Saturday, September 14, 2013

From Azmi Bishara's Facebook Page

أسوأ من النفاق
1. أنصاف مثقفين خانوا حتى دورهم المنفصم أصلا، ووقفوا مع الدكتاتوريات ضد الشعوب، ويتجرأون مع ذلك على التهجم على من وقف مع المظلومين ضد الظلم.
2.أرباع مثقفين يقسمون الدنيا والمواقف بموجب الولاء للدول، وليس للمبادئ، ومثل أنظمتهم يعتبرون الإقامة في دولة علامة على موقف، ومثل أنظمتهم لا يعارضون المال الخليجي وغير الخليجي إذا دفع للطرف الذي يقفون معه. ويعتقدون أن الناس تباع وتشترى لأنهم لل...
بيع والشراء.
3. متعصبون عصبيون، يقسمون الناس إلى معنا أو ضدنا. فمن معنا هو وطني ولو كان خائنا ، ومن ضدنا هو خائن حتى لو كان يعلمهم الوطنية. هؤلاء خونة كل شيء، وخونة الأخلاق اساسا، لأن عصبيتهم العمياء تعميهم حتى عن رؤية الدم والموت في السجون من التعذيب.
4. قلما تجد منهم من يوجه نقدا عينيا فعليا للجهة التي يتعصب لها، ولكنهم يستغلون النقد الذاتي لخصومهم للاستفادة منه.
5. مستبدون يستغلون ديمقراطية الآخرين.
6. يكرهون الآخر أكثر مما يحبون الحرية والديمقراطية.
7. يتملقون الغرب بالتحريض على الإسلام. وتبنوا مؤخرا خطاب المحافظين الجدد عن الإرهاب، وعن الشعوب العربية والإسلامية، الذي تخلت عنه أميركا نفسها.
8. طائفيون يناقشون في المواقف والأيديولوجيات لتغطية الطائفية الكامنة بخبث في كل محاولة لاحتواء الناس، وفي كل تشهير بالناس.
9. متعصبون فارغون من القراءة والكتابة والحب والعاطفة والوجدان يجترون كلاما ليس فيه إلا الكلام، ويكتبون كلاما ويقرأون كلاما.
10. من شدة الحقد المبرر بأكاذيب الهويات والآراء المسبقة فقدوا صورة الإنسان.

Mafeesh Fayda



"Mafeesh Fayda," (it is useless and hopeless) --  Saad Zaghloul

THIS IS HOW I FEEL ABOUT THE ENTIRE ARAB WORLD RIGHT NOW!

AS ZAGHLOUL SAID TO HIS WIFE "COVER ME UP," AND WENT TO SLEEP.

Friday, September 13, 2013

'We Just Wish for the Hit to Put an End to the Massacres'



I sat inside a dimly lit, ramshackle trailer functioning as a general store for the residents of the Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan, while a wiry, sad-eyed man named Adbel told me about the massacres that drove him from his hometown. Dragging deeply on a cigarette, Abdel described how army forces rained shells down on his neighborhood in Deir Ba’alba, a district in Homs, over five months ago, pounding the town over and over. Then he told me how government thugs barged into homes at 6 am, methodically slashing his neighbors to death with long knives, leaving fields irrigated with the blood of corpses, a nightmarish scene that looked much like this. Like nearly everyone I interviewed in the camp, he described his experience in clinical detail, with a flat tone and a blank expression, masking continuous trauma behind stoicism.

None of the dozens of adults I interviewed in the camp would allow me to report their full names or photograph their faces. If they return to Syria with the regime of President Bashar al-Assad still intact, they fear brutal recriminations. Many have already survived torture, escaped from prisons, or defected from Assad’s army. “With all the bloodshed, the killing of people who did not even join the resistance, Bashar only wanted to teach us one lesson: That we are completely weak and he is our god,” a woman from Dara’a in her early 60s told me. “His goal is to demolish our spirit so we will never rise up again.” The woman’s sons had spent four months under sustained torture for defecting to the Free Syrian Army. She does not know where they are now, only that they are back in the field, battling Assad’s forces in a grinding stalemate that has taken somewhere around 100,000 lives.
When news of the August 21 chemical attacks that left hundreds dead in the Ghouta region east of Damascus reached Zaatari, terror and dread spiked to unprecedented levels. Many residents repeated to me the rumors spreading through the camp that Bashar would douse them in sarin gas as soon as he crushed the last vestiges of internal resistance—a kind of genocidal victory celebration. When President Barack Obama announced his intention to launch punitive missile strikes on Syria, however, a momentary sense of hope began to surge through the camp. Indeed, there was not one person I spoke to in Zaatari who did not demand US military intervention at the earliest possible moment.
“We follow the news minute by minute,” Abdel told me. “The whole camp’s opinion is in favor of a strike. Nobody wants the country to be hit. I swear we don’t like it. But with the kind of injustice we have seen, we just wish for the hit to put an end to the massacres. We feel strange because we’re wishing for something that we have never wished for before. But it’s the lesser of two evils.”
“Just do it, Obama! What are you waiting for?” an elderly woman in a tent on the other side of the camp remarked to me. “Hit him today and bring down the whole country—we have no problem with that. We just want to go back. Besides, the country is so destroyed, even if Obama’s strike destroys houses, we can rebuild them again.”
Winter was edging closer, and many in Zaatari were not sure how they would make it through. As the cruelty of camp life persisted and the United States hesitated, frustration mounted. “I give Obama and Kerry two options,” Abdel from Deir Ba’alba remarked to me. “Either bomb the regime or you can bomb Zaatari and get it over with for us. Just get it over with for us. We are dying slowly here.”

Syria attacks hospitals, denies healthcare as 'weapon of war': U.N


"GENEVA (Reuters) - Syrian government forces are bombing and shelling hospitals in rebel-held areas to stop sick and wounded people getting treatment, acts which constitute war crimes, U.N. investigators said on Friday.
Fighters loyal to President Bashar al-Assad purposefully denied people medical care as a "weapon of war" and had also tortured people in their own medical centers, the independent investigators said.
The U.N. team had details of a smaller number of incidents when rebel forces attacked hospitals.
"The pattern of attacks indicates that government forces deliberately targeted hospitals and medical units to gain military advantage by depriving anti-government armed groups and their perceived supporters of medical assistance," the report said.
The attacks started as violence mounted in Syria's conflict in early 2012 and were continuing, it added.
Neither Assad's forces nor rebel groups immediately responded to the allegations.
The Syrian army has occupied hospitals, using them as bases for snipers, tanks and soldiers, according to the report. Ambulance drivers, nurses and doctors have been attacked, arrested, tortured or disappeared in "insidious" violations of international law.
"Intentionally directing attacks against hospitals and places containing the sick and the wounded and against medical units using the Red Cross or Red Crescent emblem is a war crime in non-international armed conflict," the investigators said, referring to a legal term for civil war.
Many people had been tortured to death in a government military hospital in Mezze, Damascus, the report added. In another military hospital in the northwestern Homs district of Al Waer "doctors were ordered to keep victims alive so that they could be interrogated further", it said.
The team of 20 human rights experts, led by Brazilian Paulo Pinheiro, was not allowed into Syria but interviewed more than 2,000 Syrian refugees, defectors, former patients and health staff in neighboring countries over the past two years.
It also analyzed photographs, satellite images, and forensic and medical records, to document atrocities for possible future prosecution.

"HARROWING ACCOUNTS"

"Victims relay harrowing accounts of the wounded and sick languishing at checkpoints unable to reach medical treatment, coming under renewed attack in hospital and doctors providing impartial aid being arrested and targeted," the report said.
Hospitals in Homs, Aleppo, Damascus, Deraa and the coastal area of Latakia have come under government shelling or aerial bombardment.
Syrian security forces occupied the National Hospital in Deraa city - in a southern province that was the cradle of the revolt - for two years to March 2013. Snipers on its roof fired on sick and wounded trying to enter, the experts said.
In the north, in Aleppo, Tal Rifat public hospital was destroyed by air strikes in April 2012 and field hospitals that tried to provide care were attacked by fighter jets from May to August, they added.
Field hospitals in Deraa have been under constant shelling this year, killing doctors and patients, according to the report. "As such attacks continue, field hospitals have literally been driven underground, forced to operate in the basements of houses."
Although the scale of documented abuses by rebel forces appeared to be far smaller, there were increasing indications some armed groups failed to respect medical personnel and neutrality of health facilities, the report said.
The al-Qaeda affiliated al-Nusra group detained the head doctor of a field hospital in northern Aleppo city for several days in April 2013 after he refused to display their banner in the hospital, it said.
The Free Syrian Army attacked the National Hospital in Deraa in May 2013, apparently because 50 patients were believed to be linked to the government, according to the report."

Inequality for All: Robert Reich Warns Record Income Gap Is Undermining Our Democracy

Democracy Now!

"Five years ago this weekend, the Wall Street giant Lehman Brothers collapsed triggering the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Today, the divide between the 1 percent and the 99 percent is as great as ever. According to one recent study, the top 1 percent has captured about 95 percent of the income gains since the recession ended. “Since the recovery, almost all of the gains have gone to the very, very top. People who are in the top 1 percent are doing even better than they did before the Great Recession, better than they have done since 1928,” says former Labor Secretary Robert Reich. “Most Americans are on a downward escalator. Median wage in the United States, adjusted for inflation, keeps on dropping.” Reich is the focus of the new film, “Inequality for All.” In this interview, he also talks about Syria, the second anniversary of Occupy Wall Street on September 17, Obama’s healthcare plan and Milton Friedman’s connection to the Pinochet dictatorship in Chile......"

هل تغازل إيران الغرب وإسرائيل؟




لم نسمع أحدا من زعماء الدول العربية (خلا زعماء السلطة الفلسطينية!) يجاهر بتهنئة اليهود بسنتهم العبرية الجديدة، وذلك رغم أنهم يعترفون بوجود الكيان الصهيوني، لكن الرئيس الإيراني روحاني فعلها، وهنّأ اليهود (كل اليهود، وليس يهود إيران وحدهم) بسنتهم الجديدة، رغم أن إيران تبشر بشطب المشروع الصهيوني برمته.

وإذا قيل إن ذلك لا يعني الكثير لأن الصراع ليس مع اليهود كأتباع دين بسبب دينهم (وهذا صحيح)، وإنما مع من احتلوا فلسطين وشردوا شعبها، فإننا إزاء تفسير سخيف للمشهد، لأن الكل يعرف أن عدد اليهود في العالم هو ثلاثة عشر مليونا، أقل من نصفهم بقليل يعيشون في الكيان الصهيوني على أرض سرقت من أصحابها، فيما يعرف الجميع أن قلة لا تكاد تذكر منهم هي التي تعترف أن فلسطين هي للفلسطينيين والعرب.

بينما يتوفر قطاع لا بأس به آخر يعترف بأن الأراضي المحتلة عام 1967 محتلة، لكن قلة من هؤلاء يمكنهم التنازل مثلا عن القدس الشرقية، وهي جزء من تلك الأراضي المحتلة عام 1967.


إذا كان زعماء عرب الاعتدال يحجمون عن فعل ما فعل روحاني (تهنئة اليهود بسنتهم العبرية)، فإن دلالة الفعل من طرف رئيس الدولة التي تتحدث عن ضرورة تحرير فلسطين من البحر إلى النهر لا يمكن إخفاؤها بحال من الأحوال.

إذا كان زعماء عرب الاعتدال يحجمون عن فعل ما فعل روحاني، فإن دلالة الفعل من طرف رئيس الدولة التي تتحدث عن ضرورة تحرير فلسطين من البحر إلى النهر لا يمكن إخفاؤها بحال من الأحوال
وحين يكرر وزير الخارجية الجديد نفس الفعل (التهنئة بالسنة العبرية)، معطوفا على التأكيد على عدم إنكار إيران (نكرر إيران) للمحرقة النازية، فهذا يعكس تغيرا في لهجة الخطاب لا يمكن إخفاؤه بأية طريقة كانت، ولاسيما حين يقول الوزير إن الشخص الذي يُعتقد أنه (أنكر المحرقة) قد ولى (يقصد بذلك أحمدي نجاد)، مما يعني حرصه على التأكيد على أننا إزاء زمن جديد مختلف إلى حد كبير.

من الذكاء بالطبع أن يكون الغزل مع اليهود هو المفتاح الأهم للدبلوماسية الإيرانية الجديدة، إذ يدرك الجميع أن كل ما أصاب إيران من عقوبات وتحريض إنما كان نتاج ملفها النووي الذي لا يشكل خطرا على أميركا ولا على الغرب، بقدر ما يثير مخاوف لدى الكيان الصهيوني، وهي مخاوف تتعلق بكسر ميزان القوى في المنطقة، وليس بالخوف من استعمال النووي ضده بالفعل.

وحين يرضى اليهود (رضا غالبيتهم الساحقة من رضا إسرائيل)، فستكون الأبواب الغربية قد أشرعت أمام طهران للخروج من مأزق العقوبات والحصار، وفي المقدمة البوابة الأميركية التي يملك اللوبي الصهيوني مفاتيحها الشرق أوسطية بشكل شبه كامل.

ما ينبغي التذكير به ابتداء هو أن فوز روحاني بالرئاسة لم يأت رغم أنف المرشد والمؤسسة الحديدية التي تمسك بتلابيب السلطة في إيران، إذ كان بوسعهم أن يقصوه قبل ذلك كما فعلوا مع آخرين، والأرجح أنه جاء بإرادتها تبعا لرؤية سياسية في الاتجاه الذي يعكسه خطاب الرجل الذي يقف سياسيا في مسافة بين الإصلاحيين والمحافظين، وإن رآه البعض إصلاحيا بسبب دعم خاتمي ورفسنجاني له في الانتخابات.

وللتذكير أيضا، فمن عادة المرشد في حال لم يعجبه شيء من كلام الرئيس أن يخرج معقبا، أحيانا بـ"روحية" إعلامية من أجل التأكيد على عدم تغيير مواقف القيادة العليا، وربما من أجل الإشارة إلى مدى تساهل الطرف الآخر (في سياق المناورة بطبيعة الحال)، وأحيانا بـ"روحية" جدية تعكس رفضه لما جرى، ويبدو أنه هنا لا يبدي اعتراضا حقيقيا على تطور الخطاب، حتى لو استمر هو في الحديث بذات اللهجة القديمة حفاظا على بعض المصداقية.

واللافت في هذه الحكاية على وجه التحديد أن نتنياهو لم يمنحها الكثير من الأهمية، رغم ما أثارته من ضجة وجدل في الأوساط الإسرائيلية نظرا لفرادتها، إذ واصل الابتزاز التقليدي قائلا إن الحكم هو على الأفعال، وليس على التهنئة بالسنة الجديدة!

حين يكرر وزير الخارجية الجديد التهنئة بالسنة العبرية، مع التأكيد على عدم إنكار إيران للمحرقة النازية، فهذا يعكس تغيرا في لهجة الخطاب لا يمكن إخفاؤه بأية طريقة كانت
ما يشير إلى بعض التغير في الخطاب الإيراني هو ما تابعناه من ردود أفعال حيال الضربة العسكرية التي هددت بها أميركا نظام بشار، الحليف الأوثق لطهران، فما صدر كان أقرب إلى التحذير منه إلى التهديد في معظم الأحيان، وحين كان أحدهم يصدر تصريحا ساخنا، كان آخرون يعدلونه على نحو واضح.
وقد وصل الحال حد التأكيد على أن إيران لن تتدخل في الحرب بشكل مباشر، وأن جل ما ستفعله هو مواصلة دعم النظام السوري (يستخدمون مصطلح الحكومة السورية) بذات الطرق القديمة.

أما الذي لا يقل أهمية، فيتمثل في الإشارة إلى أمن الكيان الصهيوني كما جاء من خلال سؤال علاء الدين بروجردي (رئيس لجنة الأمن القومي والسياسة الخارجية بالبرلمان الإيراني) لأميركا عما إذا كانت "تريد أن تعرِّض أمن إسرائيل وبقاءها للخطر".

ثم جاءت الموافقة الإيرانية على عرض سوريا وضع سلاحها الكيميائي تحت وصاية دولية، لتعكس روحية جديدة في التعاطي مع الشروط الدولية، رغم ما تنطوي عليه الصفقة من إمكانية تكرار السيناريو مع طهران (التلويح بالخيار العسكري لفرض تفكيك المشروع النووي الإيراني).

الجانب الآخر في تطور خطاب الدبلوماسية الإيرانية يتعلق كما هو واضح بالملف النووي، إذ تشير دلائل مختلفة على أن طهران ستكون أكثر مرونة في معالجة هذا الملف من خلال وزير الخارجية (المتخرج من جامعة أميركية)، وهذا ما عكسته تصريحاته الأخيرة حين قال إن "تبديد المخاوف الدولية من مصلحتنا لأن الأسلحة الذرية ليست جزءا من سياسة الجمهورية الإسلامية. لذلك، مصلحتنا هي تبديد أي غموض بشأن البرنامج النووي للبلاد".

وإذا تذكرنا ما تعانيه إيران على الصعيد الاقتصادي بسبب العقوبات، والذي كان سببا في معاناة كبيرة للناس، ومن ثم في ضجر واسع النطاق في الشارع أدى إلى انتخاب روحاني بتلك النسبة والكثافة العالية، فإن معالجة هذا الأمر (الملف النووي) على نحو يرفعها لا يبدو مستبعدا، وإن كانت آمال إيران معقودة على صفقة مع أميركا تشمل الملف السوري، الأمر الذي لا يزال قائما بهذا القدر أو ذاك.

وعموما لا يغير من حقيقة وجود هذا المزاج في الأوساط الإيرانية قول روحاني إن طهران لن تتنازل قيد أنملة عن حقوقها النووية.
عموما لا يغير من حقيقة وجود هذا المزاج في الأوساط الإيرانية قول روحاني إن طهران لن تتنازل قيد أنملة عن حقوقها النووية
جدير بالذكر هنا أنه من الصعب على المراقب تجاهل زيارة سلطان عمان إلى طهران، والتي قيل إنها تنطوي على وساطة مع واشنطن، وإلى جانبها زيارة نائب الأمين العام للأمم المتحدة "جيفري فيلتمان"، سفير أميركا السابق في بيروت، والذي يعرف إيران وتعرفه جيدا بسبب الاشتباك القديم معه في الملف اللبناني، وكذلك زيارة مدير دائرة الشرق الأوسط في الخارجية السويسرية ولفغانغ آمادنوس برولهارت، وجميع تلك الزيارات ذات صلة بالعلاقة مع أميركا والغرب، وبالملف النووي أيضا. ولعل أهم ما ورد في هذا السياق هو ما قيل عن نقل سلطان عمان رسالة من أوباما لخامنئي تدعو "لفتح صفحة جديدة"، الأمر الذي رد عليه مرشد إيران بطريقة إيجابية.

هي إيران جديدة كما يبدو. دولة تقلل الاشتباك مع أميركا والغرب، وكذلك مع الكيان الصهيوني، من دون أن تلجم تماما أطماعها الإقليمية، ولا البحث عن دور محوري في الإقليم من خلال أدواتها المعروفة. لكن المخاض التاريخي في المنطقة قد ينتهي -في زمن لا يُعرف مداه- إلى صيغة يعرف كل طرف فيها حجمه دون عدوان على الآخرين، بيد أن ذلك لا يزال بعيدا بعض الشيء، بسبب مخاض المنطقة العربية من جهة، وبسبب التحولات في موازين القوى الدولية من جهة أخرى

Real News Video: What's behind Kerry and Kissinger's meeting?

Michael Ratner: Despite being from different parties, the meeting between Kerry and Kissinger highlights the consistency of an American foreign policy based on imperialism


More at The Real News

Current Al-Jazeera (Arabic) Online Poll


Do you support nominating Egypt's defense minister Sisi to run in the presidential elections?

With about 150 responding so far, 94% said no.

Thursday, September 12, 2013

Real News Video: PT 2: Chris Hedges and Rania Masri On What the Future May Hold For Syria

Part two of writer Chris Hedges and scholar Rania Masri response to President Obama's Syria address 


More at The Real News

Egyptian welcome mat pulled out from under Syrian refugees

"CAIRO (Reuters) – Syrian Ghassan el-Shahada enjoyed tolerance and an affordable life when he first fled to Egypt as a refugee. But everything changed after the army took over in July.

Where once they were welcomed as brothers, Syrian refugees are now taunted in Cairo’s streets – an open hostility fuelled by a media campaign that casts them as “terroristsallied with the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood and former president Mohamed Mursi, who was overthrown by the army on July 3.

Ghassan gives an example of the remarks directed at him when he is out selling Syrian bread.
Bashar (Assad) is too good for you, he should hit you harder,” he whispers, when his son, 5, and daughter, 3, are out of earshot.

The family now plans to leave illegally aboard a boat from Alexandria to Italy, less than a year after fleeing the civil war in Damascus.

“There are no good options,” Ghassan’s wife Nahad says quietly.
It’s an unexpected turn of events for the Syrians who found refuge in Egypt in the year Mursi was president....."

Surrender Flag?

By Clay Bennett

Palestinian firms listed as clients of Israeli general who fled war crimes arrest

By Ali Abunimah

"A “security company” owned by an Israeli general who once fled the UK fearing a war crimes arrest boasts of major Palestinian and foreign firms in Ramallah as its clients.

The firm, Netacs Ltd., was founded and is co-owned by reserve Major-General Danny Rothschild, who commanded Israeli occupation forces in the West Bank in the 1990s.

Rothschild, who has defended the use of torture, also commanded Israeli occupation forces in southern Lebanon and worked in military intelligence.

Among the clients Rothschild’s firm lists on its website is the Palestinian conglomerate PADICO, which owns large swathes of the Palestinian economy, and whose chairman is the billionaire Munib Masri.....

The employment of Major-General Danny Rothschild by so many Palestinian firms, although apparently not new, has got to be a new low."

Egypt: Detained Morsi supporters denied their rights


"Scores of detainees arrested following the dispersal of two large pro-Morsi sit-ins in Cairo last month have been deprived of their basic legal rights, Amnesty International said.  

The organization has documented several cases of protesters who were denied prompt access to their lawyers and relatives, or an opportunity to challenge the lawfulness of their detention after their arrest.

“The failure of the Egyptian authorities to respect due process for people who have been arrested is a worrying sign. Everyone must be equal before the law. It is unacceptable for supporters of Morsi or the Muslim Brotherhood to be singled out for unfair treatment based on their political affiliations,” said Philip Luther, Middle East and North Africa Director at Amnesty International.  

“All of those detained by the authorities must immediately be given access to their lawyers and families.”

Security forces have arrested at least 3,000 people, mostly supporters or members of the Muslim Brotherhood, since 3 July, according to lawyers representing them. Around 600 have since been released...."

Snowden Documents Reveal NSA Gave Israeli Spies Raw Emails, Texts, Calls of Innocent Americans

Democracy Now!

"Despite assurances from President Obama, the scandal around the National Security Agency continues to grow. The Guardian reports the NSA has routinely passed raw intelligence to Israel about U.S. citizens. “The NSA was sharing what they call raw signals intelligence, which includes things like: who you are calling and when you are calling; the content of your phone call; the text of your emails; your text messages; your chat messages,” says Alex Abdo of the American Civil Liberties Union. “It sounds like all of that was handed over.” Abdo also discusses the ACLU’s successful fight to force the government to declassify documents that show the NSA wrongly put 16,000 American phone numbers on an "alert list."....."

What Vladimir Putin didn't tell the American people about Syria

Russia's leader poses as a champion of the rule of law in a New York Times op-ed, but his record as Assad's backer is shameful
 

(Anna Neistat is associate director for Emergencies at Human Rights Watch. )
theguardian.com,

"It's not what Vladimir Putin's New York Times op-ed says that's so worrisome; it's what it doesn't say. As a Russian and as someone who has been to Syria multiple times since the beginning of the conflict to investigate war crimes and other violations, I would like to mention a few things Putin overlooked …

There is not a single mention in Putin's article, addressed to the American people, of the egregious crimes committed by the Syrian government and extensively documented by the UN Commission of Inquiry, local and international human rights groups, and numerous journalists: deliberate and indiscriminate killings of tens of thousands of civilians, executions, torture, enforced disappearances and arbitrary arrests. His op-ed also makes no mention of Russia's ongoing transfer of arms to Assad throughout the past two and a half years.

The Russian president strategically emphasizes the role of Islamic extremists in the Syrian conflict. Yes, many rebel groups have committed abuses and atrocities. Yet Putin fails to mention that it is the Syrian government that is responsible for shooting peaceful protesters (before the conflict even started) and detaining and torturing their leaders – many of whom remain detained – and that the continued failure of the international community to respond to atrocities in Syria allows crimes on all sides to continue unaddressed....."

SARIN Republic, by Khalil Bendib

Ramallah, Gaza and the Identity Crisis

Tale of Two Cities

By Ramzy Baroud
CounterPunch

"....Bold and very difficult questions must be asked and addressed without frenzy and further division. How long can the Palestinian people sustain their sense of nationhood under political tribalism, geographic division, factionalism, relentlessly polarizing media discourses, the renting out of Palestinian political independence to donor and Gulf countries, the marginalization of Palestine in the wake of Arab turmoil and civil wars, and much more? Should Palestinians be expected to sustain their sense of common identity purely based on their shared sense of injustice invited by the Israeli occupation, Apartheid and discrimination?

Palestine is more than a flag and an anthem, and Palestinians are united by more than their factional affiliation, political sympathies or their detestation of the Israeli soldier and the military checkpoint. But neither the political leaderships in Ramallah, nor in Gaza are capable of defining or representing real Palestinian identity that spans time and space. The fragmentation of Palestinian identity will not cease, but will intensify, if a third way that is born out of the collective will of Palestinians, is not introduced to Palestinian society and advocated with unwavering resolve. This third way cannot be elitist and must come from the streets of Gaza and Ramallah, not academic papers or press conferences. Only then, Gaza and Ramallah can find their historic rapport, once more."

Bahrain and the art of deception

False claims of international backing for repression

By Brian Whitaker

"....
On Wednesday the Gulf Daily News followed this up by claiming that Bahrain had "won superpower backing against 'unfair' comments" by Pillay. It said America's ambassador to the UN Human Rights Council, Eileen Donahoe, had "agreed" that Pillay's remarks did not reflect reality.

The story did not elaborate on what the ambassador had supposedly said or indicate in what ways she thought Pillay's remarks had failed to "reflect reality", but it was duly regurgitated by various other publications and websites, including Trade Arabia and the British-based Middle East Association.

There's no evidence to suggest the Gulf Daily News story might be true and, considering that the US had just put its name to the 47-country "statement of concern" about Bahrain, there's every reason to suppose the story was false. A note subsequently issued by the American mission to the UN in Geneva complained of "gross factual inaccuracies" in the story.

This might be viewed simply as a case of bad reporting but it's not a one-off. Bahrain and its media have a history of making false claims about international support.

Last November, for example, the official Bahrain News Agency twisted a statement from Alistair Burt, Britain's Foreign Office minister with responsibility for the Middle East, to make it appear that he was totally supportive of the Bahraini government.

On other occasions, Bahraini media have:

  • Misrepresented a statement from Amnesty International about the death of a 14-year-old protester.
  • Falsely claimed that UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon had declared support for the kingdom's "security" measures (i.e. repression).
  • Invented a statement from Navi Pillay about unrest in Bahrain which the official news agency later admitted to be false. 
  • Misreported a critical statement from William Hague, the British foreign secretary, to make it appear that he was praising Bahrain's government.  "

From Azmi Bishara's Facebook Page

المفكر العربي الدكتور عزمي بشارة‎‎ shared ‎نادي الصور الفلسطينية‎'s photo.
توفي تحت التعذيب في السجون السوري الناشط السوري في الإغاثة خالد بكراوي، عندما اقمنا ما اسميناه "الهيئة الوطنية للحافظ على الثوابت الفلسطينية" انضم إليها فورا في مخيم اليرموك
خالد بكراوي..الناشط بالمجال الاغاثي بمؤسسة جفرا, خالد ابن اليرموك, ابن فلسطين وابن الشام..خالد ضحكة المخيم وخالد كان اول واحد بيزرع علم فلسطين بمجدل شمس بيوم النكبة بال٢٠١١ ويومها اكل رصاصتين اسرائيليتين..بعد شهور باقبية المخابرات الاسدية سلم الامن جثة خالد لاهلو بعد ما استشهد تحت التعذيب.....
خالد بكراوي.. لروحك السلام
 

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

NSA shares raw intelligence including Americans' data with Israel

, and
theguardian.com,
 
 

Chomsky: Instead of "Illegal" Threat to Syria, U.S. Should Back Chemical Weapons Ban in All Nations

Democracy Now!

"In a national address from the White House Tuesday night, President Obama announced he is delaying a plan to strike Syria while pursuing a diplomatic effort from Russia for international monitors to take over and destroy Syria’s arsenal of chemical weapons. However, Obama still threatened to use force against Syria if the plan fails. We get reaction to Obama’s speech from world-renowned political dissident and linguist, MIT Professor Emeritus Noam Chomsky. "The Russian plan is a godsend for Obama," Chomsky says. "It saves him from what would look like a very serious defeat. He has not been able to obtain virtually any international support, and it looked as though Congress wasn’t going to support it either, which would leave him completely out on a limb. This leaves him a way out: he can maintain the threat of force, which incidentally is a crime under international law. We should bear in mind that the core principle of the United Nations charter bars the threat or use of force. So all of this is criminal to begin with, but he’ll continue with that."...."

Chomsky on 9/11, Syria’s "Bloody Partition" and Why U.S. Role Ensures Failure of Mideast Talks

Democracy Now!

"Noam Chomsky, the world-renowned political dissident, linguist and author, weighs in on today’s 12th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks and how the civil war in Syria appears destined to permanently break the country apart. "[9/11] was very significant, a major terrorist act, thousands of people killed," Chomsky says. "It’s the first time since the war of 1812 that U.S. territory had been attacked. The United States has had remarkable security, and therefore was, aside from the horrible atrocity, a very significant, historical event. And it changed attitudes and policies in the United States quite considerably. And in reaction to this, the government was able to ram through laws that sharply constrained civil liberties. It was able to provide pretexts for the invasion of Afghanistan, invasion of Iraq — the destruction of Iraq, with consequences that spread through the region. And it’s the basis for Obama’s massive terrorist war, the drone war, the most extreme terrorist campaign that’s underway now, maybe most extreme in history, and the justification for it is the same, the second 9/11 — 9/11, 2001. So yes, it’s had enormous effects on society, on attitudes, on policies. Many victims throughout the world can testify to that." On Syria, Chomsky says the country "is plunging into suicide. If negotiations [don’t] work, Syria is moving towards a kind of very bloody partition."....."

Real News Video: Rania Masri and Chris Hedges On Obama's Syria Address

Pt 1: Scholar Rania Masri and writer Chris Hedges respond to President Obama's Major Syria Address

More at The Real News

What Happened to Obama's Red Line?

By Signe Wilkinson

The Big Flop!

أوباما يمنح الدبلوماسية فسحة ويبقي خيار الضربة


Why a UN resolution on Syria is needed

Signing Chemical Weapons Convention is not enough

By Brian Whitaker

"Arguments about Syria's chemical weapons have now shifted to the UN Security Council, with predictable results. Russia is resisting American and French attempts to issue a binding resolution – i.e. one that could be backed up with the use of force if Syria failed to comply......

While Russia's opposition to chemical weapons (in general) is well established, there is as yet no sign that its support for the Assad regime is waning. It appears to be trying to do just enough about Syria's chemical weapons to avert airstrikes while continuing to muddy the waters over who was responsible for the August 21 attacks.....
 
That gives a clue as to where things may be headed next. Technically speaking, the Security Council doesn't have to be involved at all. Syria could simply sign the Chemical Weapons Convention and the matter would then automatically fall into the hands of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), triggering a lengthy disarmament process.
The trouble with the OPCW process is that it is designed for countries that have decided to renounced chemical weapons voluntarily, rather than under duress. It's all rather leisurely and gentle, since it assumes there's little prospect that a new member will be tempted to use its existing weapons in the meantime.
Under the OPCW procedures, for example, Syria's first step after joining the Convention would be to appoint a National Authority. The OPCW, very helpfully, would then provide "advice and assistance" to the Syrian National Authority, "in order to help them enhance their skills and expertise to facilitate effective, autonomous, national implementation". 
Basically, member-countries are expected to do their own implementation at their own pace, with the OPCW merely assisting and verifying.
A further point to note is that the Chemical Weapons Convention also has an annex on confidentiality. Information, it says, shall be considered confidential "if it is so designated by the State Party from which the information was obtained and to which the information refers". 
This seems to mean that the Assad regime could insist on as much confidentiality as it likes, thus preventing the level of public disclosure that would be needed to satisfy world opinion in the current circumstances.
Clearly, that is not the way to go if the Russian initiative is a genuine attempt to remove chemical weapons from the Syrian conflict. The situation demands something much stronger and, if airstrikes are to be avoided, that will have to be done through the Security Council. Which brings us back to Square One, and the question of whether Russia will continue to block it."

Syria war crimes worsen in battle for territory: U.N. report

"(Reuters) - U.N. human rights investigators said on Wednesday Syrian government forces had massacred civilians, bombed hospitals and committed other war crimes in widespread attacks to recapture territory from rebels this year.

Opposition forces, including Islamist foreign fighters, have also perpetrated war crimes including executions, hostage-taking and shelling of civilian neighborhoods, the investigators said in their latest report, covering the period of May 15-July 15.
"The perpetrators of these violations and crimes, on all sides, act in defiance of international law. They do not fear accountability. Referral to justice is imperative," said the report by the U.N. commission of inquiry, which is led by Paulo Pinheiro of Brazil.

The independent experts said they had received allegations about the use of chemical weapons "predominantly by government forces ... On the evidence currently available, it was not possible to reach a finding about the chemical agents used, their delivery systems or the perpetrators. Investigations are ongoing," the report said.

The team of some 20 investigators carried out 258 interviews with refugees, defectors and others in the region and in Geneva, including via Skype, for their 11th report in two years. They have never been allowed into Syria despite repeated requests.

The report called for a political solution to Syria's civil war and urged other states to "stop weapons transfers in view of the clear risk that they will be used to commit serious violations of international law"."

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

لماذا تراجع بشار الأسد؟

رأي القدس

"اشتغل الرئيس السوري بشار الأسد بدأب على تكوين صورة لنفسه باعتباره طبيباً استدعاه قدر البشرية لتولّي شؤون سورية بعد وفاة أبيه للاستفادة من خبرته الأكاديمية، لا ليعالج أمراض بلده فحسب بل أمراض العرب والعالم أيضاً.
استطاب الأسد اللجوء الى مخزونه الطبّي ذاك ليطرح على وسائل الاعلام والقمم العربية والعالمية محاضراته العياديّة مستخدماً مصطلحات من عالم الطبّ والكيمياء ساخراً من زعماء العرب الجاهلين مرة ومن المثقفين الأكثر جهلاً مرة أخرى على علاجاتهم غير النافعة لأوبئة شعوبهم ومشاكلها.
في إحدى خطبه التي ألقاها بعد الثورة السورية شبّه الأسد ‘مؤامرات’ أعداء نظامه بالجراثيم التي ‘تتكاثر كل لحظة’ واقترح وقتها تقوية ‘جهاز المناعة’ في أجساد السوريين لأن الجراثيم يمكن ‘عزلها’ ولا يمكن ابادتها.
بين تلك الخطبة المبكّرة ومجزرة الغوطة الكيمياوية طوّر الأسد أطروحته العلمية تلك وقرّر ان يجرّب ابادة ‘الجراثيم’ من خلال جرعة كبيرة من دواء استخدمه عشرات المرّات ولكن بجرعات مخففة لم تكن كافية، على ما يبدو، لعلاج المريض، او لإقلاق ضمير المجتمع الدولي.
المفاجأة التي زلزلت الأسد أن الولايات المتحدة الامريكية اعتبرت هذه ‘الجرعة الزائدة’ تجاوزاً واضحاً لـ’خطّ أحمر’ لم يعد طبيب العيون قادراً أن يراه بعد أن خفّفت
امريكا تعريفها للون الأحمر مرات لا تحصى، ثم قررت امريكا، على حين غرّة، تحريك آلتها الدبلوماسية والعسكرية العالمية الهائلة فاردة عضلاتها الفولاذية للقيام بضربة عسكرية للنظام السوري.
استعدادات النظام للهجوم تمثّلت باعادة موضعة قوات النخبة من حرس جمهوري وفرقة رابعة، وبتنفيذ حملات اعتقال عشوائية ووضع ضحاياها ‘المتطوعين’ (مع وجوه فنية واعلامية للتمويه) في مواقع متوقعة للهجوم الامريكي لتلقّي الضربة بدل قوات النظام، وبنزوح كبير لعائلات كبار الضباط والمسؤولين الى
لبنان (في ظاهرة يمكن تسميتها ‘نازحون 5 نجوم’ رفعت معنويات وزير السياحة اللبناني فادي عبود فتحدث عن ‘سياح’ سوريين يدعمون السياحة في لبنان).
بذلك جهز النظام نفسه لينجو بنخبته العسكرية فيما يتحمّل تبعات الضربة ضحاياه المدنيون أنفسهم الذين شكّلت أمريكا جبهة عالمية لنصرتهم!
النظام السوري الذي عاش على مقوّيات ومهدئات الأسلحة الروسية، واستعان بقوات حليفة من لبنان والعراق وايران والبحرين واليمن أدرك مع ذلك أن ‘الضربة’ تلك، ولو محدودة، قد تشلّ قدرات جيشه المتهالك التي لا يعرف كيف يستخدمها إلا ضد شعبه، كما ستعرّي أطروحاته السياسية حول الممانعة و’التصدي لاسرائيل’ لأنه، كالعادة، سيتجنب الرد عليها.
الدرس الذي تعلّمه السوريون خلال خمسين عاماً من سيطرة النظام أنه يتراجع بسرعة أمام أية تهديد جدّي من قوّة خارجية لكنه مستعدّ لتدمير البلد بأكمله اذا تجرأ الشعب على المطالبة بالحرية.
تراجع النظام عام 1998 عندما هددت
تركيا سورية بالحرب إذا لم تسلّم عبد الله اوجلان، رئيس حزب العمال الكردستاني، وكان أن سلّم النظام السوري اوجلان.
كما تراجع عندما اغتيل رئيس الوزراء اللبناني الأسبق وفيق الحريري عام 2005 وأدى الموقف الدولي القويّ آنذاك الى انسحاب الجيش السوري من لبنان خلال شهرين بعد 29 سنة طويلة من احتلال البلد ‘الشقيق’.
موافقة النظام السوري على المبادرة الروسية لوضع أسلحته الكيماوية تحت رقابة دولية تدخل في باب هذه المعادلة المأساوية من الخنوع المخزي للضغط العالمي والرفض الاستكباريّ لمطالب الشعب السوري، وهي تأكيد جديد أن لا شيء يمكن أن يوقف النظام إلا وقفة دولية حقيقية تحاسبه على جرائمه.
يتضمن إقرار النظام السوري بوجود ترسانته الكيميائية اعترافاً ضمنياً بجريمته ضد شعبه، وهو يأمل مقابل وعده بتقديم سلاح الجريمة أن ينجو بفعلته، فهل سيسمح العالم بذلك؟

"

As Assad Regime Accepts Russian Plan on Chemical Weapons, A Debate on Syria’s Path Forward

Democracy Now!

"As President Obama prepares to address the nation on his push for congressional backing of a military strike on Syria, the Assad regime has accepted a Russian initiative to put its chemical weapons under international control. Could the move stop a U.S. strike and bring the Syrian crisis closer to a diplomatic resolution? We host a debate on how to resolve the Syrian conflict between Rafif Jouejati of the Syrian Local Coordination Committees, a network of activists throughout Syria, and Rania Masri, Lebanese-based human rights activist and professor at the University of Balamand in Lebanon....."

THE COWARD!


THE COWARD HAS BEEN SAYING THAT HE HAS NO CHEMICAL WEAPONS......BUT NOW HE HAS AGREED TO DESTROY THESE "NON-EXISTING" WEAPONS.

TYPICAL OF ALL ARAB LEADERS, THEY ONLY UNDERSTAND FORCE.
THEY USE THEIR WEAPON ARSENALS ON THEIR PEOPLE, BUT THEY CAVE IN TO OUTSIDE PRESSURE.

THE ULTIMATE IRONY IS THAT THIS COWARD'S CHEMICAL WEAPONS WERE ONLY USED  ON SYRIAN CIVILIANS, AND PROVED TO BE WORTHLESS AS A BARGAINING CHIP AGAINST ISRAEL.

Al-Jazeera Video: في العمق- الضربة العسكرية ومسار الثورة السورية

How Putin Saved Obama, Congress and the European Union from Further Embarrassing themselves on Syria

By Juan Cole
Juan Cole
"Secretary of State John Kerry was asked at a press conference in London Monday morning if there was anything that could forestall a US missile attack on Damascus, and he replied off the cuff that Syria could surrender its chemical weapons stockpile to the international community within a week.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov pounced on Kerry’s comment, abruptly announcing that Russia would see what it could do. Lavrov said, “If the establishment of international control over chemical weapons in that country would allow avoiding strikes, we will immediately start working with Damascus . . . We are calling on the Syrian leadership to not only agree on placing chemical weapons storage sites under international control, but also on its subsequent destruction and fully joining the treaty on prohibition of chemical weapons,”
Syria’s portly Foreign Minister Walid Muallim clearly knows how to chow down while the meal is still hot, and he wasted no time embracing Lavrov’s suggestion. Muallim said, “The Syrian leadership welcomes the Russian initiative because of its own eagerness to preserve the lives of Syrian citizens and ensure the security of the country, and given our confidence in the desire of the Russian leadership to prevent an attack on our country.”
Senate majority leader Harry Reid immediately postponed a vote on a Syria attack by his body that had been scheduled for Wednesday.
The indications were that President Obama might well not get 60 votes in the Senate for his attack on Damascus, and Reid must have exhaled a big sigh of relief. As for the House of Representatives, the likelihood of it voting to allow Obama to fire cruise missiles at Syrian targets is between slim and none.
To that extent, Putin’s suggestion (and it was his; Lavrov doesn’t have an independent power base and does as the president tells him) functions to save Obama a lot of trouble.
He can now possibly avoid the most embarrassing defeat in congress of a president on a major international issue since that body told Woodrow Wilson where he could stick his League of Nations.
Likewise, Putin’s proposal ironically helped soothe troubled waters in the European Union. German Chancellor Angela Merkel was by all accounts absolutely furious at Spain, Britain and France for issuing a statement at the G20 meeting in Moscow supportive of President Obama’s condemnation of Syria for chemcial weapons use (though they did not back a military attack on Syria). Merkel reprimanded Spain in particular for not waiting for a joint European Union statement. (For Spain to defy Germany at this point in time is rather like a deeply indebted gambler being rude to the casino owner). Spain for its part only talked a good game, going on to say that Spanish law forbade the Spanish military from in any way being involved with the US assault on Damascus, since it is not in self-defense.. It is not clear what Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy was supporting at the G20, if he thinks military action so illegal that Spain has to avoid having anything to do with it. And, of course, the British Parliament had rebuked Prime Minister David Cameron for considering joining the US in air strikes on Syria.
Putin’s gambit is irresistible to the West, even if it amounts to nothing. After all, it will take time to amount to nothing, and with the passage of time the urgency of military action (already low) will dissipate irrevocably.
The Russian initiative is not attractive because it seems practical or likely to be swiftly implemented but because it allows everyone involved to save face. Obama can look statesmanlike. He is already taking credit for Putin’s move, saying it would not have come about without his own saber-rattling.
The US Congress might be able to avoid the uncomfortable position of agreeing that Syria is guilty of chemical weapons use but declining to do anything about it.
And, the European Union was desperately looking for some step that could avoid further friction within the deeply divided organization.
All this is good news for Western politicians and bad news for the Syrian rebels, who are denouncing the Russian initiative as mendacious. They had hoped that the US would degrade some key regime capabilities, especially the bombing of airports that the regime uses to resupply its troops. Of course, even before the Putin Plan, it was increasingly unlikely that Obama would gain authorization for such a step, in any case.
The one good thing about this development is that it strengthens Russia’s position with the Baath government of Bashar al-Assad and may lend new energy to Moscow’s determination to broker a compromise between the rebels and the regime.
Without a US or Western bombing campaign, the Syrian regime is likely just strong enough to hold on for years. The rebels’ advance of last spring has stalled and in some places been reversed. Some sort of negotiation now seems likely. While in my view the two sides are not yet desperate or exhausted enough to make that sort of agreement the Lebanese acquiesced in at Taif in 1989, they may be able to take small steps toward that eventual outcome, which increasingly seems the most plausible one."

Master Flip-Flopper


MASTER FLIP-FLOPPER......
"I OPPOSED THE WAR.......BEFORE I SUPPORTED IT!"

WHAT IS HIS POSITION TODAY?
STAY TUNED, AS THE STOMACH TURNS!

Syria: Government Likely Culprit in Chemical Attack

New Evidence based on Rocket Analysis, Witness Accounts

"(New York) – Available evidence strongly suggests that Syrian government forces were responsible for chemical weapons attacks on two Damascus suburbs on August 21, 2013. These attacks, which killed hundreds of civilians including many children, appeared to use a weapons-grade nerve agent, most likely Sarin.
The 22-page report, “Attacks on Ghouta: Analysis of Alleged Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria,”documents two alleged chemical weapons attacks on the opposition-controlled suburbs of Eastern and Western Ghouta, located 16 kilometers apart, in the early hours of August 21. Human Rights Watch analyzed witness accounts of the rocket attacks, information on the likely source of the attacks, the physical remnants of the weapon systems used, and the medical symptoms exhibited by the victims as documented by medical staff.
Rocket debris and symptoms of the victims from the August 21 attacks on Ghouta provide telltale evidence about the weapon systems used,” said Peter Bouckaert, emergencies director at Human Rights Watch and author of the report. “This evidence strongly suggests that Syrian government troops launched rockets carrying chemical warheads into the Damascus suburbs that terrible morning.”
The evidence concerning the type of rockets and launchers used in these attacks strongly suggests that these are weapon systems known and documented to be only in the possession of, and used by, Syrian government armed forces, Human Rights Watch said...."

Monday, September 9, 2013

How to get Syria to give up chemical weapons

 
US should put Russian offer to the test
 
By Brian Whitaker

"As regular readers of this blog will know, I have recently been advocating two things in connection with Syria:
First, to address the issue of chemical weapons separately from the wider conflict. 

That's because it IS a separate issue. Although the chemical crisis has arisen out of the wider conflict, maintaining the international ban is a matter of global importance. Whatever people may think about the principle of intervening in another country's internal struggle, the use of banned weapons – wherever it happens – requires a strong international response. 

Secondly, to explore diplomatic/political ways of dealing with chemical weapons in Syria.

On the first of these two points, things have got worse rather than better. In the US especially, the level of confusion – among the public and in the media – is now extraordinary. Much of the debate relates to internal politicking around Obama's "leadership" (or supposed lack of) rather than the matter in hand. As for chemical weapons, they have become little more than a peg for discussing more familiar but only marginally related topics like jihadists and Iran, as well as for expressions of isolationist sentiment.

On the second point, though, there are signs of progress. When I first suggested placing Syria's chemical stockpile in the hands of the UN, it was greeted with a mixture of silence and scepticism. But now it seems the idea may have legs after all.

Earlier today, John Kerry, the US secretary of state, suggested the Assad regime could avoid being attacked if it handed over its entire stock of chemical weapons. In the form delivered by Kerry it sounded like an ultimatum – hand them over within a week, or else – and Kerry added that he did not expect Assad to comply. 

But then something very interesting happened. The Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, chipped in, unexpectedly agreed with Kerry about handing over the weapons (though without the threatening tone) and even went a bit further. He said:

"We are calling on the Syrian authorities not only [to] agree on putting chemical weapons storages under international control, but also for its further destruction and then joining the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
"We have passed our offer to Walid al-Muallem [the Syrian foreign minister] and hope to receive a fast and positive answer." 

The best way the US can respond to this is not to add further demands, such as an admission of guilt from Assad, but to say to the Russians: "That's an interesting idea. Let's see what can be done."

There are two steps involved in dealing with the use of banned weapons:

1. Preventing any further use.
2. Holding accountable whoever was responsible.

As far as achieving these objectives is concerned, airstrikes are not a precise tool. They could hold the regime accountable to some extent by destroying some of its assets – in other words, punishment. Airstrikes would not directly prevent further use of chemical weapons, however. Bombing toxic stockpiles themselves could be dangerous, so the aim would be partly to reduce the military's ability to use them but mainly to serve as a deterrent – a message that further use of such weapons would result in increasingly severe airstrikes.

Apart from saving lives, the diplomatic route could prove more effective. Persuading Assad to hand over his chemicals to the UN, together with agreeing to inspections, etc, would – if done properly – ensure there could be no further use of these weapons. It would not address the issue of accountability, but that is less urgent and could be set aside till later.

In theory, it ought to be possible to secure Russian co-operation in a diplomatic initiative since President Putin has already said he regards use of chemical weapons as a crime. (As a side-note, Iran – another important ally of Assad – also takes a dim view of chemical weapons, having been on the receiving end during the Iran-Iraq war.)

It's necessary to recognise, though, that on other issues relating to the Syrian conflict Russia has been thoroughly obstructive, as Samantha Power, the US ambassador at the UN, explained recently. If the Americans want to test Russia's willingness to co-operate on chemical weapons, therefore, they will have to treat it as a self-contained issue in any discussions.

Another potential obstacle is that in the absence of any startling new evidence Russia will probably stick to its insistence that the Assad regime was not responsible for the attacks on August 21. If the Americans persist in trying to change the Russian view on point, talks will inevitably founder.

But, surprising as it may seem, disagreements over culpability need not necessarily be a problem. There are perfectly good arguments for urging Assad to give up his chemical weapons without blaming him for the events of August 21.

One is that surrendering the chemicals will protect him from further accusations (either true of false) of their use. Another is that it will prevent any of the weapons being captured – and even used – by rebel fighters.

The biggest unknown quantity in this, of course, is how Assad himself will react to the proposal. Currently, he seems to be neither confirming nor denying that he has chemical weapons (which is what Israel also does in connection with its nuclear weapons). But there's no real doubt that he has both actual weapons and a research programme which was originally developed as the "poor man's defence" against Israel's nuclear capability.

Assad might remain defiant, claiming that the weapons (if he admits to their existence at all) are purely for national defence. Or he could offer to give them up on condition that Israel does the same with its nuclear weapons.

That's the kind of bravado that made Saddam Hussein a hero among his supporters but ultimately led to his downfall. If Assad has any sense, though, he will weigh up the costs and benefits of keeping his weapons versus giving them up. If he's prepared to swallow his pride (and values his relationship with Russia) it shouldn't be a difficult choice to make."