And next, Syria?

[Divisive Cotton]

It's a big day is Syria. Keep updated with the latest events here: http://blogs.aljazeera.net/live/middle-east/syria-live-blog-april-22

 

[Divisive Cotton]

That's what I like to see:

Thousands have started to protest in the following places: Douma, close to Damascus, and the suburbs of Zabadani and Midan – people in the latter have not taken to the streets before. There are also breaking reports of protests in Deir Ezzor, Latakia and towns in Idleb province.

Kurdish sources also confirm that protests have broken out in the north-eastern towns of Ras al-Ayn, Amouda, Qamischli and al-Hassakeh, some shouting for freedom and others calling for the toppling of the regime.

The fear barrier seems to have come down in Syria in a spectacular fashion. Concessions seem to be failing to quell unrest.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/apr/22/libya-syria-middle-east-misrata-gaddafi#block-14

 

[Divisive Cotton]

The authorities have gone totally ape shit today

The body count so far is 40 and rising

 

[dylans]

The authorities have gone totally ape shit today

The body count so far is 40 and rising

Today a line has been crossed. All his recent attempts to offer "concessions" have failed. It's looking as though Assad has realized this and has decided to drown this in blood. Even Hama, scene of the worst massacre in the Arab world, is witnessing protests.There is no going back now.

 

[Divisive Cotton]

The count is now 69

 

[MellySingsDoom]

According to AJE, death toll from yesterday is now 103 (including a 10-year old shot in the head in Daraa).

Now, although the source for this is the US-based Christian Science Monitor, this article on current events in Syria raise a question or two, including alleged Iranian involvement with the Assad regime: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/terrorism-security/2011/0414/US-officials-Iran-helping-Syria-s-Assad-put-down-protests

From what I can see, official co-operation between Syria and Iran on a military basis boils down to a recently-signed treaty on naval matters - all other co-operation tends towards the realm of speculation. What seems to be an even-handed precis on the Syria-Iran relationship comes from the Foreign Policy Centre here: http://fpc.org.uk/articles/432. This includes the following:

Similarly, whilst the Ayatollahs have eagerly funded several Ba'athist military programs, Damascus' principal arms dealer is Russia, who recently supplied Asad with a new arsenal of missiles following public loyalty during the 2008 Georgia War.

Do any Urban Syrian-watchers see any credence in Tehran supporting the Assad regime at this time?

 

[Pickman's model]

it's rather surprising that there's been a treaty about naval matters between iran and syria when syria's got a tiddly navy

 

[MellySingsDoom]

it's rather surprising that there's been a treaty about naval matters between iran and syria when syria's got a tiddly navy

Yeah, from what I can see, Syria's navy is strictly small-time, though I think Russia has offered to supply Syria more ships in recent times.


Another view of the Syria uprisings - part of me suspects this may be in tinfoil hat territory (or pro-Assad barracking), but here be they anyway:

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/03/elliot-abrams-plan-for-syria.html
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/03/globalist-hit-in-syria.html

 

[MellySingsDoom]

Syria update (from AJE): 4 protestors killed by snipers at funeral procession in Douma. 5 reported killed at funeral procession in Izraa: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/04/20114231169587270.html

2 MPs have resigned as a result of the ongoing violenceI:

In protest of the violence, two Syrian politicians have resigned from parliament.

Nasser Hariri, from the town of Daraa, told Al Jazeera that he "feels sorry for those who were killed in Haran [today and yesterday] by the bullets of security forces despite the fact that the president has promised no live ammunition by security forces at all".

"Being an MP I feel the need to step down as I am not able to protect the voters killed by live ammunitions and now I feel better to resign so I'm resigning from the Syrian People's Assembly."

 

[MellySingsDoom]

Reportings of Syrian security forces firing on more funeral processions around the country. AL Jazz have a reporter at Izraa, who's given an account of what happened, ending with the following obsevation:

I think it's pretty clear now that the government feels that the eyes of the world are elsewhere, and that this is the best way to deal with what they are calling an armed insurrection ... we saw this yesterday, and clearly we're seeing this again today. The government was clearly anticipating funerals like this, and clearly was anticipating that violence could break out at these funerals, people are obviously very angry because they've had family members who have been killed, and I think the government was anticipating violence, but what I witnessed was a clear, brutal use of force on behalf of the security forces.

Also unrest and casulaties reported in the Damascus district of Berze.

 

[Fedayn]

Hmmmmmm...... editing or reality?

 

[MellySingsDoom]

Fedayn -from what I can tell, that was a speech the Gorgeous One made at Damascus University in 2005, at around the time that Syria had withdrawn militarily from Lebanon, and at the same time was still under the Bush/Blair "Axis Of Evil" rhetoric. Also, Syria had been implicated in the assasination of Lebanese PM Rafik Hariri. As for any anti-Assad groupings at the time, they seem to be mainly either in the Muslim Brotherhood or Kurdish separatists.

As for his current views, here's what he said in a March 2011 intervew on the Arabian Business.com site:

Syria is the shoe which didn’t drop. And I have a theory for that. The Syrian regime is authoritarian, no doubt, freedoms personal and political, are, of course, scant, it is a one party state, and the father in this case successfully handed over power to the son. So on one level it is a candidate [for an uprising]. And yet it has not. And what is the reason for that? Well, here is my theory: the government of Syria for a long time has pursued a policy of Arab-ness. Of Arab nationalism, of Arab dignity, of support for the Palestinian cause, material support, material support for the resistance, rejection for the foreign occupation of Iraq. And a refusal to bow before the foreign powers. This is the perception, and it is largely the reality, though the perception is greater than the reality. And I think that has somehow inoculated the Bashar Al Assad regime from the kind of events we are seeing elsewhere. Of course Syria is not the richest place, and there are extreme divisions between the very rich and very poor, but most people support the government because of its stand on Arab issues and the West. They think that Bashar is heir to a tradition of which they are quite proud. These may be famous last words, but that is my take on it.

So Galloway thinks that Assad's internationalist stance inoculated him from internal pressures. Looks like events have proved otherwise.

 

[Fedayn]

He's a joke frankly....

 

[Divisive Cotton]

So Galloway thinks that Assad's internationalist stance inoculated him from internal pressures. Looks like events have proved otherwise.

He's totally misunderstood the dynamics the the Arab revolts. They are not a protest against foreign policy but against internal policies

 

[dylans]

He's totally misunderstood the dynamics the the Arab revolts. They are not a protest against foreign policy but against internal policies

I think this is the heart of things. In opinion polls outside Syria Assad has consistently topped polls as the most respected Arab leader. And he has earned that respect solely on the basis of Syria's support for the resistance against Israel particularly Hezbollah. However that respect will mean nothing as Assad moves to kill and repress his own people. There is a good article on this here

The Delusions of Bashir al-Assad
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=76507

Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president, insists on believing that his support for the 'resistance against Israel' distinguishes his regime from others in the region and, therefore, makes it immune to the revolutions that have brought down pro-Western presidents in Tunisia and Egypt.

His support for Hamas and Hezbollah may make the Syrian president more popular among Arabs, but he is engaged in dangerous delusions if he thinks this makes the killings of peaceful Syrian protesters less reprehensible.

The eruption of Arab revolutions has been a reaction to decades of repression and the skewed distribution of wealth; two problems that have plagued anti- and pro-Western Arab governments alike.

The article also points out the hypocricy of Assads supposed "anti imperialism. Assad joined the so called "coalition" against Iraq. Has been heavily involved in repressive activities in Lebanon and cooperated with the US extraordinary rendition programme. Notto mention the incredibly brutal repression of his own people. Hama remains the biggest act of mass murder ever committed by an Arab regime. For that alone he deserves a bullet

The regime's 'survive at any cost' policy saw it join the US-led coalition against Iraq in 1990 and enthusiastically cooperate with the 'war on terror' after 9/11. Its 'resistance position' did not prevent it from torturing the Syrian Maher Arar* when he was handed over as part of the controversial extraordinary rendition policy.

The cynical use of revolutionary political language by the regime to cover its contradictory political positions has no doubt helped it. But the Arab revolutions have stripped all regimes of their masks and this regime's attempt to crush protests has unveiled its tyrannical face.

Bashar al-Assad, judging by his 'j'accuse' speech, is still living with his delusions. But the era of crying foreign conspiracy to cover up bloody crimes is over, even if the message has yet to reach the Syrian president.

* Maher Arar is a Canadian citizen who was deported by the US to Syria where he was tortured for a year. Both the Canadian and Syrian Governments later admitted his total innocence and Canada awarded him 10 and a half million Canadian dollars in compensation. The US government still maintains he is a member of Al Qaeda

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maher_Arar

 

[Divisive Cotton]

You should read this article. It's really fucking grim: http://blogs.aljazeera.net/middle-east/2011/04/24/there-no-humanity-here-0

Every other journalist is trying to get into Syria, but on Saturday I was trying to get out. The government had made it perfectly clear: My visa was expiring and unless I left on the 23rd of April, I would "face the full force of the law". I had agreed the night before with my cameraman, Ben Mitchell, over a drink that neither of us wanted to discover what "full force of the law" meant. So the debate was really whether I should fly out from Damascus or drive to Amman, Jordan, and fly from there.

The decision was made that he would fly out from Damascus, the Syrian capital, with the gear and I would drive to Amman. I had left my second passport there with a friend. One for Arab countries and the other for Israel. Welcome to 21st century diplomatic relations.

 

[dylans]

You should read this article. It's really fucking grim: http://blogs.aljazeera.net/middle-east/2011/04/24/there-no-humanity-here-0

Wow

 

[teqniq]

No understatement.

 

[MellySingsDoom]

Looks like Assad and Assad-barrackers are trying to spin coverage of this by Al Jazeera etc as being faked and US/Israel-led. A German on Indymedia UK (yeah, I know) has posted an article claiming as well: http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2011/04/478019.html (Note:in German language). My Deutsch is a bit rusty these days, but what I can figure out is that the poster claims that images (including a "snuff film") and interviews have been filmed/produced in a Christian area of Lebanon, and then faked up in post-production to look like they come from Syria. The same allegation is made for a particular incident by Syrian state TV.

News faking is hardly new stuff, but I dunno, this seems a tad desperate here I think. Mr German Indymedia seems to hint that Al-Jazeera is a tool of the Qatari state (and therefore a US proxy) - not the first time I've heard that one.

 

[Divisive Cotton]

Any news from any source should be read sceptically but while Al-Jazeera is indeed funded by Qatari state I'm not aware of any major journalist news scandals since its launch in 1996. Of all the coverage I've watched over the last few months they seem to aspire to the highest journalist news standards. A lot of their reporters have a lot of experience on a host of different news outlets across the world.

 

[dylans]

Any news from any source should be read sceptically but while Al-Jazeera is indeed funded by Qatari state I'm not aware of any major journalist news scandals since its launch in 1996. Of all the coverage I've watched over the last few months they seem to aspire to the highest journalist news standards. A lot of their reporters have a lot of experience on a host of different news outlets across the world.

Not entirely. Their coverage of Egypt was first class but I would expect any coverage of the Gulf states and especially anything directly involving Qatar to be suspect. It should be borne in mind that Al Jaz support for revolution in Egypt and Tunisia was entirely in tune to the Qatari governments political view. Bahrain is another story entirely and its reporting of events there raises serious questions of its commitment to journalistic impartiality.

For viewers watching protests spread across the region, the excitement stopped abruptly in Bahrain. Scant coverage was given to protests in the Gulf Cooperation Council member and to the ensuing crackdown by its Sunni rulers, who called in Saudi and Emirati troops in March under a regional defense pact.
Protests in Oman and Saudi Arabia have also received scant attention in recent months.
"Bahrain does not exist as far as Al Jazeera is concerned, and they have avoided inviting Bahraini or Omani or Saudi critics of those regimes," said As'ad AbuKhalil, politics professor at California State University.

"Most glaringly, Al Jazeera does not allow one view that is critical of Bahraini repression to appear on the air. The GCC has closed ranks and Qatar may be rewarded with the coveted post of secretary-general of the Arab League."

Despite a wealth of material, there were no stirring montages featuring comments by protesters or scenes of violence against activists in Bahrain. Al Jazeera has produced such segments to accompany Egyptian and Tunisian coverage.

The threat posed by Bahrain's protests was closer to home. Their success would have set a precedent for broader public participation in a region ruled by Sunni dynasties. More alarming for those dynasties, it would have given more power to Bahrain's majority Shi'ites, distrusted by Sunni rulers who fear the influence of regional Shi'ite power Iran.

From an early stage, Al Jazeera framed the movements in Tunisia, Egypt and then Yemen as "revolutions" and subverted government bans on its coverage by inviting viewers to send in images captured on mobile phones to a special address.
"Despite being banned in Egypt, Al Jazeera went to great lengths to provide non-stop live coverage of events. It did not do that in Bahrain," said political analyst Ghanem Nuseibeh.
"Unless it can address concerns about its coverage of Bahrain, Al Jazeera will suffer reputation damage."

There is little doubt that pressure has been directly applied by Saudi onto Qatar to reign in Al Jaz coverage of Bahraini events.

Analysts say Saudi Arabia persuaded its neighbors that any concessions by Bahrain's rulers would have repercussions for all Gulf states, including Qatar, though it has a tiny population of only 260,000 nationals among a 1.7 million total.
"There has been fantastic pressure from Saudi Arabia on Qatar to join in (the Gulf military operation) in Bahrain, and at least to rein in Al Jazeera," said a London-based analyst who did not want to be named due to the sensitivity of the issue.
Qatar and Saudi Arabia -- rivals for leadership roles in the Gulf -- ended years of frosty ties in 2007. The result was the end of any serious discussion of Saudi politics on Al Jazeera.
The channel and its leading competitor, the Saudi-owned Al Arabiya, operate in a crowded news market that includes Hezbollah's Al Manar, BBC Arabic, France 24, Iran's Al Alam and Egyptian channels, catering to some 300 million Arabic speakers.
"Al Jazeera is not much different to Al Arabiya when it comes to Bahrain -- both are tongue-tied by the Saudi military intervention," said Ayman Ali, a commentator in the Gulf press.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110414/tv_nm/us_mideast_protests_media

 

[sihhi]

Any news from any source should be read sceptically but while Al-Jazeera is indeed funded by Qatari state I'm not aware of any major journalist news scandals since its launch in 1996. Of all the coverage I've watched over the last few months they seem to aspire to the highest journalist news standards. A lot of their reporters have a lot of experience on a host of different news outlets across the world.

Al Jazeera is not a tool of the US, but it is pro-Qatari. It is owned by Sheikh Hamad bin Thamer Al Thani.
See here http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2011/furuhashi250211.html

http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2011/03/aljazeera_26.html

Saturday, March 26, 2011
Aljazeera
Yesterday, Aljazeera's main evening newscast gave a summary of the Arab uprisings: it listed all the countries in which protests occurred and simply omitted Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Oman. That is how blatant the propaganda there is now.

http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2011/04/saudi-qatari-alliance-and-aljazeera.html

Saturday, April 23, 2011
Aljazeera and Bahrain
Adel Iskandar tells me that he was heavily edited out by Aljazeera English in his remarks on the coverage (or lack of coverage) of Bahrain.

 

[Divisive Cotton]

Yesterday, Aljazeera's main evening newscast gave a summary of the Arab uprisings: it listed all the countries in which protests occurred and simply omitted Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Oman. That is how blatant the propaganda there is now.

I watch BBC and Sky news and you could state the same for those two channels as well. It's not just Al-Jazeera that has relegated news on Bahrain to secondary to events in Syria and Libya

 

[dylans]

I watch BBC and Sky news and you could state the same for those two channels as well. It's not just Al-Jazeera that has relegated news on Bahrain to secondary to events in Syria and Libya

All news channels show bias for sure. The BBC coverage of Israel is appalling for example. It's a question of degree and blatantness. Al Jaz isn't simply showing a slight bias towards the Bahraini regime, it has become a propaganda channel for the CCG forces in Bahrain.

Al Jazeera and other Gulf-sponsored news organisations barely reported the start of riots. Even when the events in Bahrain became top story in international media, Al Jazeera relied mainly on newswire reports. The Bahrain riots were later given the top story slot on the English language channel, and second story on the Arabic channel. Al Arabiya similarly refrained from giving the story adequate coverage. Many viewers were disappointed, especially given the proximity of Bahrain to Qatar and the UAE. It was only after some criticism that Al Jazeera started reporting about Bahrain, though in no way comparable to the way it reported Tunisia, Egypt or Libya. Despite being banned in Egypt, Al Jazeera went to great lengths to provide non-stop live coverage of events. It did not do that in Bahrain.

http://campaignme.com/2011/03/27/11702/why-bahrain-could-damage-al-jazeera’s-image/

 

[sihhi]

I watch BBC and Sky news and you could state the same for those two channels as well. It's not just Al-Jazeera that has relegated news on Bahrain to secondary to events in Syria and Libya

It's not about the size of events that's important. It's about how much we're on the side of the dissident movements. Because of the particular relationship between Britain and Yemen and Bahrain -they are not reported properly. The Metropolitan police have been training Bahraini police - does that get a mention on the BBC? No. It's actually much more important to us here than what the King of Bahrain said in a speech. But the speech is what gets reported.

 

[TomUS]

It's probably beed said on this thread but Bibi & his pals have to be absoultely delighted with Assad's behavior. Every time Assad's SS fire into a crowd of protestors or morners, the Likud bunch must break out the Kosher champagane. And they must bring out the party hats & confetti whenever Hez defends him.

 

[dylans]

It looks like Assad has launched a huge crackdown across the country. Tanks and troops are moving into Deraa and the regime is making mass arrests across the country. It's also closed its land border to Jordan

The Syrian government's brutal crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrations has escalated dramatically, with tanks rolling on to the streets for the first time and troops reported to have opened fire in several towns and villages across the country.

Scores were reportedly killed and many more arrested in a widespread pre-emptive crackdown that was described by one human rights activist as a "savage war" against the pro-democracy movement.

The southern town of Deraa, which has been a centre of the rebellion, bore the brunt of the regime's assault. Witnesses said at least 3,000 troops, backed by tanks and heavy weapons, entered the town in the early hours of Monday.

Soldiers were said to have opened fire at random, with snipers firing from rooftops and men armed with guns and knives conducting house-to-house searches. Although these reports have not been verified, videos posted online appear to support the claims of witnesses.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/25/syria-crackdown-protesters-brutal

 

[MellySingsDoom]

More info here c/o AJE -http://blogs.aljazeera.net/live/middle-east/syria-live-blog-april-25

Looks like Assad has been blaming Jordan for supplying weaponry to anti-Assad groupings in Deraa etc. AJE also mentions a possible knock-on effect for Lebanon:

President Bashar al-Assad's war with his own Syrian people is moving perilously close to Lebanon. Indeed, over the past few days, Lebanese opposition leaders have been voicing their suspicions that the Baathist regime in Damascus – in an attempt to distract attention away from the Syrian popular uprising – is deliberately stirring sectarian tensions in a country which has only just commemorated the 36th anniversary of its own terrifying 15-year civil war, which cost 150,000 lives.

Looks like Assad's state of emergency lifting was simply hot air - he obviously now wants to flatten his opponents with military force.

 

[elbows]

The Al Jazeera English coverage of Bahrain was fine for the first few days, albeit nowhere near the coverage of Egypt, and after that it seemed pretty clear that they were keen to talk about other stories, anything to get attention away from Bahrain. I stopped watching it at that point and have rarely returned since. I was not surprised, given the comments that were made about AJ in its early years (eg lots of former BBC staff), who owns it, and wikileaks of examples where it had shown favouritism. It would be unusual to find a tv station in this day and age that is not strongly engaged in international propaganda. The sheer number of government owned, controlled or influenced news stations that have popped up in English in the last decade says it all. In any case its not just the media, its not like the Bahrain thread here has been bursting with activity of late.

As for Syria, now here is a fine example of a country that our media has seldom done a great job of helping me to understand. Clearly a brutal and hideous regime, and as they are usually our foes our media is not afraid to focus on these aspects. This makes it hard for me to feel like I've ever had a good sense of daily life in Syria, and I have to be especially wary of propaganda now, since Syria is likely number 2 on the US middle east regime collapse fantasy wishlist (with Iran being number 1). Given that hopes that the present dictator of Syria would be more progressive than his dad have long since faded, I am not surprised to see that it is turning very bloody. It made me upset again in a way that I have not been since the early days of the Libyan uprising, and Bahrain and Egypt before that. So I will start paying more attention and hope to find something worth posting here later on.

 

[elbows]

As for Galloway, like many others he got very comfortable with how to play propaganda games in an era where the US imperialism, middle east and Israel-Palenstine stuff was woven together in a way that remained reasonably consistent for a number of decades. The game has changed somewhat though, and perhaps a strong hint of this should of been apparent during the Iraq invasion, when the arab street did not express outrage to quite the extent many predicted. At that point it was probably tempting to think that the people had been successfully marginalised by a variety of regimes, that the arab street didnt matter so much anymore in countries where the US and the regime were 'strong partners in the war on terror', leaving only a few rogue regimes in the region to worry about. 2011 has shown that the new game will not be this straightforward, the struggle continues in a big and now highly visible way. And as we do not know the outcome, its hard for players like Galloway to adjust so quickly to the new realities, and with Syria it seems he saw the potential to play it the old fashioned way, just one more time, although I think he knew he had a fair chance of being wrong as shown by his 'these may be famous last words' comment quoted earlier in this thread.