A Congressional Digest Publication A Pro & Con Monthly

A Congressional Digest Publication

September 2011VOL. 9 NO. 6

A Pro & Con® Monthly

Syria CrackdownThe Pro-Democracy Movement andthe Regime of Bashar al-Assad

Should the International CommunityCondemn Syria for Violating theHuman Rights of Its Citizens?

Also in this issue:

Drought and Famine in Africa

Haiti’s New Leadership

International Debates, a Pro & Con® Monthly | September 2011 (Vol. 9, No. 6) Syria Crackdown

Contents September 2011

Vol. 9 ■ No. 6

International Debates


(ISSN 1542-0345) is an independent publication featuring controversies before the United Nations and other international forums, Pro & Con®. It is not an official organ of the United Nations or any other international organization, nor is it controlled by any party, interest, class, or sect. Published monthly, September through May, and made available exclusively through Congressional Digest Debates Online, a Pro & Con® service.

© Copyright 2011

Published by: The Congressional Digest Corp. Washington, D.C. www.congressionaldigest.com Founder: Alice Gram Robinson Publisher: Page Robinson Editors in Chief: Anthony Zurcher Sarah Orrick Subscription Rates: 1 yr: $295, 2 yrs: $575, 3 yrs: $823 NOTE: Available exclusively as part of the Congressional Digest Debates Online service, which also includes Congressional Digest and Supreme Court Debates Single Copies: $19 (print and PDF) – available on the Web Subscription Orders: Visa and MasterCard accepted Web: www.congressionaldigest.com Phone: (800) 637-9915 / (301) 916-1800 Email: [email protected] Fax: 240-599-7679

This Month’s Feature

Syria Crackdown The Pro-Democracy Movement and the Regime of Bashar al-Assad ■Foreword: Syria Crackdown ··································· 3 ■ Syria Profile History, Government, Economy, and Foreign Relations ······ 5 ■ Syrian Uprising Background and Recent Developments·························17 ■ Obama Administration’s Position on Syria The President’s Statement and Executive Order ··············21 ■ Human Rights Council’s Resolution on Syria Recommendations of the Fact-Finding Mission···············26 ■ U.S. Denouncement of Assad’s Actions Statement by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton···············28 ALSO IN THIS ISSUE: ■ Drought and Famine in Africa·································29 ■ Haiti’s New Leadership ·········································29

Should the International Community Condemn Syria for Violating the Human Rights of Its Citizens? Pros Navi Pillay·····························································30 Juan Méndez··························································32 Federal Republic of Germany, French Republic, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ···33 United States of America···········································34 Commonwealth of Australia ······································35 Kingdom of Norway·················································36

© 2011 Congressional Digest Corp. | www.congressionaldigestdebates.com | Page 1

http://www.congressionaldigest.com/

http://www.congressionaldigest.com/

mailto:[email protected]


Cons Syrian Arab Republic···············································38 People’s Republic of China ········································48 Republic of Cuba ····················································49



Foreword

SYRIA CRACKDOWN The Pro-Democracy Movement and the Regime of Bashar al-Assad The ancient country of Syria ― strategically located along the edge of the Mediterranean Sea with Lebanon to the west, Israel and Jordan to the south, Iraq to the east, and Turkey to the north ― has seen centuries of conflict driven by the competing interests of varied religious and ethnic factions. Today, these include a large Sunni Muslim majority and significant minorities of Christians and Alawites, a branch of Shia Islam. The modern state of Syria gained its independence in 1946, after being ruled since World War I by the French, who had taken over control of the country from the Ottoman Turks. A decade of political instability followed, after which Syria briefly united with Egypt to form the United Arab Republic. The two entities separated in 1961, however, and the Syrian Arab Republic was re-established. In the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, Syria lost the Golan Heights to Israel, then became engaged politically and militarily in the civil war in Lebanon, before pulling out in 2005, having come under intense international pressure to do so following the assassination of former Lebanese Premier Rafik Hariri, in which pro-Syrian Lebanese officials were implicated. In 1971, Syria adopted a constitution giving the Ba’ath Party the majority of leadership roles in the government and defining the nation as a secular socialist state with Islam recognized as the majority religion.

… human rights organizations accused Syrian government authorities of repeated violations, including the arbitrary detention and torture of activists, website censorship, and the imposition of travel bans.

Syria’s current president, Bashar al-Assad, was elected in 2000, immediately after the death of his father, Hafez al-Assad, whose 29 years in power were known for political stability and social reforms, but also criticized for repressive acts, particularly the 1982 massacre ordered to quell a revolt in the Muslim Brotherhood-controlled town of Hama. Bashar al-Assad ran unopposed, garnering 97 percent of the vote. With the release of hundreds of political prisoners, his election initially brought hopes for reform; however, the Alawites ― the minority Shia sect to which Assad belongs ― has wielded disproportionate power within the Syrian government, military, and business elite, and the excluded Sunni majority has leveled charges of corruption and nepotism. In addition, human rights organizations accused Syrian government authorities of repeated violations, including the arbitrary detention and torture of activists, website censorship, and the imposition of travel bans. The U.S. State Department’s 2010 human rights report stated that the Assad government “systematically repressed citizen’s ability to change their government.” In March 2011, the wave of Arab unrest that started with the Tunisian revolution two months earlier, reached Syria, with rallies occurring in the southern border town of Deraa. When the turmoil spread to other towns and cities, Assad sent in tanks and troops to restore order. Hundreds of protesters were killed, and some 10,000 people fled to refugee camps in Turkey. The protesters demand that Assad step down and that the ruling Ba’ath Party give others more power. They also call for an end to unjust incarceration and torture, equal rights for ethnic and religious groups, and freedom of the press, speech, and assembly. The government has made



certain concessions, including repeal of the Emergency Law, in place since 1963, which gave it sweeping authority to suspend constitutional rights. The violence has continued to escalate, however, with government killings in August reaching even higher levels. Syria’s crackdown on its citizens has been widely denounced, with several countries, the Arab League, and the United Nations condemning the use of deadly force. As for the United States, relations between the two countries historically have been tense. The United States imposed economic sanctions on Syria in 2004 and again in 2010 for the Assad government’s support for terrorist groups. The United States then tightened sanctions in May 2011, with the European Union following suit in August. President Obama also signed an executive order imposing additional sanctions against Syria, freezing Syrian Government assets in the United States, and banning the U.S. importation of petroleum or petroleum products of Syrian origin. The following day, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights published the report of its Fact-Finding Mission on Syria. The report found a pattern of widespread, systematic violations and called on the Government of Syria to put an immediate end to such atrocities, allow full access to humanitarian aid, and prevent further crimes. In a resolution adopted on August 23, following a Special Session on Human Rights in Syria, the UN Human Rights Council welcomed the mission’s report and ordered an investigation of alleged violations of international human rights law by the Syrian Government

since March 2011. The resolution, presented by the European Union, the United States, and Arab countries, passed the 47-member council by a vote of 33 in favor, four against, and nine abstentions. Those arguing in favor of the resolution stressed that the international community is obligated to not let the violations go unpunished and to assess whether they may constitute crimes against humanity and therefore should be prosecuted. Delegates of China and Cuba

took the floor to denounce what they called interference in Syria’s internal affairs.

On August 18, U.S. President Barack Obama officially called for Bashar al-Assad’s resignation, stating, “For the sake of the Syrian people, the time has come for President Assad to step aside.”

In a June 21, 2011, speech at Damascus University, President Assad made vague promises to open Syria’s political system but offered no concrete proposals for reform and continued to blame foreign conspiracies for the violence in his country. The speech, possibly intended to buy time and placate those Syrians who had not yet taken to the streets, instead may have helped to solidify international condemnation of the regime and made it less likely that it will survive.



SYRIA PROFILE History, Government, Economy, and Foreign Relations

rchaeologists have demonstrated that Syria was the center of one of the most ancient civilizations on earth. Around the excavated city of Ebla in northern Syria, discovered in

1975, a great Semitic empire spread from the Red Sea north to Turkey and east to Mesopotamia from 2500 to 2400 B.C. The city of Ebla alone during that time had a population estimated at 260,000. Scholars believe the language of Ebla to be the oldest Semitic language.

A

Syria was occupied successively by Canaanites, Phoenicians, Hebrews, Arameans, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Nabataeans, Byzantines, and, in part, Crusaders before finally coming under the control of the Ottoman Turks. Syria is significant in the history of Christianity — Paul was converted on the road to Damascus and established the first organized Christian Church at Antioch in ancient Syria, from which he left on many of his missionary journeys. Damascus, settled about 2500 B.C., is one of the oldest continuously inhabited cities in the world. It came under Muslim rule in A.D. 636. Immediately thereafter, the city’s power and prestige reached its peak, and it became the capital of the Omayyad Empire, which extended from Spain to India from A.D. 661 to A.D. 750, when the Abbasid caliphate was established at Baghdad, Iraq. Damascus became a provincial capital of the Mameluke Empire around 1260. It was largely destroyed in 1400 by Tamerlane, the Mongol conqueror, who removed many of its craftsmen to Samarkand. Rebuilt, it continued to serve as a capital until 1516. In 1517, it fell under Ottoman rule. The Ottomans remained for the next 400 years, except for a brief occupation by Ibrahim Pasha of Egypt from 1832 to 1840.



Twentieth Century History French Occupation. In 1920, an independent Arab Kingdom of Syria was established under King Faysal of the Hashemite family, who later became King of Iraq. However, his rule over Syria ended after only a few months, following the clash between his Syrian Arab forces and regular French forces at the battle of Maysalun. French troops occupied Syria later that year after the League of Nations put Syria under French mandate. With the fall of France to Nazi Germany in 1940, Syria came under the control of the Vichy Government until the British and Free French occupied the country in July 1941. Continuing pressure from Syrian nationalist groups forced the French to evacuate their troops in April 1946, leaving the country in the hands of a republican government that had been formed during the mandate. Independence to 1970. Although rapid economic development followed the declaration of independence of April 17, 1946, Syrian politics from independence through the late 1960s were marked by upheaval. A series of military coups, begun in 1949, undermined civilian rule and led to army Colonel Adib Shishakli’s seizure of power in 1951. After the overthrow of President Shishakli in a 1954 coup, continued political maneuvering supported by competing factions in the military eventually brought Arab nationalist and socialist elements to power. Syria’s political instability during the years after the 1954 coup, the parallelism of Syrian and Egyptian policies, and the appeal of Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser’s leadership in the wake of the 1956 Suez crisis created support in Syria for union with Egypt. On February 1, 1958, the two countries merged to create the United Arab Republic, and all Syrian political parties ceased overt activities. The union was not a success, however. Following a military coup on September 28, 1961, Syria seceded, reestablishing itself as the Syrian Arab Republic. Instability characterized the next 18 months, with various coups culminating on March 8, 1963, in the installation by leftist Syrian Army officers of the National Council of the Revolutionary Command (NCRC), a group of military and civilian officials who assumed control of all executive and legislative authority. The takeover was engineered by members of the Arab Socialist Resurrection Party (Ba’ath Party), which had been active in Syria and other Arab countries since the late 1940s. The new cabinet was dominated by Ba’ath members. The Ba’ath takeover in Syria followed a Ba’ath coup in Iraq the previous month. The new Syrian Government explored the possibility of federation with Egypt and Ba’ath-controlled Iraq. An agreement was concluded in Cairo on April 17, 1963, for a referendum on unity to be held in September 1963; however, serious disagreements among the parties soon developed, and the tripartite federation failed to materialize. Thereafter, the Ba’ath regimes in Syria and Iraq began to work for bilateral unity. These plans foundered in November 1963, when the Ba’ath regime in Iraq was overthrown. In May 1964, President Amin Hafiz of the NCRC promulgated a provisional constitution providing for a National Council of the Revolution (NCR), an appointed legislature composed of representatives of mass organizations ― labor, peasant, and professional unions; a presidential council, in which executive power was vested; and a cabinet. On February 23, 1966, a group of army officers carried out a successful intra-party coup, imprisoned President Hafiz, dissolved the cabinet and the NCR, abrogated the provisional constitution, and designated a regionalist, civilian Ba’ath government. The coup leaders described it as a “rectification” of Ba’ath Party principles.



The defeat of the Syrians and Egyptians in the June 1967 war with Israel weakened the radical socialist regime established by the 1966 coup. Conflict developed between a moderate military wing and a more extremist civilian wing of the Ba’ath Party. The 1970 retreat of Syrian forces sent to aid the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) during the “Black September” hostilities with Jordan reflected this political disagreement within the ruling Ba’ath leadership. On November 13, 1970, Minister of Defense Hafez al-Assad affected a bloodless military coup, ousting the civilian party leadership and assuming the role of prime minister. 1970 to 2000. Upon assuming power, Hafiz al-Assad moved quickly to create an organizational infrastructure for his government and to consolidate control. The Provisional Regional Command of Assad’s Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party nominated a 173-member legislature, the People’s Council, in which the Ba’ath Party took 87 seats. The remaining seats were divided among “popular organizations” and other minor parties. In March 1971, the party held its regional congress and elected a new 21-member Regional Command headed by Assad. In the same month, a national referendum was held to confirm Assad as President for a seven-year term. In March 1972, to broaden the base of his government, Assad formed the National Progressive Front, a coalition of parties led by the Ba’ath Party, and elections were held to establish local councils in each of Syria’s 14 governorates. In March 1973, a new Syrian constitution went into effect followed shortly thereafter by parliamentary elections for the People’s Council, the first such elections since 1962. The authoritarian regime was not without its critics, though most were quickly dealt with. A serious challenge arose in the late 1970s, however, from fundamentalist Sunni Muslims, who reject the basic values of the secular Ba’ath program and object to rule by the Alawis, whom they consider heretical. From 1976 until its suppression in 1982, the archconservative Muslim Brotherhood led an armed insurgency against the regime. In response to an attempted uprising by the brotherhood in February 1982, the government crushed the fundamentalist opposition centered in the city of Hama, leveling parts of the city with artillery fire and causing many thousands of dead and wounded. Syria’s 1990 participation in the U.S.-led multinational coalition aligned against Saddam Hussein marked a dramatic watershed in Syria’s relations both with other Arab states and with the West. Syria participated in the multilateral Middle East Peace Conference in Madrid in October 1991. During the 1990s, Syria engaged in direct, face-to-face negotiations with Israel; these negotiations failed. Hafiz Al-Assad died on June 10, 2000, after 30 years in power. Immediately following Al-Assad’s death, the parliament amended the constitution, reducing the mandatory minimum age of the president from 40 to 34 years old, which allowed his son Bashar Al-Assad legally to be eligible for nomination by the ruling Ba’ath Party. On July 10, 2000, Bashar Al-Assad was elected president by referendum in which he ran unopposed, garnering 97.29 percent of the vote, according to Syrian Government statistics. He was inaugurated into office on July 17, 2000, for a seven-year term. 2000 to 2011. In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States, the Syrian Government began limited cooperation with U.S. counterterrorism efforts. However, Syria opposed the Iraq War in March 2003, and bilateral relations with the United States swiftly deteriorated. In December 2003, President George W. Bush signed into law the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003, which provided for the



imposition of a series of sanctions against Syria if Syria did not end its support for Palestinian terrorist groups, curtail its military and security interference in Lebanon, cease its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, and meet its obligations under United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding the stabilization and reconstruction of Iraq. In May 2004, President Bush determined that Syria had not met these conditions and implemented sanctions that prohibit the export to Syria of U.S. products except for food and medicine, and the taking off from or landing in the United States of Syrian Government-owned aircraft. At the same time, the U.S. Department of the Treasury announced its intention to order U.S. financial institutions to sever correspondent accounts with the Commercial Bank of Syria based on money-laundering concerns, pursuant to Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act. Acting under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, President Bush also authorized the secretary of the treasury, in consultation with the secretary of state, to freeze assets belonging to certain Syrian individuals and entities. Tensions between Syria and the United States intensified from mid-2004 to early 2009, primarily over issues relating to Iraq and Lebanon. The U.S. Government recalled its ambassador to Syria in February 2005, after the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri. Prior to the assassination, France and the United States in 2004 had co-authored UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1559 calling for “all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon.” Under pressure following the assassination, Syrian troops stationed in Lebanon since 1976 were withdrawn by April 2005. Sensing its international isolation, the Syrians strengthened their relations with Iran and radical Palestinians groups based in Damascus and cracked down on any signs of internal dissent. During the July-August 2006 conflict between Israel and Hezballah, however, Syria placed its military forces on alert but did not intervene directly on behalf of its ally Hezballah. On May 27, 2007, President Al-Assad was reaffirmed by referendum for a second seven-year term with 97.6 percent of the vote. During 2008, though Syria’s relations with the United States remained strained, Syria’s international isolation was slowly being overcome as indirect talks between Israel and Syria, mediated by Turkey, were announced and a Qatar-brokered deal in Lebanon was reached. Shortly thereafter, French President Nicolas Sarkozy invited President Assad to participate in the Euro-Mediterranean summit in Paris, spurring a growing stream of diplomatic visits to Damascus. Since January 2009, President Barack Obama’s administration has continued to review Syria policy, and there have been a succession of congressional and U.S. administration officials who have visited Syria while in the region. Despite high hopes when President Al-Assad first took power in 2000, there has been little movement on political reform, with more public focus on limited economic liberalizations. The Syrian Government provided some cooperation to the UN Independent International Investigation Commission, which investigated the killing of Hariri until superseded by the Special Tribunal for Lebanon. Since the 34-day conflict in Lebanon in July and August 2006, evidence of Syrian compliance with its obligations under UNSCR 1701 not to rearm the Lebanese group Hezballah is unpersuasive. On April 17, 2007, the United Nations Security Council welcomed the secretary-general’s intention to evaluate the situation along the entire Syria-Lebanon border and invited the secretary-general to dispatch an independent mission to fully assess the monitoring of the border, and to report back on its findings and recommendations. As of March 2011, the border had yet to be demarcated. Since 2009, the United States has attempted to engage with Syria to find areas of mutual interest, reduce regional tensions, and promote Middle East peace. These efforts have included



congressional and executive meetings with senior Syrian officials, including President Assad, and the return of a U.S. Ambassador to Damascus. Government The Syrian constitution vests the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party with leadership functions in the state and society and provides broad powers to the president. The president, approved by referendum for a seven-year term, is also secretary-general of the Ba’ath Party and leader of the National Progressive Front, which is a coalition of 10 political parties authorized by the regime. The president has the right to appoint ministers, to declare war and states of emergency, to issue laws (which, except in the case of emergency, require ratification by the People’s Council), to declare amnesty, to amend the constitution, and to appoint civil servants and military personnel. The Emergency Law, which effectively suspends most constitutional protections for Syrians, has been in effect since 1963. The National Progressive Front also acts as a forum in which economic policies are debated and the country’s political orientation is determined. Because of Ba’ath Party dominance, however, the National Progressive Front has traditionally exercised little independent power. The Syrian constitution of 1973 requires that the president be Muslim but does not make Islam the state religion. Islamic jurisprudence, however, is required to be a main source of legislation. The judicial system in Syria is an amalgam of Ottoman, French, and Islamic laws, with three levels of courts: courts of first instance, courts of appeals, and the constitutional court, the highest tribunal. In addition, religious courts handle questions of personal and family law. The Ba’ath Party emphasizes socialism and secular Arabism. Although Ba’ath Party doctrine seeks to build pan-Arab rather than ethnic identity, ethnic, religious, and regional allegiances remain important in Syria. Members of President Assad’s own minority sect, the Alawis, hold most of the important military and security positions, while Sunnis (in 2006) controlled 10 of 14 positions on the powerful Ba’ath Party Regional Command. In recent years there has been a gradual decline in the party’s preeminence. The party also is heavily influenced by the security services and the military, the latter of which consumes a large share of Syria’s economic resources. Syria is divided administratively into 14 provinces, one of which is Damascus. A governor for each province is appointed by the president. The governor is assisted by an elected provincial council. Political Conditions Officially, Syria is a republic. In reality, however, it is an authoritarian regime that exhibits only the forms of a democratic system. Although citizens ostensibly vote for the president and members of parliament, they do not have the right to change their government. The late President Hafiz Al-Assad was confirmed by unopposed referenda five times. His son, Bashar Al-Assad, also was confirmed by an unopposed referendum in July 2000 and May 2007. The president and his senior aides, particularly those in the military and security services, ultimately make most basic decisions in political and economic life, with a very limited degree of public accountability.



Political opposition to the president is not tolerated. Syria has been under a state of emergency since 1963. Syrian governments have justified martial law by the state of war that continues to exist with Israel and by continuing threats posed by terrorist groups. The Assad regime has held power longer than any other Syrian government since independence. Its survival has been due partly to a strong desire for stability and the regime’s success in giving groups such as religious minorities and peasant farmers a stake in society. The expansion of the government bureaucracy has also created a large class loyal to the regime. The president’s continuing strength is due also to the army’s continued loyalty and the effectiveness of Syria’s large internal security apparatus. The leadership of both is comprised largely of members of Assad’s own Alawi sect. The several main branches of the security services operate independently of each other and outside of the legal system. Each continues to be responsible for human rights violations. All three branches of government are guided by the views of the Ba’ath Party, whose primacy in state institutions is assured by the constitution. The Ba’ath platform is proclaimed succinctly in the party’s slogan: “Unity, freedom, and socialism.” The party has traditionally been considered both socialist, advocating state ownership of the means of industrial production and the redistribution of agricultural land, and revolutionary, dedicated to carrying a socialist revolution to every part of the Arab world. Founded by Michel ‘Aflaq, a Syrian Christian, and Salah al-Din Al-Bitar, a Syrian Sunni, the Ba’ath Party embraces secularism and has attracted supporters of all faiths in many Arab countries, especially Iraq, Jordan, and Lebanon. Since August 1990, however, the party has tended to deemphasize socialism and to stress both pan-Arab unity and the need for gradual reform of the Syrian economy. Nine smaller political parties are permitted to exist and, along with the Ba’ath Party, make up the National Progressive Front (NPF), a grouping of parties that represents the sole framework of legal political party participation for citizens. Created to give the appearance of a multi-party system, the NPF is dominated by the Ba’ath Party and does not change the essentially one-party character of the political system. Non-Ba’ath parties included in the NPF represent small political groupings of a few hundred members each and conform strictly to Ba’ath Party and government policies. In addition, some 15 small independent parties outside the NPF operate without government sanction. The Ba’ath Party dominates the parliament, which is known as the People’s Council. With members elected every four years, the Council has no independent authority. The executive branch retains ultimate control over the legislative process, although parliamentarians may criticize policies and modify draft laws; according to the constitution and its bylaws, a group of 10 parliamentarians can propose legislation. The government has allowed independent non-NPF candidates to run for a limited allotment of seats in the 250-member People’s Council. Following the April 22-23, 2007, parliamentary elections, the NPF strengthened its hold on parliament, with the number of non-NPF deputies shrinking from 83 to 80, ensuring a permanent absolute majority for the Ba’ath Party-dominated NPF. There was a surge of interest in political reform after Bashar al-Assad assumed power in 2000. Human rights activists and other civil society advocates, as well as some parliamentarians, became more outspoken during a period referred to as "Damascus Spring" (July 2000 to February 2001). Assad also made a series of appointments of reform-minded advisors to formal and less formal positions, and included a number of similarly oriented individuals in his cabinet.



In October 2008, 12 members of the Damascus Declaration National Council were sentenced to two- and- one-half years in prison. The Damascus Declaration is a civil society reform document written in 2005 and signed by a confederation of opposition parties and individual activists who seek to work with the government to ensure greater civil liberties and democratic political reform. The government has shown no hesitation in suppressing those who advocate for human, legal, or minority rights. Although Internet access is increasing and nonpolitical private media is slowly being introduced, the government continues to ban numerous newspaper and news journal publications from circulating in the country, including Al-Hayat and Al-Sharq Al-Auwsat (both Saudi owned). It has recently allowed access to previously blocked websites, including YouTube.com, Amazon.com, and Facebook.com, but since many computer users in Syria had already learned to circumvent these restrictions, the move is largely cosmetic. Economy Syria is a middle-income, developing country with an economy based on agriculture, oil, industry, and tourism. Syria’s economy faces serious challenges and impediments to growth, however, including: a large and poorly performing public sector; declining rates of oil production; widening non-oil deficit; wide-scale corruption; weak financial and capital markets; and high rates of unemployment tied to a high population growth rate. In addition, Syria currently is subject to U.S. economic sanctions under the Syria Accountability Act, which prohibits or restricts the export and re-export of most U.S. products to Syria. As a result of an inefficient and corrupt centrally planned economy, Syria has low rates of investment, and low levels of industrial and agricultural productivity. The two main pillars of the Syrian economy used to be agriculture and oil, which together accounted for about one-half of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Agriculture, for instance, accounted for about 25 percent of GDP and employed 25 percent of the total labor force. Poor climatic conditions and severe drought badly affected the agricultural sector, however, thus reducing its share in the economy to about 17 percent of 2008 GDP, down from 20.4 percent in 2007, according to preliminary data from the Central Bureau of Statistics. On the other hand, higher crude oil prices countered declining oil production and led to higher budgetary and export receipts. Water and energy are among the most pervasive issues facing the agriculture sector. Another difficulty the agricultural sector suffered from is the government’s decision to liberalize the prices of fertilizers, which have increased between 100 and 400 percent. Drought was an alarming problem in 2008; however, the drought situation slightly improved in 2009. Wheat and barley production about doubled in 2009 compared to 2008. In spite of that, the livelihoods of up to 1 million agricultural workers have been threatened. In response, the UN launched an emergency appeal for $20.2 million. Wheat has been one of the crops most affected, and for the first time in two decades Syria has moved from being a net exporter of wheat to a net importer. Damascus has implemented modest economic reforms in the past few years, including cutting lending interest rates; opening private banks; consolidating all of the multiple exchange rates; raising prices on some subsidized items, most notably diesel, other oil derivatives, and fertilizers; and establishing the Damascus Stock Exchange, which began operations in 2009. In May 2008, Damascus raised the price of subsidized diesel by 357 percent, and in January 2009 the price of fuel oil was raised by 50 percent. In addition, President Assad signed legislative



decrees to encourage corporate ownership reform and allowed the Central Bank to issue treasury bills and bonds for government debt. Despite these reforms, the economy remains highly controlled by the government. Long-run economic constraints include declining oil production, high unemployment and inflation rates, rising budget deficits, increasing pressure on water supplies caused by heavy use in agriculture, increasing demand for electricity, rapid population growth, industrial expansion, and water pollution. The Bashar al-Assad government started its reform efforts by changing the regulatory environment in the financial sector, including the introduction of private banks and the opening of a stock exchange in March 2009. In 2001, Syria legalized private banking, and the sector, while still nascent, has been growing. To attract investment and to ease access to credit, the government allowed investors in 2007 to receive loans and other credit instruments from foreign banks, and to repay the loans and any accrued interest through local banks using project proceeds. In February 2008, the government permitted investors to receive loans in foreign currencies from local private banks to finance capital investment. Syria’s exchange rate is fixed, and the government maintains two official rates — one rate on which the budget and the value of imports, customs, and other official transactions are based, and a second set by the Central Bank on a daily basis that covers all other financial transactions. The government passed a law in 2006 that permits the operation of private money exchange companies. However, a small black market for foreign currency is still active. Given the policies adopted from the 1960s through the late 1980s, which included nationalization of companies and private assets, Syria failed to join an increasingly interconnected global economy. Syria withdrew from the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1951 because of Israel’s accession. It is not a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO), although it submitted a request to begin the accession process in 2001 and again in 2004. Syria is developing regional free trade agreements. As of January 1, 2005, the Greater Arab Free Trade Agreement (GAFTA) came into effect, and customs duties were eliminated between Syria and all other members of GAFTA. Syria’s free trade agreement with Turkey came into force in January 2007. Syria is a signatory to free trade agreements with Jordan, India, Belarus, and Slovakia. In 2004, Syria and the European Union initialed an Association Agreement; the ratification process had not been finalized as of March 2011. Although Syria claims a recent boom in non-oil exports, its trade numbers are notoriously inaccurate and out-of-date. Syria’s main exports include crude oil, refined products, rock phosphate, raw cotton, clothing, fruits and vegetables, and spices. The bulk of Syrian imports are raw materials essential for industry, petroleum products, vehicles, agricultural equipment, and heavy machinery. Earnings from oil exports as well as remittances from Syrian workers are the government’s most important sources of foreign exchange. Syria has made progress in easing its heavy foreign debt burden through bilateral rescheduling deals with its key creditors in Europe, most importantly Russia, Germany, and France. Syria has also settled its debt with Iran and the World Bank. In December 2004, Syria and Poland reached an agreement by which Syria would pay $27 million out of the total $261.7 million debt. In January 2005, Russia forgave 73 percent of Syria’s $14.5 billion long-outstanding debt, and in June 2008, Russia’s parliament ratified the agreement. In 2007, Syria



and Romania reached an agreement by which Syria will pay 35 percent of the $118.1 million debt. In May 2008, Syria settled all the debt it owed to the Czech Republic and Slovakia. National Security President Bashar Al-Assad is commander in chief of the Syrian armed forces, comprised of some 400,000 troops upon mobilization. The military is a conscripted force; males serve 18 months in the military upon reaching the age of 18, though exemptions do exist. Some 17,000 Syrian soldiers formerly deployed in Lebanon were withdrawn to Syria in 2005 in accordance with UNSCR 1559. Syria’s military remains one of the largest in the region, although the breakup of the Soviet Union ― long the principal source of training, material, and credit for the Syrian forces ― slowed Syria’s ability to acquire modern military equipment. Syria received significant financial aid from Gulf Arab states in the 1990s as a result of its participation in the first Gulf War, with a sizable portion of these funds earmarked for military spending. Besides sustaining its conventional forces, Syria seeks to develop its weapons of mass destruction capability, including chemical munitions and delivery systems. In September 2007, Israeli warplanes attacked a purported nuclear facility in Syria. Investigation by the International Atomic Energy Agency discovered particles of enriched uranium at the site, with a low probability they were introduced by the missiles used to attack the facility. As of March 2011, the IAEA continued to investigate the issue with only limited cooperation from the Syrian Government. Foreign Relations Relations With Other Arab Countries. Syria reestablished full diplomatic relations with Egypt in 1989. In the 1990–91 Gulf War, Syria joined other Arab states in the U.S.-led multinational coalition against Iraq. In 1998, Syria began a slow rapprochement with Iraq, driven primarily by economic needs. Syria continues to play an active pan-Arab role and has emerged from its relative isolation following the Hariri assassination to assert its influence regionally and expand diplomatic relations with Europe, Latin America, and China. Though it voted in favor of UNSCR 1441 in 2002, Syria was against coalition military action in Iraq in 2003. However, the Syrian Government accepted UNSCR 1483 (after being absent for the actual vote), which lifted sanctions on Iraq and established a framework to assist the Iraqi people in determining their political future and rebuilding their economy. Syria also voted for UNSCR 1511, which called for greater international involvement in Iraq and addressed the transfer of sovereignty from the U.S.-led coalition. Since the transfer of sovereignty in Iraq on June 28, 2004, Syria extended qualified support to the Iraqi Government and pledged to cooperate in the areas of border security, repatriation of Iraqi assets, and eventual restoration of formal diplomatic relations. While Syria has taken some steps to tighten controls along the Syria-Iraq border, Syria remained one of the primary transit points for foreign fighters entering Iraq. Consequently, relations between Syria and the Iraqi Government remained strained. Following a series of visits between high-level officials from both governments ― including Foreign Minister Mu’allim’s November 2006 visit to Baghdad and Iraqi President Talabani’s subsequent visit to Damascus ― formal diplomatic relations were established in



December 2006. That same month, the ministers of interior from both countries signed a Memorandum of Security Understanding aimed at improving border security and combating terrorism and crime; however, both nations withdrew their ambassadors following August 2009 bombings in Baghdad. Both countries returned their ambassadors in 2010. Up to an estimated 1 million Iraqi refugees live in Syria since the 2003 U.S.-led intervention in Iraq, of which more than 224,000 have officially registered with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. The U.S. remains the largest single contributor to UN and nongovernmental organization efforts to assist Iraqi refugees in the region. Total U.S. support region-wide in 2008 approached $400 million ― up from $171 million in 2007. Involvement in Lebanon. Syria has played an important role in Lebanon by virtue of its history, size, power, and economy. Lebanon was part of post-Ottoman Syria until 1926. The presence of Syrian troops in Lebanon dated to 1976, when President Hafiz al-Assad intervened in the Lebanese civil war on behalf of Maronite Christians. Following the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, Syrian and Israeli forces clashed in eastern Lebanon; however, Syrian opposition blocked implementation of the May 17, 1983, Lebanese-Israeli accord on the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon. In 1989, Syria endorsed the Charter of National Reconciliation, or “Taif Accord,” a comprehensive plan for ending the Lebanese conflict negotiated under the auspices of Saudi Arabia, Algeria, and Morocco. In May 1991, Lebanon and Syria signed the treaty of brotherhood, cooperation, and coordination called for in the Taif Accord. Until its withdrawal in April 2005, Syria maintained approximately 17,000 troops in Lebanon. A September 2004 vote by Lebanon’s Chamber of Deputies to amend the constitution to extend Lebanese President Lahoud’s term in office by three years amplified the question of Lebanese sovereignty and the continuing Syrian presence. The vote was clearly taken under Syrian pressure, exercised in part through Syria’s military intelligence service, whose chief in Lebanon had acted as a virtual proconsul for many years. The UN Security Council expressed its concern over the situation by passing Resolution 1559, which called for the withdrawal of all remaining foreign forces from Lebanon, disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias in accordance with the Taif Accord, the deployment of the Lebanese Armed Forces throughout the country, and a free and fair electoral process in the presidential election. Syrian-Lebanese relations have improved since 2008, when in response to French and Saudi engagement with Syria, Damascus recognized Lebanon’s sovereignty and the two countries agreed to exchange ambassadors. The United States supports a sovereign, independent Lebanon, free of all foreign forces, and believes that the best interests of both Lebanon and Syria are served by a positive and constructive relationship based upon principles of mutual respect and nonintervention between two neighboring sovereign and independent states. The United States called for Syrian noninterference in Lebanon, consistent with UNSCR 1559 and 1701. Arab-Israeli Relations. Syria was an active belligerent in the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, which resulted in Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights and the city of Quneitra. Following the October 1973 Arab–Israeli War, which left Israel in occupation of additional Syrian territory, Syria accepted UNSCR 338, which signaled an implicit acceptance of Resolution 242. Resolution 242, which became the basis for the peace process negotiations begun in Madrid in 1981, calls for a just and lasting Middle East peace to include withdrawal of Israeli armed forces



from territories occupied in 1967; termination of the state of belligerency; and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence of all regional states and of their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries. As a result of the mediation efforts of then- U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, Syria and Israel concluded a disengagement agreement in May 1974, enabling Syria to recover territory lost in the October war and part of the Golan Heights occupied by Israel since 1967, including Quneitra. The two sides have effectively implemented the agreement, which is monitored by UN forces. In December 1981, the Israeli Knesset voted to extend Israeli law to the part of the Golan Heights over which Israel retained control. The UN Security Council subsequently passed a resolution calling on Israel to rescind this measure. Syria participated in the Middle East Peace Conference in Madrid in October 1991. Negotiations were conducted intermittently through the 1990s and came very close to succeeding; however, the parties were unable to come to an agreement over Syria’s nonnegotiable demand that Israel withdraw to the positions it held on June 4, 1967. The peace process collapsed following the outbreak of the second Palestinian uprising (Intifada) in September 2000, though Syria continues to call for a comprehensive settlement based on UNSCR 242 and 338, and the land-for-peace formula adopted at the 1991 Madrid conference. Tensions between Israel and Syria increased as the second Intifada dragged on, primarily as a result of Syria’s unwillingness to stop giving sanctuary to Palestinian terrorist groups conducting operations against Israel. In October 2003, following a suicide bombing carried out by a member of Palestinian Islamic Jihad in Haifa that killed 20 Israeli citizens, Israeli Defense Forces attacked a suspected Palestinian terrorist training camp 15 kilometers north of Damascus. This was the first such Israeli attack deep inside Syrian territory since the 1973 war. During the summer of 2006, tensions again heightened due to Israeli fighter jets buzzing President Assad’s summer castle in response to Syria’s support for the Palestinian group Hamas, Syria’s support of Hezballah during the July-August 2006 conflict in Lebanon, and the rearming of Hezballah in violation of UNSCR 1701. Rumors of negotiations between the Israeli and Syrian governments were initially discounted by both Israel and Syria, with spokespersons for both countries indicating that any such talks were not officially sanctioned. The rumors were confirmed in early 2008, however, when it was announced that indirect talks facilitated by Turkey were taking place. The talks continued until December 2008, when Syria withdrew in response to Israel’s shelling of the Gaza Strip. U.S.–Syrian Relations. U.S.–Syrian relations, severed in 1967, were resumed in June 1974, following the achievement of the Syrian–Israeli disengagement agreement. In 1990–91, Syria cooperated with the United States as a member of the multinational coalition of forces in the Gulf War. The United States and Syria also consulted closely on the Taif Accord ending the civil war in Lebanon. In 1991, President Assad made a historic decision to accept President George H.W. Bush’s invitation to attend a Middle East peace conference and to engage in subsequent bilateral negotiations with Israel. Syria’s efforts to secure the release of Western hostages held in Lebanon and its lifting of restrictions on travel by Syrian Jews helped to further improve relations between Syria and the United States. There were several presidential summits; the last one occurred when President Bill Clinton met the late President Hafiz al-Assad in Geneva in



March 2000. In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United States, the Syrian Government began limited cooperation with U.S. counterterrorism efforts. Syria has been on the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism since the list’s inception in 1979. Because of its continuing support and safe haven for terrorist organizations, Syria is subject to legislatively mandated penalties, including export sanctions and ineligibility to receive most forms of U.S. aid or to purchase U.S. military equipment. In 1986, the U.S. withdrew its ambassador and imposed additional administrative sanctions on Syria in response to evidence of direct Syrian involvement in an attempt to blow up an Israeli airplane. A U.S. ambassador returned to Damascus in 1987, partially in response to positive Syrian actions against terrorism such as expelling the Abu Nidal Organization from Syria and helping free an American hostage earlier that year. Relations cooled as a consequence of U.S. intervention in Iraq in 2003, declined following the imposition of U.S. economic sanctions in May 2004, and worsened further in February 2005 after the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Hariri. Issues of U.S. concern include the Syrian Government’s failure to prevent Syria from becoming a major transit point for foreign fighters entering Iraq, its refusal to deport from Syria former Saddam regime elements who are supporting the insurgency in Iraq, its ongoing interference in Lebanese affairs, its protection of the leadership of Palestinian rejectionist groups in Damascus, its deplorable human rights record, and its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. In May 2004, the U.S. Government, pursuant to the provisions of the Syrian Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act, imposed sanctions on Syria that banned nearly all exports to Syria except food and medicine. In February 2005, in the wake of the Hariri assassination, the U.S. recalled its ambassador to Washington. On September 12, 2006, the U.S. Embassy was attacked by four armed assailants with guns, grenades, and a car bomb (which failed to detonate). Syrian security forces successfully countered the attack, killing all four attackers. Two other Syrians killed during the attack were a government security guard and a passerby. The Syrian Government publicly stated that terrorists had carried out the attack. Both the Syrian ambassador to the U.S., Imad Mushtapha, and President Assad, however, blamed U.S. foreign policy in the region for contributing to the incident. Since 2009, the United States has attempted to engage with Syria to find areas of mutual interest, reduce regional tensions, and promote Middle East peace. These efforts have included congressional and executive meetings with senior Syrian officials, including President Assad, and the return of a U.S. Ambassador to Damascus. From information provided by the U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs. See http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3580.htm.



SYRIAN UPRISING Background and Recent Developments

ince 1970, the Assad family has ruled Syria. President Bashar al- Assad, like his father Hafez al-Assad before him, has wielded almost total control over domestic politics and has steered

the country’s outsized foreign policy to play key roles in multiple arenas in the Middle East (Lebanon, Israel-Palestine, Iran, and Iraq) despite Syria’s small size and lack of resources.

S Now, with the country in turmoil, many observers are interested in how prolonged Syrian instability (or a possible changing of the guard there) might affect other U.S. foreign policy priorities in the region, such as Lebanese stability and countering Hezbollah, limiting Iranian influence, and solving the Arab-Israeli conflict. Unlike in Egypt, where the United States has provided support to the military and democracy assistance to newly empowered political groups, in Syria the U.S. role is more limited. Some U.S. sanctions are already in place, and Syria has been ineligible for U.S. aid due to its inclusion on the State Sponsor of Terrorism list. Military and intelligence cooperation is sporadic and limited. Thus, what role the United States can play in Syria’s evolving domestic crisis is in question, and policymakers may be searching for channels of influence in order to preserve U.S. interests in a rapidly changing political landscape. In March 2011, the public anger on display in other Arab countries surfaced in Syria, putting the regime of President Bashar al- Assad on the defensive for the first time in his 11-year presidency. While Tunisia and Egypt experienced revolution and Bahrain, Libya, and Yemen continue to struggle with unprecedented degrees of civil unrest and conflict, Syria had largely been free of large-scale public protests that have been occurring elsewhere across the Arab world since December 2010. Socioeconomic and Political Conditions Syria has long shared many of the socioeconomic and political conditions that bred deep dissatisfaction with the status quo in other Arab autocracies, including high unemployment, high inflation, limited upward mobility, rampant corruption, lack of political freedoms, and repressive security forces. These factors fueled opposition to the Syrian Government, although activity among exiles largely overshadowed internal opposition in the eyes of most outside observers. Many observers believed that Syria’s pervasive police state, lower level of Internet usage, and deep public sensitivity to avoiding Sunni–Alawite sectarian tensions would serve as a bulwark against spreading unrest. Those assumptions have proven unfounded. Limited calls in February 2011 to organize protests and gatherings failed, but a violent government response to an isolated incident in the southern town of Dara’a in March provided a decisive spark for the emergence of protest movements. The use of force against demonstrators in Dara’a and later in other cities has created a corresponding swell in public anger and public participation in demonstrations. An escalating cycle of tension has continued to intensify, as the Assad government has paired responsiveness to some public demands for political reform with the use of military force against some protestors. Sectarian divisions among Syrians are being exacerbated by the demonstrations and crackdowns, as pro-government Alawis and Christians confront predominantly Sunni Muslim demonstrators.



To date, the international community is divided over Syria. Russia and China have opposed any action against Syria at the United Nations Security Council, rejecting a previous attempt to condemn Syria in late April. Reportedly, the United States is pushing for the Security Council to vote on a new resolution condemning Syria. Syrian officials have publicly stated that they are “relying on the Russian position.” China also may be against sanctioning Syria at the United Nations, as one Chinese Government spokesperson said that “the Chinese Government supports the efforts made by Syria to safeguard its national sovereignty and stability and also hopes to see the early restoration of stability and normalcy in Syria.” On the other hand, members of the European Union, Canada, and others have joined the United States in sanctioning the Assad regime. Other key actors, such as Turkey, have called on the president of Syria to reform but have refrained from calling for his immediate removal from power. Implications Foreign observers are now debating what could result from a period of sustained unrest. Many foreign governments are concerned that a breakdown in law and order in Syria could lead to civil war or sectarian conflict inside Syria or embolden Sunni Islamist groups to carry out operations against foreign targets. Other observers also are concerned that Syrian weaponry, including advanced surface-to-air missiles, advanced antitank weapons, or chemical weapons, could fall into the hands of terrorist groups. Israel, which has grown accustomed to having a familiar enemy in the form of the current Syrian regime, may fear that the overthrow of President Assad would lead to a power vacuum and would possibly compel it to increase its force posture on its northern front at a time when Israel is already having to reconsider its defense strategy vis-à-vis Egypt and facing more rocket attacks from Gaza. There is also uncertainty surrounding how Iran or Hezbollah in Lebanon will react to threats against the Assad regime, their ally. Some U.S. reports suggest that the Iranian Government has provided some logistical support to the Assad government. According to one unnamed official, “There are ‘very strong indications’ that Iran is helping the Syrians crack down on protesters with advice on how to track or block their Internet use, training on how to put down demonstrations, and the supply of riot control equipment.” On the other hand, the possibility of revolution in Syria may present opportunities for the United States, under some conditions. Few observers expect that a more democratic Syrian Government would abandon longstanding nationalist goals of, for instance, seeking a return of the Golan Heights; however, if Syrian protestors somehow succeed in toppling the Assad regime in a peaceful manner, a more democratic Syria may seek to broaden its relationships with Western democracies and could choose to reduce its dependence on its current alliance with Iran. Most experts believe, however, that this scenario is a distant possibility and it depends on the ability of any Syrian protest movement to overthrow the Assad government without destabilizing the country and upsetting its ethnic/sectarian balance among Alawites, Christians, Sunni and Shi’a Muslim Arabs, and Kurds. Despite fears of sectarian clashes, Syrian public dissatisfaction over economic inequality, corruption, and dictatorship are what is driving the protests. In this regard, what is happening in Syria is no different than what has already transpired in Egypt, Tunisia, and elsewhere; however,



because the Assad regime is so entrenched domestically in the Alawite community and military and so entangled in various regional relationships/conflicts, the Syrian opposition has a long way to go before it can uproot the president and his family from power. Nevertheless, the government will not be able to address public grievances in any meaningful manner, which only leaves the use of repression to hold the state together.

U.S.–Syrian Trade Statistics ― 2005 to 2010 ($ in millions)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

U.S. Exports to Syria $155.0 $224.3 $361.4 $408.8 $300 $506.2 U.S. Imports From Syria $323.5 $213.7 $110.5 $352.0 $285.9 $428.7 Totals $478.5 $438.0 $471.9 $760.8 $585.9 $934.9

Source: TradeStats Express ― National Trade Data, Presented by the Office of Trade and Industry Information, Manufacturing and Services, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.

Spring 2011 Developments Assad’s Speech. On June 20 at Damascus University, President Assad delivered a national address in which he promised to enact political reforms, such as allowing new political parties aside from the Ba’ath Party to compete in elections. The president also somewhat changed tone from previous speeches by acknowledging the grievances of some protestors. He remarked that “we make a distinction between those” — the protesters with legitimate grievances — “and the saboteurs who represent a small group which has tried to exploit the goodwill of the Syrian people for its own ends.” His words again failed to quell public unrest, however, and many analysts believe that his intention was to stave off harsher international sanctions against his own regime rather than offer his people genuine reform. New nationwide protests immediately followed his calls for national dialogue, which opposition groups have firmly rejected, accusing the president of stalling for time. Obama Administration Action. On June 19, reports suggested that Obama Administration officials are considering possible international legal action against President Assad, such as “looking into” whether “there are grounds here for charges related to war crimes, and whether referrals on that are appropriate.” Reports also indicated that the administration also may be exploring the possibility of harsher sanctions against Syria and its energy sector. Turkish Criticism of Assad. Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who had cultivated close relations with Assad over the years and initially responded to the unrest in Syria by calling for political reform while expressing confidence in Assad’s intention to pursue it, has begun to publicly criticize the regime’s violent crackdown as it intensifies, particularly in northern Syria with its increasingly direct implications for Turkey’s own border security. In a June 9 television interview, Erdoğan said: “I heard that around 2,500 Syrians are about to enter Turkey [as refugees]. I spoke with al-Assad four to five days ago about the situation there. But they are underestimating this. They tell us different things. They are not acting in a humane fashion.” Turkey also allowed a conference of Syrian opposition leaders to take place in the city of Antalya from May 31 to June 3.



Uprising in the North. Beginning in early June, after the government claimed that 120 of its soldiers were killed by armed protestors in the largely Sunni Muslim town of Jisr al Shoghour, loyal Syrian army units were deployed to the north to lay siege to the town and others in the region. Other reports claim that soldiers stationed in Jisr al Shoghour defected from the army and clashed with loyal units. On June 12, security forces using tanks and helicopters retook the town, and in the process, nearly 8,900 Syrians fled to Turkey, where they have been relocated to refugee camps near the border. Between June 6 and June 21, other northern and far- eastern Syrian towns have experienced protests and subsequent government repression. Throughout the month of June, there were reports of rank- and- file Sunni soldiers defecting from the army, though Syria’s media blackout made it difficult to confirm these reports. IAEA Resolution on Syria. On June 9, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors adopted a resolution, co-sponsored by 14 nations, finding Syria in noncompliance with its international nuclear obligations. It was the first time the IAEA referred a country to the Security Council since it reported on Iran in 2006. Russia and China voted against the proposal, raising questions over their willingness to issue Security Council sanctions against Syria. French Foreign Minister Remarks. On June 6, French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said that Syrian President Bashar al- Assad has “lost his legitimacy” to rule Syria amid the crackdown against his own people. Weeks later, he remarked that President Assad had reached “a point of no return,” amidst European Union plans to toughen sanctions against Syria and U.S., British, and French efforts to have a UN Security Council vote condemning Syria. From the Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service report Syria: Issues for the 112th

Congress, issued June 21, 2011. See http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/167964.pdf.



OBAMA ADMINISTRATION’S POSITION ON SYRIA The President’s Statement and Executive Order On August 18, 2011, U.S. President Barack Obama called for the President of Syria, Bashar al-Assad, to step aside and took the strongest financial action against the Syrian regime thus far. The following is President Obama’s full statement on the situation in Syria.

he United States has been inspired by the Syrian peoples’ pursuit of a peaceful transition to democracy. They have braved ferocious brutality at the hands of their government. They

have spoken with their peaceful marches, their silent shaming of the Syrian regime, and their courageous persistence in the face of brutality ― day after day, week after week. The Syrian Government has responded with a sustained onslaught.

T

I strongly condemn this brutality, including the disgraceful attacks on Syrian civilians in cities like Hama and Deir al Zour, and the arrests of opposition figures who have been denied justice and subjected to torture at the hands of the regime. These violations of the universal rights of the Syrian people have revealed to Syria, the region, and the world the Assad government’s flagrant disrespect for the dignity of the Syrian people.

Executive Order Key Provisions

• Blocks the property of

the Syrian Government.

• Bans U.S. persons from new investments in or exporting services to Syria.

• Bans U.S. imports of, and other transactions or dealing in, Syrian-origin petroleum or petroleum products.

The United States opposes the use of violence against peaceful protesters in Syria, and we support the universal rights of the Syrian people. We have imposed sanctions on President Assad and his government. The European Union has imposed sanctions, as well. We helped lead an effort at the UN Security Council to condemn Syria’s actions. We have coordinated closely with allies and partners from the region and around the world. The Assad government has now been condemned by countries in all parts of the globe, and can look only to Iran for support for its brutal and unjust crackdown. The future of Syria must be determined by its people, but President Bashar al-Assad is standing in their way. His calls for dialogue and reform have rung hollow while he is imprisoning, torturing, and slaughtering his own people. We have consistently said that President Assad must lead a democratic transition or get out of the way. He has not led. For the sake of the Syrian people, the time has come for President Assad to step aside. The United States cannot and will not impose this transition upon Syria. It is up to the Syrian people to choose their own leaders, and we have heard their strong desire that there not be foreign intervention in their movement. What the United States will support is an effort to bring about a Syria that is democratic, just, and inclusive for all Syrians. We will support this outcome by pressuring President Assad to get out of the way of this transition, and standing up for the universal rights of the Syrian people along with others in the international community. As a part of that effort, my administration is announcing unprecedented sanctions to deepen the financial isolation of the Assad regime and further disrupt its ability to finance a campaign of violence against the Syrian people. I have signed a new Executive Order requiring



the immediate freeze of all assets of the Government of Syria subject to U.S. jurisdiction and prohibiting U.S. persons from engaging in any transaction involving the Government of Syria. This E.O. also bans U.S. imports of Syrian-origin petroleum or petroleum products; prohibits U.S. persons from having any dealings in or related to Syria’s petroleum or petroleum products; and prohibits U.S. persons from operating or investing in Syria. We expect today’s actions to be amplified by others. We recognize that it will take time for the Syrian people to achieve the justice they deserve. There will be more struggle and sacrifice. It is clear that President Assad believes that he can silence the voices of his people by resorting to the repressive tactics of the past. But he is wrong. As we have learned these last several months, sometimes the way things have been is not the way that they will be. It is time for the Syrian people to determine their own destiny, and we will continue to stand firmly on their side. On August 18, 2011, President Obama signed an Executive Order blocking property of the Government of Syria and prohibiting certain transactions with respect to Syria. The following is the text of the Executive Order.

y the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA),

the National Emergencies Act, and Section 301 of Title 3, United States Code, I, Barack Obama, President of the United States of America, in order to take additional steps with respect to the Government of Syria’s continuing escalation of violence against the people of Syria and with respect to the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13338 of May 11, 2004, as modified in scope and relied upon for additional steps taken in Executive Order 13399 of April 25, 2006, Executive Order 13460 of February 13, 2008, Executive Order 13572 of April 29, 2011, and Executive Order 13573 of May 18, 2011, hereby order:

B

Section 1 (a) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person, including any overseas branch, of the Government of Syria are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in. (b) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person, including any overseas branch, of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State: (i) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services in support of, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or



(ii) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order. Section 2 The following are prohibited: (a) new investment in Syria by a United States person, wherever located; (b) the exportation, reexportation, sale, or supply, directly or indirectly, from the United States, or by a United States person, wherever located, of any services to Syria; (c) the importation into the United States of petroleum or petroleum products of Syrian origin; (d) any transaction or dealing by a United States person, wherever located, including purchasing, selling, transporting, swapping, brokering, approving, financing, facilitating, or guaranteeing, in or related to petroleum or petroleum products of Syrian origin; and (e) any approval, financing, facilitation, or guarantee by a United States person, wherever located, of a transaction by a foreign person where the transaction by that foreign person would be prohibited by this section if performed by a United States person or within the United States. Section 3 I hereby determine that the making of donations of the type of articles specified in section 203(b)(2) of IEEPA by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to Section 1 of this order would seriously impair my ability to deal with the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13338 and expanded in scope in Executive Order 13572, and I hereby prohibit such donations as provided by Section 1 of this order. Section 4 The prohibitions in Section 1 of this order include but are not limited to: (a) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; and (b) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person. Section 5 The prohibitions in Sections 1 and 2 of this order apply except to the extent provided by statutes, or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the effective date of this order.



Section 6 (a) Any transaction by a United States person or within the United States that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, causes a violation of, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited. (b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited. Section 7 Nothing in Sections 1 or 2 of this order shall prohibit transactions for the conduct of the official business of the Federal Government by employees, grantees, or contractors thereof. Section 8 For the purposes of this order: (a) the term “person” means an individual or entity; (b) the term “entity” means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization; (c) the term “United States person” means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States; and (d) the term “Government of Syria” means the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic, its agencies, instrumentalities, and controlled entities. Section 9 For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render those measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13338 and expanded in scope in Executive Order 13572, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to Section 1 of this order. Section 10 The secretary of the treasury, in consultation with the secretary of state, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the president by IEEPA as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this order. The secretary of the treasury may redelegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government consistent with applicable law. All agencies of the United States Government are hereby directed to take all appropriate measures within their authority to carry out the provisions of this order.



Section 11 This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. Section 12 This order is effective at 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on August 18, 2011. From information provided by the White House briefing room. See http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/08/18/president-obama-future-syria-must-be-determined-its-people-president-bashar-al-assad.



HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL’S RESOLUTION ON SYRIA Recommendations of the Fact-Finding Mission

earing in mind the findings of the Mission on Syria, the response thus far provided by the Government of Syria and the international community, as well as the ongoing situation on

the ground, the High Commissioner reminds that states unanimously agreed at the 2005 Summit that each individual state has the responsibility to protect its populations from crimes against humanity and other international crimes. This responsibility entails the prevention of such crimes, including their incitement, through appropriate and necessary means. When a state is manifestly failing to protect its population from serious international crimes, the international community has the responsibility to step in by taking protective action in a collective, timely, and decisive manner.

B

In particular the High Commissioner recommends the following: To the Government of Syria

• Immediately put an end to the gross human rights violations, including the excessive use of force against demonstrators and the killing of protestors, torture and ill-treatment of detainees, and enforced disappearances; halt violations of economic, social and cultural rights.

• Take immediate steps to end impunity, including by abolishing legislation which grants security and intelligence personnel virtual immunity from prosecution.

• Ensure the immediate and unconditional release of detainees held on the basis of their participation in peaceful demonstrations and other political prisoners.

• Ensure the safe and voluntary return of refugees and internally displaced persons to their areas of origins in Syria.

• Allow safe and unrestricted access to international and national journalists to investigate and report on the situation on Syria without hindrance.

• Take immediate measures to ensure full and unhindered access for humanitarian workers to provide aid and assistance to those in need in Syria.

• Allow OHCHR [Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights] immediate access to Syria to conduct investigations into all human rights abuses, irrespective of alleged perpetrator, in the context of protests since mid-March 2011.

• Invite the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council, in particular the special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, and special rapporteur on torture, and the working group on arbitrary detention, to visit Syria to monitor and report on the human rights situation.



To the Human Rights Council

• Ensure that the situation of human rights in Syria remains on the agenda of the Human Rights Council through the establishment of appropriate monitoring and investigating mechanisms, including the possibility of extending the mandate of the Fact-Finding Mission on Syria, as well as through periodic reporting.

• Urge Syria to cooperate with Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Human Rights Council’s Special Procedures, including by granting them unfettered access to Syria.

• Urge the Security Council to remain seized of, and address in the strongest terms the killing of peaceful protestors and other civilians in Syria through the use of excessive force and other grave human right violations; to call for an immediate cessation of attacks against the civilian population; and to consider referring the situation in Syria to the International Criminal Court.

To the League of Arab States

• Continue being actively engaged in calling for concerted action for the protection of human rights in Syria.

From the Report of the Fact-Finding Mission on Syria pursuant to Human Rights Council Resolution S-16/1. See http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/countries/SY/Syria_Report_2011-08-17.pdf.



U.S. DENOUNCEMENT OF ASSAD’S ACTIONS Statement by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

congratulate the Human Rights Council for its work to create an international independent Commission of Inquiry to investigate the deteriorating human rights situation in Syria and to

make clear the world’s concern for the Syrian people. Today, the international community joined together to denounce the Syrian regime’s horrific violence. The United States worked closely with countries from every part of the world — more than 30 members of the Human Rights Council, including key Arab members — to establish this mandate.

I

The Commission of Inquiry will investigate all violations of international human rights law by Syrian authorities and help the international community address the serious human rights abuses in Syria and ensure that those responsible are held to account. There are credible reports that government forces in Syria have committed numerous gross human rights violations, including torture and summary executions in their crackdown against opposition members. The most recent attack by Syrian security forces on protesters in Homs is as deplorable as it is sadly representative of the Assad regime’s utter disregard for the Syrian people. The United States condemns in the strongest possible terms the slaughter, arrest, and torture of peaceful protesters taking place in Syria. We continue to urge nations around the world to stand with the Syrian people in their demands for a government that represents the needs and will of its people and protects their universal rights. For the sake of the Syrian people, it is time for Assad to step aside and leave this transition to the Syrians themselves. From an August 23, 2011, statement of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, released August 23, 2011. See http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2011/08/170949.htm.



Current Topics in Brief Drought and Famine in Africa, Haiti’s New Leadership This month, International Debates is also following these issues: Drought and Famine in Africa According to the United Nations Office of the Coordination for Humanitarian Affairs, the current drought in the Horn of Africa is the worst in 60 years. An estimated 12.4 million people in Somalia, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Djibouti are affected, making the drought both a humanitarian and a security crisis. Famine has been declared in areas of Somalia that are difficult to access, and refugees from that country are pouring into Kenya and Ethiopia. The Family Early Warning System (FEWSNET) of the U.S. Agency for International Development, along with the UN Food and Agriculture Organization’s Food Security Analysis Unit, maintains a presence in the African Horn to identify conditions that portend increased drought so that emergency relief aid and food supplies can be prepositioned in the region; however, the scale of the problem and access difficulties outstrip the resources currently provided to alleviate the crisis. How can communities and their ability to prepare for and withstand these weather-related calamities be strengthened? What is the role of the international community in helping these stricken areas build sustainable futures? International Debates will continue to follow these issues as they are considered by the U.S. Congress, the United Nations, and other international organizations. Haiti’s New Leadership On April 4, 2011, Haiti elected Michel Joseph Martelly, a former musical celebrity and businessman also known as “Sweet Mickey, as its new president. The election was seen as a potential turning point in the country’s reconstruction efforts following the catastrophic earthquake of January 2010. Having recently marked his first 100 days in office, however, Martelly is still struggling to form a government, let alone resettle the thousands of earthquake victims still living in tent cities and clean up the vast piles of remaining rubble. The opposition-led parliament so far has rejected two of his nominees for prime minister, and it may be months before that office is filled. Meanwhile, the new president has proposed a pilot plan for resettling displaced citizens and has extended the mandate of an interim relief commission led by former U.S. President Bill Clinton and former Haitian Prime Minister Jean-Max Bellerive. With the support of the International Monetary Fund, Martelly also has launched a National Fund for Education (FNE) with the aim of providing free education for every child in Haiti. The FNE is financed through a tax on international calls and fund transfers that is projected to raise $8.5 million per month. It remains to be seen whether Haiti can make progress under its new president and restart a recovery effort that has all but stalled. Overcoming the current deadlock between Martelly and parliament will be key to setting priorities and moving ahead with effective programs.




Should the International Community Condemn Syria for Violating the Human Rights of Its Citizens? PROS

Navi Pillay UN High Commissioner for Human Rights The Office of the United Nations (UN) High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCR) was established in December 1993 with a mandate to promote and protect all human rights. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon named Navi Pillay of South Africa, High Commissioner for Human Rights on July 28, 2008. Prior to that, she served as a judge on the International Criminal Court. The following is excerpted from Commissioner Pillay’s August 22, 2011, address to the Human Rights Council Special Session on Human Rights in Syria.

Allow me to recall that the Human Rights Council in its 16th Special Session on April 29, 2011, requested that I dispatch a fact-finding mission to Syria to investigate all alleged violations of human rights law and report on the situation of human rights in Syria to the Council during its 18th regular session in September. This report was released on August 18, as you may have seen. In a closed session on the same day, I also briefed the members of the Security Council on the findings of our report and urged them to consider referring the current situation in Syria to the International Criminal Court. The situation remains under consideration by the Security Council. I wish to begin today by highlighting the mission’s key findings. The OHCHR [Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights] Fact-Finding Mission found a pattern of widespread or systematic human rights violations by Syrian security and military forces, including murder, enforced disappearances, torture, deprivation of liberty, and persecution. Although the report covered the period of March 15 to July 15, 2011, there are indications that the pattern of violations continues to this day. It is our assessment that the scale and nature of these acts may amount to crimes against humanity. It is regrettable that the Government of Syria did not give access to the mission, despite my repeated requests. Nonetheless, the mission gathered credible, corroborated, and consistent accounts of violations from victims and witnesses, including military defectors, and Syrian refugees in neighboring countries. The mission concluded that while demonstrations have been largely peaceful, the military and security forces have resorted to an apparent “shoot-to-kill” policy. Snipers on rooftops have targeted protestors, bystanders who were trying to help the wounded, and ambulances. The mission also documented incidents of summary execution outside the context of the demonstrations and during house-to-house searches and in hospitals. Victims and witnesses reported widespread attempts to cover up killings by the security forces, including through the use of mass graves. The authorities, using heavy artillery and military vehicles, imposed de facto blockades on several cities, and effectively deprived inhabitants of basic goods and services. Restrictions

Pros, imposed on freedom of movement prevented injured persons from receiving medical treatment. Public hospitals were sometimes closed ahead of military operations, or the injured were turned away by staff. The mission found that security forces have pursued a policy of arbitrary arrest and detention of individuals suspected of having taken part in demonstrations. Torture and ill-treatment were found to have been widespread. Former detainees cited cases of death in custody, including that of children, as a result of torture. In its communications to OHCHR, the Government of Syria denies allegations of wrongful acts. While it acknowledges that about 1,900 have been killed since mid-March, it claims that the majority of the victims have been military and security forces killed by “armed gangs.” It also claims that “terrorists” and “extremists” are behind the protests. Yet accounts from victims and witnesses indicate that, far from being acts of terrorism, the people targeted were exercising their legitimate rights of assembly and speech. The Government of Syria has also informed my office of reforms introduced by the government. These include lifting emergency legislation, abolishing the Supreme State Security Court and granting amnesties for thousands of detainees, legislating to regulate peaceful assembly and establish political parties, and new electoral and information laws. However, these pronouncements have been followed by more excessive use of force, killing of demonstrators, mass arrests, and reports of torture and other abuses. The bloodshed in Hama, Latakia, and other Syrian cities just in the past three weeks seriously undermines the credibility of the reform initiatives, as further elaborated by [Syrian] President [Bashar al-]Assad yesterday. I wish to use this opportunity to once again call on the Syrian Government to immediately and fully halt its crackdown on peaceful protests and ensure the immediate and unconditional release of all detained for their participation in peaceful demonstrations. The government should also allow for the safe and voluntary return of refugees and internally displaced persons to their areas of origins in Syria. I welcome the first humanitarian assessment mission to Syria on August 20 and call on the Government of Syria to allow open access for international humanitarian workers. At the same time, the Syrian authorities should allow full human rights access to Syria, including for impartial and thorough human rights investigation and monitoring. As of today, over 2,200 people have been killed since mass protests began in mid-March, with more than 350 people reportedly killed across Syria since the beginning of Ramadan. The military and security forces continue to employ excessive force, including heavy artillery, to quell peaceful demonstrations and regain control over the residents of various cities, particularly in Hama, Homs, Latakia, and Deir al-Zour. The heavy shelling of the al-Ramel Palestinian refugee camp in Latakia last week resulted in at least four people killed and the displacement of the 7,500 inhabitants of the camp. Despite assurances from President Assad to the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Wednesday that military operations had finished, I regret to note that at least five people were killed around the country on Thursday and 34 more on Friday by Syrian military and security forces. Tanks continue to remain on the outskirts of the cities. Let me conclude by emphasizing the importance of holding perpetrators of crimes against humanity accountable. The Fact-Finding Mission has found that such crimes may have been committed in Syria. It was against this backdrop that I urged the Security Council to consider referring the situation in Syria to the International Criminal Court. The people of Syria must be supported in their struggle for fundamental rights and freedoms and the Human Rights Council can play a vital role in that respect.


Pros,

Juan Méndez Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment In 1985, the UN Commission on Human Rights appointed a special expert to examine questions relevant to torture, such as identifying victims and investigating incidents of torture and human rights violations. Juan Méndez began a three-year term as special rapporteur on November 1, 2010. The following is excerpted from Méndez’s August 22, 2011, address to the Human Rights Council Special Session on Human Rights in Syria. Since the beginning of the protests in Syria, we have persistently urged the government to put an end to the violence. Most recently, we have denounced that the scale and gravity of the crackdown against protesters continues unabated, and reiterated our call for an immediate end to the violent strategies adopted by the government to quell largely peaceful demonstrations. The figures reported speak for themselves. With 2,000 deaths reported since mid-March 2011, numerous serious injuries due to shelling, the use of live ammunition, heavy machine guns, sniping, and ill-treatment ― including thousands of arbitrary detentions of protesters, incommunicado detention, and possibly a large number of enforced disappearances ― we fear that the threshold of widespread and systematic violence has clearly been reached. According to reports, the Syrian people have suffered from further heavy restrictions on their fundamental rights and freedoms. Military operations have been conducted in numerous cities across Syria. Entire cities and towns have been reportedly besieged, depriving the population of basic water and food supplies and leading to a humanitarian crisis. Thousands of those who were not under siege have fled to neighboring countries, fearing reprisals from security forces. It has not been easy to gather precise information about the extent of the atrocities unfolding on the ground, as journalists, human rights defenders, and others have been prevented from monitoring the situation and investigating violations. Many have been targeted, banned from accessing the country, detained, ill-treated, and even reported to be missing. Means of communication have been disrupted. While promising reforms and enacting new legislation, the government has unfortunately continuously stepped up the crackdown against protesters. The issuing of a number of legislative decrees in April ― notably on the termination of the state of emergency, granting Syrian nationality to Kurds, or restricting the detention of people suspected of having committed criminal offences to 24 hours ― are welcome steps forward. However, we expect much more from the authorities, starting with an immediate end to the violence. Despite numerous calls made by the UN Security Council, the secretary-general, the high commissioner for human rights, as well as many states, international organizations, and civil society, the international community continues to be alerted to reports indicating blatant excessive use of force against unarmed civilians, unlawful prohibition of the rights to freedom of assembly and of expression, attacks against medical facilities and personnel, torture in detention facilities and deaths in custody, and unacknowledged detentions that constitute enforced disappearances. The international community has the duty not to allow these violations to go unpunished and to assess whether some of these violations may constitute crimes against humanity. If we are serious about combating human rights violations, we should not turn a blind eye to these


Pros, egregious acts. We believe that those bearing the highest responsibility for such violations should be referred to the highest instances to be prosecuted and judged. Perpetrators should be held accountable, and victims or their families should be adequately compensated. In this respect, we deplore that the Fact-Finding Mission of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has not been allowed access to the country to gather first-hand information on the human rights situation on the ground. We urge the authorities to grant such free and unfettered access. This would also send a strong signal that the Syrian authorities are willing to cooperate with the UN. We do, however, welcome the mission of the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, which will hopefully open space for humanitarian assistance that is so urgently needed. We nevertheless regret that the government has not actively engaged with our mandates. We call for cooperation in this regard and to respond to our requests for access and information. We once again, in the strongest terms, condemn the brutal repression of protesters and express our solidarity with the Syrian people and the victims of this unjustified repression. We urge the Syrian authorities to immediately stop all acts of violence and embark upon a path of urgent and thorough democratic reforms which meet the claims and demands of the Syrian people in a spirit of openness and dialogue, where everyone has a role to play in the public sphere, including women and minority groups, with respect for the human rights of all.

Federal Republic of Germany, French Republic, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, and British Prime Minister David Cameron On August 18, 2011, the leaders of Germany, France, and the United Kingdom issued a joint statement on alleged human rights violations in Syria. The following are excerpts from that statement. The Syrian authorities have ignored the urgent appeals made over recent days by the UN Security Council, numerous States in the region, the Gulf Cooperation Council, and the Secretaries-General of the League of Arab States and of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. They continue to cruelly and violently repress their people and flatly refuse to fulfill their legitimate aspirations. They have ignored the voices of the Syrian people and continuously misled them and the international community with empty promises. France, Germany, and the United Kingdom reiterate their utter condemnation of this bloody repression of peaceful and courageous demonstrators and the massive violations of human rights, which President Assad and his authorities have been committing for months. We are actively supporting further strong EU [European Union] sanctions against the regime of President Assad. We urge the Syrian regime to stop all violence immediately, to release all prisoners of conscience, and to allow free access to the UN for an independent assessment of the situation. Our three countries believe that President Assad, who is resorting to brutal military force against his own people and who is responsible for the situation, has lost all legitimacy and can no longer claim to lead the country. We call on him to face the reality of the complete rejection of


Pros, his regime by the Syrian people and to step aside in the best interests of Syria and the unity of its people. Violence in Syria must stop now. Like other Arab peoples during recent months, the Syrians demand that their rights to liberty, dignity, and to choose freely their leaders be recognized. We will continue to work with the Syrian people, countries in the region, and our international partners, with a central role for the United Nations, to support their demands and achieve a peaceful and democratic transition.

United States of America Ambassador Susan E. Rice The United States is a permanent member of the UN Security Council. It also has a seat on the Human Rights Council that expires on December 31, 2012. Susan Rice has served as the U.S. permanent representative to the UN since January 2009. The following is excerpted from an August 10, 2011, statement by Ambassador Rice during UN Security Council consultations on the situation in Syria. We face a grave and growing threat to international peace and security in Syria today. The Syrian people have moved the world with their aspirations for democracy and universal human rights. But the Assad regime has met their calls for change with cruelty and contempt. Assad has deliberately chosen to use repression and force against unarmed civilians. Thousands of innocent people have already been killed in cold blood, and countless more have been wounded, scarred, and maimed. The Assad regime’s crackdown has grown even bloodier in recent days, and anyone who still doubts the regime’s true character has only to look at the havoc and destruction it has unleashed in the streets of Hama and Deir al-Zour. Assad has plain international obligations to meet. He must immediately end the crackdown, stop using force against civilians, fully respect the Syrian people’s human rights, and comply with international law. He must heed the Syrian people’s legitimate aspirations and concerns and let them assemble freely, speak out without fear of reprisal, and exercise their fundamental freedoms. He must permit full and unfettered access to humanitarian agencies and workers and cooperate fully with the OHCHR. In failing to do so, Assad is not just ignoring the will of his own citizens. He is not just ignoring urgent calls to end the bloodshed from the Security Council, the UN secretary-general, the Arab League, the Gulf Cooperation Council, regional leaders from Turkey to Saudi Arabia, and religious leaders, such as the head of al-Azhar [a prominent religious, cultural, and educational center in Cairo]. He is also ignoring the tide of history. All across the Middle East and North Africa, brave men and women are standing up for the rights that all of us have but not all of us can exercise. Regimes that meet peaceful and legitimate demands with tanks, guns, and clubs will themselves lose all legitimacy. The crisis in Syria has already rippled across the region. Refugees fleeing the Assad regime’s onslaught are huddled in Turkey. The Syrian Government has risked wider violence by trying to provoke distractions along its frontiers with its neighbors. Assad has breached the most basic rules of diplomacy by sending thugs to attack diplomatic missions. And the Assad regime’s policies of repression and deep reliance on Iran increasingly risk dangerous spillovers of sectarian and other tensions into neighboring nations.


Pros, We are particularly concerned by the continued flow of arms to Syria. Turkish Foreign Minister [Ahmet] Davutoglu said Friday that Turkey had intercepted a shipment of arms from Iran to Syria. We urge all states not to supply the Syrian regime with the arms it will surely turn on its own citizens. The United States is working together with its international partners to bring greater pressure to bear on the Syrian regime through further coordinated diplomatic and financial measures. We are also working with our partners to stem the flow of the weapons and ammunition that Syrian security forces, under Assad’s authority, continue to use against peaceful protestors. Our ambassador remains in Syria, where he will continue to speak out against the gross abuses being committed by the regime — and challenge the propaganda it continues to peddle even as it denies access to journalists, human rights groups, and international fact-finding missions. We now face a growing crisis because of a handful of ruthless people who value their grip on power more than the lives of the Syrian people. Over and over again, Assad has refused to respond to the legitimate aspirations of ordinary Syrians. Over and over again, he has relied on torture, corruption, and terror rather than embracing democracy, liberty, and reform. Through his own actions and choices, Assad is ensuring that he and his regime will be left in the past. The brave people of Syria will determine their country’s future, and Syria will be a better place when a democratic transition is complete. We commend the secretary-general for his forthright denunciation of the regime’s violence and his plain conversation last weekend with Assad. We would like to see the UN take further steps to help resolve this crisis, including perhaps sending a senior UN official to Damascus. We support the idea of a briefing by the High Commission for Human Rights, and we remain determined to work with our fellow Security Council members to ensure that this Council meets its responsibilities.

Commonwealth of Australia Ambassador Paul Wilson, Chargé d’Affaires Australia has never had a seat on the UN Human Rights Council. Paul Wilson is chargé d'affaires at Australia’s Permanent Mission to the UN in Geneva. The following is excerpted from a statement by Ambassador Wilson during the Human Rights Council Special Session on Human Rights in Syria on August 22, 2011. Australia condemns in the strongest possible terms the ongoing violence committed by the Syrian regime. Credible reports indicate that an estimated 2,000 people have been killed since March and thousands of others have been injured or detained. The August 18 Report of the UN Fact-Finding Mission for Syria, which covers events from March 15 to July 15, details a consistent pattern of violence against unarmed protestors. It reports accounts of summary executions, including of injured protestors seeking medical treatment; indiscriminate firing on civilians, including children, by security forces; and the use of tanks, heavy machine guns, and helicopters in urban areas. And the violence has escalated significantly since the end of the period covered by the report. The images that reach us, from courageous people who risk their lives to obtain them, are shocking.


Pros, As we said to this Council in April: The violence perpetuated by Syrian authorities violates some of the most basic human rights — the rights to life, freedom of expression, and freedom of assembly — as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and subsequent international human rights instruments. Australia has called on Syrian President Assad to step down so that the people of Syria can engage in peaceful political activity and be given the chance to determine their own future. Australia has also announced further targeted autonomous sanctions against members of the Syrian regime involved in violence and repression. These sanctions add to the existing measures imposed by Australia on the Syrian regime. Australia continues to encourage the secretary-general [Ban Ki-moon] to consider appointing a Special Representative on Syria to report on developments. Australia also continues to call for the situation in Syria to be referred to the International Criminal Court and very much welcomes the recent call by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, that this take place. Those responsible for human rights abuses in Syria must be brought to account. Australia supports calls for the establishment of a commission of inquiry to investigate all alleged violations of human rights in Syria since March. We call on the Syrian authorities to cooperate fully with a commission of inquiry. The international community, including this Council, must send a strong message to the Syrian regime: The violence must stop and human rights must be respected.

Kingdom of Norway Ambassador Bente Angell-Hansen Norway has a seat on the UN Human Rights Council that expires on December 31, 2012. Bente Angell-Hansen has served as ambassador and permanent representative to the UN in Geneva since December 2007. The following is excerpted from her statement during the Human Rights Council Special Session on Syria on August 28, 2011. The international community has over time become increasingly concerned over the situation in Syria. This includes the brutal and ruthless use of violence against the population, arrest campaigns, mistreatment of detained opposition supporters, and lack of access to medical treatment for civilians wounded in the unrest. President Assad has made positive statements indicating willingness to meet the demands for political reform, but has failed to deliver on his promises. Political leaders who use military force against its population lose their legitimacy. President Assad has repeatedly ignored international demands for a change of course, including from the Human Rights Council. President Assad has at this point lost legitimacy to rule the country and must step aside. More than 2,000 people, including children, are believed to have been killed and more people injured as the Syrian authorities have escalated its large-scale military clamp-down on demonstrators in several cities. Norway strongly condemns the Syrian authorities’ use of violence and killing of the civilian population. We call for an immediate end to the violence and for all possible steps to be taken to address the legitimate demands of the population.


Pros, The humanitarian situation in Syria continues to deteriorate. Norway urges the Syrian authorities to allow humanitarian assistance to enter the country. The Syrian regime — including President Assad, regardless of whether he chooses to step aside now — continues to be legally responsible for its treatment of the Syrian population. The use of deadly force against peaceful protesters exercising their rights to expression and assembly and the arrest and inhumane treatment of political detainees is entirely unacceptable, and in breach of the government’s international human rights obligations. As noted in the recently published report of the Fact-Finding Commission, the events that have unfolded in Syria may amount to crimes against humanity. Unlawful acts of violence on the scale observed in Syria must not go unpunished. The responsible must be held accountable. On this background, we join the call for the establishment of an independent commission of inquiry to investigate violations of international human rights law in Syria since July 2011 and to identify those responsible with a view of ensuring that perpetrators of violations are held accountable. This new initiative is necessary as Syrian authorities, in spite of their promises of reform, are not changing their course. Norway supports all peoples’ desire to live in a society where all human rights, including civil and political rights, are safeguarded. We believe freedom of expression and assembly is a precondition for sustainable development and prosperity. Human rights defenders must be protected and supported, not attacked and prosecuted. The will of the people must be the basis of the authority of any government. We urge the Human Rights Council member states to send a strong and united message to the Syrian authorities on their duty to uphold the fundamental human rights for the people of Syria.




Should the International Community Condemn Syria for Violating the Human Rights of Its Citizens? CONS

Syrian Arab Republic Bashar al-Assad, President Syria has been a member of the United Nations (UN) since October 24, 1945. Bashar al-Assad has served as president of Syria and regional secretary of the Ba’ath Party since 2000. He assumed office following the death of his father, Hafez al-Assad, who had served as leader of Syria for 29 years. The following is excerpted from a June 21, 2011, speech by President Bashar al-Assad at Damascus University.

Today, we meet at an important juncture in the history of our nation. This is a moment in which, through our will and determination, we strive to make a point of departure from a past burdened with pain and unrest — where innocent blood, which has pained every single Syrian heart, was shed. We aim at a future full of hope; hope that our homeland will restore the harmony and tranquility that it always enjoyed, based on strong foundations of freedom, solidarity, and engagement. We have been through difficult times. In terms of our security and stability, we have paid a heavy price. What happened was an unprecedented ordeal that overshadowed our country and led to a situation of distress, confusion, and frustration. This was due to riots, the killing of innocents, terrorizing the population, and sabotaging both public and private property. A number of martyrs died and others were injured during these incidents, being ordinary citizens, security personnel, and the armed forces. That was a great loss to their families and loved ones, a great loss to the homeland, and an extremely heavy loss for me personally. I pray the Almighty God to have mercy on the souls of all martyrs, and offer my deep and heartfelt condolences to their families and relatives. Inasmuch as we feel the loss and pain, we are prompted to contemplate this profound experience, both in its negative aspects, vis-à-vis the loss of life and property, and in its positive ones, in terms of the test it has constituted to all of us. We discovered our true national element with all its strength and solidity, on the one hand, and weaknesses on the other. Since turning the clock back is futile, our only option is to look forward. We took this option when deciding to shape the future, rather than standing by and letting the future shape us and the events around us. We have decided to control events rather than letting events control us — we will lead rather than be lead. This means that we should build upon rich experiences that have singled out deficiencies. In all this, we keep looking forward while taking a long hard look at the past in order to understand the present.

Cons, External Forces at Work in Syria It is only natural that the common question today is: What is happening to our country, and why? Is it a conspiracy, and if so, who stands behind it? Or is it our fault, and if so, what is this fault? And, of course, there are many natural questions during these circumstances. I do not think there is a stage in Syria’s history where it was not the target of some sort of conspiracy, both before and after independence. Those conspiracies took place for many reasons, some relating directly to the important geopolitical position that Syria occupies. Others were linked to its political positions, principles, and interests. Conspiracies are like germs, after all, multiplying every moment everywhere. They cannot be eliminated, but we can strengthen the immunity of our bodies in order to protect ourselves against them. It doesn’t require much analysis, based on what we heard from others and witnessed in the media, to prove that there is indeed a conspiracy. We should not waste time discussing it or being frightened by it. Rather, we would to identify the internal weaknesses through which this conspiracy can infiltrate the country. Then we should work on correcting these weaknesses. The solution, at the end of the day, is for us to solve our own problems and to avoid ramifications that could weaken our national immunity. Germs exist everywhere, on the skin and within the guts. Throughout the history of scientific development, scientists always thought of ways to strengthen the immunity of our bodies. This is what we must think of because it is certainly more important than analyzing the conspiracy. I don’t think that data will show all details anytime soon. Probably the truth will not emerge for years to come. Some, however, say that there is no conspiracy. This is also not objective, not only for the crisis, but for the circumstances and the historical context of Syria. External political positions, after all, are applying pressure on Syria and trying to interfere in the internal affairs of our country. Their target is a price that we know in advance, related directly to us abandoning our principles, rights, and interests. What do we say about these political positions? What do we say about all of this media pressure? What do we say about these sophisticated phones that are found in Syria in the hands of vandals? What do we say about all the fraud that we witnessed recently? We certainly cannot say that this was an act of charity. It is definitely a conspiracy, but again, we will not waste our time discussing it. I said this before in my speech before the People’s Assembly and at the Cabinet: “We must focus on domestics.” In today’s speech, I will only address the domestic situation, without referring to external factors, neither positively or negatively. Components of the Domestic Situation What is happening on the street has three components. First are those who have demands or needs that they want the state to meet. I have previously spoken about rightful demands. This is one of the duties of the state towards its citizens; where it should work tirelessly in order to meet those demands to the best of its capacities. All of us, in our positions of responsibility, should listen to them, talk to them, and help them, under the umbrella of public order. Law enforcement does not justify neglecting demands of the people. The urgent need of some people also does not justify the spreading of chaos, the breaking of laws, and harming of public interests. I met a large number of those who belong to


Cons, this component. And when I say those who have needs, I do not mean the demonstrators in specific. I rather mean all those who have needs. Although some of them also have needs, they did not demonstrate, and yet, we need to deal with them, as well. The delegations I met with were from all sectors of society and all religions, as well. We need to differentiate between those people, and others who were involved in destruction. The latter are a small group. It is true that they made an impact; they tried to manipulate others. They tried to manipulate the good majority of the Syrian people in order to achieve different purposes. Differentiating between the two groups is very important. The first constitute a part of our national component and all of the demands I heard from them were raised underneath the national umbrella. They had no foreign agenda and no foreign connections. They were against any foreign intervention under any pretext, asking to engage, however, rather than be marginalized. They wanted justice. Many issues were raised. For instance, there are unsolved accumulated issues dating back three decades since confrontation with the Muslim Brotherhood. That was a black phase, and generations are still paying the price for that period, like being refused government employment, for example, or not being given security permissions. In other words, we held certain individuals responsible for other the mistakes of other individuals — which is not right. We have started to solve these problems. The second component consists of outlaws and [those] wanted for various criminal cases who found in the state’s institutions an enemy and a target because they constitute an obstacle for their illegitimate interests and because they are sought by the state’s institutions. For those, chaos was a golden opportunity that should be grasped in order to ensure that they remain free and persist in their illegal activities. If it is only natural that we seek to enforce the law on all, it does not mean that we should not look for solutions with a social nature in order to prevent those people from choosing the wrong path and encourage them to be good citizens fully integrated into society. You may be asking about the number of these outlaws and wanted individuals. I myself was surprised with this number. I thought they were a few thousand in the past. The number at the beginning of the crisis was more than 64,400 people. Imagine this number of wanted persons for various criminal cases the verdict of which ranges between few months and execution, and they had escaped justice; the verdict of 24,000 of those is three years and above. Of course, a few days ago that number dropped slightly to less than 63,000 because some turned themselves in to authorities. Thus, the number is 64,000, may be more or less, and this equals in military terms almost five military divisions, almost a whole army. If a few thousands of those wanted to carry weapons and engage in sabotage, you can imagine what damage can be caused to the state. The third and more dangerous component, despite its small size, consists of those who have extremist and takfiri [a splinter Muslim sect] ideology. We have known and experienced this kind of ideology decades ago when it tried to infiltrate Syria; and Syria was able to eliminate it thanks to the wisdom and intelligence of the Syrian people. The ideology we see today is no different from that we saw decades ago. It is exactly the same. What has changed, however, are the methods and the persons. This kind of ideology lurks in dark corners in order to emerge when an opportunity presents itself or when it finds a handy mask to put on. It kills in the name of religion, destroys in the name of reform, and spreads chaos in the name of freedom. It is very sad to see in any society in the world some groups that belong to other bygone ages, that belong to a period we do not live in and we do not belong to.


Cons, In fact, this is the biggest obstacle in the reform process because development starts with human beings. It does not start with computers. It does not start with machines. It does not start with legislation or anything else. It starts with human being. Therefore, we have to encircle this ideology if we really want to develop. In any case, there are other components. I did not talk about the external component and its role in this crisis. I did not talk about the components that we all know. There are people who are well paid to carry out video cameras, film, and collaborate with the media. Some are paying money for those to participate in demonstrations and to do the video filming. These components do not concern us that much. That is why, and recalling the course of events, it is found that escalation and chaos have always been the response to every reform announced or accomplished. When they lost all justifications, taking to arms was the only available choice remaining to them in order to execute their plan. In some cases, peaceful demonstrations were used as a pretext under which armed men took cover; in other cases, they attacked civilians, policemen, and soldiers by attacking military sites and positions or used assassination. Schools, shops, and highways were closed by the use of force, and public property was destroyed, ransacked, and put to fire deliberately. Cities were cut from each other by blocking highways. All of this has posed a direct threat to the normal daily life of the citizens and undermined their security, education, economic activity, and communicating with their families. They distorted the country’s image in the outside world and opened the way, and even called for, foreign intervention. By doing so, they tried to weaken the national political stand, which adheres to the full return of national rights and supports the legitimate rights of our brothers and supports their resistance. They invoked detestable sectarian discourse that we have never endorsed and in which we only see an expression of a hateful ideology that has never been part of our religion, history, or traditions and that has been an anathema and a sacrilege to our national, pan-Arab, and moral identity. In all these issues, and with the exception of the first component, I am talking about a small minority that constitutes only a very small part of the Syrian people. That is why it is not cause for concern, but once again I say this should be addressed. When they failed in the first stage, in manipulating the first component, those who have demands, they moved to armed confrontation and acts of violence. When they failed in this, they moved to a new kind of action. They started this in Jisr al-Shughour by committing the atrocious massacres whose images we saw in the media, when they killed security men and destroyed the post office. The post office is public property — people living in the city use it. There is a great deal of hatred. The important thing is that they possessed sophisticated weapons that did not exist before. They had sophisticated communication systems. They moved to another kind of action. Near the town of Ma’aret al-Nou’man, they tried to strategic fuel and gas depots. They were able to take control of them. They surrounded the army units that tried to restore them. We were surprised that they have modern four-wheel-drive vehicles on which they installed sophisticated weapons capable of dealing with helicopters. They also had communication equipment. They tried to commit another massacre in Ma’aret al-Nou’man against a security checkpoint. They almost succeeded had not the people of the town intervened to protect the patrol by hiding them in their houses. Some of the town people paid the price by being tortured and having their bones broken. I appreciate the work of all of those who took this patriotic stance and hope to meet them soon. Of course, there were many people who tried to do similar things, to prevent sedition in different parts of Syria. Many of them succeeded, and some of them have not succeeded so far.


Cons, Had it not been for this patriotic feeling that many people have, the situation in Syria could have been much worse. The response came from the Syrian people who have once again come up in force to express their national and patriotic feelings in a manner that superseded all expectations. All this under the heavy shadow of a media campaign launched through satellite TV stations and in cyberspace that made it difficult to distinguish what is real from what is illusory and what is genuine from what is fake. But the patriotic feelings and the historic intuition that our people possess, and which are based on an accumulation of experience across generations, were immeasurably more powerful. The importance of this experience, then, is that it showed the extent of national and patriotic awareness, which is the most important guarantee for the success of the development and modernization process we are embarked on and which is based on three pillars — awareness, morals, and institutions. The absence of any of these pillars will definitely lead to a deviation of the process from its intended objectives and consequently lead to its failure with all the dangerous consequences on our society and our future. What some people are doing today has nothing to do with development, modernization, or reform. What is happening is a form of destruction, and with every act of destruction we are driven away from our objectives in modernization and development and from our aspirations. And here I do not only mean material destruction, for rectifying this can be easy. I rather mean psychological, moral, and behavioral destruction that becomes difficult to correct as time goes by. And we see that some people are trying to endorse such practices and are gradually enshrining disrespect for state institutions and what they stand for on the national level. This will lead to a slackening of the patriotic and national feelings, which are essential for the creation and the protection of the homeland. This is exactly what our enemies want us to do, and this is the direction they want us to take. Today, we have a generation of children who grew up witnessing these events or learned disorder, lack of respect for institutions, lack of respect for the law, and hatred for the state. The consequences of this will not be felt today but later on, and the price will be high. And here I want to raise the question of whether this chaos has produced more job opportunities for job seekers or whether it has improved public conditions. Has it improved the security that we have enjoyed and prided ourselves on? There is no development without stability, and there can be no reform through destruction, sabotage, or chaos. On the other hand, laws and decisions on their own will not be sufficient to achieve any progress in isolation from the appropriate environment. That is why we should rebuild what has been destroyed, and we need to correct these destructive elements or isolate them. Only then can we proceed with development and modernization. All the above is concerned with principles. As to practice, however, it should be based on reality — and when we talk about reality we need to talk about people. That is why I started a long series of meetings that have included all sections of society from Syrian regions and governorates in order to see this reality and understand it as it is, or to have as close an idea as possible about reality from the different perspectives of the Syrian people and in a manner which helps us arrange the priorities of state institutions in line with the priorities of our citizens.


Cons, Starting a National Dialogue If we assume that the government can be given a certain size and the opposition a certain size, it is true that in all countries and all societies, the largest section of society is that which does not belong to either. We cannot talk about a national dialogue, about planning for the future, and about drawing Syria’s future for decades and generations to come by neglecting the largest section of the people. Hence, the idea of national dialogue that has started recently. There is no doubt that I was part of a national dialogue; nevertheless, I cannot claim to have accomplished it, because in the end I am only an individual and those I met were hundreds or thousands, and the country includes tens of millions. Hence, the basic idea was to launch a national dialogue in which the widest social, intellectual, and political stakeholders take part in an institutional forum. For this purpose, a national dialogue committee has been set up charged with identifying the principles and mechanisms for ensuring comprehensive dialogue on the different issues of concern to Syrian citizens. The dialogue will allow, on the one hand, a discussion of the proposed draft laws at this stage, and on the other, provides an opportunity to drawing Syria’s future in a comprehensive sense for future decades and generations and help us all arrive at a mature vision for this future. It will push forward the political, social, and economic dynamics in our country until political parties can play a wider role in public life after a new party law is passed. A number of views have been expressed about the possible format of the dialogue. And one of the first tasks of the national dialogue committee is to consult with different stakeholders in order to arrive at the best format which enables us to accomplish our reform project within a specific timeframe. As I said in my meeting with the cabinet, everything should be tied to a timeframe, and I believe that you are all calling for a timeframe for everything we talk about. We can say, then, that national dialogue is the title for the present stage. This dialogue is a very important process, and it should be given an opportunity, because the whole future of Syria, if we want it to succeed, should be based on this dialogue in which all parts of the Syrian spectrum take part. We cannot always expect a vision from the state or from the government. A few scores of people cannot plan for millions of people. This is the importance of this dialogue. As to the urgent needs and demands of the people, they have been put into implementation before the beginning of the dialogue. We have lifted the emergency law and abolished the state security court, steps which will ensure the organization of the work of relevant agencies in a manner that enhances and protects people’s dignity without undermining the country’s security. We also passed a law regulating the right to peaceful demonstration, which strengthens the possibility of expressing views and positions in a free, peaceful, and organized manner as a healthy condition which helps the state rectify failures and correct trends. Questions have been raised about the issue of arrest and detention, for some people found that detentions continued after lifting the state of emergency. I believe that most people, whether in the state, inside and outside the competent authorities, did not understand the meaning of the state of emergency or the meaning of lifting the state of emergency. However, we stressed the import of this issue. What is important is that any case of arrest takes place after permission is obtained from the attorney general. There is a specific period allowed for investigation. If they want to extend this period, they should obtain permission from the attorney general or from the judicial system.


Cons, But there is a specific time limit. When somebody is caught in the act, there is no need for permission, but the same procedures are followed with the permission of the attorney general. However, lifting the state of emergency does not mean violating the law. This should be clear. Lifting the state of emergency has nothing to do with legal punishments or the nature of these punishments. Based on our conviction that citizens should be better represented in elected institutions, particularly in the People’s Assembly and local administration councils, a committee was set up to draft a new elections law. This will strengthen the role of these institutions for the public good and enable them to be more effective and ensure wider participation. This will enhance the principles of justice, equality, integrity, and transparency. These principles will be the hallmark of the future which we seek for our country. This issue is now subject to public discussion. Some people believe that there is a certain degree of procrastination on the part of the state regarding political reform. In other words, they imply that the state is not serious about this reform. I want to stress that the reform process for us is a matter of complete and absolute conviction because it represents the interest of the country, and because it expresses the desire of the people, and no reasonable person can oppose the people or the interest of the country. What is more important is that there is no opposition to reform. This is a question that has been put to me. I personally have not met any individual in the state who opposes reform. Everybody is enthusiastic for reform. The problem, however, is what reform do we want? What are the details? The package of laws that I have mentioned consists of laws in the general sense. But what are the details that we want and which we believe are useful? Some people expect that the law is passed and the president signs it, so it is easy. Can this happen? Does this lead to positive results and achieve the public interests? Maybe. And when I say maybe I mean that all possibilities are there. We cannot do something crucial and carry out a full reform process after 50 years of a certain political structure and move forward by leaping into the unknown. We need to know where we are going and what to expect. What we are doing now is making our future, and making the future is a sort of history. The history or the future that we are making will affect future generations for decades to come. Even if they make amendments in line with their circumstances in the future, still what we do now is something of crucial importance that will affect Syria’s future. That is why we need to have the broadest possible participation; and hence the importance of national dialogue. We need the broadest possible participation in order to have a wider take on things and to have a far-reaching impact on the future. When some people say that the president should lead the reform process, this does not mean that he can replace the people and carry out the reform process on his own. Leadership does not mean that one individual should stand alone, but rather he should be in front and the people proceed with him. Leadership is a process of consultation and interaction. And here I reiterate the importance of national dialogue. What are the things that the dialogue should focus on? We are talking about an election law. Which election law is in the best interest of Syria? Do we want small constituencies, medium-size constituencies, or large constituencies? Every option has its positive and negative aspects. Which election law achieves full integration for Syrian society and does not lead to fragmentation? Which election law is better suited to the new party law that we want? What is the party law that leads to full integration of Syrian society and preserves Syria’s unity and at the same time prevents Syria


Cons, from turning into a ball rather than a player, as it used to be decades ago. There are so many questions which need to be raised. So, we need to answer these questions, and these are only samples of a larger variety of questions. As far as we are concerned, we do not want to adopt a certain answer for these questions. We want to be impartial as a state. What is important is public consensus. If there is no consensus on these and other issues, we will have a big problem in Syria. By the beginning of September all this package will be completed. The constitution is different because it needs the People’s Assembly. If the new People’s Assembly is elected in August, it can directly start studying the constitutional amendments. If they are postponed as a result of a decision taken in the process of national dialogue for three months, the package will be completed before the end of the year — i.e., in five months. However, if we want to have a full revision of the constitution and to have a new one, the process is completely different. Then we should have a constitutional assembly that proposes the constitution for the public referendum. But what we will do immediately is to set up a committee to study the issue of the constitution in order to save time. Implementing Reform A lot has been said about the delays in reform. I talked about this in front of the People’s Assembly and said that we are a bit late. Some people started to ask why they are late. There is no justification. I said that we are late but did not say that we have stopped. In other words, the law for lifting the state of emergency was ready about 18 months ago, and the draft party law was also ready about a year ago. We started preparing the local administration law less than a year ago. The reason why we have not passed the first and second laws is that we believe that the local administration law, which is the most important in the reform process, has two aspects to it — elections and participation. Getting to the local administration law, in any case, requires amending the election law. So it was a matter of priorities, and we did not neglect the other laws. Every individual might ask, how can I contribute? I want to do something. How can I contribute to solving this problem? Of course, we do not have complete solutions but we can contribute now. I say that there is a role that the people can play and a role that the state can play. The state plays its role through the reforms I talked about — political reform, economic reform, and reform in other areas. The state has a role to play in providing services. There are deficiencies. There are grievances. There are measures that have harmed the citizens. The state should rectify these deficiencies. Those who have been involved in acts of killing, terrorization, and destruction will be brought to justice and prosecuted. It is the duty of the state to prosecute them. In this regard, some people debate whether the solution should be political or security-based. They say that the security-based solution has failed, and consequently the state should proceed in the direction of the political solution. In fact, we in the state think that the solution should be political. The problem consists of political, economic, and social demands. But what identifies the method of solving the problem is not the state’s view but the nature of the problem itself. It is not the state that wanted, desired, or forced those who are involved in acts of destruction; neither can we deal with those politically. This is not reasonable.


Cons, There is no political solution for those who carry weapons and kill. We want a political solution and want the army to go back to its barracks as soon as possible. We want security personnel to go back to their offices, premises, and positions, also as soon as possible. The normal thing is for citizens to deal with the police and the judiciary. Citizens have nothing to do with the army or with security personnel. The problem is that the police force in Syria is small and the police have not been trained for such cases. We started recruitment, but the capacity is limited, and at the same time training takes a long time. In any case, and regardless of the crisis, if we want to regulate the relationship between the citizen and the state in this direction, this needs some time. As to citizens, to the people, the first thing I want to say is we want them to support reform, and this is self-evident, because the people are demanding reform, so it is only natural for them to support reform. But supporting reform takes place by distinguishing between real reformists and those involved in destruction and sabotage, and also isolating those who want to ride the wave of reform in order to make personal gain. We want them to prevent chaos. As I said, there are those who acted in order to prevent chaos — parents with their children, brothers with each other, friends among each other. It is a process of awareness-raising. We want the demonstrations to be turned into pens, to written opinions, to ideas, to dialogue, to acts on the ground. Now I am not talking about something theoretical, I am talking rather about something practical. In many places, the security forces were withdrawn and the people of the region started to work with the state for the development process, in fighting corruption, in order to preserve the security of the villages and cities in which they live. This requires the existence of channels between these people and the state. When we created these channels, they turned form demonstrators into individuals who wanted to build their country. A demonstration is an expression of pain, of suffering that the state has not responded to. When the state responded, the situation became completely different. We can increase the number of these channels in order to turn every individual into a productive citizen. This is, of course, a temporary phase until political parties start to play their role in the future, for parties are the natural channel for transforming the energy of individuals into action on the ground and contributing to the return to normal life. This is the most important. Even if the crisis went on for months or years, we should accommodate ourselves to it; we should corner it and make it limited to those who are concerned with the crisis. Now we have an army there. Until the army returns to their barracks, we have to support this army and ask for its support everywhere. The army consists of the brothers of every Syrian citizen, and the army always stands for honor and dignity. Young people have an important role to play at this stage, because they have proven themselves to be an active power. This generation has to prepare itself for the next political phase so that we become the model for the whole region. Instead of taking lessons from others, we will teach them. In this speech, I touched on a number of important points. I met a large number of delegations, and I have a list of issues that number over 1,000 and 100 big and small issues, and every one of those I met would wish that I raised the issue they touched on, for everyone believes that his issue is an important one. I mentioned these issues not because they encompass all our problems, but because they are the most important and most comprehensive. As to the other issues, we in the state are addressing them continuously.


Cons, The intensive meetings with public delegations have allowed me to expand the direct communication channels that principally exist between me and the citizens. These channels have formed a rich source of information on the reality with all its facts, and this is what any official needs. In the next stage, I will continue holding such meetings, which, in addition to providing me with confidence, are the compass according which our internal policies will be built. The same goes for foreign policy, which I sought to base on the pulse of the street and reflect in every situation we faced — this popular pulse that does not accept anything short of Syria as an independent state both on its land and its decisions. This popular pulse that refuses to let the homeland be a ball instead of being a player on its own court. This pulse refuses to allow its role to be measured according to its geographical size rather than its historical importance. Otherwise, Syria will be besieged within its borders, rather than reaching out to its natural and vital regional dimension, and thus turn into a state of rival tribes living on the crumbs thrown to her children from outside the borders. Through all of that, we must realize that achieving reform and development does not only represent an internal need, but it is necessary and vital to confront those plans — and therefore we have no option but to succeed in the domestic project in order to succeed in our external project. The pressures are directed against Syria's role in resisting the schemes of sectarian division in the region, which will mean that there is neither resistance nor rights, but collapse and surrender. Accomplishing security is our starting point; and the people are the most capable to be entrusted with maintaining security and protecting the homeland. I am saying this based on experience and reality, not out of courtesy. Those who protected the country through hard times and those who protected it today are the people, the young people who confronted dangers, made initiatives, and implemented things on the ground, forming popular committees and youth groups, making personal initiatives which kept the country’s name high and reflected its spirit and the pulse of its youth and people. The power of the state is derived from the power of the people whose power is derived from their dignity, which in turn is derived from their freedom, which is again derived from the power of their state. So, let the people embrace the state and let the army, the security personnel, the police, and the people work hand in hand to prevent sedition, protect the homeland, and ensure its supremacy. Syria’s destiny is to face crises; but it is also its destiny to be proud, strong, resistant, and victorious. Its destiny is to come out of crises stronger thanks to the solidarity and cohesion of its society, its deeply rooted values, and the determination of its people who are endowed with intelligence, civilization, and openness. It is you who prevented the confusion between the greed and designs of superpowers, on the one hand, and people’s desire for reform and change on the other. It is you who protected the flower of youth from being sacrificed to the greed of international powers. It is you who prevented all attempts of sectarian sedition scrambling at the gates of the homeland and cut off the head of the snake before it could bite the Syrian body and kill it. I say that as long as you enjoy this great spirit and this deep sense of identity, Syria is fine and safe.


Cons,

People’s Republic of China Ambassador He Yafei China has a seat on the UN Human Rights Council that expires on December 31, 2012. He Yafei is China’s permanent representative to the UN in Geneva. The following is excerpted from a statement by Ambassador He during the Human Rights Council Special Session on Human Rights in Syria on August 22, 2011. China pays great attention to the situation in Syria. We are deeply saddened by and concerned about the continuous violent clashes taking place there. We would like to make the following observations on the situation in Syria. Firstly, we hope all parties in Syria can show maximum restraint, refrain from all acts of violence, seek a political solution through dialogue and consultations, prevent violence from escalating and leading to more bloodshed, and restore stability and order to the country as soon as possible. Secondly, the future of Syria should be determined by its people rather than being dictated by outside forces. The only solution to the current crisis in Syria is through an inclusive and Syrian-led political process. Thirdly, the Syrian Government is taking a series of reform measures. We urge the government to implement its reform commitments. We would also call upon all parties in Syria to participate constructively in the dialogue so as to jointly move forward the political process to diffuse tensions at an early date. The turmoil affecting some countries of the Middle East and North Africa is seriously disrupting the economic and social development and people’s lives in those countries. Syria is an important country in that region. The stability of Syria has significant impact on the overall stability and security of the Middle East. The international community has made a lot of initiatives to solve the Syrian problem. We believe that these initiatives must be guided by the Purposes and Principles of the UN Charter and norms governing the international relations, and must fully respect the sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity of Syria. Moreover, they should facilitate the realization of the following objectives: firstly, to help all parties to find an appropriate way to resolve their differences through dialogues and consultations; secondly, to contribute to the maintenance of stability and normal public order in the country; and thirdly, to help maintaining overall stability and security of Middle East. It is our hope that in paying attention to and discussing this issue, the Council can maintain its impartiality and objectivity and base its actions on accurate and reliable information. We also hope that the special session will help to advance dialogue and cooperation, instead of turning into a forum to level accusations and exert pressures on the country, in order to bring an early solution to the problem in the interests of the healthy development of the international human rights cause.


Cons,

Republic of Cuba Ambassador Rodolfo Reyes Rodríguez Cuba has a seat on the UN Human Rights Council that expires on December 31, 2012. Rodolfo Reyes Rodriguez is the Cuban representative to the Council. The following is excerpted from a statement by Ambassador Rodriguez during the Human Rights Council Special Session on Human Rights in Syria on April 29, 2011. Cuba condemns the hypocrisy and double standards on which the convocation of this special session is based. Human rights are not its genuine motive. The motive is the insatiable hegemonic appetites of a group of powers, led by the United States, that manipulate even human beings’ right to life in order to justify their interventionist zeal. Cuba shares the concern for the losses of innocent lives in any part of the world. Cuba does not share, however, the view that the supposed protection of human lives must be turned into a pretext for foreign intervention and military adventures, which only sow destruction and multiply deaths. Why try to condemn Syria now? Perhaps because Syria has not been forgiven for its history of confrontation with the United States and its Israeli ally, which have been executing the policy of domination over the Arab peoples in general and the Palestinian people in particular? Is it a matter of seeking a pretext to justify foreign military intervention in Syria? Why is it that not a word is said about the secret [U.S.] State Department cables that confirm the infiltration of foreign agents and the financing of groups seeking to destabilize Syria? The government of President Bashar al-Assad has recognized the legitimacy of popular demands and declared that it is preparing to advance the economic, political, and judicial reforms that are necessary to satisfy them and fulfill the mandate of the people. At the same time, it has denounced the participation of saboteurs financed and armed from the outside who have instigated violence and chaos. As the Syrian foreign minister said on April 18, “The priorities of the government are reforms, peace, and order.” If those who proposed this meeting are worried so much about human lives, why aren’t they agitating for a special session to consider the barbaric actions of the NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization], especially of the United States, in Iraq and Afghanistan, or of Israel in the occupied Palestinian territories, which have taken thousands of innocent civilian lives? Why is no special session convoked to examine the extrajudicial executions and abductions of individuals, without any evidence of their participation in terrorist acts, who are tortured in the detention center established in Guantánamo — illegally occupied Cuban territory — as confirmed by secret U.S. documents which irrefutably demonstrate, once gain, that lies and double standards constitute the basis of U.S. policy? What will the European allies of the United States have to say now, the allies who have in turn ignored reports on their own participation in the CIA’s [Central Intelligence Agency’s] secret flights and secret prisons? The interference of the Western powers in the current situation in Syria, as history shows, is only for the purpose of undermining the independence of the peoples of the South, their sovereignty over their own natural resources, and their free self-determination. It is up to the Syrian people, side by side with their government, to determine the ways and means to fulfill and carry out the popular will. Cuba categorically rejects any attempt to exploit the regrettable situation created to destabilize Syria and to advance the plans for domination by the United States and Israel, its principal ally in the region.


Cons, As the Cuban foreign minister stated here last March: “The reality is that the origin of the situation in the Middle East and North Africa lies in the crisis of the policy of plunder imposed by the United States and its NATO allies in that region.” Cuba reiterates its confidence in the capacity of the Syrian people and government to resolve their internal problems, without any foreign interference, and demands full respect for the sovereignty and free self-determination of this Arab country.


Periodicals PostagePaid at

Boyds, MD,and additional

offices

Congressional DigestA Congressional Digest

Corp. PublicationPO Box 240

Boyds, MD 20841-0240

ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED

U.S. InternationalBroadcastingMay 2011

Libyan UprisingApril 2011

Revolution in EgyptMarch 2011

Space ExplorationSeptember 2011

Public BroadcastingMay 2011

Free Speech andCampaign FundingSeptember 2011

Minors andMirandsApril 2011

Material WitnessDententionsApril 2011

Medicare andthe BudgetJune 2011

Two Sides, One SourceCongressional Digest Debates Online

a Pro & Con® Online Service

Congressional Digest Debates Online.......$295/year,24/7, multi-user access to Congressional Digest, International Debates, and Supreme Court Debates

Congressional Digest in Print................$94/yearNOW INCLUDES FREE DIGITAL ACCESSPostal delivery of 10 issues per year

Congressional Digest P.O. Box 240, Boyds, MD 20841-0240 (301) 916-1800 / (800) 637-9915www.congressionaldigest.com

FOR PRINT SUBSCRIBERSPrint subscription now includes FREE digital access

Activate your free Congressional Digest online account at CongressionalDigest.com

MAY 2011VOL. 14 NO. 5

A Pro & Con Monthly

Minors andMirandaThe Rights of JuvenilesDuring Interrogation

Should a Court Consider Age WhenDetermining Whether a Suspect MustBe Informed of His Miranda Rights?

Also in this issue:Recent Cases Granted Certiorari

Arizona Christian Tuition Org. v.Winn, et al.: Private School TaxCredits Upheld


U.S. InternationalBroadcasting


May 2011VOL. 9 NO. 5


U.S. InternationalBroadcastingPublic Diplomacy in theTwenty-First CenturyHave U.S. Public DiplomacyEfforts Become Ineffective orEven Counterproductive?

Also in this issue: Syria Sanctions

Pentagon Funding Nuclear Cooperation

PublicBroadcasting

May 2011VOL. 90 NO. 5


PublicBroadcastingThe Debate Over Federal Funding

Should the House Vote to

Prohibit Federal Funding for

National Public Radio?

Also in this issue ...Also in this issue ...Also in this issue ...Also in this issue ...Also in this issue ...

Abortion and Federal Funds

Supreme Court TV Coverage

Greenhouse Gas Regulation

Minors andMiranda