely a declaration that Tehran is prepared to fight for Mr. Assad down to the last Iranian.

07/08/2012

A diplomatic resolution looks unlikely in Syria, but in the realm of Saudi politics, a personal invitation from the king is symbolically important

Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been invited by the Saudi king to attend a meeting of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation. Photograph: Behrouz Mehri/AFP/Getty Images

The visit of the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to Saudi Arabia comes at a crucial time for the conflict in Syria. Few observers can be optimistic about the chances for diplomacy, with the Annan plan abandoned and the quieter efforts at reaching a US-Russia deal stalled.

Most analysts predict that Syria’s uprising against dictatorship – which began as a peaceful cross-sectarian movement calling for basic freedoms – will increasingly mutate into a sectarian civil war. Much of the western policy debate is moving on to the risks of prolonged state failure in a post-Assad future.

Within the Arab world, the debate over Syria is increasingly becoming polarised along ideological and sectarian lines, as the country’s strategic importance to the region’s great powers seems to be obscuring the commonalities between the basic demands of the Syrian protesters and their counterparts in other Arab countries. Any efforts to draw back from the brink – and to stop the Syrian uprising against dictatorship being derailed by a sectarian regional proxy war – deserve attention.

Ahmadinejad’s visit, which an aide has said will go ahead, is a rare one. He last visited Saudi Arabia in 2007, at a time when the Gulf states were trying so hard to reach out to Iran that Qatar even invited him to join in the annual summit of the Gulf Co-operation Council (the regional organisation representing the six Gulf Arab monarchies, which was founded in 1981 partly in response to the perceived threat of the Iranian revolution).

Although there is a long history of rivalry and competition between the Gulf Arab countries and Iran, relations have not always been so conflicted. Back in 2008, Ahmadinejad visited Bahrain and signed an agreement for Iran to supply Bahrain with natural gas. The deal, which seems almost unthinkable today, never materialised.

By contrast, Ahmadinejad’s most recent foray to the other side of the Gulf was in April, when he toured Abu Musa, an island occupied by Iran but claimed by the UAE. This prompted fury in the Gulf monarchies, where rulers saw it as a sign of Iranian expansionist tendencies, and were frustrated by the lack of reaction from their western allies (who were preparing for talks with Iran over the nuclear issue and who are not deeply engaged on the islands issue).

It is in Syria that the Saudi-Iranian confrontation has become the most pronounced and dangerous, but the two are competing for influence in the wider region. They back rival camps in Iraq, Lebanon, and to some extent Yemen and the Palestinian territories (though Hamas has always had some support in the Gulf and is now distancing itself from both Iran and Syria). They are also at odds over the treatment of Shia protesters in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia’s own eastern province. Saudi officials routinely suggest that Iran is fomenting the protests in both cases.

For its part, Iran’s interests seem to be best served by giving only moral support to the protesters, so it can sit back and watch its rivals challenged from within, without the kind of direct involvement that could spark retaliation.

Both Iran and Saudi Arabia are effective exploiters of “soft power”, making use of their various media channels and religious networks to try to discredit the other.

One of the disadvantages of this approach is that it is never quite clear how centralised the control of foreign policy really is. Another problem is that the Middle Eastern media are becoming increasingly sectarian – a trend that is worrying many people in the ethnically and religiously diverse countries of the Gulf.

Now, with the collapse of Kofi Annan’s mission to Syria, the Gulf Arab monarchies are becoming more open about their support for the Syrian opposition, including the armed Free Syrian Army. Saudi Arabia has hosted a variety of Syrian opposition visitors, from members of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood to Assad’s estranged uncle, Rifaat al-Assad and Manaf Tlass, a senior Syrian military officer who defected just a few weeks ago.

The latter visitors illustrate that Saudi Arabia is not only supporting the Islamist opposition; it has its own concerns about the rising regional influence of the Muslim Brotherhood, whose focus on electoral politics represents a major challenge to the Saudi model of partnership between clerics and hereditary rulers.

The UAE is also pursuing a delicate balancing act, as it is home to a number of Syrian National Council activists – who recently announced the defection of the Syrian ambassador to the UAE – but is extremely wary of the role the Muslim Brotherhood could play in its own territory, and is investigating around 50 imprisoned Islamist political activists who are accused of conspiring with foreign organisations.

Even before the Annan mission collapsed, the Saudi and UAE foreign ministers were expressing extreme frustration with what they see as international inaction over Syria. Saudi Arabia has never seemed particularly convinced by western diplomatic efforts; Kofi Annan did not visit Riyadh during his Syria mediation efforts, and neither Saudi Arabia nor Iran was included in the last “Friends of Syria” meeting.

Most indications point to further conflict rather than a diplomatic resolution. But in the highly personalised realm of Saudi politics, a personal invitation from the king is symbolically important.

In Lebanon, in 2008 and 2009, the confrontation between the Saudi-backed 14 March alliance and the Iranian-backed 8 March alliance occasionally looked like it could lead to renewed civil conflict. But there, the rival factions stepped back from the brink, negotiating power-sharing agreements before and after the 2009 elections.

This would be far harder to achieve in Syria, with its daily bloodshed and its asymmetry of forces, but the cost of conflict is high enough for any remaining diplomatic options to be worth exploring.

The UN’s special envoy and the Bric countries have got increasingly frustrated with the west’s domineering consensus on Damascus

When the history of Syria’s catastrophic civil war comes to be written, 30 June 2012 will surely be recognised as the only true moment of hope. On that day in Geneva the five permanent members of the UN security council united behind a communique calling for a transition to a democratic system in Syria and the formation of a government of national unity in which opposition leaders and members of the current government would share power.

They called for a firm timetable for elections in a fair environment. And, with an eye on the chaos that followed the US-imposed scheme of de-Ba’athification in Iraq, said the continuity of government institutions and qualified staff in Syria’s public services must be preserved. This included the military and security forces – though they must in future adhere to human rights standards.

They also called on the Syrian government and opposition groups to re-commit to a ceasefire. Sensible, detailed and constructive, the communique was also remarkable for what it did not contain. Although the call for a government of national unity meant Syria’s authoritarian regime should be dismantled, the security council’s permanent members did not mention the usual cliche of “regime change”, which over-personalises complex issues by focusing on the removal of a single towering personality. There was no specific demand for Bashar al-Assad to resign, let alone as the precondition for negotiations between the government and its opponents, as western states and most Syrian opposition groups previously insisted.

In short, the communique appeared to move the US, Britain and France, as well as Turkey and Qatar, which also attended the Geneva meeting, to an even-handed stance at last. It marked Kofi Annan’s finest hour as the UN and Arab League’s special envoy.

A few days later, Russia circulated a draft resolution at the UN in New York to endorse the new approach. It urged member-states to work in the co-operative spirit of the Geneva text, extend the UN monitors’ team in Syria and press for a ceasefire. Then came the spanner. Britain, France and the US proposed a rival resolution with the one-sided elements that provoked earlier Russian and Chinese vetoes – punishment of Assad if he did not comply, threats of new sanctions, no word of pressure on the opposition and veiled hints of eventual military force by referring to chapter seven of the UN charter.

The resolution was a disaster, and it is no wonder that in explaining his resignation (in a Financial Times article on Friday) Annan highlighted the security council’s failure to endorse the Geneva recommendations. Annan remains too much of a diplomat to take sides openly but his disappointment with the big western states for their “finger-pointing and name-calling” of Russia and China over Syria is clear.

His frustration is shared by the new powers on the international stage that are increasingly angry with the domineering western consensus on many issues. When the UN general assembly debated a Saudi resolution last week that followed the west in calling for sanctions and Assad’s departure, Brazil, India and South Africa all objected. In the west it is easy to pillory Russia for rejecting internationally imposed regime change by saying Vladimir Putin fears a “colour revolution” in Russia (even though there is no such prospect). China’s democratic credentials can be sneered at. But when the three other Brics, which hold fair, orderly, and regular elections, object to the western line on Syria, it is time to take note. Indeed, the west did adjust. It got the Saudis to water down the draft lest it receive less than half the world’s votes.

The retreat was only tactical. The Obama administration promptly announced it is “accelerating” its support to Syria’s rebels by giving them intelligence and satellite data on troop movements. Annan’s disappointment must be massive. Until he started work in February, the military pattern in Syria had been consistent for several months – occasional forays by rebels into urban areas followed by excessive reaction by government troops, with artillery, snipers, and mass arrests.

Since then, apart from a few days of relative quiet in April when a ceasefire partially held, Syria has seen a huge influx of arms to the rebels, growing involvement by foreign special forces, and the infiltration of al-Qaida jihadis and other Salafists. What began as a peaceful uprising and then became local self-defence has been hijacked. Under Saudi, Qatari and US leadership, and with British, French and Israeli approval, it has turned into an anti-Iranian proxy war.

This does not mean the democratic aspirations of Syria’s original protesters should be abandoned, or that the Syrian government should not start to implement the Geneva principles for transition that Annan briefly persuaded the big powers to accept. The outlook is too desperate. As tens of thousands flee their homes, and the destruction of Aleppo – and perhaps soon of Damascus – looms ever closer, a ceasefire and political compromise have never been more urgent.

• Jonathan Steele
• guardian.co.uk, Sunday 5 August 2012 21.00 BST

05/08/12

Syrian refugee boy cries as he attends the funeral of five Free Syrian Army fighter near Idlib Photo: REUTERS

02/08/12

Kofi Annan resigned as the international peace

envoy for Syria on Thursday night, criticising the

UN Security Council for “finger-pointing and

name-calling” when it should have been taking

ction to resolve the crisis.

9:16PM BST 02 Aug 2012

MOSCOW, July 18, 2012: Russian leader Vladimir Putin and US President Barack Obama were unable to resolve their differences on Syria in a phone talk Wednesday following a Damascus bomb attack, the Kremlin said.

“Differences in approaches remain that concern practical steps in achieving a settlement,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov was quoted as saying by Russian news agencies.

A bomb struck at the heart of Syria’s senior command Wednesday, killing at least three of President Bashar al-Assad’s top brass in an attack claimed by rebels, amid fighting in the capital city.

The first such deadly attack against Assad’s inner core came ahead of a showdown Thursday between the West and Russia over a UN Security Council resolution calling for sanctions against Damascus.

Russia has threatened to veto the measure and proposed its own draft that does not provide for punitive measures against its Soviet-era ally while extending a current UN monitoring mission there by another three months.

Western powers had refused to back Russia’s initial proposal or an amended version submitted by Moscow at the United Nations on Tuesday.

The Kremlin spokesman provided few details of the phone call except to say that it was initiated by Obama and included a “detailed discussion of Syria in which the recent escalation was noted”.

Peskov said the conversation showed that the two leaders “have a coinciding view of the general satiation in Syria (and agree) on the end goal of reaching a settlement.”

But the spokesman made no mention of Russia’s refusal to back firmer action against Assad or of Obama’s insistence of imposing sanctions against his regime should it fail to comply with the most urgent points of a peace plan drafted by mediator Kofi Annan.

Rebels declared the battle to “liberate” Damascus has begun as heavy fighting raged across the city yesterday and Russia said an agreement is possible for a UN resolution on the Syria crisis. 
The proclamation by the Free Syrian Army, which also claimed it had shot down a helicopter in the capital, came as peace envoy Kofi Annan said the 16-month crisis increasingly described as a civil war was at a “critical time”. 
Heavy machinegun fire was reported in Damascus’s Sabaa Bahrat Square, where President Bashar al-Assad’s regime has staged rallies to counter anti-regime protests that erupted in March 2011. 
At least 19 people were killed as tanks and helicopter gunships were deployed in Qaboon district and battles were fought in Al Midan and Al Hajar Al Aswad, said the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. 
As the fighting inched closer to the regime’s nerve centre, FSA spokesman Colonel Kassem Saadeddine said “victory is nigh” and the struggle would go on until the city was conquered. 
“We have transferred the battle from Damascus province to the capital. We have a clear plan to control the whole of Damascus. We only have light weapons, but it’s enough.” 
“Expect surprises,” Saadeddine added, before adding later that rebels had downed a helicopter over Qaboon, although an activist in the district said there was “no foundation” to the report. 
Fighting in the city has raged since Sunday, with the rebels announcing a full-scale offensive dubbed “the Damascus volcano and earthquakes of Syria”. 
An activist who said he was in Al Midan neighbourhood said the army was shelling the neighbourhood “hysterically”. 
“The collapsing regime has gone mad,” the man calling himself Abu Musab said via Skype. 
“The army has tried to storm the district, but the Free Syrian Army has stopped them. So they have intensified their shelling. They are shelling everything,” he said. 
AFP could not independently verify the account. 
Witnesses also reported heavy machinegun fire in Sabaa Bahrat Square in central Damascus and in nearby Baghdad Street. 
But an army officer in Damascus said troops have “the situation under control” and were “chasing the terrorists seeking refuge in apartments and mosques”. 
The source said “battles raged” in Qaboon, “where the majority of rebels were”, adding that “33 terrorists were killed, 15 were wounded and 145 were arrested,” referring to rebels. 
The regime has vowed not to surrender the capital. 
In that context, the Israeli army’s intelligence chief said Syrian troops had been moved from the Golan Heights towards conflict zones including Damascus. 
“Assad has removed many of his forces that were in the Golan Heights to the areas of conflict,” Major General Aviv Kochavi told MPs. 
“Radical Islam” was gaining ground, he warned, adding that Syria was undergoing a process of “Iraqisation”, with militant and tribal factions controlling different zones. 
In Moscow, Russian President Vladimir Putin told Annan that he would “do everything” to support the UN-Arab League peace envoy’s plan to end the conflict. 
Annan told Putin “the Syrian crisis is at a critical time.” 
Later, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said he saw “no reason why we cannot also agree at the UN Security Council. We are ready for this.” 
Annan added: “The Council, I expect, will be sending out a message that the killings must stop and that the situation on the ground is unacceptable.” 
Annan’s Moscow meetings came one day before Western powers plan to hold a vote on a UN resolution that threatens sanctions against Damascus. 
The council must also vote to decide on renewing the 300-strong UN Supervision Mission in Syria, deployed to monitor an April 12 ceasefire Assad agreed with Annan. 
UN leader Ban Ki-moon “called on Russia to use its influence to ensure the full and immediate implementation” of Annan’s plan in a telephone call with Lavrov, a spokesman said. 
Ban was due in Beijing yesterday, also on a mission to get support for tougher action on Syria. 
Russia and China have twice blocked resolutions against Syria at the Security Council, which remains divided over Western calls to impose new sanctions. 
On a visit to Syria’s neighbour Jordan, British Foreign Secretary William Hague said the crisis is too unpredictable to rule out “any option”. 
Stepping up the pressure, French President Francois Hollande said “the Russians must understand that they cannot be seen as the only ones or almost the only ones hindering the search for a solution.” 
As wrangling continued over rival resolution drafts, the Security Council expressed concern about fallout from the conflict in Lebanon, UN diplomats said. 
UN envoy to Lebanon Derek Plumbly said there was “concern about the pressures on the Lebanese border in recent weeks, incursions and shooting across the border”. 
The Observatory said at least 35 people were killed across Syria yesterday, 16 of them civilians, adding to its toll of more than 17,000 people dead since the uprising began. 
Meanwhile, Nawaf Fares, who became the most prominent figure to abandon Assad when he defected as Syria’s ambassador to Iraq, warned the regime will use chemical weapons against opposition forces and may have already deployed them. 
Another key defector, General Manaf Tlass, a childhood friend of Assad, said in a statement sent to AFP that he was in Paris and called for a “constructive transition” in the country.

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Russia said on Thursday it would not agree to a threat of sanctions to end the 16-month conflict in Syria as a deeply divided U.N. Security Council began negotiations on a resolution to extend a U.N. monitoring mission there.

The 15-member council must decide the future of the U.N. mission, known as UNSMIS, before July 20, when its 90-day mandate expires. UNSMIS was deployed to monitor a failed truce as part of international envoy Kofi Annan’s peace plan.

Russia has proposed extending the mission for 90 days, but Britain, the United States, France and Germany countered with a draft resolution to extend the mission for just 45 days and place Annan’s peace plan under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter.

Chapter 7 allows the council to authorize actions ranging from diplomatic and economic sanctions to military intervention. U.S. officials have said they are talking about sanctions on Syria, not military intervention.

The Security Council is currently due to vote next Wednesday.

President Bashar al-Assad’s forces have killed more than 15,000 people since a crackdown on pro-democracy protesters began in March 2011, some Western leaders say. Damascus says rebels have killed several thousand of its security forces.

“We are definitely against Chapter 7. Anything can be negotiated, but we do not negotiate this, this is a red line,” Russian Deputy U.N. Ambassador Alexander Pankin told reporters.

The opening stance by Russia, a key ally of Syria, was no surprise to Western diplomats. Russia and China previously vetoed U.N. resolutions designed to pressure Assad.

“They would say that at this stage wouldn’t they,” said Britain’s U.N. ambassador, Mark Lyall Grant. “It’s clear that there’s very strong support for the text.”

Negotiations are unlikely to move quickly. After the first round of talks on Thursday, French U.N. Ambassador Gerard Araud said that negotiators started 10 miles apart, and “now we are 10 miles less 5 centimetres.”

‘TIME TO ACT’

The Western-backed draft resolution in particular threatens the Syrian government with sanctions if it does not stop using heavy weapons and withdraw its troops from towns and cities within 10 days of the adoption of the resolution.

A Western diplomat, who did not want to be named, said the resolution had been drafted with the strongest possible language and action because “it’s long past time for the council to act.”

“It’s frankly outrageous that the council would leave unarmed observers twisting in the wind and not use all the tools they have at their disposal,” he said. “We’re now at the point where 100 or more people are dying a day.”

Opposition activists said more than 200 people, mostly civilians, were massacred in a Syrian army and militia onslaught in a village in the rebellious province of Hama on Thursday.

Syrian Ambassador to the United Nations Bashar Ja’afari said on Wednesday that countries raising the threat of sanctions were not helping efforts to end the conflict and maintained that Damascus was committed to Annan’s peace plan.

Annan asked the U.N. Security Council on Wednesday to make clear to Syria’s government and opposition there would be “clear consequences” for not complying with his plan to broker peace in a conflict that has killed thousands.

“The United States is determined to support him (Annan) because our experience of the last year makes it absolutely clear that the Assad regime will not do anything without additional further pressure,” U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Thursday during a visit to Cambodia.

U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon has recommended a shift in the emphasis of UNSMIS’ work from military observers - who suspended most of their monitoring activities on June 16 because of increased risk amid rising violence - to the civilian staff focusing on a political solution and issues like human rights.

(Additional reporting by Arshad Mohammed; Editing by Peter Cooney)

MOSCOW (Reuters) - U.N. special envoy Kofi Annan will visit Moscow on Monday for talks on the conflict in Syria, RIA news agency quoted a Foreign Ministry source as saying on Friday.

“The current state of affairs in Syria and prospects for a (peace) settlement will be discussed,” the source said, adding that Annan would meet Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

(Reporting By Nastassia Astrasheuskaya, Editing by Timothy Heritage)