Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

And next, Syria?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/08/syria-bashar-al-assad-rebel-attack

That should be a little reminder that it's not over yet.

I've seen some reports that the rebels are going back to guerilla tactics, suicide bombings and terrorist attacks and such, rather than trying to hold territory, which they've been unable to do very well over the last few months. I also think that the hope the west will come to the rescue and intervene has been lost, the rhetoric seems a bit softer now from Britain anyway, so they might change in tactics because of this.

elbows Even if the govt is winning the war, and controls most of the country, Syria's crippled for the next 10 years. Even if they beat the rebels militarily the state of Syria is going to be plagued by long period of terrorism and sectarian war. It's unlikely Assad will ever regain absolute control. He'll stay on as the leader of a nominally united Syria but will govern a destroyed rump state.

The Kurds may well get autonomy in the north east if they keep up the fight against the FSA and Al-Nusrah, but doing that could likely provoke Turkey and maybe even piss off the USA and risk the no-fly zone in northern iraq, which is the most important thing in recent Kurdish history and their lifeline. They have to be careful because they have their own historic state finally within their grasp and they don't want to miscalculate and fuck up that opportunity. China also has oil concerns in the Kurdistan area and I'm sure Russia would happily step in and provide a no-fly zone of some kind if it meant freezing the US out of the oil in Northern Iraq. Such a thing would be massively provocative of course, but impossible?

As for Hezbollah, they've suffered the loss of some of their best fighters in Syria and had to shift their troops away from the Israeli border into the north. That's a huge win for Israel and the US right there. The US has got just about everything it needs from all this, with the one exception of not being able to get rid of Assad personally, but they'll settle for Syria being rubble instead for the next few years.
 
Delroy Booth said:
The Kurds may well get autonomy in the north east if they keep up the fight against the FSA and Al-Nusrah, but doing that could likely provoke Turkey and maybe even piss off the USA and risk the no-fly zone in northern iraq, which is the most important thing in recent Kurdish history and their lifeline.
Click to expand...
What do you mean with "risk the no-fly zone in northern Iraq?
That hasn't existed since 1 May 2003.
 
elbows said:
If hundreds of Kurds have been killed then even if the western media ignore it,we should eventually hear from the Kurds about it, rather than just the aforementioned Russian and Iranian state-linked news agencies which have obvious pro-Assad bias.
Click to expand...

Update: 10,000 Kurdish refugees crossed the border into Iraqi Kurdistan yesterday. Also, last week Massoud Barzani, President of Iraqi Kurdistan, vowed to intervene in Syria if Kurds were "under threat of death and terrorism."

Following on from Hezbollah's recent involvement, could this be a sign of a further escalation? Could this potentially have consequences in Turkey and Iraq, given recent events there?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23745201

Syria refugees pour into Iraqi Kurdistan in thousands

Thousands of refugees from Syria are pouring over the border into Iraqi Kurdistan, the UN refugee agency says.

Up to 10,000 crossed at Peshkhabour on Saturday, adding to an earlier influx of 7,000 on Thursday.

The UN agencies, the Kurdish regional government and NGOs are struggling to cope, correspondents say.

The UN says the reasons are not fully clear, but there has been a sharp rise in clashes between Syrian Kurds and anti-government Islamist militants.

The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) says this is one of the biggest single waves of refugees it has had to deal with since the uprising against the rule of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad began in March 2011.

New camp

The BBC's Jim Muir in neighbouring Lebanon says the latest refugees are mainly families and have come from a broad stretch of territory in northern Syria.

They have been taking advantage of a new pontoon bridge over the Tigris.

Some 150,000 Syrian refugees are already registered in Iraq, of the nearly two million said to have fled Syria in total since the uprising began.

The UNHCR says its field officers spotted the first group of 750 Syrians before noon on Thursday but in the afternoon, some 5,000 to 7,000 people followed.

The UN said the latest refugees had come from Aleppo, Hassakeh, Qamishli and other areas of conflict.

On Friday, UNHCR spokesperson Adrian Edwards told reporters in Geneva: "The factors allowing this sudden movement are not fully clear to us."

The UN said it was working with the Iraqi Kurdistan government and other agencies to establish a camp at nearby Darashakran.

"This should open in two weeks, and our hope is it will relieve pressure," Mr Edwards said.

The ethnic make-up of the latest wave has not been detailed.

Kurds make up about 10% of the Syrian population and are largely concentrated in the north-east.

They staged their own anti-Assad protests after the Syria conflict began in 2011 and their areas have been run by Kurdish local councils and militia since government forces withdrew last year.

But the Kurdish militias have recently been fighting jihadists of the anti-Assad al-Nusra Front, leaving dozens dead.

The president of Iraqi Kurdistan, Massoud Barzani, recently threatened to intervene to defend the Kurdish population caught up in Syria's unrest.

He said if Kurds were "under threat of death and terrorism" then Iraqi Kurdistan would be "prepared to defend them".

Iraqi Kurdistan comprises three provinces in northern Iraq. It has its own military and police force.
Click to expand...
 
_69345317_bridge.jpg


from the above link
 
So, will this chemical attack be verified, I understand a UN inspector team is in Syria at the moment, and if it is verified will it really cross a line for Obama as he said it would?
 
It makes absolutely no sense on any level for the SAA to use chemical weapons that close to Damascus, against an enemy in retreat, just as a UN inspector team is in the country. I'm not saying it hasn't happened only that it's totally inexplicable.
 
weltweit said:
So, will this chemical attack be verified, I understand a UN inspector team is in Syria at the moment, and if it is verified will it really cross a line for Obama as he said it would?
Click to expand...

Well it sounds like some countries will have a UN session to discuss the attack and this is likely to lead to inspectors being mandated to investigate. However since even the likes of Frank Gardner of the BBC are pointing out the suspicious timing, it would not be wise to jump to conclusions. As for the US red line crossing, we've already seen that they have not exactly been looking for excuses to act, quite the opposite. This could change, but the assumption for now should probably remain that the US have reasons not to significantly ratchet up their involvement.
 
teqniq said:
I am not convinced this was the regime. It all feels dodgy as fuck.
Click to expand...

Who else would it be? Rebels? I'm not really up to date on Syria but it seems very unlikely to me. Surely the government would be denying it much more strongly than they are if it was not them.
 
I'm not convinced it'll lead to anything, UN can't do anything without Russia and China, US ain't gonna go it alone on this one.

It's still a stalemate.
 
8115 said:
Who else would it be? Rebels? I'm not really up to date on Syria but it seems very unlikely to me. Surely the government would be denying it much more strongly than they are if it was not them.
Click to expand...

It's pretty hard to work out exactly what's happening at any given moment in Syria because nearly all the reporting is heavily biased one way or another. If the Syrian government were denying it strenuously would that even get reported? By the BBC?

And there's also the complicated situation on the ground too. The Syrian Arab Army, and the new National Defence Forces, are made up of thousands of scattered units, often cut from each other physically and with little communication. Even though they've held together far longer than anyone thought they would, it would be foolish to think than an army this deep into a brutal civil war will be functioning like a cohesive group, with total discipline and professionalism. It could be some individual commander or general who ordered it, it could be Bashar Al-Assad personally, it's such chaos I doubt even the Syrian govt knows for sure what's gone on. They might only have a limited influence on what's happening on the frontlines anyway, stuck in their bunkers. Perhaps the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing? Because I just can't see why they'd choose to use chemical weapons when they were faced with an enemy that was on the retreat, right in the middle of the capital city that they need to hold onto at all cost, with their own supporters in the suburbs at risk of being killed, whilst a team of UN weapons inspectors are hanging around in the city. That seems utterly irrational. Is there something we're missing? Assad is a murderous bastard no doubt about it but irrational?

Then on the rebel side you've got countless hundreds of milita groups, being trained and backed by a huge assorted of wealthy emirs in the Gulf states and powerful western nation states. It's way more complex than just the Free Syrian Army and the Al-Nusrah, split along secular vs islamist lines. There's as many groups as you can imagine, drawn from people all over the world who are fighting each other, fighting Kurds, fighting civilians. There's oranised criminal gangs who've pretended to be Jihadi's to loot towns take all the property over to Turkey to sell it. There's jihadi's who are from abroad who've come to Syrian and ended up as gangsters.

Then you've also got to remember there's Hezbollah, Iran, Jordan, Turkey and all sorts of other countries that have a stake in what happens here, and are also likely have a presence in the country, whether that be a few hundred Russian "advisors" or a few thousand Hezbollah soldiers. There's almost certainly US and Israeli special forces in Syria right now too.

It's such a mess because the number of different groups there is so huge and complicated that if the rebels were responsible there'd be absolutely no way of working out which rebel group and why. It could be the Al-Qaeda affiliated rebels, and there was an Al-Qaeda chemical weapon stash found in Turkey not too long ago (and which should be documented on this thread) and they're the sort of scum who would have even less moral equivocation about using chemical weapons in a civilian area than even a butcher like Assad. It could be the FSA affiliated groups, wanting to create some arresting images of people suffering from Sarin gas poisoning to co-incide with the visit of the UN inspection team, but that's a bit of a trip down conspiracy avenue so I'm not prepared to go down there unless something really points to it.
 
8115 said:
Who else would it be? Rebels? I'm not really up to date on Syria but it seems very unlikely to me. Surely the government would be denying it much more strongly than they are if it was not them.
Click to expand...

The last time this happened albeit on a much smaller scale it was almost certainly the rebels. But Delroy is right it's a complete mess and very difficult to ascertain who is responsible for what.
 
Delroy Booth said:
If the Syrian government were denying it strenuously would that even get reported? By the BBC?
Click to expand...

Strong denials by the Syrian military were featured in all of the BBC reporting of the story I saw today, including their claim that it is part of the 'dirty media war'. What tended to be absent from the short video reports as opposed to the written ones was much of the head-scratching about the timing.

The Syrian Arab Army, and the new National Defence Forces, are made up of thousands of scattered units, often cut from each other physically and with little communication. Even though they've held together far longer than anyone thought they would, it would be foolish to think than an army this deep into a brutal civil war will be functioning like a cohesive group, with total discipline and professionalism. It could be some individual commander or general who ordered it, it could be Bashar Al-Assad personally, it's such chaos I doubt even the Syrian govt knows for sure what's gone on.
Click to expand...

I fail to believe that such communication failures and that level of chaos exist in the capital. I'm not sure how far to stretch such themes elsewhere either, but certainly not in Damascus. That doesn't mean I totally rule out the rogue possibilities, just that I wouldn't want to overdo the suggestion of a breakdown of military discipline.

Because I just can't see why they'd choose to use chemical weapons when they were faced with an enemy that was on the retreat, right in the middle of the capital city that they need to hold onto at all cost, with their own supporters in the suburbs at risk of being killed, whilst a team of UN weapons inspectors are hanging around in the city. That seems utterly irrational. Is there something we're missing? Assad is a murderous bastard no doubt about it but irrational?
Click to expand...

Its puzzling for sure. I suppose one possibility is that its some kind of 'rubbing their noses in it' act, to underscore the impotence of the UN and various powers to intervene. Risky, but long before the civil war Syria did have something of a reputation for being rather blatant with some of its actions, but I do not pretend to completely understand the power psychology behind it, or to judge how likely it would be in this case. I'm only really floating this half-baked idea out there because of the lack of other explanations for the timing.

It could be the Al-Qaeda affiliated rebels, and there was an Al-Qaeda chemical weapon stash found in Turkey not too long ago (and which should be documented on this thread) and they're the sort of scum who would have even less moral equivocation about using chemical weapons in a civilian area than even a butcher like Assad. It could be the FSA affiliated groups, wanting to create some arresting images of people suffering from Sarin gas poisoning to co-incide with the visit of the UN inspection team, but that's a bit of a trip down conspiracy avenue so I'm not prepared to go down there unless something really points to it.
Click to expand...


Never mind the morals, what purpose would Jihadist groups have for such an attack either? I don't think there is anything wrong with raising the false-flag stuff as a possibility, for sure we cannot go far down that path without something more tangible to suggest that is the right path, but the same can be said for the other possibilities at this point as well.

Beyond all these possibilities I don't think I've thought of many others yet. Some kind of accident is the only other thing that springs to mind, whether it be the accidental use of such payload, a targeting error, or the destruction of something on the ground that released deadly substances? None of these seem particularly likely to me either but I thought I would throw them out there anyway. My expectations for easily discovering the truth in Syria remain very low.
 
mental comment on the mail website about the sarin attack..

And once the photos are all those bodies, get up and start walking around. The men pick up their guns, and start shooting. I Don't believe this rebel propaganda. Even if it is true, which is doubtful, why does the UK media only listen and report on what the rebels have got to say. It has been a constant barrage, of terrible stories only directed at Alsaad an his people.
- dan , Kani Japan, 22/8/2013 00:41
Click to expand...

Pic of victims below

article-2398691-1B6450B4000005DC-43_634x451.jpg
 
gabi said:
no idea what its going to take for obama to grow a set of balls and intervene
Click to expand...
He'd have to feel threatened politically & he's not because most Americans don't really care about Syria.

BTW, Assad could prove that chem weapons were not used by letting the UN inspectors into the area or letting in journalists & chem weapons experts. Bet he won't.
 
Shocking, horrific footage. It is awful to see people being subjected to this level of attack.
But we sit here, safe at our keyboards and wonder who is responsible.
To those suffering, they are not concerned who is capable, responsible and calculative enough to commit this atrocity.
The civilians just want it to stop.
And the world sits back once again, whilst poor folk at the bottom are massacred.

The UN proves yet again it is a paper tiger, and it's envoys and diplomats grow rich, sitting round tables drinking coffee and saying,
'This is terrible, poor people, awful violence, pass the biscuits'.

Who would gain by such an attack, as Delroy says, would the regime in Damascus be so blatant?
Who would gain by discrediting the regime, the free Syrian army? Hezbollah? Iran? Israel? the Gulf states?

We sit here, powerless to help and have to witness the deaths of children.
What a total screwed up world we live in.

Is it only a matter of time before we see such attacks outside Syria? This morning dawns into a far more dangerous place than it as been since the Cold War era.
I wish peace could be around the corner, all I can see is chaos, war and more innocent death.
Deplorable.
 
Chemical weapons were undoubtedly used, the footage confirms that.
As to who used them? Would surely be utter insanity for the regime to have
unleashed them with the U.N inspectors in the country. It's so very
murky, the news we get out of Syria. No idea what is really going on there.
 
...and what with William Hague being so eager to convince
us that it was the Syrian regime who committed this atrocity
and seeming so hungry for a response from the "West", call me
cynical, but that just makes me doubt it was the SAA even more.
 
I can see the argument that it makes no sense for the regime to order the use of chemical weapons, but that doesn't rule out the possibility some local commander with access may have -- clearly problems with that scenario too, but not impossible is all IMO
ETA: And reading back see that's already been said. teach me to jump in at the end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

teqniq
Huge earthquake in Turkey and Northern Syria 05-06/02/23
2 3
Replies
83
Views
3K
JimW
JimW
P
The next American Civil War
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
321
Views
15K
pbsmooth
P
MrCurry
After Ukraine, what’s next?
2 3
Replies
76
Views
5K
Dogsauce
Dogsauce
T
Hong Kong: what next?
65 66 67 68 69
Replies
2K
Views
83K
Yossarian
Yossarian
H
Syria, attack on Conoco gas plant in Feburary 2018
Replies
1
Views
349
yield
Y
Back
Top Bottom