Eretz Israel is our unforgettable historic homeland...The Jews who will it shall achieve their State...And whatever we attempt there for our own benefit will redound mightily and beneficially to the good of all mankind. (Theodor Herzl, DerJudenstaat, 1896)

We offer peace and amity to all the neighbouring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all. The State of Israel is ready to contribute its full share to the peaceful progress and development of the Middle East.
(From Proclamation of the State of Israel, 5 Iyar 5708; 14 May 1948)

With a liberal democratic political system operating under the rule of law, a flourishing market economy producing technological innovation to the benefit of the wider world, and a population as educated and cultured as anywhere in Europe or North America, Israel is a normal Western country with a right to be treated as such in the community of nations.... For the global jihad, Israel may be the first objective. But it will not be the last. (Friends of Israel Initiative)
Showing posts with label Al-Nusra Front. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Al-Nusra Front. Show all posts

Tuesday, 11 October 2016

David Singer: Clinton Will Continue Obama Policy Confronting Russia in Syria and the UN

My previous post, which begins with mention of Jenny Tonge, involves an observation of mine on the execrable antisemitism David Collier discovered over the weekend when he attended visit to the anti-Israel/anti-Jewish Hatefest at Lichfeld Cathedral, a post that does that intrepid photo-blogger great credit.

This post is by another David, Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer, who of course needs no introduction to regular readers of my blog.

Writes David Singer:

Hillary Clinton has made it very clear in the second Presidential Debate that if elected next President of the United States she will continue President Obama’s confrontation with Russia both in Syria and at the United Nations.

Clinton told 66.5 million viewers:
“Well, the situation in Syria is catastrophic. And every day that goes by, we see the results of the regime by Assad in partnership with the Iranians on the ground, the Russians in the air, bombarding places, in particular Aleppo, where there are hundreds of thousands of people, probably about 250,000 still left. And there is a determined effort by the Russian air force to destroy Aleppo in order to eliminate the last of the Syrian rebels who are really holding out against the Assad regime.
Russia hasn't paid any attention to ISIS. They're interested in keeping Assad in power. So I, when I was secretary of state, advocated and I advocate today a no-fly zone and safe zones. We need some leverage with the Russians, because they are not going to come to the negotiating table for a diplomatic resolution, unless there is some leverage over them. And we have to work more closely with our partners and allies on the ground.
But I want to emphasize that what is at stake here is the ambitions and the aggressiveness of Russia. Russia has decided that it's all in, in Syria. And they've also decided who they want to see become president of the United States, too, and it's not me.”  
Clinton’s no-fly zone over Libya proved disastrous and has already been rejected by Russia over Syria.

She left unexplained what leverage she could put on Putin to get him to the negotiating table.

Her assessment that Russia wanted Trump elected as President of the United States was probably correct for the following reasons enunciated by Trump during the debate.
“I don't like Assad at all, but Assad is killing ISIS. Russia is killing ISIS. And Iran is killing ISIS…
… I think you have to knock out ISIS. Right now, Syria is fighting ISIS. We have people that want to fight both at the same time. But Syria is no longer Syria. Syria is Russia and it's Iran, who she [Clinton] made strong and Kerry and Obama made into a very powerful nation and a very rich nation, very, very quickly, very, very quickly.
I believe we have to get ISIS. We have to worry about ISIS before we can get too much more involved. She had a chance to do something with Syria. They had a chance. And that was the line. And she didn't.”
The choice for America’s voters could not be clearer:
* co-operation with Russia to first get rid of ISIS and  – unmentioned during the debate  – al Nusra – threats to world peace and security already declared by the UN Security Council or
* continuing confrontation with Russia seeking to resolve the Syrian civil conflict which has raged since 2011. 
Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov extended the following olive branch to America on 18 November 2015:
“The Security Council needs to give preferential attention to the task of creating a solid legal foundation for the fight against this evil [Islamic State] and for the mobilization of an actual global coalition in response to this common uncompromising challenge for us all.”
Obama has spurned Russia’s offer - Clinton is adopting Obama’s position.

Trump seems ready to take up Russia’s offer of defeating ISIS first.

American voters have been presented with a stark choice between Clinton and Trump on America’s future involvement in Syria.

Wednesday, 5 October 2016

David Singer: United Nations Must Militarily Confront Islamic State and Al-Nusra

Here's the latest article by Sydney lawyer and international affairs analyst David Singer.

He writes:

Russian UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin’s assumption of the Presidency of the United Nations Security Council for October could have a lightning rod effect on the Security Council finally authorising military action against Islamic State and Al Nusra under article 42 of the UN Charter.

Both terrorist organisations have been the subject of many unanimous Security Council resolutions declaring them to be a threat to world peace and security – but all such resolutions have stopped short of authorising military action.

American-Russian relations are in a precarious and highly volatile situation today due to:
* the collapse of the ceasefire in Syria negotiated between America and Russia, 
* America’s decision to call off further negotiations with Russia on reinstating the ceasefire 
* President Putin signing a decree suspending a Russia-US deal on plutonium disposal – blaming hostile US actions
* America and Russia engaging in a vitriolic diplomatic war shaming each other for the humanitarian disaster in Aleppo as Russian-backed Government forces and American-backed rebel forces battle for supremacy at horrendous cost to the civilian population caught in the crossfire.
Churkin [pictured] has been afforded a world stage to justify Russia’s actions in Syria during regular media conferences that will be held by him as President of the Security Council. Churkin was quick to grab that opportunity on 4 October – as this official UN record reveals:
“He (Churkin) was not aware of plans for further discussions between United States Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Federation Minister for Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov, and did not know the result of discussions between the two countries during the last few hours. The nature of their differences was overdramatized. He hoped cooperation on Syria could be resumed.
He could not accept unilateral steps such as grounding of airplanes.
Al-Nusrah had moved to Aleppo and was keeping the civilian population hostage. He wanted as close cooperation with the United States as possible in fighting Al-Nusrah. Had it not been for Russian involvement, [Islamic State] black flags could now be flying over Damascus. There were 3,500 fighters in eastern Aleppo, of which 2,000 were Al-Nusrah, based on Russian intelligence. The rest were scattered in different groups. ISIL was not there.” 
White House spokesman Josh Earnest reportedly said US policy would continue to give priority to the fight against jihadi groups in Syria. 
“With regard to US options, we obviously have been very focused on countering ISIL [Isis] and other extremist groups that are using the chaos in Syria as a safe haven to plot and carry out attacks” 
Both Russia and America have previously expressed their willingness to involve the Security Council in defeating Islamic State and al-Nusra. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov made this clear on 18 November last:
“The Security Council needs to give preferential attention to the task of creating a solid legal foundation for the fight against this evil [Islamic State] and for the mobilization of an actual global coalition in response to this common uncompromising challenge for us all.”
President Obama preached a similar mantra in St Petersburg on 6 September 2013:
“And I respect those who are concerned about setting precedents of action outside of a U.N. Security Council resolution. I would greatly prefer working through multilateral channels and through the United Nations to get this done.” 
Given the commonality of the positions of both America and Russia as reflected above – the possibility looms large that during Russia’s October presidency of the Security Council – Russia and America could co-sponsor a draft resolution to the Security Council authorising military action against Islamic State and al-Nusra.

October could indeed be make or break month for Syria.