Implications of the Iraqi Crisis

By Jordan Morris

Flag of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria

Within the last few weeks we have watched a paradigm shift in Middle Eastern foreign relations. With The Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham on Baghdad’s doorstep, the US is confronted yet again with the prospect of becoming involved in one of the most turbulent states of the Middle East. ISIS’s conquest in Northern Iraq and Syria has already led to President Obama doing something no one thought he would ever do: send American troops back to Iraq. The limited deployment brought some 300 military advisors to assist the Iraqi army in fighting the lingering ISIS militants who have stopped just short of Baghdad, but have explicitly stated their intent to take Iraq’s capital city. ISIS fighters, led by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, will find that Baghdad is not Mosul or Tikrit, and at that the Iraqi government’s last stand will not be taken alone. 

Iraq has pleaded for help from the US and received a limited response, one that is unlikely to be followed up with any significant US presence or even the air-strikes that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki had petitioned for. Even without major assistance from the US, Maliki’s government may still stand, thanks to Iran. On June 18th Iran’s president, Hassan Rouhani, gave a speech at the Iraq-Iran border, pledging to do whatever it took to protect Shia populations and holy sites in southern Iraq (a move reminiscent of Vladimir Putin, who invaded Crimea citing his government’s duty to protect Russian nationals in Ukraine). At the eleventh hour, when an ISIS attack on Baghdad is imminent , we may very well see an anomaly of world politics take place—cooperation between the US and Iran. Both Iran and the US have been clear that there will be no conventional military coalition between the countries, but undoubtedly both recognize a common interest in protecting the current state of Iraq. Consequently, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has condemned cooperation, and suggested that the US is using this issue to further sink its teeth into Middle-Eastern affairs. 

The ‘enemy of my enemy is my friend’ scenario is an optimistic look at the future of relations between the US and its historical adversary, but some, and specifically Israel, are wary of cooperation with the Islamic Republic. Understandably the small Jewish state is highly skeptical of and opposed to its biggest ally cooperating with a government that has time and time again threatened to destroy it, but Iranian action supported by the U.S. could actually benefit Jerusalem. ISIS has been clear its vision of al-Sham includes the lands of Palestine. The militants announced the development of a special unit, the Al Quds Unit, whose mission is to destroy the “Zionist regime occupying Palestine,” according to an article on CounterPunch.org. 

Syrian Support for the PKK in Turkey?

By Peter Thompson

In a recent interview between a reporter from the BBC and Murat Karayilan, the current de facto leader of the PKK, the issue of support for the PKK from Syria was raised. Karayilan denied that the PKK was receiving any assistance from outside forces, including Syria, and stated that the story was "baseless" and "coming from outside, from the Turkish government" (BBC). Huseyin Celik, deputy chairman of Prime Minister Erdogan's AK party in Turkey, however, recently made a claim to the contrary: "It's known that the PKK works arm in arm with Syria's intelligence organisation" (Telegraph).

As is generally the case in situations like this, the reality is clear. Certainly one side is making a factual error, but it's not clear which one. It's even less evident if such an error is the result of bad information or an overt act of deception. There are more than a few reasons why both the PKK and the Turkish government might make manipulative statements on this issue, with the PKK benefiting from the impression that they represent a widely popular movement among Kurds in Turkey and the government able to discredit them by claiming foreign control. Without any real proof offered by either side, however, it's nearly impossible to be persuaded by either claim.

Since the Kurdish population in the region spans Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran (among others), I would be surprised if they weren't receiving some level of aid from outside of Turkey, but it seems unlikely that Turkey's claims of direct support from the Syrian government, embroiled in their own internal conflict, reflect a substantial truth. At the same time, though one has to wonder how an organization like the PKK could sustain itself in a military conflict spanning decades without some high-level access to outside forces. Perhaps some further digging might illuminate the reality underneath this all, but for the moment it all smacks of unsubstantiated propaganda to me.

Syria: A Failed Ceasefire

By Sophie Kaplan

In a disheartening but not unexpected turn of events Brahimi's attempted ceasefire has encouraged no change in Syria as conflict and violence continued today unimpeded. Attacks by Syrian jets in Damascus have left at least 23 dead and the air raids continued with a special focus on the city of Maaret al-Numan. Along with this, rather than a steady continuation of the violence that preceded the truce, the conflict seems to be picking up in intensity as illustrated by the assassination of Syrian air force General Abdullah Mahmoud al-Khalidi. 

Kofi Annan

This isn't the first ceasefire that the Syrian civil war has seen. Back in February some may recall Kofi Annan's "Six Point Peace Plan for Syria," Kofi Annan, former special envoy to Syria proposed a similar ceasefire between the conflicting forces. Kofi's truce proposal held out longer than Brahimi's modern attempt and at several points even looked quite promising. Just as in the failed truce this last week, Syria eventually acquiesced to the conditions. Unfortunately, both ceasefires failed in similar ways as well, primarily because neither side was able to keep their end of the bargain. 

I'll leave you with a thought; Kofi's ceasefire was able to persist for at least enough to foster some international discussion, so what does it say about the state of the conflict now that Syria couldn't even hold out for four days? With this in mind feel free to check out the video below for an in depth look at the failed ceasefire and some updates on other major topics in Syria this week.

Air War, Potential Ceasefire in Syria

By Nate Hanson

As violence continues to escalate in Syria, there is also hope for a truce. The Syrian government has announced that it is interested in exploring a truce proposal created by the UN and Arab League peace envoy. The government wants to meet with Lakhdar Brahimi, an envoy, to hear his proposal for a ceasefire over the four-day period of the Muslim holiday Eidul Azha. The Syrian rebels have also expressed an interest in a truce.

This newly expressed interest in truce has not led to a decrease in violence, however. A lot of the fighting has shifted to the air, as Syrian warplanes targeted a rebel blockade in the city of Idlib. This rebel blockade has been preventing the government from getting reinforcements to the city of Aleppo.

As the government continues to launch attacks from the air, the rebel forces continue to get their hands on bigger and bigger weapons. The rebels are now in possession of anti-aircraft weapons, and claim to have shot down a Syrian helicopter. (Viewer discretion advised)

According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, roughly 30,000 people have been killed since the fighting broke out in March of last year. Of all the dead, about 2,300 of them have been children.

More Tension Between Turkey and Syria

By Alexa Karavos

There has been artillery fire between Syria and Turkey for several consecutive days now. The tension has been growing recently in result of the several mortar bombs landing on Turkeish grounds from the Syrian side. Turkey is retaliating and returning fire. Turkey's chief of staff, General Necdet Ozel, said their military response would be stronger if the shells continued to fall onto Turkish soil. The tension with Syria and Turkey raises a bigger issue by involving NATO. Turkey is a part of NATO, so if there were to be an attack on them, it would be an attack on all. NATO has plans to protect and defend Turkey if needed, though. The tension is also growing with the two countries because Turkey has many anti-Assad insurgencies and about 100,000 Syrian refugees have traveled onto Turkish grounds because of increase of violence.

Another event that happened that is not helping with the growing tension is that a Syrian plane was forced to land in Turkey. Two F-16 warplanes were sent from Turkey to force a Syrian Airbus A320 plane to land. The plane was traveling from Moscow to Damascus [through Turkish airspace] and had 37 passengers plus the crew. The reason the plane was forced to land was because there was suspicion of the military cargo being carried on the plane. Turkey does not want to help the Syrian government and does not want them to be receiving weapons. Cargo was taken from the plane and parts of a missile were found and confiscated. The plane was eventually allowed to leave and return on their way, just without the cargo. In The New York Times, Turkey's foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, was quoted saying, "There are items that are beyond the ones that are legitimate and requited to be reported in civilian fights. There are items that we would rate as troublesome." Davutoglu was also quoted in ABC News talking about the confiscated equipment saying, "There are elements... that are not legitimate in civilian fights. If equipment is being carried under the guise of civilian flights or if they are not being declared, then of course we'll inspect it." Turkish planes are to now avoid Syrian airspace in fear of Syrian retaliation.

Turkey Close to War with Syria

By Nicholas Merges

Just last week things were looking up as far as the violence in Turkey. Although stats came out that said that the violence was increasing over the past year, Turkey started to look closer to a resolution as leaders said they would start to meet with PKK leaders and possibly negotiate an end to the violence.

This progress appears to have been brought to an abrupt end this week with violence now spilling over the border from Syria, whom Turkey had accused of helping the PKK over the past year. Multiple sources including the Vancouver Sun and the Pittsburgh Gazette have reported a recent mortar attack from across the Syrian border which killed 5 Turkish citizens, has risen already very high tensions between the two countries. Turkey responded to the attack with a bombardment of their own on Syrian military bases, a reaction that many fear will escalate into a full fledged war. 

Turkeys desire to wage war on Syria became even more evident when Turkey called a meeting of NATO powers to discuss possibility of a military intervention. While it is obvious that Turkey is seriously considering taking the violence on its borders to new levels, the other NATO powers are more reluctant and want to avoid escalating the situation in Turkey further than it already has.

The situation in Turkey become ever more complex as the weeks go on. One day officials are ready to talk and the next they want a war, what has become more obvious is that although sometimes seeings signs of progress, the violence and tension in the area is steadily increasing and one can only wonder when the breaking point will be. 

Turkey is allied with the United States and it is possible they could ask for some help if this becomes a larger conflict, but as of now NATO countries would rather take a passive stance, however if tensions continue to rise in the area it is increasingly likely that the United states may become involved.

Another 'Bloodiest Day' in Syria

By Sophie Kaplan

Five days ago more than 300 people were killed across Syria. This wasn't the direct result of a single bombing or a mass shooting, but rather a collection of casualties from all over the country, some from the cities like Damascus and others from smaller villages such as al-Dhiyabia. Of the 343 reportedly killed an estimated 199 were civilians. The fact that the death toll was not isolated to a single location speaks to the overall state of Syria, specifically that violence permeates the country and effects its every corner. The civilians caught in the crossfire also indicate the weight that violence holds over all of Syria, there is good reason why Panes Moumtzsis, a refugee coordinator for Syria is anticipating some 700,000 refugees fleeing from Syria before the end of 2012. 

While the sheer number of people killed on the 28th is staggering it's important to also consider that there have been many previous "Bloodiest Days" that resulted in similar numbers of casualties, this consisted of 302 deaths on July 19th 2012, and 330 as recently as August 25th. Even though many major media sites are reporting these terrible numbers with the "bloodiest day" title tacked on it is in no way the first time that such numbers have been recorded since the start of the conflict. I'd encourage everyone to consider this aspect of the report seriously, September 28th may have been the bloodiest, but it does not indicate a startling increase in the death toll or a drastic shift in the immediate situation in the country. Rather, this "new" bloodiest day is instead a testament to the lack of progress toward the conclusion of the conflict as well as commentary on the consistent state of violence that the country exists within. 

As I delve more into the history and current events surrounding the Civil War in Syria it's impossible to ignore the statistics of people killed thus far in the conflict. Death in Syria's tumultuous environment is a grim inevitability that should be considered carefully as the people affected by the conflict are not merely numbers on a graph, but individuals. Many of the people killed were civilians that had no direct contribution to the violence itself. 

Throughout the entirety of the conflict an estimated 30,000 people have died. And unless something is done, there is nothing to indicate that the killing will stop. This is further enforced by the fact that Monday October 1st, only a day after the "Bloodiest Day," 164 more people were killed. The death toll continues to rise rapidly, only three months ago on July 22nd the death toll was reportedly at 19,000. 

There is much more to the Syrian Civil War than numbers, but in order to gain perspective on the severity of the situation sometimes it's the easiest thing to visualize. However, it's so easy to distance oneself from a situation when all you have are a series of figures. To restate what I think is a vital method of comprehending the gravity of Syria's rebellion, don't ever forget that each number represents an individual. For those of you who missed it in my last post feel free to take a look at the story of one of these individuals.

Intervention in Syria?

By Whitney Parlow

Oliver Knox, on Yahoo! News, wrote an article today entitled "McCain Calls for U.S. -led airstrikes in Syria."In it, Knox quotes McCain in saying "the time has come for a new policy. . . The United States should lead an international efforct to protect key population centers in Syria, especially in the north, through airstrikes on Assad's forces." 

I can see where McCain is coming from on this one: He's trying to act as a police force against President Assad and his forces in Syria; however, it's directly undermining a U.N. veto against such actions. Personally, I do think something more should be done to pressure President Assad into not only allowing aid into all parts of the country to aid the victims of the violent crackdown on the rebellious populous; but also ending his crackdown on the rebellion. 

However, I oppose Senator McCain's views on how to go about forcing President Assad to stand down. Not only does it violate a U.N. resolution, as I said before; but it further escalates the conflict in Syria. Airstrikes, even in today's technologically advanced era, are still all not that precise: In the initial invasion of Iraq, airstrikes were responsible for 31% of civilian deaths, according to a Washington Post article entitled "Study Claims Iraq's 'Excess' Death Toll Has Reached 655,000" (link). Plus, not to mention the possibly causalities that we could receive as a result of such operations. 

Also, starting a militaristic intervention on behalf of the rebels could have drastic, unintended consequences: If it doesn't lead to an all-out war, or cold war as I wrote about in a previous article; the rules of engagement could change for the Syrian army. What if they were to occupy the cities and civilian buildings instead of surrounding the city? Would we still deem it safe to continue bombing? What if the Syrian Army decides to completely level the cities via their own airstrikes? 

Escalating the situation to a military intervention is definitely not the answer to ending the crisis in Syria. Nations must work together to come to a resolution on the issue and not act independently to advance their own agenda (E.g. the U.S. airstriking the Syrian Army). This is a very delicate situation that should be the of the utmost importance on the world stage to find a resolution to end this conflict, so that further bloodshed of non-combats is ceased.

Syria, Intervention, and the UN

By Isaac Sammis

Within Syria, opportunity is not a lengthy visitor and sometimes a push towards the proper path of virtuous democracy is needed. Syria has been given foreign help from multiple nations, the main one of those being the United States. The goal of US intervention is to give the people a “society free from the whims of a dictator” says Hilary Clinton, US Secretary of State. “This means” she continues, “setting Syria on the path of the rule of law and protecting universal rights of all citizens.”

Intervention, however, is not always prudent or even justified. According to Michael Walzer, author of Just and Unjust Wars, “evidence must be provided that a community actually exists whose members are committed to independence and ready and able to determine the conditions of their government.” The society he is explaining must be deserving and willing to create a new political system for itself, and in Syria this will to secede is very apparent. There have been several meetings with the Syrian National council regarding their hopes of pressuring President al-Assad’s reign and according to French foreign minister Alain Juppe, “the Syrian National Council is the legitimate interlocutor with whom we will continue to work.” By forming groups of opposition Syria is demonstrating their desire to create a new, more autonomous government. They even have established the Free Syrian Army, a group claiming to be the true government although unable to exercise their power, also showing that if President al-Assad were to step down they would have a full political and military system established and ready to go.

Although extending a helping hand in organization, the United States has stated that “military intervention has been absolutely ruled out and we have made that clear from the beginning.” This is a wise move for the reasons that the United States has been in conflict for some time with other Middle Eastern nations, they currently have a poor economy, and pushing the envelope of violence would only enrage US citizens. To bring in the words of Michael Walzer for a second time, “when required for the sake of independence, military action is honorable and virtuous, but not always prudent.”

To help resolve the dilemma facing Syria, the UN Security Council set up a vote for a resolution calling on the stepping down of al-Assad, to take place on February 4th. Although all other 13 members voted in favor, Russia and China vetoed the resolution. Chinese representative Li Baodong is noted as saying “to push through a vote when parties are still seriously divided over the issue will not help maintain the unity and authority of the security council or help resolve the issue.” These vetoes come even after yet another bombardment in the district of Homs, killing more than 200 people in the worst night of bloodshed of the 11-month uprising, according to Reuters. This attack included upwards of 99 women and children and by vetoing the attempts for a resolution the UN is paralyzed and resulting in the Syrian National council saying they will head into complete military confrontation, according an article on Financial Times.

Although giving up power peacefully is not an Assad family tradition, the UN’s attempts would have strengthened the efforts of Syrian opposition forces, but now the area is on the brink of complete civil war with frustration mounting more each day. [Update - The UN General Assembly passed its own resolution condemning the violence in Syria on 16 February 2012. (CNN)]

Civil Unrest in Syria: The Beginning

By Whitney Parlow

The civil unrest in Syria is not that uncommon when looking at the larger picture of the public in the Middle East. The citizens of the three countries of Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt have all managed to overthrow their own respective governments; while there have been large protests in Iraq and Algeria with "Sustained civil disorder and governmental changes" in Syria and Yemen- to draw attention to major instances of civil unrest from the populations of the states. The uprising in Syria had similar origins to that of the other nations: A demand for more political freedoms, a change in the current regime to that of a more democratic one- meaning also that the current leader of the nation Bashar al-Assad step down, and finally that more civil rights are granted to the citizens.

A specific point to the goals of the Syrian opposition was to have the 48-year long emergency law repealed. This law, according to Al Jeezera,"gave the government a free hand to arrest people without charge and extended the state's authority into virtually every aspect of citizens' lives" (Al Jazeera). This law was repealed back on the 21st of April, 2011, however the protests have continued. Interestingly seven officers deserted from the Surian Army to form the Free Syrian Army, led by Colonel Riyad al-Asad, to protect the protesters from the Syrian government's army (Asharq Alawsat).  Currently, the opposition control several key towns throughout the country: Douma, a city that is northeast of the capital city of Damascus (Alarabiya); Homes, a city that has been the center of attention in the past weeks as pro-government forces have been shelling the opposition controlled city (NYTimes); and even suburbs of Damascus itself have fallen under the opposition's control (MSNBC).

Human Rights Abuses in Syria

A visualization of the death toll updated in May, 
depicting 7,069 people

By Issac Sammis

The uprising in Syria has all stemmed off of one root, human rights. The people feel that the government has taken the power out of their hands and corruption has lead to the abuse of the freethinking civilization. The seed of destruction as it were, has risen due to the instatement of a state of emergency, or to place a simpler term to paper,the emergency law. This law “gave the government a free hand to arrest people without charge and extended the state's authority into virtually every aspect of citizens' lives”says an article from Aljazeera. A state of emergency is generally put in place to give the government added authority in defending and strengthening itself and its people during periods of man made or natural disaster and will suspend constitutional protection for the sake of this cause. According to Michael Walzer, author of Just and Unjust Wars, the country’sabilities towards protection “extends not only to the lives and liberties of individuals but also to their shared life and liberty, the independent community they have made, for which individuals are sometimes sacrificed.” So implementing this law, although taking away the rights of the citizens, can be a useful tool in rebuilding that country into the area they once knew her as. For the Ba’ath party, the Arab nationalist group whom has a monopoly over Syria,the rationale used to implement this law was that they felt Syria to be in danger from Israel and other militant groups and I believe they were correct in implementing this strategy of defense.

Syria has been in conflict with Israel four separate times, three of those times falling within a patterned time period of each other, that being in 1967, ’73, and ’82. Some may ask as to how they were justified in implementing this law in 1963 when conflict arose in serious proportions some four years later, but to this inquiry there is an easy response. The War of 1967, better known as the six-day war, was a huge success on the side of Israel, taking over parts of Egypt, Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights from Syria. The war was so swiftly won due to the enormous effort put forth by an Israeli spy by the name of Eli Cohen. He was able to rise through the Syrian government to achieve intelligence as to the whereabouts of rough and difficult terrain, the types of weapons used by the Syrian defenses, and he was even able to plant trees as markers for aerial attacks. Cohen eventually got as high as the Chief Advisor to the Minister of Defense and was third in line to succeed as President of Syria. He was caught and hung on May 18^th, 1965 but the information that he was able to transfer to Israel was enough to set them up for a large attack in the Six-Day War and previous bombings before then. Cohen first moved to Damascus, the capital of Syria, in 1961 and suspicions grew in Syria of a high-level leak soon after and they implemented the emergency law and strengthened their efforts towards the eventual finding of Cohen, all this information to be found at his website elicohen.org. Unfortunately, the state of emergency was not lifted at that time and the abuse of power was soon to follow.

The clearest starting point of this abuse was the Hama Massacre in 1982, where an army patrol team was investigating the city of Hama and came across the hiding guerrilla commander Umar Juwwad and fighting erupted between Islamic insurgents and the Ba’ath party. These parties have been fighting for control of the area for sometime and the Islamic insurgents,that being the Muslim Brotherhood, were fighting for the idea that religion,specifically the writing in the Qur’an, were to be inseparable from life and government, the Ba’ath party, as I mentioned previously, were fighting for Arab unity. On the day subsequent to the encounter, the Syrian government called for surrender of the city and warned that anyone remaining in the city would be treated as a rebel. They then bombed the center of the city, allowing for ground troops to infiltrate and search for surviving insurgents. They then proceeded to torture and execute these rebels and suspected more to be hiding beneath the city in a series of tunnels. Under the orders of Hafez al-Assad, the Syrian president at the time, the soldiers pumped diesel fuel into the tunnels and blocked the exits of those channels with tanks and other military forms of resistance and ignited the fuel burning many. It has been estimated that between 10,000 and 25,000 were killed, most of those being civilians and is said to be “the single deadliest act by any Arab government against its own people in the modern Middle East” by author Robin Wright.

After this event, the grip of the government began to tighten as they realized that the power was all in their hands and put forth attempts to ensure that their reign was not to be challenged. They began putting censors on anything thatwasn’t pro-government and put those against their rule in jails, where it is said they were tortured. An estimated 2,500 to 3,000 of these political prisoners were never tried. There were of course no protests allowed unless they too were pro-government and on January 30^th 2012, 28 protesters were shot and killed in the midst of an anti-government crowd. The violence however stops not there and the current death toll is estimated at around 7,000,according to The Huffington post.

            

The emergency law was lifted on April 19^th, 2011 but the protesters are not done there and are noted saying that the lifting of the “emergencylaw is long overdue, but there are a host of other laws that should be scrapped, such as those giving security forces immunity from prosecution, and giving powers to military courts to try civilians,” according to Aljazeera.com. This shows that there is much more for these people to fight for and much more on the side of the government that is up for reform, and as the crowds grow in size, so do their supporters.