Monday 10th of August 2020

pompeo's palace — an illegal punishment house....

POPEOM

While debate rages on whether the statues of colonial plunderers should be tossed into rivers or otherwise removed as blots on civilised landscapes – and as we progressives virtue-signal our damning of racism while enjoying to varying degree its fruits[1] – looting and sacking of the global south continues apace.

 

 

From Philip Roddis

Only now we don’t call it colonialism. Direct rule of Asia, Africa and “Latin” America, which for all its horrors imposed a modicum of responsibility on Europe’s maritime powers, has largely gone.[2] Now we have the arm’s length – market discipline – controls of imperialism, practised by the former colonial powers and a good few more, all in the global north.[3]

(Like ‘ruling class’, I ration my use of ‘imperialism’. It puts off readers who might otherwise be receptive to the things I say. And as with ‘ruling class’ – defined by its monopoly ownership of some essential of wealth creation – I offer a simple but robust core definition. Imperialism is the export of capital from north to south, and repatriation of profits in the reverse direction. These remarkably consistent flows are empirical facts, as IMF, WTO and World Bank data attest.)

As with colonial powers, the imperialist powers are either armed to the teeth (Britain, France, USA) or in half competitive cahoots (Germany, Japan) with those that are. Almost as important, their control of narrative and ability to manufacture consent, subject of a recent post, enables them to sell wars of profit, the victims overwhelmingly brown skinned, as altruistic intervention in the Gladstonian tradition, and/or as defensive moves to take out a Threat To Us All.

This is by way of scene setting. Yesterday, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told the world of a new round of sanctions dubbed, for reasons I’ll get to in a moment, the Caesar Act. It targets the last remaining Ba’athist state.[4] Here’s a press release by the State Department, though Pompeo’s tweets give the gist.

But how do sanctions impact on people in the nations targeted? Why “Caesar” Act? Why trust a word of what Washington says about Syria? Why trust a word of what Mike Pompeo says about anything? What do America and its junior partners really want in Syria?

The rest of this post is dedicated to addressing these questions.

WHAT HARM DO SANCTIONS INFLICT?

For many a decade we’ve been nurtured in a view of sanctions (preferable to the harsher term, ‘blockade’) as almost benign – the gentle nudging by a caring parent to encourage a wayward child to mend her ways. The most serious puncturing of so naive and rose-tinted a view came when, it having emerged that half a million Iraqi children under five had died as a result of Bill Clinton’s sanctions, his Secretary of State Madeleine Albright defended them as “a price worth paying”.

Though their creators deny this, sanctions kill indiscriminately and are intended to do just that.

(Former National Security Advisor John Bolton, now a thorn in the side of the boss who cut him loose, let the cat out of this bag when he declared his desire to see ordinary Iranians suffer to the point where, in desperation, they rose up to overthrow the theocrats in Tehran.)

But they do have this one merit. Thanks to that naïve view of them – damaged but not fatally so by the utterances of Albright and Bolton, and by UN/WHO data few read – sanctions, unlike bombs and returning body bags, never bring people out onto the streets of Western cities.

WHY IS THIS ROUND OF SANCTIONS CALLED THE CAESAR ACT?

This from a CounterPunch piece of March 2016:


On 20 January 2014, two days before negotiations about the Syrian conflict were scheduled to begin in Switzerland, a sensational report burst onto television and front pages around the world. The story was that a former Syrian army photographer had 55,000 photographs documenting the torture and killing of 11,000 detainees by the Syrian security establishment.

The Syrian photographer was given the code-name ‘Caesar’. The story became known as the “Caesar Torture Photos”. A team of lawyers plus digital and forensic experts were hired by the Carter-Ruck law firm, on contract to Qatar, to go to the Middle East and check the veracity of “Caesar” and his story. They concluded that “Caesar” was truthful and the photographs indicated “industrial scale killing”.

CNN, London’s Guardian and LeMonde broke the story which was subsequently broadcast in news reports around the world. The Caesar photo accusations were announced as negotiations began in Switzerland. With the opposition demanding the resignation of the Syrian government, negotiations quickly broke down.

 

The piece goes on to list no fewer than a dozen “significant problems with the ‘Caesar torture photos’ story”. To be sure, the lies already proven of Western media and politicians in respect of Syria are huge. But for reasons I’ll go into, even if everything said of Assad and the Damascus “regime” were true, I’d still oppose imperialism’s dirty war on Syria.

But at least we know why it’s called the Caesar Act. Who knows? Maybe it’ll pop up, many years from now, in a round of Trivial Pursuits.

WHY SHOULD WE TRUST WHAT WASHINGTON SAYS ABOUT SYRIA?

No good reason – but a few dreadful ones. By any number of metrics, America is the world’s foremost rogue state. What would your proverbial Martian make of its unique and militarily unnecessary[5] use of nuclear weapons … proliferation across the planet of military bases which outnumber those of all other nations combined … the chilling extent to which armaments are key to the US economy … the non stop wars on the global south … the flouting of inconvenient UN resolutions … the underwriting of Israeli apartheid and backing of coups to install far more Washington friendly dictatorships than I can keep count of?

Why then is it given a free pass by so many of us? Why, in the face of overwhelming and quite damning evidence, is the good ol’ US of A seen as a force for good? I’ve gone into this question elsewhere and more than once. Here I’ll confine myself to the basics.

One, it helps that, thanks to a previous apex predator, English is the world’s lingua franca. The advantage is incalculable as the hard propaganda of news delivery, and the soft propaganda of the entertainment industries, paint a nuanced but – as the final credits roll – ultimately glowing picture of Uncle Sam.

Two, America emerged from WW2 as the stronger of two new superpowers. Three, this reality was cemented by Bretton Woods, Marshall Plan – and, later, Nixon’s decoupling from gold, and arrival of the petrodollar system. All in the context of a cold war on the other superpower.

Other imperialist nations, as they more or less reluctantly withdrew from their colonies, had to choose between looking to Moscow or to Washington. This was a no-brainer, the occasional outburst of resentment – from France especially – notwithstanding. In a world divided between the Good Guys of a Free West, and the Bad Guys lurking behind the Iron Curtain and itching to enslave us all, Washington was our protector and saviour from Red Tyranny. Now things are a little more complex – not least because in the War on Terror it spearheads, America has a habit of covertly backing The Enemy in places like Syria[6] – but the legacy has life in it yet.

 

 

Read more:

https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/20/caesars-palace-5-questions-on-the-la...

the empire dominion...

The ultimate purpose of dominating another country is to secure opportunities for big business to accumulate wealth. The dominated country may provide direct opportunities for wealth accumulation, or be a stepping stone to profit-making opportunities in a third country, without offering attractive opportunities of its own. Such a country may become the target of an imperialist power because favorably placed.


Perhaps it bounds important shipping lanes and is prized as a naval base from which the movement of goods can be protected from rival imperialist powers that might choke off the flow. Or perhaps the aim is to position military power at a shipping choke point. Or maybe the territory is close to enticing targets that could be absorbed through military coercion. Maybe the dominated country is close to another imperialism and attractive for encircling it.


There are scores of reasons why an imperialist power might dominate a country that offers no immediate or direct economic benefit, but all are traceable to a perceived economic advantage for the dominating country’s major investors.

 

 

Read more:

https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/20/caesars-palace-5-questions-on-the-latest-round-of-syria-sanctions/

vengeance by any other name...

While special envoy James Jeffrey says the US no longer demands regime change in Syria, only “change of behavior,” his explanation shows this distinction is without a difference and no November election results will change it.

“We’re not demanding total victory, we’re not saying that Assad has to go,” Jeffrey said on Monday, during a live event hosted by the Middle East Institute and moderated by MEI director Charles Lister.

Instead, he explained, the goal of the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act – a US sanctions law that came into effect last week – is to “make it clear to anyone who wants to rebuild Assad’s Syria that that cannot happen without Caesar sanctions,” until there is a government in Damascus that carries out US demands with what Jeffrey described as “real eagerness.”


It is not regime change,” Jeffrey insisted, but a change of behavior. Theoretically, he explained, President Bashar Assad could just comply with all US demands and get the sanctions lifted. Among the demands, for example, is for Damascus to stop “besieging the Syrian people” or “threatening the neighborhood” by having Russian and Iranian forces inside the country – though Jeffrey later explicitly said it’s “not part of our policy” to try to get the Russians out.

Yet it is the “neighborhood” – from Turkey to Israel, whom Jeffrey referred to but refused to name – that has bombed Syria or sent troops there in support of “opposition” militants or bombed , and the US sanctions are themselves an act of siege against the population loyal to Damascus.

Compliance with US sanctions also appears impossible by design. Jeffrey described the “dramatic shift of the behavior” expected of Damascus as being without precedent except from Japan before and after WWII. That is a telling comparison, given that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor followed harsh US sanctions, and that Tokyo was under US military occupation for almost seven years afterward, only nominally retaining the Emperor as the figurehead of state. 

Another revelation by Jeffrey is that the Washington establishment has reached a bipartisan consensus on Syria, independent of President Donald Trump. The envoy said he was “not at all concerned” about a possible change in administrations after the November election. He also noted that the sanctions policy was adopted because military intervention against Damascus would get neither international nor domestic US support.

 

 

Read more:

https://www.rt.com/news/492629-usa-sanctions-syria-jeffrey/

 

The US weasels have spoken the same language since 1949 or whatever... Why don't they ask the same bloody thing from the Saudis, who by all accounts would be 100 times worse than Assad? Ah... bend the knees to the US god: the Dollar... and smile a lot when shaking hands... Sociopathic US Idiots, especially James Jeffrey — a nasty man...

 

caesar is a bastard...

On 30 June 2020 during a videoconference devoted to the reconstruction of Syria, Lebanese Prime Minister Hassan Diab appealed to the United Nations and the European Union for their help in respect to the Caesar bill.

The Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act, which entered into force on 17 June, is a US piece of legislation meant to punish Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, guilty of still being there after years of braving threats, an embargo, false charges, a rigged trial and war.

It imposes US sanctions on any person or entity that extends assistance to the Syrian "regime".

However, the sanctions can be dodged by Syria since it can deal through the Kurdish mercenaries sponsored by the Pentagon, but not by Lebanon, whose population is already starting to go hungry.

"I call on the United Nations, the European Union and friendly countries to protect Lebanon from the negative repercussions of any sanctions which could be imposed on the Syrians, in particular within the framework of the Caesar Act, and to ensure that such repercussions do not disrupt our commercial and economic activities abroad, thus jeopardizing our ongoing efforts to overcome the crisis that our country is going through," said Hassan Diab.

Read more:

https://www.voltairenet.org/article210424.html

 

Read from top.

the criminal US empire...

 

Caesar Act”: USA wants to bring Syria to its knees by tougher sanctions


by Karin Leukefeld, Bonn and Damascus


The sanctions imposed on Syria by the West have had devastating consequences for the civilian population. They are to be used against the Assad government, whose overthrow by military means did not succeed. Now the USA is tightening the thumbscrews with the “Caesar Act”.

The Syrian government controls 70 % of the country and partly cooperates with the Syrian Kurds in northeastern Syria – under Russian mediation. Nevertheless, the country is prevented from starting the necessary reconstruction after the destructive war years. Not only is there no international aid for reconstruction, but also states such as Russia, China, Iran, India and the Gulf States, that want to support the country in its reconstruction, are to be prevented from doing so by the “Caesar Act”. Particularly affected are Syria’s direct neighbours: Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon, for whom trade with Syria is vital for their own economy and national security.

   The Syrian government condemned the new sanctions as “economic terrorism”. Unilateral economic coercive measures would violate international law and international humanitarian law. According to a statement by the Syrian Foreign Ministry, quoted by the Syrian news agency SANA, the measures are based on “false statements by those who are hostile to the Syrian people”.

   Furthermore, the Syrian ambassador in Moscow, Riad Haddad, condemned the sanctions as “medical terrorism”. In view of the global corona pandemic, such measures were inhumane. Syria, he said, also needed medicine and technical equipment to protect its population. The new sanctions package was also aimed at Syria’s allies in the Persian Gulf, Haddad continued. The sanctions were intended to block foreign trade, domestic trade and joint investment projects with the Syrian government as well as loans and remittances, Haddad said. “Nobody should invest in Syria, and anyone who intends to do so should seek permission from the US”. Haddad further said that he saw the danger that Syria would be divided by the sanctions and pointed out that the “Caesar Act” would not apply in the northeast of Syria, which is controlled by the US army and the Syrian Kurds allied with it.

   Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif reiterated that Iran would deepen its economic relations with Syria, and that the Syrian-Iranian credit line would be maintained. Zarif, who met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov for bilateral talks in Moscow on 16 June, told Russian media that they were preparing another meeting with Russia and Turkey in Astana format. The economic pressure on Syria was also discussed between Iran and Russia.

   China and Russia have so far not officially commented on the US Caesar Act. Both countries are closely allied with Syria politically, as well as economically and Russia also militarily. The US administration has openly stated that the “Caesar Act” is also intended to put pressure on Syria’s allies Russia, China and Iran.1 

   The new US economic sanctions against Syria entered into force on 17 June 2020. The “Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act”, or “Caesar Act” for short, is embedded in the US national defence budget for 2020 and is used by the US administration as a foreign policy instrument against Syria and its allies.

   The law was an “important step in promoting accountability for the large-scale atrocities Bashar al Assad and his regime have carried out in Syria”, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced immediately after US President Donald Trumpsigned the law on 21 December 2019.2

   The law would provide the US administration “tools to help end the horrific and ongoing conflict in Syria”. “It also holds accountable those responsible for the widespread death of civilians and for numerous atrocities including the use of chemical weapons”, Pompeo continued. The Caesar Act “sends a clear signal that no external actor should enter into business with or otherwise enrich such a regime”, he said.

   The new US sanctions package is aimed at individuals, institutions, companies and states that do business with the Syrian government. Officially, the targets are said to be the Syrian president, the government, the military and intelligence services. In reality, however, it affects Syria’s largely state-run economy in the energy, transport and agricultural sectors, as well as the state-run healthcare system and all state-owned manufacturing companies.

   Alleged exceptions for the medical and humanitarian sector will hardly have any effect, as companies or civil society organisations are reluctant to start projects in Syria from the outset due to the unclear and complicated application procedures. Many aid organisations practised “self-censorship”, explained Bassma Alloush of the Norwegian Refugee Council to the internet portal Al Monitor. Aid organisations were afraid of the risk, and if there was a danger of falling under US sanctions, they would withdraw.

   Alloush called the “Caesar Act” “salt on the wound” of the Syrian population, which had been suffering from the war for years. “Now to … say, you can’t rebuild for another five years because of Caesar and because we think it’s going to create regime change or accountability or justice – that’s where I disagree”, Alloush said.

International criticism of unilateral sanctions

Criticism of unilaterally imposed economic sanctions by the EU and the US administration comes from all over the world. Syrian church representatives have been pointing out for years the serious consequences for the civilian population that has been severely affected by the war. At the beginning of the year, an association of Syrian non-governmental organisations, foundations and individuals appealed to the UN Secretary-General and called on him to stand up against the sanctions. Signature lists and protests by committed civil society all over the world, however, went unheard in Washington, Brussels, London, Paris and Berlin, as did the numerous studies presented worldwide on the consequences of economic sanctions in general and against Syria in particular.

   These include a 2016 study by the UN Commission on Economic and Social Affairs in West Asia ESCWA3 and a report by Algerian diplomat Idriss Jazairy, the recently deceased UN Special Rapporteur on the Effects of Unilateral Coercive Measures.4 

Syria in the gray zone

The note that the unilateral EU and US sanctions should lead to a division of Syria is confirmed by the remarks made at the “Syria in the Gray Zone” meeting held at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington in November 2019.5

   Dana Stroul of the Washington Institute for Middle East Policy explained the US administration’s strategy in Syria, where the aim is to keep both Russia and Iran in check in Syria’s “gray zone”. The “architecture of economic sanctions” is part of the “Trump administration’s campaign to exert maximum pressure on Iran”. Reconstruction aid could be provided through “stabilisation aid” in northeastern Syria, the “resource-rich economic and agricultural powerhouse of Syria”, which the US administration was claiming “through the US military with its local partners, the Syrian Democratic Forces […]”. The US administration also has influence on “the international financial institutions, and (through) cooperation with the Europeans” one has a “card in hand” to force “the Assad regime” to make concessions. It needs to be impeded, said Stroul, that “reconstruction aid and technical expertise arrive in Syria”.

Confrontation in the UN Security Council

The political and humanitarian situation in Syria was discussed in the UN Security Council on 16 June 2020. The economic distress in the country was one of the topics. The massive decline of the Syrian pound towards the US dollar within a few days of the beginning of June has led to an enormous surge in the price of food and medicines. According to the World Food Programme (WFP) prices in Syria have risen by more than 100 per cent in the span of a year. The unilateral coercive measures and sanctions are hampering the reconstruction of national production because the purchase of spare parts, new machinery, and raw materials is obstructed. Because there is no improvement, no jobs are being generated with which the workers can feed their families. Syria’s close connections to its neighbours Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon are such that the crisis in Syria, deliberately perpetuated by the Western states, is also leading to ongoing economic crises among its neighbours.

   As many times before, Russia and China had called for the lifting of unilateral sanctions against Syria at the last monthly UN Security Council consultations on Syria. The concrete reason for this was the health threat to the population in April and May posed by the corona pandemic. UN Secretary General António Guterres had requested that all states should cooperate and suspend their wars and battles to protect themselves from the corona virus.

   The representatives of the US, Great Britain, France and Germany are not willing to lift the sanctions against Syria. In March, the German UN diplomat Jürgen Schulz had already rejected a respective appeal by Russia. The sanctions were “not targeted against the population”, but “against the leadership in Damascus […], which was guilty of the severest human rights crimes imaginable”, said Schulz. “The human rights situation in Syria is solely the result of the Damascus policy.”6


Caesar and the international humanitarian law


The new US sanctions law is named after the Syrian military photographer “Caesar”, who in 2013 smuggled thousands of photographs of bodies from Syrian military prisons with the assistance of a support troop under the same name. Allegedly the dead were prisoners tortured to death.

   However, there are strong indications that the dead may also have been victims of attacks, abductions and fighting. All the dead who have been found by the Syrian civil defence or military since the beginning of the war in 2011 are documented in military hospitals, as to the author was confirmed in numerous conversations in Syria.

    After his escape, “Caesar” did not turn to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), advocating for prisoners, disappeared persons and victims of torture since its foundation, with the photographic material. In Syria, the ICRC has been working for decades and since 2017 has also participated in negotiations between armed opposition groups and the Syrian government to exchange prisoners or search for disappeared persons.

   The work of the ICRC is based on the Geneva Convention and the clear rules of international humanitarian law, and is neutral, impartial, and independent. The ICRC has developed a guide on the subject of death in captivity.7

   But this was not what “Caesar” and his supporters were interested in. They showed the photos to French reporter Garance La Caisne. “Caesar” told her his story which the journalist published media-effective in a book.8

   Invitations to “Caesar” followed at the highest political level in the US and Europe. The photos were shown internationally at exhibitions, in the UN, and in the EU Parliament. In a “first criminal trial worldwide” opened by the Oberlandesgericht Koblenz against two presumed former employees of the Syrian intelligent service the photos were used as evidence.9 

   Under ICRC rules, that would presumably not have been possible. The protection and dignity of the victims, including their families, prohibit under international humanitarian law the unauthorized presentation of such photos in public. The elucidation of the events behind the pictures would be tedious, lengthy and could lead to a multifaceted result.

   “Caesar” was then supported by the US-based “Syrian Emergency Task Force” (SETF), which handed over the photos to the US secret service FBI, that verified them as authentic.10

   Since 2014, SETF has been intensively lobbying the US Senate and Congress for the new sanctions law “Caesar Act”. The Syrians should be happy about this, SETF director Mouaz Moustafa told the internet portal Al Monitor: “It should be a comfort to Syrian civilians because it is coming to punish those that are forcing them to live in poverty.”


Money-heavy lobby for the “Caesar Act”


In addition to the “Syrian Emergency Relief Operations Command (Task Force)”, a number of other organisations campaigned in Washington for the passage of the “Caesar Act”. The groups “Americans for a Free Syria” and “Citizens for a Secure America”, registered in the USA as non-profit organisations, have been campaigning for the “Caesar Act” for years, according to an article in “Foreign Lobby”. The Internet portal examines the work of foreign lobby groups in Washington and provides access to the $500 million “foreign influence industry in Washington”.11

   Lobby groups must register in the USA and disclose their activities. The lobbyists were particularly campaigning for the Syrian central bank to be placed on the US sanctions list as a “money laundering operation”. The spokesman of “Americans for a Free Syria”, Thomas George, who is registered as a lobbyist in the USA, told Pecquet that the Syrian central bank is the “most important instrument for enriching the oligarchy in Syria to the detriment of the Syrian people”. The group has spent $78,000 since 2017 to promote the Sanctions Act in the US Congress and the US Government.

   According to the Foreign Lobby, the “Citizens for a Secure America” paid $330,000 to the company of lobbyist Brian Ballard between April 2018 and September 2019 to campaign for a tougher sanctions law against Syria. Ballard, who was for a long time the most important lobbyist for Donald Trump, is considered the “most powerful lobbyist in Trump’s Washington”, according to Politico magazine. When he spoke, “the wallets of influential donors in Florida opened up”.12

   Voices such as those of the Lebanese ambassador to the USA, Gabriel Issa, are having a hard time making their voices heard against the money-heavy sanctions advocates. For Lebanon, trade with Syria and the urgent reconstruction of the war-ravaged neighbouring country means an important recovery and stabilisation of the Lebanese economy. For this reason, they are trying to keep the impact of the sanctions on Lebanon “as low as possible”, Issa explained to “Foreign Lobby”.

   This is also too much for the advocates of sanctions. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who announced the first part of the target persons and companies on 17 June 2020, made it clear that, no matter where in the world, “anyone who does business with any of the listed persons or companies can be sanctioned themselves”. The “campaign” will continue in the coming weeks and months and “target every individual and company that supports the Assad regime”. Pompeo expressly pointed out that the USA is conducting its “campaign of economic and political pressure in full cooperation [...] especially with our European partners”. They had “renewed their own sanctions against the Assad regime […] only three weeks ago”.13    •


1  www.state.gov/passage-of-the-caesar-syria-civilian-protection-act-of-2019/

2  www.state.gov/passage-of-the-caesar-syria-civilian-protection-act-of-2019/

3  theintercept.com/document/2016/09/28/humanitarian-impact-of-syria-related-unilateral-restrictive-measures/

4  reliefweb.int/report/world/report-special-rapporteur-negative-impact-unilateral-coercive-measures-enjoyment-human;  deutsch.rt.com/der-nahe-osten/89109-un-botschafter-zu-syrien-einseitige/

5  www.csis.org/analysis/syria-gray-zone

6  deutsch.rt.com/der-nahe-osten/100353-trotz-corona-pandemie-bundesregierung-fuer-sanktionen-syrien/;deutsch.rt.com/der-nahe-osten/101092-lage-hier-ist-schrecklich-syrer-sanktionen-corona-krise/

7 www.icrc.org/en/publication/4126-guidelines-investigating-deaths-custody

8 www.chbeck.de/le-caisne-codename-caesar/product/16128742

9  www.lto.de/recht/hintergruende/h/olg-koblenz-1ste919-folter-prozess-auftakt-syrien-assad-geheimdienst-voelkerstrafrecht/

10www.syriantaskforce.org/caesar-team-1

11www.foreignlobby.com/2020/06/16/lobbyists-scramble-to-shape-imminent-syria-sanctions/

12www.politico.com/interactives/2017/politico-power-list/brian-ballard/

13www.state.gov/syria-caesar-act-designations/

 

Read more:

https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/archives/2020/no-14-7-july-2020/caesar-act-usa-wants-to-bring-syria-to-its-knees-by-tougher-sanctions.html

 

 

See toon at top.

 

 

 

“The U.S. policy vis-à-vis the International Criminal Court is based on an absolute, exclusionary, understanding of sovereignty that openly contradicts the United Nations Charter’s principle of ‘sovereign equality.’ The ‘absolutist’ interpretation of sovereignty has also been obvious in other areas such as the U.S. practice of extraterritorial sanctions. Though politically consistent, this approach is legally inconsistent when it comes to decisions of the United States in matters of international criminal justice.”

 

See also:

https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/archives/2020/no-14-7-july-2020/the-international-criminal-court-in-the-web-of-power-politics.html

yes, the west has left the syrians in the lurch...

There are many problems with this “opinionated” report from DW. More about this later. First what they say:

Opinion: Europe and the US have completely failed Syria


Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has been in power for 20 years. This is largely thanks to support from Russia and Iran but also because the West has left Syria in the lurch, says DW's Rainer Sollich.


From his point of view, Bashar al-Assad can be proud of his 20 years in power so far. He was able to crack down on the democratic uprising of 2011 — Syria's "Arab Spring" — and thanks to massive military help from Russia and Iran he has effectively won the ensuing civil war. His opponents, who now boil down to a few Islamist militias, only control small parts of the country.

Furthermore, the West has decided that compared to "Islamic State" (IS) and other terrorist militias, which paraded their cruel and brutal practices in spectacular fashion, he is the lesser evil. Western governments and observers have stopped calling for his resignation. And though it found many sympathizers in Europe and the US at first, the democratic opposition has now been marginalized. Assad can count this as one of his achievements too.

The West has left Syrians in the lurch

But the fact that the president is more firmly in the saddle than ever has less to do with him than with Russia and Iran, as well as the West's failure.

The US under President Donald Trump is much more concerned with itself and has been gradually making a strategic withdrawal from the region, despite occasional about-turns. Trump's predecessor Barack Obama had already shown how ridiculous the West's Syria policy was when he did not act upon his threat to intervene militarily if the Assad regime crossed the "line" and used chemical weapons.

Read more: https://www.dw.com/en/opinion-europe-and-the-us-have-completely-failed-syria/a-54207984


Going backwards through the arguments, one can state:

— It has not been proven that Assad used chemical weapons as many of the called incidents had been staged by the White Helmets whose founder was “found dead” after having written a note explaining how his organisation was stealing moneys from donors. 

— We don’t know if his death, le Mesurier, was an accident, a suicide or if the geezer had been pushed as not to reveal that the White Helmets was a sham, designed to stage terrorists using chemical weapons, organise rescues and blame Assad.

— Barak Obama was responsible for having financed “moderate rebels” against Assad. The “Arab Spring” was organised by the UK secret services to destabilise the Middle East and African leaders. hence the destruction of Libya by the UK, USA and France, because Gaddafi was not going to move (against the tiny uprising of his people). 

— The “Arab Spring”was designed to shift countries controlled by the Shia into the hands of the Wahhabis/Sunnis/Saudis. Nothing else. Why? Because the Shia communities are mostly aligned with the “evil” Russians, while the most ruthless family of full-blown-sadists, the Saudis, are aligned with the US. 

Russia (Putin) saw the trick. His country had been in turmoil when the European and the US (under Bill Clinton) savaged Yugoslavia under some false flag pretext. He was still rebirthing the Russian economy that had been hit by the GFC when NATO demolished Libya. Putin was not going to let Syria fall like the others

And yes, the West has left the Syrians in the lurch… By imposing a Caesar sanction regime on Syria, the US and their lackeys — the Europeans — are thus leaving the Syrians in the crap… The Caesar sanctions are based on one reporter’s views and photographs that made the press a few years back… The US (and their Sunni/Daesh/alQaeda terrorists) having been mostly “defeated” in Syria, are now stealing the oil of that country, while making sure the Syrian suffer more hardship with sanctions. This is disgusting... 

This is disgusting…
THIS IS DISGUSTING!
THIS IS DISGUSTING


We expect better from the old German DW… Meanwhile the treatment of Assange by the US, and its earthworm minion the UK, is completely immoral and sadistic.

Read from top.