Syrian Prime Minister Riyad Hijab has confirmed his defection from Al Assad’s government and that he is in Jordan, thus refuting the Syrian media which has suggested that he was dismissed by Al Assad.

“I announce today my defection from the killing and terrorist regime, and I announce that I have joined the ranks of the freedom and dignity revolution,” Hijab said in a statement read by his spokesman, Muhammed el-Etri, according to Al Jazeera. “I announce that I am from today a soldier in this blessed revolution.”

Hijab, former Minister of Agriculture, was elected prime minister in June after the parliamentary elections. Syrian authorities said this was a decisive step towards the path of democracy, while the opposition denounced it as a fraud.

Apparently, the now former Syrian prime minister has left the country along with at least two ministers and three military officers.

Hijab is thus added to the growing list of defectors, becoming the highest-ranking official to defect from Bashar Al-Assad’s government since the beginning of the uprising. It all started with the Oil Deputy Minister Abdo Houssameddine, who announced on March 8 his desertion and became the first government men to join the opposition.

Diplomats such as the Syrian ambassador in Iraq, his counterpart in the United Arab Emirates, and four deputies have also crossed the border to join the revolution since civil war started.

Hundreds of soldiers, including senior military personnel have also turned their back on Assad’s regime.

According to The Guardian, “Hijab’s defection had been planned for more than two months” but the actual implementation of the plan had be “delayed on many occasions.” Haaretz Israeli newspaper reports that “Hijab had started to plan how he would defect from the first day that he was appointed as prime minister.”

Omar Ghalawanji, a local government minister, has been appointed to take on Hijab’s office at the moment, official Syrian television announced.

The United States believes that the defection of Syria’s prime minister shows that President Assad grip on power is loosening: “This is the latest indication that Assad has lost control of Syria and that the momentum is with the opposition forces and the Syrian people,” says Tommy Vietor, the National Security Council spokesman.

“It’s clear that these defections are reaching the highest levels of the Syrian government and demonstrate that the Syrian people believe Assad’s days are numbered,” Vietor continued.

The news on Hijab’s defection was released just hours after a bomb ripped through the state TV building in the capital Damascus.

Image Courtesy of  jan kranendonk / Shutterstock.com

The article Syrian Prime Minister Riyad Hijab Defects from Regime appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

In late 2010, a wave of protest and civil unrest swept through nearly every Arab nation. Dubbed the Arab Spring, the protest’s whipped through the region like one of their legendary sand storms, and swept rulers in the countries Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen out of power. In their wake have been uprisings in Bahrain, Oman, Algeria, and Syria.

The term “Arab Spring” is meant to be an analogy for the thawing out of the average Arab citizens acceptance of rigid and authoritarian regimens. This is more a hope than a reality, and the events have exposed America’s weakness and limits in foreign policy regarding the Arab region.

From the start, the Obama administration has had a schizophrenic response to the events of the Arab spring. The protesters in Iran, arguably the start of the Arab spring, got very little, if any, support from the U.S. Though President Obama was near-silent toward Iran, the President was quite forceful in telling President Mubarak of Egypt he had to go. Odd, given that Mubarak was the only true ally of the U.S. in that area.

He might have been a dictator, but he was our dictator. Now, the Muslim brotherhood stands poised to take political power, just as Hamas did in Palestine. As Libyans began to fight against Gaddafi, the U.S. took a position of leading from behind in helping to enforce a no-fly zone, and providing other low-key military assistance to the rebels, while Syrian rebels were getting, and still are getting, slaughtered by the hundreds with only words of support from the international community.

Opponents of President Obama believe his ambivalence is another sign of weakness in his administration, but you can argue that he’s politically stuck. The stark realty is that Iran, Syria, and every other situation in the Middle East exposes an ugly truth about foreign policy for that region; there is not much that the U.S. can do.

Americans, the citizens not the politicians, are a strange lot. We cannot stomach human rights violations wherever they occur: China, North Korea, Darfur, South Africa, or the Middle East nations. When we see 8500 innocent civilians killed in Syria, we feel the need to do something to stop it.

However, the only way to stop killing on that scale in a country a world away is through force. We are either going to send troops in, or we have to arm the rebels and lend military support similar to what was done in Libya. Unfortunately, the American public does not want to do that, and therefore neither does President Obama.

Instead, we get empty statements from our President and other world leaders about how President Assad must give up power. Really?  According to whom? Every time a statement like that is issued, I hear President Assad saying, “So what? Who are you to tell me what to do,” and “Okay, well make me leave.”

Even if President Assad is not saying those exact words, they are certainly the sentiments of the reality on ground. Dictators are either forced from power by their own people or forced out by an outside force. In either case, force is what is needed for changes.

Unless we force him from power, there is nothing we can do. And that’s the problem every President must face at times. Situations in the world that we would like to alter, but the choices on the table on how to do it are not good choices. Whether we are talking about halting the killing in Syria, or stopping Iran from going nuclear, force is the only thing that is ultimately going to work. And going that route is fraught with other implications and unintended consequences.

Diplomacy is its own minefield. It takes a long time to work, which is not exactly good for the people getting shot at in Syria. And an unspoken assumption in diplomacy is that the person across the table is a rational actor. The heads of oppressive governments are seldom rational, and rationality, as Americans and Europeans measure it, is completely absent from the Muslim world.

In America, for instance, ostensibly everyone gets a say while the Middle East is fraught with authoritarian discipline, often guided by religious doctrine; a “do this, or there will be consequences” approach. Couple that with the general principle of dictatorship — doing what is necessary to stay in power — and you have a volatile mix that Americans may never understand.

President Reagan, in his memoirs, has famously lamented getting the U.S. involved in Lebanon. His opinion being that if he had to do it again, he would not, because, we (America) do not understand the Middle East. This remains true to a large degree today. President Obama is in charge now, but if it were President McCain, or if it turns to be a Republican candidate in 2012, not much will change.

Force is what is necessary, and we cannot send troops into every Muslim country that decides to start shooting up their citizenry. Does anyone really see a President Romney sending in ground troops to Syria? No, the best we can hope for is a President, present or future, who can explain that some things we cannot affect, and that the things we can, may require force.

We will have to make hard choices about what is in our national interest, preventing Iran from a nuclear bomb, and things that, while sickening, do not affect the U.S. directly, like what is happening in Syria. The only question remaining is whether the voting public will understand and accept those distinctions.

Image Courtesy of Fabio Rodrigues Pozzebom / ABr [CC-BY-3.0-br], via Wikimedia Commons

The article Syria Exposes Limits of U.S. Influence appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The international organization Human Rights Watch released a report on Thursday, December 15, concerning violations and abuses in Syria committed by security forces since the beginning of anti-government protests and demonstrations in March 2011.

The 94-pages report called “By All Means Necessary!” is the result of the investigations conducted independently by Human Rights Watch in Syria, and it is based on statements of hundreds of victims and witnesses. In particular, it focuses on the violence and killings that occurred between April and August 2011, in seven of Syria’s fourteen governorates: Damascus, Daraa, Homs, Idlib, Tartous, Deir al-Zor, and Hama.

Sixty-three defectors, both from the army and the intelligence agencies, were interviewed separately and accurately. They provided detailed information and reports on the violations, the abuses, and the orders they received from commanders of the Syrian army at any level for repressive actions, violence, and attacks on civilian protesters.

The orders were to stop the protests “by all means necessary”. The people who were interviewed had firsthand knowledge of the violations. Their statements provide accounts and evidence of the systematic abuse on civilians and of the responsibility of the government forces for these abuses.

Anna Neistat, an associate director for emergencies at Human Rights Watch who participated directly in the investigations for the report, said and wrote to CNN, “But responsibility for these crimes does not stop with the commanders on the ground.

Under international criminal law, al-Assad, as commander in chief of all forces in Syria, bears responsibility for the most serious crimes committed by his forces – even if he did not order them – to the extent that he knew, or should have known, about the abuses and failed to prevent them.”

A quote from the report reads, “Human Rights Watch’s findings show that military commanders and officials in the intelligence agencies gave both direct and standing orders to use lethal force against the protesters (at least 20 such cases are documented in detail in this report) as well as to unlawfully arrest, beat, and torture the detainees.

In addition, senior military commanders and high-ranking officials, including President Bashar al-Assad and the heads of the intelligence agencies, bear command responsibility for violations committed by their subordinates to the extent that they knew, or should have known, of the abuses, but failed to take action to stop them.

Given the widespread public and international criticism of the abuses, it would be incredible for al-Assad to argue that he did not know.” Hence, what comes out from this report is the commitment and the responsibility of the Syrian regime, and its president, in crimes against humanity during the crackdown of the anti-government protests.

The non-involvement and non-responsibility claims of President Bashar Al-Assad were demolished by the witnesses’ accounts and statements documented in the report of Human Rights Watch.

Moreover, the claims of Syrian authorities about the violations and the violence having been committed and organized by armed terrorist gangs that were “incited and sponsored from abroad” and by foreign countries, crumble in view of what has been reported and documented. During the nine-month crackdown, the number of victims is estimated around 5,000 people, of whom at least 300 were children.

Despite the sanctions imposed recently by the Arab League on Syria and the increasing isolation of the country, the violence and the abuses did not stop, and there seems to be no change in the regime’s police. Maybe the worst has yet to come.

The article Syria, Human Rights Watch Report on Crimes Against Humanity appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The Arab league has voted to suspend Syria from its meetings on November 16th if the regime in Damascus fails to implement a deal to put an end to the brutal crackdown against anti-government protesters. The Arab League decided last week to suspend Syria, but the decision was adopted at a meeting in Morocco on November 16th.

The league also decided to impose severe political and economic sanctions against Syria; making Syria more isolated from both economic and political orbit. Recently, the 22-member body agreed that it would withdraw its army and security forces, open dialogue with the opposition and invite press within two weeks.

Nevertheless, Syria reneged and lingered irreverently, killing more than 100 people. This stronger-than-expected move came amid worsening humanitarian conditions in Syria over the last eight months. Meanwhile, Jordan’s King Abdullah has become the first Arab Leader to explicitly call for President Basher-Al –Assad’s resignation.

Prince Turki al Faisal, former chief of Saudi intelligence, has also echoed his sentiments by saying that it is inevitable that he will have to step down one way or the other. The Arab League intervention in Syrian political unrest opens in a big way the possibilities of repairing the damaged system, especially in Syria and other Arab countries devastated by greed for authoritative power.

The United States hoped that the League would use meetings to send a clear and hard signal to Assad that he needs to allow for democratic change and end violence against its people. The year 2011 brought unrivaled changes at the political podium in the Arab world, ending decades of human oppression at the hands of both economic and political discourse.

Anti-government protest first abruptly erupted in Tunisia, paving a way forward as a mark of encouragement. Tunisia, Egypt, Libya; the three African nations witnessed a change that was overlooked as impossible a few years back.

In the Middle East, Yemen and Syria are still poised with reluctance to hear calls for installation of democracy, good governance and economic reforms that are inversely in the interest of their countries. Arab League General Nabil Araby suggested that the body had run out of patience with Assad. “The Arab League started exerting pressure on Syria to put an end to deathly battle with the protestors and to come to dialogue from the last four months, but Assad didn’t budge”

The Arab League intervened in the crisis and called for urgent measures to safeguard the Syrian people from violent and despotic repression by Assad’s regime, that during the last nine months killed nearly 3500 people.

Syria’s Baathist regime which has been in power for the last five decadesand even so doesn’t seem to soften its stance against its own people, shows that greed for power perhaps diminishes the substance to subsistence!

Image Courtesy of  http://www.flickr.com/photos/96884693@N00/

The article Can Arab League End the Game of Thrones in Syria? appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.