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.

29/07/12

Syria has expanded its chemical weapons arsenal in recent years with help from Iran and by using front organizations to buy sophisticated equipment it claimed was for civilian programs, according to documents and interviews.

The buildup has taken place despite attempts by the United States and other Western countries to block the sale of precursor chemicals and so-called dual-use technology to Damascus, according to the documents.

As recently as 2010, documents show that the European Union provided $14.6 million in technical assistance and equipment, some intended for chemical plants, in a deal with the Syrian Ministry of Industry. Diplomats and arms experts have identified the ministry as a front for the country’s chemical weapons program.

Recognizing the potential for Syria to divert equipment to the weapons program, the E.U. stipulated that it be allowed to conduct spot checks on how it was used. But the inspections were halted in May 2011 when the organization imposed sanctions on Syria after the crackdown on opposition groups.

Concerns about Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal took on new significance this week when a top Syrian official warned that the regime of President Bashar al-Assadwould use them “in the event of external aggression.”

U.S. officials have expressed concerns over whether Assad would authorize using the weapons against his own people as a last-ditch effort to remain in power. Similarly, officials have said they worry about the security of the arsenal if Assad’s government falls.

The portrait of Syria’s efforts to develop a larger chemical weapons program emerged from E.U. documents, a handful of little-noticed State Department cables released by WikiLeaks and interviews with outside experts.

Arms experts say Syria has pursued a two-pronged strategy to build and grow its chemical weapons stockpile: overt assistance and procurement of chemical precursors and expertise from Iran, coupled with the acquisition of equipment and chemicals from seemingly unwitting businesses in other countries, in many cases through a network of front organizations.

The materials are often dual use, with purposes in civilian plants and in weapons facilities.

Iranian assistance

A 2006 cable recounts a confidential presentation by German officials to the Australia Group, an informal forum for 40 nations plus the European Commission that protects against the spread of chemical weapons. The cable described Syria’s cooperation with Iran on Syria’s development of new chemical weapons, noting that Syria was building up to five new sites producing precursors to chemical weapons.

“Iran would provide the construction design and equipment to annually produce tens to hundreds of tons of precursors for VX, sarin, and mustard [gas],” said the cable, written by a U.S. diplomat. “Engineers from Iran’s DIO [Defense Industries Organization] were to visit Syria and survey locations for the plants, and construction was scheduled from the end of 2005-2006.”

A 2008 State Department cable summarized a presentation by Australian officials to the monitoring group that concluded Syria had become sophisticated in its efforts to move equipment and resources from civilian programs to weapons development.

“The Australians believe Syria is committed to improving and expanding its program, including through testing,” the cable said. “Syria maintains a basic indigenous capability, in contrast to other countries of concern, but maintains some dependence on precursor imports. . . . Syria appears focused on importing precursors and precursors of precursors.”

Despite such warnings, analysts say it has proved difficult for the United States and other Western countries to prevent Syria’s acquisition of precursor materials and equipment, given thei

In 2010, the European Union initiated a $14.6 million technical assistance program intended to improve industrial production in Syria.

An E.U. spokesman said the money was part of a program to finance Syria’s development of safety standards for products and laboratories. But the testing equipment, experts said, could potentially have been used in a chemical weapons program.

The contract was with the Syrian Ministry of Industry, which Dutch officials warned in 2008 “allegedly serves as a front organization for procurement efforts” and had helped acquire precursors that could be used to manufacture VX nerve gas and mustard gas from a Netherlands company.

Acquiring precursors

According to a procurement notice in the E.U.’s official register, the Syrian ministry solicited tenders from European companies for “equipment and consumables for chemical analysis laboratory,” “equipment for preparation and analysis of biological substances” and “standards for calibration laboratories.”

“It is difficult to be specific about the order,” said Alastair Hay, a British expert in chemical weapons at the University of Leeds. “It could cover legitimate government agencies anxious to ensure quality control so that they can meet the expectations for other governments regarding the quality of exports.”

In an illustration of the difficulty in selling dual-use equipment, another expert found Syria’s purchase order suspect.

James Quinlivan, senior operations research analyst at the RAND Corporation, noted that such testing equipment can be an important component of chemical weapon programs, particularly with relation to retention and longevity.

“Calibration is a big deal for these things,” Quinlivan said. “While mustard [gas] lasts amazingly well, nerve agents do not. For nerve gases, particularly sarin, retention relies on purity, and this must be tested.”

The spokesman for the European Commission, Peter Stano, said the E.U. had a “regular independent monitoring schedule” until it was suspended in May 2011, along with other E.U. cooperation, in response to the Syrian government crackdown on unrest.

Countries outside Europe have also apparently provided dual-use equipment to Syria in recent years. According to the cables disclosed by WikiLeaks, U.S. officials have contacted their counterparts in China and India over concerns about the sale of dual-use technology to Syria.

In one instance, the United States objected to China’s plan to sell Syria a large quantity of pinacolyl alcohol (pine alcohol), which can be used as a precursor to soman nerve gas. It is not clear whether the U.S. intervention prevented the sale, but other documents in the WikiLeaks cache show China taking two years or more to provide responses to similar U.S. queries.

Quinlivan, of RAND, said the experience of the Syrian weapons program showed the difficulty of preventing the country from developing chemical munitions.

“Certainly a lot of equipment is obviously dual use: A lot of equipment bears a close similarity to that in a pesticide plant,” he said. “You can see that there’s a large overlap between civilian and military uses. The person selling chemicals does not have to know they’re selling chemicals for military use: Basic precursors have hundreds of uses.

“For the country building the program, it’s like high school chemistry — how simple do you want your ingredients to be?” he added. “How many steps can you take toward a chemical weapon? I think you do have to credit Syria with the ability to assemble a weapon from precursors.”r many civilian uses.

27/07/12

Syrian rebels are readying themselves to battle government forces for control of Aleppo

27/07/2012

Syrian forces have renewed their assault on the northern city of Aleppo, firing from helicopter gunships on rebel-held areas.

The US state department has said it fears Syrian government forces are preparing to carry out a massacre.

The pro-government al-Watan newspaper has warned that the mother of all battles is about to start.

Rebels in Aleppo, Syria’s most populous city, have been stockpiling ammunition and medical supplies in preparation.

Syrian troops fired from helicopter gunships on south-western neighbourhoods of Aleppo, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights told the AFP news agency.

A convoy of tanks from Idlib province, near the border with Turkey, arrived in Aleppo overnight and was attacked by rebels, the Observatory said.

At least 34 people were killed in the city on Thursday, activists said, as artillery and helicopter gunships attacked rebel targets.

Residents flee

The US state department said the deployment of tanks, helicopter gunships and fixed-winged aircraft around Aleppo suggested an attack was imminent.

But the US would not intervene, said state department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland, except by continuing to channel non-lethal assistance such as communications equipment and medical supplies to the rebels.

The BBC’s Ian Pannell, near Aleppo, says thousands of people have already left as fears grow that an intense battle looms.

Talal al-Mayhani, an activist with connections to the rebel movement in Aleppo, said the battle for the city was likely to play out in a similar way to an earlier battle in the capital Damascus.

There, rebels took control of large parts of the city before being forced to withdraw in the face of a government offensive.

Foreign journalists operate under heavy restrictions in Syria so claims made by either side are difficult to verify.

Continue reading the main story‘Lessons from Balkans conflict’

A Syrian MP from Aleppo has fled to Turkey, Turkey’s state-run Anatolia news agency says.

Ikhlas Badawi, a mother of six, said she was defecting in protest at the “violence against the people”.

Meanwhile, another defector, Gen Manaf Tlas, has put himself forward as a possible figure to unite the fractious opposition.

In an interview with a Saudi newspaper, Asharq al-Awsat, he said: “I am discussing with… people outside Syria to reach a consensus with those inside.”

However, some in the opposition regard Gen Tlas - who fled earlier this month - as a compromised figure too close to the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon said the world must apply the lessons learned from the Bosnian conflict in the 1990s.

He was speaking in Srebrenica, where a UN peacekeeping force failed to stop the killing of more than 7,000 Bosnian Muslim men and boys in 1995.

“I do not want to see any of my successors, after 20 years, visiting Syria, apologising for what we could have done now to protect the civilians in Syria - which we are not doing now,” Mr Ban said.

The head of UN peacekeeping operations, Herve Ladsous, defended the decision to reduce the number of observers in Syria.

“We found ourselves with too many people and not enough to do,” he said.

Speaking in Damascus, he said there was “no plan B” beyond Joint Special Envoy Kofi Annan’s peace plan.

Repeated diplomatic attempts to stop the violence have foundered, with the UN Security Council bitterly divided.

The Syrian government has said its forces are trying to dislodge the “remnants of mercenary terrorist groups”.

More than 16,000 people have been killed in Syria since the start of anti-regime protests in March 2011, activists say.

24.07.12

Planning for possible intervention is already under way in Western capitals, Turkey and Jordan, the report says.

It is being spurred, above all, by fears of Syrian chemical weapons falling into the wrong hands.

The report comes from the Royal United Services Institute - with close ties to the UK defence ministry, say analysts.

Last week the Syrian regime was rocked by the assassinations of four of its senior officials in a bomb blast.

On Monday, US President Barack Obama warned the Syrian government against using chemical weapons, after an implicit acknowledgement by Damascus that it held a stockpile of such weapons.

‘Responsibility to prepare’

The Rusi report quotes Col Richard Kemp, who led UK forces in Afghanistan, as saying the escalating civil war meant it was more likely that Western governments would intervene to stop the bloodshed spreading to neighbouring countries.

“Military planners have a responsibility to prepare for intervention options in Syria for their political masters in case this conflict chooses them,” Col Kemp says in the report, called A Collision Course for Intervention.

“Preparation will be proceeding today in several Western capitals and on the ground in Syria and in Turkey.

“They will however have grave reservations over the consequences and the cost of intervention as well as the geopolitical implications.”

The report suggests President Assad’s own future is becoming less relevant, says BBC diplomatic correspondent Bridget Kendall.

The key issues now include:

• the danger of Syria’s chemical weapons being used either by desperate pro-regime commanders, or extremists allied to the opposition
• the spectre of a flood of refugees
• the crisis turning into a proxy confrontation between Iran and its Shia allies on one side, and Sunni governments from the Gulf on the other.

The report discounts a full scale invasion as unlikely, but concludes more limited action to protect civilians or to try to secure and destroy chemical stocks may be necessary, our correspondent says.

That could include arming opposition groups or putting together a military coalition for action.

Intervention ‘already happening’

The report suggests planning for this and other scenarios is already under way.

However, Col Kemp asserts in the report that foreign intervention is already under way in Syria.

“External intervention has been under way in Syria for months, with Russia arming the regime,” he says.

“At the same time Saudi Arabia and Qatar, with US and Turkish facilitation, have been arming and funding the opposition; and this covert support has been substantially responsible for the progress opposition forces have made in recent weeks.

“Western political leaders may have no appetite for deeper intervention. But as history has shown, we do not always choose which wars to fight.”

Members of the Free Syrian Army are seen in Tafes near Deraa July 22, 2012. Click through to see more photos from the conflict in Syria

Beirut— Syria threatened Monday to unleash its chemical and biological weapons if the country faces a foreign attack, a desperate warning from a regime that has failed to crush a powerful and strengthening rebellion.

The statement — Syria’s first-ever acknowledgement that the country possesses weapons of mass destruction — suggests President Bashar Assad will continue the fight to stay in power, regardless of the cost.

“It would be reprehensible if anybody in Syria is contemplating use of such weapons of mass destruction like chemical weapons,” U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said during a trip to Belgrade, Serbia. “I sincerely hope the international community will keep an eye on this so that there will be no such things happening.”

Syria is believed to have nerve agents as well as mustard gas, Scud missiles capable of delivering these lethal chemicals and a variety of advanced conventional arms.

During a televised news conference Monday, Foreign Ministry spokesman Jihad Makdissi stressed that the weapons are secure and would only be used in the case of an external attack.

“No chemical or biological weapons will ever be used, and I repeat, will never be used, during the crisis in Syria no matter what the developments inside Syria,” he said. “All of these types of weapons are in storage and under security and the direct supervision of the Syrian armed forces and will never be used unless Syria is exposed to external aggression.”

The Syrian government later tried to back off from the announcement, issuing an amendment to the prepared statement read by Makdissi.

In his comments to reporters, Makdissi also repeated the regime’s assertion that the country’s 17-month-old conflict is the work of foreign extremists looking to destroy the nation.

Israel and the U.S. are concerned that Syria’s stockpile of chemical weapons could fall into the hands of Islamist militants should the regime collapse. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Sunday that his country would “have to act” if necessary to safeguard the arsenal from rogue elements.

Syria appears to be quietly shifting some chemical weapons from storage sites, say Western and Israeli officials, but it is not clear whether the operation is merely a security precaution amid the chaos of war, or something more.

Some analysts see the move as serving a dual purpose - to keep the weapons from capture by an expanding insurgency, and to deprive Syria’s Western foes of any excuse for intervention on the grounds of securing dangerous material gone astray.

The Syrian government denies carrying out the operation, first reported by the Wall Street Journal, and there is no firm word on the materials involved. Syria’s undeclared stockpile reportedly includes sarin nerve agent, mustard gas and cyanide.

But the reports contribute to an impression of crumbling government control in parts of Syria, and are likely to heighten international concern about the security of what is believed to be the Middle East’s largest chemical weapons stockpile.

An Israeli official said however the movements reflected an attempt by President Bashar al-Assad to make “arrangements to ensure the weapons do not fall into irresponsible hands”.

“That would support the thinking that this matter has been managed responsibly so far.”

In Washington, a national security official confirmed the US government had received reports of chemical weapons movements but was not sure of the reasons.

Tight control

A second US official said the reported movements were “relatively new”, but not necessarily hugely frightening.

Pentagon spokesman George Little said Pentagon believed the Assad regime retained control of chemical weapons but the United States and its partners were watching closely.

“We would of course caution them (the Syrians) strongly against any intention to use those stockpiles. That would cross a serious red line,” he said.

“We cannot assume nefarious intent,” said Dina Esfandiary, a research analyst at London’s International Institue for Strategic Studies.

She said mustard gas, stored in weaponised form in artillery shells, could be used against “tactical targets” like advancing troops.

“This is the reason why moving them looks suspicious - because it looks like he is moving them to be used, even though he could be moving them to more secure locations.”

Western countries believe Damascus has the world’s largest remaining stockpile of undeclared chemical weapons - including mustard gas and the deadly VX nerve agent. The arsenal could give Assad a means to project power domestically and in the region, and counterbalance Israel’s undeclared nuclear weapons.

In London, the British Foreign Office (ministry) said Syria was a country “of proliferation concern” and had a track record of covert weapons programmes.

From Israel’s point of view the biggest “red line” would be a transfer of such weaponry to the powerful Shi’ite political party and guerrilla group Hezbollah, a sworn foe.

More localised leakage within Syria would be less worrying as such weapons are not easy to operate in the absence of a military infrastructure, Israeli officials have said.

Restive areas

But Damascus worries that even the appearance that it no longer enjoys 100 percent control of the material could trigger military action by the West to secure the sites and prevent them from getting into the hands of Islamist militants, analysts say.

“The material in question may not be adequately protected, or they are near restive areas,” said Shashank Joshi of the Royal United Services Institute military think tank.

Assad’s focus on the possibility that Western forces may one day seek to capture his chemical weapons may have been sharpened by the holding of regular multinational military exercises involving U.S. forces in neighbouring Jordan earlier this year.

Joshi said the US had been training for that kind of operation with nuclear-armed Pakistan in mind, “and so the stories have been trickling out (from Jordan) in a very clear US signaling that ‘we are preparing for this eventuality’. That will obviously have affected Assad.”

Western media reports have said suspected sites are in half a dozen cities and towns including the capital Damascus, Latakia, Hama and near Aleppo.

A senior Free Syrian Army source said two weeks ago that Assad’s forces, with Iranian help, were moving chemical weapons out of the the Tal Qartal military site, around 14 km southwest of Hama.

The source said some were going to Damascus and being airlifted to Lebanon. There was no immediate confirmation of the report.

Front lines

Leonard S. Spector, director of the Washington office of the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies research center, said there were several scenarios in which control could be lost over portions of the chemical arsenal.

Writing in a June 26 article in Yale Global Online, Spector listed these as:

- Custodians could be reassigned to the front lines of the impending civil war. 
- They could desert posts to protect families as domestic turmoil continues. 
- They could defect to the rebel cause, transferring control over weapons stocks to the Free Syrian Army, with confused lines of authority and plans to manage such materials that are likely non-existent. 
- Depending on the ebb and flow of battle, Assad could abandon the custodians if, for example, the sites fell within swathes of territory taken by rebel forces. 
- They could be overrun by rebel troops. Free Syria Army leaders might try to demonstrate, through capture of a site symbolizing

Assad’s military strength, that the Syrian leader was losing his grip on power.

“In any of these chaotic settings, bribery, bargaining for passage out of the country or ideological commitment could lead remaining guardians to offer up assets under their control,” Spector wrote.

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)

President Hugo Chavez and the country’s state-run oil company have defended fuel shipments to Syria.

Caracas, Venezuela (CNN) — While many world leaders have condemned Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, the embattled leader has found an ally in Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

The South American country’s state-run oil company has sent large diesel shipments to Syria, despite international sanctions.

In recent months, Venezuela supplied Syria with at least three shipments of diesel fuel in exchange for Syrian naphtha, a refined petroleum product, according to a May report from the U.S. Congressional Research Service.

In late May, Syria’s oil minister said that an oil tanker loaded with 35,000 tons of diesel fuel had arrived in his country from Venezuela, the state-run Syrian Arab News Agency reported. At the time, he said Venezuela was preparing another tanker to head to Syria.

Citing Venezuelan and Syrian government documents, the Wall Street Journal reported this week that a fourth shipment was in the works. CNN has not independently confirmed that report.

“If they need diesel, and we can provide it, there is no reason not to do it,” Rafael Ramirez, Venezuela’s energy minister, told reporters in February, according to state media reports.Chavez and the president of Venezuela’s state-run oil company have defended their sovereign right to send fuel to Syria.

Ramirez, who also heads the state-run oil company, said Venezuela was not worried about possibly facing international sanctions for sending fuel to the Middle Eastern nation.

“We cannot determine our foreign policy with fear of U.S. sanctions,” he said. “We have said that those truly don’t matter to us.”

Chavez and al-Assad have a “longstanding personal fraternity,” Venezuela’s foreign ministry said in a statement after the two leaders spoke on the phone in April.

This week, Chavez criticized what he said was Washington’s imperialistic approach to Syria.

“They should be focusing on solving their own country’s problems, but they want to impose themselves, like they did in Libya, where they killed thousands and thousands of people to then kill (Libyan leader) Moammar Gadhafi, and now they want to do the same with Syria and they are also threatening Iran,” he said, according to state-run VTV.

In March, Venezuela’s parliament passed “an agreement in solidarity with Syria in light of the imperial threat presented by the United States and its Arab allies.”

“The document exhorts the international community and peace lovers to undertake a massive campaign to reject intervention in that nation,” Venezuela’s interior ministry said.

Critics have alleged that fuel sent by Venezuela has been used to maintain the Syrian government’s military operations.

Otto Reich, a U.S. assistant secretary of state during President George W. Bush’s administration and a fierce critic of Chavez, told Venezuela’s El Universal newspaper last month that he feared ships sending fuel could have a more nefarious purpose.

“Chavez uses his own vessels because no self-respecting international shipping firm will transport fuel to Assad’s killing machine. There is another advantage, however: since he controls the entire voyage, from dock to dock, Chavez may be sending Assad military material hidden in the ships,” he said.

Alberto Aranguibel, a political analyst in Caracas who supports Chavez, told CNN en Español Tuesday that the fuel shipments are an economic and humanitarian matter.

U.S. sanctions against Syria must be stopped, he said.

“There is a humanitarian reason. The blockade is arbitrary, illegal and illegitimate. … It doesn’t affect the government. It affects the people,” he said.

Mauricio Meschoulam, an international relations professor in Mexico City, told CNN en Español that Venezuela was one of many nations that had become involved in the Syrian crisis.

“They are, unfortunately, feeding the parties that are clashing,” he said.

U.S. sanctions in Syria and Venezuela’s attempts to defy them are part of a global geopolitical battle, he said.

“There are no good or evil (countries). They are all fighting for resources, each one searching for its piece of the pie,” he said.

The close relationship between Venezuela and Syria has been years in the making.

After signing several agreements with al-Assad on an October 2010 trip to Syria, Chavez said the country’s capitals “have become the poles of the new world.”

“We are obligated to weave the connections between Damascus and Caracas with threads of steel … new economic, political, agricultural and scientific relations much strengthen so we can overcome together the great challenges that the times we live in impose,” Chavez said.

Violence erupted in Syria in March 2011, when Syrian forces launched a brutal crackdown on anti-government demonstrations, part of the Arab Spring that swept through several countries. Syrian officials have regularly blamed “armed terrorist groups” for the clashes.

The United Nations says more than 10,000 people, mostly civilians, have been killed in the violence. Opposition groups give an even higher figure.

CNN cannot independently confirm reports of violence in Syria, as the country’s government has severely limited the access of international journalists.

CNN’s Catherine E. Shoichet, CNN en Español’s Fernando del Rincon and journalist Osmary Hernandez contributed to this report.

he opposition movement inside and outside the country must walk a fine line between independence and intervention.

Clashes between rebel fighters and government forces have wrought great destruction [Reuters]

Deciding whether or not to oppose Syria’s rulers has been the recent dominant preoccupation of many anti-imperialist and left-leaning movements. This hesitant attitude towards the Syrian struggle for freedom is nurtured by many anti-regime actions that were recently taken by many Western and Middle-Eastern countries, whose main interest lies in isolating Syria from Iran. However, I believe a better question to ask with respect to Syria is whether the leftist movement should support, or not support, the struggle of the Syrian people.

What I find lacking in many of the analyses relating to the Syrian crisis, which I find oftentimes biased and politically motivated, is how well the interests of the Syrian people who are living inside are taken into account. Dry and unnecessarily sophisticated in nature, these analyses ignore simple facts about why the Syrian people rebelled against the regime in the first place.

A brief historical context is probably the best way to bring about some insight with respect to the events that are unfolding in front of our eyes today. Before doing so, it is important to highlight that, unlike many other Arab countries, Syria is not a religiously homogenous Middle-Eastern country. I am mentioning this because it is through religion that the majority of Arabs identified themselves for centuries. As it stands today, Syria’s population is composed 74 per cent of Sunnis (including Kurds and others), 12 per cent Alawites (including Arab Shia), ten per cent Christians (including Armenians) and three per cent Druze.

Syria earned its independence from the French in 1946. As has always been the case with any occupying and imperial force, France worked diligently to ensure that Syrian minorities were placed in top government and military positions.  The Alawites’ share of the pie was the military. By the time France left Syria, Alawites became well entrenched in this crucial government institution.

After two decades of military coups and counter-coups, it was no surprise that Hafez al-Assad, an Alawite and minister of defence at the time, seized power in a bloodless coup in 1970. Within a few years he was relatively able to bring about economic and social stability - which made him a hero in the eyes of the majority of Syrians, regardless of their religion or ethnicity.

Bolstering power

A cunning politician and an experienced military officer, Assad knew that unless he solidified his rule, the time would soon come when other military officers would mount a coup against him. Over the span of few years, he made sure the top brass of the military and intelligence was filled with fellow Alawite officers who, thanks to France’s pro-minorities policy, were available in abundance.

These Alawite officers were also less likely to mount a coup against a fellow countryman. To deprive the mukhabarat[“intelligence service”] of the opportunity to be able to mount a serious coup against him, Assad created 13 different intelligence agencies - completely independent of each other.

When I was detained at the Sednaya prison in 2003, a 60-year-old man told me of a conversation between him and a general in the political security directorate. The old man was trying to have a rational dialogue with the general during the interrogation, by advising the him that the regime must treat people like human beings if it wanted to rightly earn the respect of the Syrian people.

“To deprive the mukhabarat of the opportunity to be able to mount a serious coup against him, Assad created 13 different intelligence agencies - completely independent of each other.”

The general responded: “We want to rule people by our shoes.” This is a famous Syrian expression akin to: “We want to rule people with an iron fist, humiliating them.” This example sheds some light on the type of mentality that dominates the inner circles of the Assad regime even today. Understanding this point in particular is crucial to understanding the violent response that the regime showed towards the protesters since day one.

Crushing dissent

Those who still buy Assad’s anti-imperial rhetoric should know that the old man whose story is mentioned above was imprisoned simply because he and other fellow citizens organised a small rally to denounce the illegal US invasion of Iraq.

In fact, it is not uncommon to find prisoners - including some of those I met in Sednaya prison - whose only “crime” was to help Palestinian groups. How could a regime that claims to be anti-Israel not even dare to protect itself against the frequent Israeli air incursions throughout the past decade?

I remember vividly the day I was released, when Israeli warplanes bombarded a site inside Syria under the pretext that it was being used to train Palestinian fighters. Syria’s response on that day was mute - as had always been the case.  Finally, it is no secret that Syria, like many other Arab countries, cooperated closely with the US in the so-called “war on terror”. I am only one of few living examples of this covert cooperation.

I hope this brief historical context and the few stories mentioned above contain enough information which can now help us analyse the current situation. Contrary to the conspiracy theory type of analysis, which accuses the US and its allies of starting the unrest in Syria, it is now an established fact that spontaneous and peaceful demonstrations erupted after the government refused to hold to account those who tortured those teenagers who sprayed anti-regime graffiti on school walls.

In fact, the initial demands of the protesters were very simple, and did not contain a single slogan which demanded the downfall of the regime.

As peaceful demonstrations widened, and spread from one city to the next, Assad’s security forces naively thought that by using lethal force to crush these growing protests, the barrier of fear that was starting to collapse would be immediately restored. Contrary to their wishes, however, the more lethal the force they used, the more Syrians became determined to overthrow the regime - by then most had lost hope that their simple demands were going to be met.

When it became clear that there was no genuine commitment that security forces and affiliated shabiha gangs were going to refrain from using force to crush the demonstrations, people felt the need to defend themselves against the excessive aggression and atrocities committed by state agents - some of whom had reportedly gone totally rogue.

Emergence of the opposition

It is amid this atmosphere that political and armed opposition groups started to galvanise, resulting in the emergence of opposition coalitions - the largest of which was the Syrian National Council (SNC), mainly comprised of Syrians living abroad. The composition of the SNC came back to haunt it later, as dissidents living inside Syria accused the SNC of being detached from the true demands of the people on the ground. 

For instance, the main point of contention between a newly spun group led by longtime dissident Haitham al-Maleh and the SNC was the issue of how best to respond to the regime’s growing brutality. Al-Maleh believed that the priority was to arm what is called the Free Syrian Army (FSA), a group that was mostly formed, reportedly, from army defectors. It seems that al-Maleh was responding to the popular will of the people inside Syria who had lost hope in peaceful means to bring down the regime. It also seems that revolutionaries inside Syria had also lost hope that sanctions, which the SNC heavily lobbied Western countries for, would have any meaningful effect on the regime.

People also came to realise that outside military intervention would never happen. It is worth highlighting that, despite its name, the FSA is composed of hundreds of independent groups. Their emergence is a miracle, considering that the regime has become known for taking revenge upon the families of deserters. It is also worth highlighting that Syrian conscripts are usually assigned to detachments that are hundreds of miles away from their home town (another regime tactic which makes it more likely that soldiers will obey orders to kill.)

The FSA’s disorganised nature, in the sense that it does not have a single command structure, is - in my opinion - a strength and not a weakness, at least given the circumstances with respect to the excessive brutality of the regime, and the fact that the regime has a huge network of informants. Because of a lack of any other viable alternative, many Syrians see the “FSA” as their last hope.

Exaggeration of ‘outside influence’

Now to claim that there is no outside, foreign interference in Syria’s internal affairs is to deny the obvious. But in my opinion this “interference” has been exaggerated (the analyses I’ve read with respect to this issue are based on speculations that are not supported by facts on the ground). Yes, there are countries who have always had a strong desire to see the Syrian-Iranian marriage fall apart. But to what extent these countries are influencing events on the ground is far from certain. For instance, the efforts reportedly led by Qatar and Saudi Arabia to equip the rebels with heavy arms have not yet borne fruits, and it seems the FSA is mostly using light to medium weapons.

Most of these weapons have either ben bought from corrupt army officers, or are acquired by raiding weapons caches. Qatar and Saudi Arabia reportedly would want to make sure that weaponry would only be distributed to those groups that would pledge allegiance to them. While some groups may accept the deal, it is far from certain that all groups would accept any preconditions - as recently reported by Time magazine.

While the CIA may be present near the Syrian-Turkish border, all evidence points to the fact that the US is not very keen to arm the rebels, out of fear the arms would eventually fall in the hands of al-Qaeda and like-minded groups. In fact, Washington, despite the anti-Assad rhetoric we read about in media headlines, is not very keen on replacing the Assad regime with one whose allegiance to the US would be uncertain.

This explains why the US has so far reportedly refused to supply weapons to Syria’s armed opposition. The latest discussions that took place in Geneva demonstrate that the US still prefers “a political solution” (whatever that means).
The fact that Syrian revolutionaries are not receiving the help they need to win the battle against the Syrian regime will certainly prolong the conflict. While many Syrians are disappointed by this indifference, I believe it is better for the future of Syria and its independence.

Syrians have already demonstrated mind-boggling courage and determination. They have made sizeable gains over the past year and they will certainly continue to make more. The signs are clear: the murderous Assad army, the regime’s iron first, is disintegrating, albeit slowly. While it is no reason to celebrate, it is the Syrians’ last hope, and if I were living inside Syria, I would hope the same.

Maher Arar is a human rights activist, and the publisher of Prism Magazine, who first came to public attention after he was rendered by US authorities to Syria, his native country. A public inquiry in Canada later cleared his name. His commentary has appeared in publications such as The Guardian, The Globe and Mail, The Huffington Post among others.

Follow him on Twitter: @ArarMaher

Russia has circulated among UN Security Council members a draft resolution to extend its mission in Syria for three months so it can shift focus from monitoring a non-existent truce to securing a political solution to the conflict.

The deeply divided council must decide the future of the mission, known as UNSMIS, before July 20 when its initial 90-day mandate expires.

International envoy Kofi Annan is due to brief the council on Wednesday on his bid to broker peace in Syria.

Syrian 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.

The Russian draft resolution is unlikely to satisfy the United States and European council members, who have called for a resolution under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, which allows the council to authorise actions ranging from diplomatic and economic sanctions to military intervention.

US officials have said they are talking about sanctions on Syria, not military intervention.

Russia’s Deputy UN Ambassador, Alexander Pankin, said a resolution under Chapter 7 would be “counterproductive” in what he described as a “delicate situation”.

Russia and China have previously vetoed U.N. resolutions designed to pressure Assad.

“There is no mention of Chapter 7 (in the Russian draft) and that’s a matter of principle for us because we believe the special envoy is doing a commendable job,” Pankin told Reuters.

“(The draft) is a continuation of the mission bearing in mind the recommendations of the Secretary-General.”

MORE PRESSURE

UN chief Ban Ki-moon has recommended the emphasis of UNSMIS’ work shift from military observers - who suspended most of their monitoring activities on June 16 because of increased risk amid rising violence - to the roughly 100 civilian staff focusing on a political solution and issues like human rights.

The mission would keep its current mandate for up to 300 unarmed observers under this option, but significantly fewer likely would be needed to support the new focus.

The Russian draft resolution, obtained by Reuters, does not specify a number, but “stresses the need for UNSMIS to have a military observer capability to conduct effective verification and fact-finding tasks”.

It also “calls upon all Syrian parties to guarantee the safety of UNSMIS personnel without prejudice to its freedom of movement and access, and stresses that the primary responsibility in this regard lies with the Syrian authorities”.

The resolution also strongly urges all parties to cease all violence and stressed “that it is for the Syrian people to find a political solution and that the Syrian parties must be prepared to put forward effective and mutually acceptable interlocutors” to work with Annan toward an agreement.

One Security Council diplomat, who did not want to be named, described the Russian draft as “basically a rollover”.

“At the very least it needs to be combined with some real pressure on the parties,” he said.

Annan met with Assad in Damascus on Monday before travelling to Iran and Iraq for talks on the conflict.”The council will need to address the Syria situation in a more comprehensive way.”

Annan said Assad had suggested easing the conflict on a step-by-step basis, starting with districts that have suffered the worst violence.

- Reuters

DAMASCUS (AFP) - International envoy Kofi Annan has announced a new political “approach” in a bid to end Syria’s 16-month-old conflict, as the West voices concern over the violence spreading across the Lebanese border.

“We discussed the need to end the violence and ways and means of doing so. We agreed an approach which I will share with the armed opposition,” UN-Arab League envoy Annan said after meeting Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus on Monday.

Syrian foreign ministry spokesman Jihad Makdissi called the meeting “constructive and good”.

Stepping up efforts to halt the carnage which monitors say has cost more than 17,000 lives, Annan then travelled on to Iran, Syria’s closest regional ally, in his quest to broker a solution.

The diplomatic efforts were carried out against the increasingly familiar backdrop of bloodshed in Syria, with the United States and the European Union expressing concern at the outbreak of cross-border clashes with Lebanon.

Shells fired from Syria landed overnight in northern Lebanon after an exchange of fire along the border, a senior Lebanese security official told AFP early Tuesday.

The Syrian shells were fired into Lebanon following a cross-border gun battle, the source added.

There was no immediate report of casualties, but the latest incident came just two days after border clashes in which two girls were killed and several other people wounded in Lebanon.

US Ambassador to Lebanon Maura Connelly on Monday called on Damascus to “respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Lebanon”.

In Brussels EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton’s office released a statement saying she “strongly condemns the recent shelling of the Lebanese border area by Syrian artillery, causing several deaths and injuries”.

Monday’s interventions also came as at least 58 people were killed nationwide, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said, a day after nearly 100 people died.

Pro-government Al-Watan newspaper said Annan’s discussions focused on the results of the Geneva meeting at the end of June.

They discussed means “to implement the results of the meeting… on forming a transitional government in Syria that groups government and opposition representatives without mention of Assad’s departure”, it said.

World powers in Geneva agreed a plan for a transition which did not make an explicit call for Assad to quit, although the West and the opposition made clear it saw no role for him in a unity government.

On the ground in Syria, the army pounded besieged rebel-held areas of Homs, monitors said Monday, as Qusayr also came under a morning bombardment.

The opposition Syrian National Council (SNC) slammed Annan’s decision to meet Assad, saying thousands of people have been killed despite an April ceasefire.

Annan, whose military observers in Syria have been grounded because of escalating violence, admitted in remarks published by French newspaper Le Monde ahead of his Damascus trip that his peace blueprint has so far foundered.

He also expressed frustration that while Moscow and Iran are mentioned by some as stumbling blocks to peace, “little is said about other countries which send arms, money, and have a presence on the ground”.

Moscow arms export officials said Monday that Russia will not supply new weapons to its Arab ally Syria while fighting there continues, while stressing that old contracts would be fulfilled.

Earlier, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Syria needed dialogue between the regime and opposition, rather than foreign intervention, to ensure a lasting peace.

Putin spoke after prominent Syrian opposition leader and intellectual Michel Kilo met Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Moscow.

Later on Monday Annan few to Tehran for talks with Saeed Jalili, Iran’s top security official, and Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi.

Annan has said Tehran has a key role to play in efforts to end the bloodshed.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has accused the United States and its allies of opposing Assad’s regime with the goal of dominating the Middle East and propping up Israel.

On Sunday US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned time was running out to save Syria from a “catastrophic assault”.

The Observatory, a Britain-based monitoring group, estimates that 5,898 people have been killed since the Annan-brokered April truce.

By NEIL MacFARQUHAR

Published: July 9, 2012