Tag Archives: United States

Mali Begins to Form New Government

Mali’s first post-war Prime Minster began to form a new government as both France and the United States pledged their support and gave an early vote of confidence to the new administration.  Oumar Tatm Ly, who was named as head of President Ibrahim Boubacar Keita’s government last week, will be taking over the role from interim premier Diango Cissoko.  The newly appointed Prime MInister will be expected to deliver the promises put forth by the President, which include reuniting a deeply divided nation and cracking down on corruption.  Following the selection of the new Prime Minister, Mali’s new administration received a significant boost on Friday when the US State Department indicated that Washington would resume development aid to Mali, which had been suspended after the ex-president was ousted in a coup last year.  A statement released by the State Department indicated that the transition means “a democratically elected government has taken office in Mali,” adding that Washington would continue to assess the situation prior to renewing military assistance.  US support of the new administration came shortly after French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius welcomed Ly’s appointment.  In a statement released by his office, Mr. Fabius stated that “alongside President Ibrahim Boubacar Keita, the competence of Oumar Tatam Ly will be a valuable asset in confronting the challenges facing Mali and the Sahel,” adding that “as Mali opens a new page, it can count on France, which will be its partner, ally and friend.”  The newly appointed Prime Minister has spent most of the last two decades as a central bank functionary and is therefore expected to rely on advisers who have greater political experience.  He will also be responsible for selecting colleagues for a cabinet that has been charged with returning stability to a country that was upended by a military coup and Islamist insurgency last year.  While Mr. Ly began consultations with potential ministers immediately after being appointed to the post on Thursday, officials have not indicated who was in consideration for the major portfolios.  Born in Paris, France, Mr. Ly quickly became a promising academic, gaining degrees in history and economics from a number of prestigious French universities, including the Sorbonne, and ESSEC, which is one of Europe’s top business schools.  He began his career at the World Bank before moving via the general secretariat of the president of Mali to the Central Bank of West African States in 1994.  He rose to become national director for Mali and then adviser to the governor.  While he has never held high public office, Mr. Ly comes from a family that has been deeply involved in West African politics and is considered to be a close confidante of the current president.

Tagged as: France, Laurent Fabius, Mali, Oumar Tatm Ly, United States

Russia’s Proposition to Syrian Regime Seen as a Stalling Tactic

Days after the conclusion of the G20 Summit in Saint Petersburg, where global leaders remained divided on the Syrian crisis, Russia has urged Syria to put its chemical weapons stockpiles under international control in an attempt to avoid US military strikes.  Meanwhile the United States has warned that this recent diplomatic initiative made by Russia may be a form of stalling US air strikes.  The announcement of a proposed destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons comes one day after two foreign hostages were freed after being held captive for five months in Syria.

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has announced that an offer to destroy chemical weapons stockpiles was made during talks with his Syrian counterpart, Walid Muallem, who welcomed the initiative.  During talks that were held in Moscow, Mr. Lavrov stated that he had urged Mr. Muallem to “not only agree on placing chemical weapons storage sites under international control, but also on their subsequent destruction.” He also indicated that once this plan is approved and completed, Syria should fully join the Chemical Weapons Conventions.  In response to the proposal, Mr. Muallem indicated that Syria has welcomed Russia’s initiative and has praised its officials for “attempting to prevent American aggression against our people.”

Shortly after Russia’s announcement, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon also called for the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons in internationally supervised safe zones.  During a brief meeting with journalists on Monday, Mr. Ban told reporters that he may propose the zones to the UN Security Council if UN inspectors confirm that such banned weapons were in fact used.  He further noted that such a decision may also aid the Security Council’s “embarrassing paralysis” over the Syrian crisis.  While the UN’s leader has welcomed Russia’s proposal, and has urged Syria to “agree to these proposals,” adding that there would be “very swift action” by the international community to ensure that the stocks are destroyed, he warned that “first and foremost Syria must agree positively to this.”  In turn, Mr. Ban stipulated that if UN inspectors confirm the use of sarin gas in an August 21 attack, the Security Council would have no choice but to act.

Currently a UN team, which is led by Swedish expert Ake Sellstrom, is working on a report on whether chemical arms, which are banned under international law, were used in the August 21 attack that occurred near Damascus.  If the use is confirmed by the team, then according to Mr. Ban, “this would be an abominable crime, and the international community would certainly have to do something about it.”  Officials in Britain, France and the United States have already stated that Assad’s forces carried out the attack in which more than 1,400 people died.

Meanwhile the United States on Monday indicated that while it would take a “hard look” at Russia’s plan for Syria to hand over its chemical weapons, US officials expressed skepticism over the credibility of the initiative.  Deputy State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf stated that “we’ll look at this new development, we’ll take a hard look at it,” cautioning that “clearly we don’t want this as I said, to be another stalling tactic.  The Russians for months and years have stood up for the Syrian regime at the UN and in the international community.”  In turn, Ben Rhodes, a US deputy national security advisor, indicated that despite Russia’s proposal, Washington would not ease pressure on President Bashar al-Assad’s regime.  During an interview, he stipulated that the US “will just have to follow up with them and with other countries going forward to assess the seriousness of this proposal,” adding that “at the same time, it is going to be very important that we don’t take the pressure off.”

UK Prime Minister David Cameron has also stated that a destruction of the weapons would be a “huge step forward,” however he warned that such a proposition should not be used as a “distraction tactic.”

Assad’s Warning to US

Meanwhile Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad recently gave an interview to US network PBS in which he warned the US against any military intervention, cautioning that the Middle East was “on the bring of explosion,” and that the US would “…pay the price if you’re not wise with dealing with terrorists.  There are going to be repercussions.”  During the interview, Mr. Assad also stated that the US “should expect everything.  The government is not the only player in this region.  You have different parties, different factions, different ideologies.  You have everything in this decision now.”  The Syrian leader however did not specify whether or not his comments were a threat that Syrian backed groups, such as Hezbollah, would launch retaliation attacks, or whether the comments were a warning that such strikes would bolster al-Qaeda-linked groups.  He also denied that he was responsible for the chemical weapons attack, adding that there was “no evidence” to hold his government responsible for the 21 August attack.

Hostages Freed From Syria

On Monday, freed Italian journalist Domenico Quirico and Belgian teacher Pierre Piccinin spoke about the “very tough” conditions they lived through while being held hostage for five months in Syria.  The two men, who were released on Sunday, stated that during the five-month kidnap ordeal, they had been subjected to violence, humiliation and mock executions.  While both men indicated that they had overheard their captors discussing a possible rebel involvement in a poison-gas attack near Damascus, Mr. Quirico stated that they had no way of verifying the information.  Although minimal details have emerged in regards to the circumstances of the ordeal, reports indicate that Italy’s secret services had stepped up its efforts in order to secure their freedom ahead of the possible US military strikes.

A gaunt and tired Quirico and a heavily bearded Piccinin were first seen late on Sunday after stepping off an Italian government plane in Rome.  They later stated that “we are okay despite the torture suffered,” adding that “there was sometimes real violence…humiliation, bullying mock executions, Domenico faced two mock executions, with a revolver.”

According to a statement made by Mr. Quirico, he and Mr. Piccinin were initially picked up in April by the Western-backed Free Syrian Army who then handed them over to the Abu Ammar brigade.  The veteran reporter further noted that “the first days we were blindfolded.  There were maybe three groups that handled us…the conditions in which we were held were very tough from the start.  We were given food at best once a day.”  Although the two men tried to escape twice, once while their captors were at prayer, the were tracked down after two days and “seriously punished.”

Mr. Quirico has also been quoted as casting doubts on claims made by Mr. Piccinin relating to an alleged conversation they overheard about the alleged rebel role in the use of chemical weapons.  Mr. Quirico has stated that “from a room where we were being held and through a half-open door one day we overheard a conversation in English via Skype involving three people whose identities I do not know,” further stating that “in the conversation, they were saying that the gas operations in two suburbs of Damascus was carried out by rebels as a provocation to force the West to intervene military.”  He has since indicated that he is not able to say whether or not this conversation was based on real facts or on hearsay.  In turn, a source close to the Belgian government has indicated that Mr. Piccinin’s comments “engage only him personally.”

Concerns on the part of Italian authorities had mounted as the possibility of US-led air strikes on Syria increased.  However in the wake of the release of these two men, media rights watchdog Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF) has stated that thirteen journalists are still missing in Syria.  Amongst the kidnapped are two French journalists, Didier Francois and Edouard Elias, and US journalist James Foley.  Italy is also still attempting to free another one of its nationals who has been missing in Syria since July.  Father Paolo Dall’Oglio, a Jesuit priest who has lived in Syria for a number of years.

Syrian Crisis Dominates the G20 Summit in Russia, Where World Leaders Remained Divided

World leaders meeting at the G20 Summit in Russia remained divided over military action in Syria.  The Syrian crisis, and prospect of military action, has overshadowed the official agenda of the summit, which was intended to focus on the world’s top economies and emerging markets in order to stimulate growth and battle tax avoidance.  While talks on Syria dominated the first day of the summit, it was not immediately clear if the leaders would have another chance to discuss the issue on the summit’s second day or if the main session would focus on purely economic issues.  What does remain clear is that tensions between the United States and Russia have reached a new low.

Despite not being on the original agenda of the summit, which is hosted by Russian President Vladimir Putin in Saint Petersburg, global leaders discussed the Syria crisis over a working dinner on Thursday, which lasted into the early morning hours.  However there was no breakthrough during the dinner as leaders, including US President Barack Obama, presented their positions on the Syria crisis.  The discussions, which failed to bridge the divisions over US plans which are seeking military action against the Syrian regime, also confirmed the extent of global divisions on the issue.  A Kremlin spokesman was quoted as saying that “some states were defending the view the rushed measures should be taken, overlooking legitimate international institutions.  Other states appealed not to devalue international law and not to forget that only the UN Security Council has the right to decide on using force.”  While a high-ranking source close to the talks indicated that there was a disappointing lack of ambition at the dinner on the Syria issue, noting that Putin as host was keen not to aggravate tensions further, a French diplomatic source highlighted that while discussions indicated a sharp divide amongst the leaders, the overall objective of the dinner “was an exchange between the top world leaders and not to come to an agreement.”  Outside of the summit, several Western states share Mr. Putin’s opposition to military action, and after last week’s vote in the British parliament, which resulted in the UK government voting against strikes, France is the only power to have vowed that it will join American intervention if US officials go ahead with military action.

Mr. Putin has emerged as one of the most inflexible critics of military action against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, which has been accused of allegedly using chemical weapons in an attack that was carried out on 21 August.  Putin’s comments that any move without the UN’s blessing would be an aggression, remained unchanged throughout the Summit.  China also insists that any action without the UN would be illegal.

Meanwhile on Friday, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon warned that military strikes could spark further sectarian violence in the country which he said is suffering from a humanitarian crisis “unprecedented” in recent history, adding that “I must warn that ill-considered military action could cause serious and tragic consequences, and with an increased threat of further sectarian violence.”  The UN is also appealing for more aid for the estimated two million Syrians who have fled their country, in which another 4.25 million are internally displaced.  UK Prime Minister David Cameron announced on Friday that the UK would provide an additional £52 million (US $80 million) in aid for Syrian, in which much of it will go towards medical training and equipment in order to help those civilians who have been targeted by chemical attacks.

Congress To Vote On Syria Ahead of Russian G20 Summit

Amidst ongoing debates in the United States pertaining to possible military action against Syria, Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned America and its allies against taking one-sided action in Syria.  Ahead of the G20 Summit, which is set to begin in Saint Petersburg on Thursday, the Russian President also indicated that he would not exclude Russia from agreeing to a possible US-led military strike on Syria, as long as it was proven that Syria’s regime had carried out the August 21 attack.  While the G20 summit is suppose to concentrate on the global economy, it is highly likely that the Syrian crisis will dominate the discussions amongst global leaders.

Speaking during a wide-ranging interview with The Associated Press and Russia’s state Channel 1 television, Putin’s remarks come just one day after members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee agreed on a draft resolution backing the use of US military force.  According to the draft resolution, the operation would be restricted to a “limited and tailored use of the United States Armed Forces against Syria,” and ban the use of any ground forces.  The measure, which will be voted on next week, sets a time limit of sixty days on any operation.

While US President Barack Obama has called for punitive action in response to an alleged chemical attack that was carried out on the outskirts of Damascus on 21 August, President Putin stated on Wednesday that any military strikes without the approval of the United Nations would be a form of “an agreession.”  The Russian President further noted that while his country had not ruled out supporting a UN Security Council resolution that would authorize the use of force, it would have to be proved “beyond doubt” that the Syrian goverment used chemical weapons before such a mission would be launched.  In relation to the Syrian regime’s use of chemical weapons, Putin noted that it was “ludicrous” that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, an ally of Russia, would use chemical weapons at a time when it was gaining ground against the rebels.  However the Russian President did specify that “if there is evidence that chemical weapons were used, and by the regular army…then this evidence must be presented to the UN Security Council.  And it must be convincing,” adding that Russia would “be ready to act in the most decisive and serious way” if there was clear proof of what weapons were used and who used them but that at the moment, it is “too early” to discuss what Russia would do if America took action without a UN resolution.  During the interview, Putin also confirmed that Russia has currently suspended delivering further components of S-300 air defence missile systems to Syria, adding that “if we see steps are taken that violate the existing international norms, we shall think how we should act in the future, in particular regarding supplies of such sensitive weapons to certain regions of the world.

Ahead of next week’s vote in Congress, on whether to back President Obama’s push for military strikes in Syria, Secretary of State John Kerry appeared on Tuesday before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in order to promote the Obama administration’s case.  During his discussions, Kerry indicated that there was evidence “beyond any reasonable doubt” that the forces of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime prepared for a chemical weapons attack near Damascus on 21 August.  He further indicated to senators that while the President was not requesting that America go to war, “he is asking only for the power to make clear, to make certain, that the United States means what we say.”  US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and top US military officers Gen. Martin Dempsey also appeared before the Senate panel.  While a number of high profile officials, including Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner, and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger support Obama’s call for military action in Syria, the latest opinion polls in the US indicate that public opposition with respect to US involvement in the conflict is growing, with six out of ten Americans opposed to missile strikes.

Internationally, France, which is due to debate the issue on Wednesday in Parliament, has also strongly back the US plan for military action.  On Tuesday, French President Francois Hollande stated that “when a chemical massacre takes place, when the world is informed of it, when the evidence is delivered, when the guilty parties are known, then there must be an answer.”  While Hollande is under no obligation to obtain parliamentary approval for action, with public opinion deeply sceptical of military strikes, many lawmakers have called for a vote on the matter.  While UK Prime Minister David Cameron had also backed the military action, the British parliament had voted against a resolution on military action.  With the UK against the military action, the US is seeking other allies.

While the world debates possible military action in Syria, the conflict, which began in March 2011, has resulted in more than 100,000 people thought to have died since the uprising aginast President Assad.  On Tuesday, the UN refugee agency indicated that more than two million Syrians were now registered as refugees, indicating that a further 4.25 million have been displaced within the country.

Russia – US Relations

After returning to the Kremlin for a third term as president last year, relations between Russia and the US have dramatically deteriorated as the two nations have disagreed over a number of issues which have included the Syrian crisis and human rights.  Tensions  peaked this summer after Moscow gave asylum to US intelligence leaker Edward Snowden, which prompted President Obama to cancel his planned bilateral visit to Moscow ahead of the G20 summit.  While Putin did admit that he was disappointed by Obama’s decision, he did note that the move was not a “catastrophe” and that he understood that some of Moscow’s decisions did not sit well within the US administration.

Although no official bilateral meeting is planned to take place between Obama and Putin at the G20 Summit, a White House official indicated on Wednesday that the two presidents are expected “to have an opportunity to speak on the margins of the various meetings of the G20.”

UK Drafts Syria UN Resolution as the World Debates the Possible Intervention

The United Kingdom announced this week that it will put forth a resolution to the United Nations Security Council on Wednesday “authorizing necessary measures to protect civilians” in Syria.  The move comes after intelligence reports indicated that chemical weapons were likely used by the Assad regime against civilians in Syria.  During an emergency cabinet meeting on Wednesday, the UK’s Prime Minister stated that the “world should not stand by” after the “unacceptable use” of chemical weapons by the Syrian government.  The Syrian government has denied any involvement in the suspected chemical attack which was carried out in Damascus on 21 August.  Instead, the regime blames the attack, which resulted in hundreds of people dying, on the opposition.

According to UK Prime Minister David Cameroon, the draft resolution, which will condemn the “chemical weapons attack by Assad,” will be put forward during a meeting of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council which will be held in New York later on Wednesday.  The Prime Minister also indicated that “we’ve always said we want the UN Security to live up to its responsibilities on Syria.  Today they have an opportunity to do that.”  If such an intervention is passed through a UN resolution, it is likely that the United States, France and the UK, along with other regional and international states, will be involved.  Furthermore, the UK, the US and France already have the necessary forces and military equipment stationed in the region which could be diverted to focus on the intervention in Syria.

The announcement of a possible intervention comes as a team of UN weapons inspectors resumed their work on Wednesday, investigating a suspected chemical weapons attack that occurred in Damascus on 21 August.  It currently remains unclear which districts the inspectors were scheduled to visit.  Their work had previously been called because of security concerns after they were shot at by unidentified snipers on Monday.  According to UN officials, one of their cars came under fire from unidentified gunmen as it crossed the buffer zone between the government and rebel-controlled areas.  With their work resuming, and with pressure for an international intervention mounting, Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has appealed for the team to be given “time to do its job,” citing that the UN inspectors would require another four days in order to complete their probe and that more time would be needed in order analyze their findings.  He also called on the Council’s permanent members, China France, Russia, the UK and the US, to act together, stating that “the body interested with maintaining international peace and security cannot be ‘missing in action’…the council must at least find the unity to act.  It must use its authority for peace.”  Meanwhile joint UN-Arab League envoy to Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, has stated that “it does seem clear that some kind of substance was used…that killed a lot of people” on 21 August.  However the envoy emphasized that any military action in Syria would require the UN Security Council’s authorization.

Possible Models for an Intervention in Syria 

Although limited information pertaining to the draft resolution is currently available, signals from Washington and London over the past few days suggest that military action against Syria is a strong possibility.  If the resolution is passed, over the following weeks, contingency plans will be drawn and potential target lists will be reviewed.  However a number of models for the possible intervention in Syria already exist, and will likely aid officials in narrowing down their options.

Codenamed Operation Desert Storm, also known as the Gulf War, the 1991 US-led global military coalition in Iraq was tasked with removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait.  Today, the mission is considered as a perfect case study in international intervention as it had clear and limited objectives, was fully anchored in international law and had an explicit mandate from the UN Security Council.  The Balkans during the 1990’s in which US supplied arms to the anti-Serb resistance in Croatia and Bosnia in defiance of a UN-mandated embargo.  A US-led air campaign against Serb paramilitaries was later carried out.

In December 1992, in response to a humanitarian disaster which was followed by the complete failure of the Somali state, the UN Security Council authorized the creation of an international force with the aim of facilitating humanitarian supplies.  Although initially the US was not involved, Americans gradually began to contribute to the operation in Somalia.

However the US military’s involvement without a clear objective culminated in the 1993 Battle of Mogadishu, also known as Black Hawk Down, in which eighteen US servicemen died on 3 – 4 October.  The tragedy had an immediate impact on American public opinion and resulted in US troops withdrawing from Somalia despite the civil war continuing.  While elements of this model were not used in any future interventions, the mission coupled with the lack of a clear objective has become a classic example of how not to conduct an international operation.

In 2011, France and the UK sought UN Security Council authorization for a humanitarian operation to save the residents of the rebel city of Benghazi from being massacred by forces loyal to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.  Russia and China abstained by did not veto the resolution.  An air offensive continued until the fall of Gaddafi.

Western Military Options 

Western leaders will be faced with a number of military options that range from a short, sharp punitive strike against targets in Syria to a full-scale intervention to end the country’s civil war.  This option would involve both on-the-ground troops and air forces.  With long-lasting military commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan, coupled with the recent French-led military intervention in Mali, Western leaders will likely be inclined to focus on a short but deadly strike in Syria, fearing that a full-scale operation may result in Western forces being drawn into an open-ended military commitment.

An unclassified assessment of the military options as seen by the Pentagon was released in mid-July in a detailed letter to Senator Carl Levin that was written by Gen Martin Dempsey.  In the letter, Gen Dempsey lists a number of options that may be used if an intervention in Syria becomes possible.

The first option involves punitive strikes which would aim to get President Assad’s attention in a bid to persuade him not to resort to the use of chemical weapons in the future.  The attraction of this option is that it could be mounted quickly and would result in limited risk to the forces that are involved.  Possible targets in such a mission could include military sites that are linked closely to the region, including headquarters, barracks or elite units.  Although missile production facilities may be targeted, increased caution would have to be exercised if striking chemical weapons production facilities as any leakage of toxic chemicals could lead to significant damages in the area.  In turn, air defense sites and command centers may be hit as a demonstration of the West’s capabilities.

The second option would be to increase support for the Syrian opposition through training and advice.  This option would involve the use of non-lethal force and would effectively be an extension of some of the effort that has already been underway.  At its current scale, this option has already failed as the opposition has seen a growing number of divisions.  It is therefore unlikely that an increase in aid would have any effect.  A third option would be to establish a “no-fly zone,” that would effectively prevent the Syrian regime from using its air forces to strike rebels on the ground.  This option however would involve an increased risk to the US and allied aircraft and it would require the assembling of a significant force, one that would have to be maintained over time.

The fourth option is to focus on preventing the use of chemical weapons, which could be done by destroying portions of Syria’s stockpiles coupled with obstructing the movement of such weapons and seizing key installations.  This option however would result in an increased international involvement, including troops stationed on the ground.  This would also result in forces being stationed in Syria for an indefinite period.

While these are currently just options, and combinations of these varying options may be employed in Syria, what does remain clear is that if a resolution is passed by the UN Security Council, swift action is likely to occur.  Furthermore, the United States, France and the UK already have forces available in the area that can easily be prepared for a strike on Syria.

The US has four destroyers – USS Gravely, USS Ramage, USS Barry and USS Mahan – stationed in the eastern Mediterranean which are equipped with cruise missiles.  It also has two aircraft carriers, the USS Nimitz and the USS Harry S. Truman.  Cruise missiles could also be launched from submarines in the region.  If more firepower is needed, US airbases in Incirlik and Izmir, Turkey could also be used in order to carry out strikes.  The US Navy is reportedly re-positioning several vessels, including its four cruise missile-carrying destroyers and possibly a missile-firing submarine.

The UK’s Royal Navy’s response force task group, which includes helicopter carrier HMS Illustrious and frigates HMS Montrose and HMS Westminster, is also in the region on a previously-scheduled deployment.  An airbase in Cyprus may also be used while cruise missiles could be launched from a British Trafalgar class submarine.

France’s aircraft carrier, the Charles de Gaulle, is currently stationed in Toulon however Raffale and Mirage aircraft can operate from the Al-Dhahra airbase in the UAE.