Damascus: Syria's Urban Warfare At Its Worst

US Rejects Syria's Weapons Deadline

Updated: 10:55pm UK, Thursday 12 September 2013

US Secretary of State John Kerry has rejected Syria's pledge to hand over information on its chemical weapons in 30 days.

Speaking at a news conference with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, he noted that it was standard procedure for a country to submit its weapons data a month after signing an international chemical weapons ban.

But he said: "There is nothing standard about this process. The words of the Syrian regime in our judgement are simply not enough."

He warned that the US could still launch a military strike if Syria's President Bashar al Assad reneged on his promises, and said the US was wary of any stalling process.

"There ought to be consequences if it doesn't take place," he warned.

Mr Lavrov, who addressed the briefing first, said: "The solution of this problem makes unnecessary any strikes on Syria. I am sure that our American partners ... are strongly in favour of a peaceful way to regulate chemical weapons in Syria."

Earlier, Mr Assad agreed to sign up to an international agreement that would put his weapons under UN supervision - and said he would hand over information on them in 30 days.

"Syria is placing its chemical weapons under international control because of Russia. The US threats did not influence the decision," he said in the interview with Russian state TV.

Mr Kerry is in Geneva for high-stakes talks with Mr Lavrov to discuss Russia's four-point plan to place Syria's chemical stockpile under international control.

He arrived some hours ago before Mr Lavrov.

Sky's Robert Nisbet, in Geneva, said Mr Lavrov's delay was "embarrassing" for the US and showed Russia has the diplomatic upper hand in the talks.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague said the plan faced "immense practical difficulties", although obstacles could be overcome "with sufficient international unity and goodwill".

He warned the initiative would require a "complete change of approach" by the Assad regime.

The Russian plan was met with a "definitive rejection" by Salim Idriss, head of the rebel Supreme Military Council, while Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan said the Syrian regime had "won time for new massacres".

The first stage of the four-point plan has already been fulfilled - with Syria sending a letter to the UN signing up to the Chemical Weapons Convention, which bans the development, production, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons.

The second stage is for Syria to declare what chemical weapons it has. The third is for UN inspectors to visit the country and verify Mr Assad's declaration, and the last stage is for the weapons to be destroyed - either in Syria or abroad.

Meanwhile, Russia's Moskva missile cruiser has reportedly passed through the Straits of Gibraltar and is now heading toward the eastern Mediterranean to assume command of the seven-strong Russian naval force there.

Another two vessels, the landing ship Nikolay Filchenkov and the guard ship Smetlivy, will join the naval unit later, Russia Today added.

The recent deployments are aimed at "complex monitoring" of the situation around Syria, military sources told the Interfax news agency.

The talks between Mr Kerry and Mr Lavrov follow Russian President Vladimir Putin's warning that a US attack on Syria without UN approval would result in more innocent victims and an escalation in violence in the Middle East.

Writing in the New York Times, he said there is "every reason to believe" it was rebel forces, not the Assad regime, who used sarin nerve gas in an attack that killed more than 1,000 people in Damascus on August 21.

He said a strike would "increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism" and claimed America would increasingly be seen "not as a model for democracy but as relying solely on brute force".

White House spokesman Jay Carney said there was "great irony" in Mr Putin placing his opinion piece in the New York Times. He said it reflected a freedom of speech in the US that Russia lacks.

Dr Anna Neistat, an associate director of Human Rights Watch, said: "There is not a single mention in Mr Putin's article ... of the egregious crimes committed by the Syrian government ... (including) deliberate and indiscriminate killings of tens of thousands of civilians, executions, torture, enforced disappearances and arbitrary arrests."

18.46 | 0 komentar | Read More

Syria: Russia And US Push For New Peace Talks

The US Secretary Of State says America and Russia are "committed to working together" to solve the Syrian crisis and have agreed to push for a peace conference aimed at ending the war.

John Kerry and his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov are holding a second day of talks in Geneva where they are working on a plan to remove Syria's chemical weapons and avert American military action.

They held discussions this morning with UN envoy Lakhdar Brahimi before the main meeting.

After the talks, Mr Kerry said the US and Russia agreed to meet again in New York later this month to try to set a date for a long-delayed peace conference.

"We are committed to trying to work together, beginning with this initiative on the chemical weapons, in hopes that those efforts could pay off and bring peace and stability to a war-torn part of the world," Mr Kerry told a joint news briefing.

But he said the chances for a peace conference "will obviously depend on the capacity to have success here...on the subject of the chemical weapons."

L to R: Mr Lavrov, Mr Brahimi and Mr Kerry

The peace talks, first proposed during Mr Kerry's visit to Moscow earlier this year, have failed so far to materialise, while the fighting on the ground in Syria has intensified.

But the issue of chemical weapons was set to dominate the day, after Syria earlier applied to join the Chemical Weapons Convention.

The treaty bans the production, use and stockpiling of chemical weapons, but Syria's opposition National Coalition said it was "deeply sceptical" about the move.

"Such a gesture comes as too little, too late to save civilians from the regime's murderous intent and is clearly an attempt to evade international action as well as accountability in front of the Syrian people," the umbrella group said.

However Russia, Iran and China have welcomed Syria's decision to join the treaty.

The Syrian leader said US threats must stop if he is to give up weapons

"I would like to express hope that it will be a very serious step on the path to solving the Syrian crisis," Russian leader Vladimir Putin said.

The UN also welcomed Syria's move - the first stage of a four-point plan -  but said that it could take 30 days for it to become a member.

Syrian President Bashar al Assad has also said the process of surrendering the stockpile would begin when he hands over information on the weapons in 30 days.

However, the US has firmly rejected that timetable and wants more immediate action.

Mr Kerry said despite 30 days being normal procedure, Syria's words were "simply not enough".

"There is nothing standard about this process," he added.

Supporters of Mr Assad celebrated his birthday earlier this week

America's top diplomat is wary of any stalling tactics and said there could still be military strikes if the Syrian regime reneged on its promises.

"There ought to be consequences if it doesn't take place," Mr Kerry warned at a news conference.

Mr Assad managed to avert potential US strikes by agreeing to the deal, but denied being influenced by the military threat.

"Syria is placing its chemical weapons under international control because of Russia. The US threats did not influence the decision," the Syrian leader told Russian state TV.

After agreeing to the Chemical Weapons Convention, Syria must then declare exactly what weapons it has.

The third stage of the plan is for UN inspectors to visit the country and verify Mr Assad's declaration. The final stage is for the weapons to be destroyed.

Fierce conventional warfare continues in Damascus

The US claims a chemical gas attack on August 21 killed 1,429 people, but other estimates of the deaths are lower.

Syria and Russia blame the country's rebel forces for the atrocity.

The political wrangling comes as conventional fighting - such as rocket attacks and gun battles - continues in many of Syria's devastated towns and cities.

For those on the ground it is this type of warfare that is ripping the country apart.

"The reality is conventional weapons killed hundreds of thousands and made many millions of refugees," one soldier told Sky correspondent Alex Rossi, who is in Damascus.

"Nobody talks about that - only the use of chemicals."

Fighting in the northern city of Aleppo also remains as fierce as ever.

Government forces, bolstered by Hizbollah troops from neighbouring Lebanon, are ramping up their attack on the opposition stronghold.

The two-and-a-half-year civil war has claimed more than 100,000 lives and created more than two million refugees, according to recent UN figures.

18.46 | 0 komentar | Read More

Russia: Luka Hospital Fire Leaves 37 Dead

A fire has swept through a psychiatric hospital in northwest Russia, killing 37 people.

The blaze in the village of Luka in the country's Novgorod region broke out just before dawn.

Officials are investigating whether a male patient allegedly seen smoking inside the building started the fire deliberately by setting his bed alight.

The 19th century building had been due to close next year

The man, who was one of about 60 people inside the building at the time, survived, according to state television channel Rossiya 24.

The blaze engulfed the majority of the hospital's mostly wooden structure, which dates back to the 1800s.

The charred remains of the hospital, where 37 people died

Officials had warned the facility was unsafe and had called for it to be closed but hospital administrators won permission to use it until 2014.

It is the second fatal fire at a Russian psychiatric hospital this year.

Luka is a small town in the Novgorod region of northwest Russia

In April, a fire at a facility outside Moscow killed 38 people and prompted criticism of the state over the care of mentally ill patients.

There have been many fires at state institutions such as hospitals, schools, drug treatment centres and homes for the disabled in the past decade, raising questions about safety measures, conditions and escape routes.

18.46 | 0 komentar | Read More

Pastor Terry Jones: 'Koran-Burning BBQ Plans'

A Florida pastor has been arrested before he planned to burn almost 3,000 copies of the Koran on the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.

Terry Jones, 61, was detained in the town of Mulberry, near Tampa, and faces charges of transporting fuel illegally and openly carrying a firearm.

Deputies said Jones had been riding in a pickup truck that was towing a trailer carrying a large barbecue-like grill filled with kerosene-soaked Korans.

Terry Jones soaked the Korans in kerosene

He also had extra bottles of the fuel inside the truck bed, the Orlando Sentinel reported.

Jones' planned public burning of the Muslim holy book came with tensions high in the Middle East, especially over Syria.

According to Jones' website, he had planned to burn 2,998 Korans in the Tampa Bay area on Wednesday, in recognition of victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Jones was arrested alongside Associate Pastor Marvin Sapp minutes before the scheduled burning, the Sentinel said.

As pastor of Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida, Jones in 2010 threatened to burn copies of the Koran, drawing widespread outrage.

He eventually called off the stunt.

In 2011, however, his congregation did burn the Muslim holy book and the following year he promoted an anti-Islam film.

All three incidents sparked violence in the Middle East and in Afghanistan.

18.46 | 0 komentar | Read More

Syria Crisis: Vladimir Putin's Letter To America

By Vladimir Putin, Russian President, for The New York Times

Recent events surrounding Syria have prompted me to speak directly to the American people and their political leaders. It is important to do so at a time of insufficient communication between our societies.

Relations between us have passed through different stages. We stood against each other during the Cold War. But we were also allies once, and defeated the Nazis together. The universal international organisation - the United Nations - was then established to prevent such devastation from ever happening again.

The United Nations' founders understood that decisions affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus, and with America's consent the veto by Security Council permanent members was enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The profound wisdom of this has underpinned the stability of international relations for decades.

No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military action without Security Council authorisation.

The potential strike by the United States against Syria, despite strong opposition from many countries and major political and religious leaders, including the Pope, will result in more innocent victims and escalation, potentially spreading the conflict far beyond Syria's borders.

A strike would increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism. It could undermine multilateral efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and further destabilise the Middle East and North Africa. It could throw the entire system of international law and order out of balance.

Syria is not witnessing a battle for democracy, but an armed conflict between government and opposition in a multireligious country. There are few champions of democracy in Syria. But there are more than enough Qaeda fighters and extremists of all stripes battling the government.

The United States State Department has designated Al Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, fighting with the opposition, as terrorist organisations. This internal conflict, fuelled by foreign weapons supplied to the opposition, is one of the bloodiest in the world.

Mercenaries from Arab countries fighting there, and hundreds of militants from Western countries and even Russia, are an issue of our deep concern. Might they not return to our countries with experience acquired in Syria? After all, after fighting in Libya, extremists moved on to Mali. This threatens us all.

From the outset, Russia has advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for their own future. We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law. We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today's complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos.

The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not. Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defence or by the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression.

No one doubts that poison gas was used in Syria. But there is every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian army, but by opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons, who would be siding with the fundamentalists. Reports that militants are preparing another attack - this time against Israel - cannot be ignored.

It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America's long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan "you're either with us or against us".

But force has proved ineffective and pointless. Afghanistan is reeling, and no one can say what will happen after international forces withdraw. Libya is divided into tribes and clans. In Iraq the civil war continues, with dozens killed each day. In the United States, many draw an analogy between Iraq and Syria, and ask why their government would want to repeat recent mistakes.

No matter how targeted the strikes or how sophisticated the weapons, civilian casualties are inevitable, including the elderly and children, whom the strikes are meant to protect.

The world reacts by asking: if you cannot count on international law, then you must find other ways to ensure your security. Thus a growing number of countries seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction. This is logical: if you have the bomb, no one will touch you. We are left with talk of the need to strengthen non-proliferation, when in reality this is being eroded.

We must stop using the language of force and return to the path of civilised diplomatic and political settlement.

A new opportunity to avoid military action has emerged in the past few days. The United States, Russia and all members of the international community must take advantage of the Syrian government's willingness to place its chemical arsenal under international control for subsequent destruction.

Judging by the statements of President Obama, the United States sees this as an alternative to military action.

I welcome the president's interest in continuing the dialogue with Russia on Syria. We must work together to keep this hope alive, as we agreed to at the Group of 8 meeting in Lough Erne in Northern Ireland in June, and steer the discussion back toward negotiations.

If we can avoid force against Syria, this will improve the atmosphere in international affairs and strengthen mutual trust. It will be our shared success and open the door to cooperation on other critical issues.

My working and personal relationship with President Obama is marked by growing trust. I appreciate this. I carefully studied his address to the nation on Tuesday. And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States' policy is "what makes America different. It's what makes us exceptional".

It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord's blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.

18.46 | 0 komentar | Read More

Syria: Weapons Plan Faces 'Immense' Challenges

Vladimir Putin's Letter To America

Updated: 8:42am UK, Thursday 12 September 2013

By Vladimir Putin, Russian President, for The New York Times

Recent events surrounding Syria have prompted me to speak directly to the American people and their political leaders. It is important to do so at a time of insufficient communication between our societies.

Relations between us have passed through different stages. We stood against each other during the Cold War. But we were also allies once, and defeated the Nazis together. The universal international organisation - the United Nations - was then established to prevent such devastation from ever happening again.

The United Nations' founders understood that decisions affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus, and with America's consent the veto by Security Council permanent members was enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The profound wisdom of this has underpinned the stability of international relations for decades.

No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military action without Security Council authorisation.

The potential strike by the United States against Syria, despite strong opposition from many countries and major political and religious leaders, including the Pope, will result in more innocent victims and escalation, potentially spreading the conflict far beyond Syria's borders.

A strike would increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism. It could undermine multilateral efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and further destabilise the Middle East and North Africa. It could throw the entire system of international law and order out of balance.

Syria is not witnessing a battle for democracy, but an armed conflict between government and opposition in a multireligious country. There are few champions of democracy in Syria. But there are more than enough Qaeda fighters and extremists of all stripes battling the government.

The United States State Department has designated Al Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, fighting with the opposition, as terrorist organisations. This internal conflict, fuelled by foreign weapons supplied to the opposition, is one of the bloodiest in the world.

Mercenaries from Arab countries fighting there, and hundreds of militants from Western countries and even Russia, are an issue of our deep concern. Might they not return to our countries with experience acquired in Syria? After all, after fighting in Libya, extremists moved on to Mali. This threatens us all.

From the outset, Russia has advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for their own future. We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law. We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today's complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos.

The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not. Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defence or by the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression.

No one doubts that poison gas was used in Syria. But there is every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian army, but by opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons, who would be siding with the fundamentalists. Reports that militants are preparing another attack - this time against Israel - cannot be ignored.

It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America's long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan "you're either with us or against us".

But force has proved ineffective and pointless. Afghanistan is reeling, and no one can say what will happen after international forces withdraw. Libya is divided into tribes and clans. In Iraq the civil war continues, with dozens killed each day. In the United States, many draw an analogy between Iraq and Syria, and ask why their government would want to repeat recent mistakes.

No matter how targeted the strikes or how sophisticated the weapons, civilian casualties are inevitable, including the elderly and children, whom the strikes are meant to protect.

The world reacts by asking: if you cannot count on international law, then you must find other ways to ensure your security. Thus a growing number of countries seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction. This is logical: if you have the bomb, no one will touch you. We are left with talk of the need to strengthen non-proliferation, when in reality this is being eroded.

We must stop using the language of force and return to the path of civilised diplomatic and political settlement.

A new opportunity to avoid military action has emerged in the past few days. The United States, Russia and all members of the international community must take advantage of the Syrian government's willingness to place its chemical arsenal under international control for subsequent destruction.

Judging by the statements of President Obama, the United States sees this as an alternative to military action.

I welcome the president's interest in continuing the dialogue with Russia on Syria. We must work together to keep this hope alive, as we agreed to at the Group of 8 meeting in Lough Erne in Northern Ireland in June, and steer the discussion back toward negotiations.

If we can avoid force against Syria, this will improve the atmosphere in international affairs and strengthen mutual trust. It will be our shared success and open the door to cooperation on other critical issues.

My working and personal relationship with President Obama is marked by growing trust. I appreciate this. I carefully studied his address to the nation on Tuesday. And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States' policy is "what makes America different. It's what makes us exceptional".

It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord's blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.

18.46 | 0 komentar | Read More

Will US Climb Down Russia's Ladder On Syria?

Much now depends on what happens when Sergei Lavrov meets John Kerry in Geneva on Thursday.

The Russian Foreign Minister can be expected to outline vague details of how Moscow's plan to disarm Syria of chemical weapons will work.

The US Secretary of State can be expected to press for a clear timeline and structure. They may then both emerge, separately, and give their versions of what has been achieved.

Both men must surely know that the Russian idea will probably never come to fruition, or if it does, will take months to get off the ground.

As discussed on Tuesday, the complexities of inserting hundreds of civilian scientists into a war zone are many.

However, if the White House is looking for a way not to bomb, but also to save face, the Russian construct of a diplomatic ladder to climb down will not be dismissed as the improbable scenario it is.

So, Lavrov will talk about UN committees, possible Russian oversight, potential ceasefires, knowing that will take time. Kerry will make noises about a UN Security Council Resolution nailing down the timeframe and details.

After that it depends how serious the Americans are about the resolution.

If they call Russia's bluff they will insist on a Chapter Seven Resolution (one backed by force), they will want the text to blame Assad for the August 21 chemical attack and they will want to include the words "serious consequences" for failure to comply - as that is the code for war.

The Americans, British and French all know that there is no way the Russians will accept such a resolution.

So if they press it, we will know that in a matter of weeks they will return to the threat of military action.

If they do not press it, if they water down the language, or allow the process to run into the thicket of committees at the UN, we will know that the Americans are taking the Russian ladder and climbing down it.

The White House has its limits. If the Russians overstretch and play too much hardball at the UN, if they publicly embarrass the US, then President Obama, who is keeping the war card in his back pocket,  might still turn round the perception that he has presided over a slow-motion diplomatic car crash.

18.46 | 0 komentar | Read More

Syria: Obama Cautious Over Weapons Deal

President Barack Obama has confirmed that a vote on air strikes against Syria is off - for now.

In an address to the nation he said he had asked Congress to postpone any decision on military action so a diplomatic solution could be pursued.

It came ahead the release of a UN report that confirmed at least eight massacres had been carried out in Syria by President Bashar Assad's regime and one by rebels over the past year and a half.

The UN commission investigating human rights abuses in Syria described the country as a battlefield where "massacres are perpetrated with impunity," and said said it was looking into nine more suspected mass killings since March.

Despite Mr Obama's decision to postpone the Congress vote, he said he remained cautious about Russia's plan for Syria to declare its chemical weapons - saying it was "too early to tell" if an agreement could be reached.

Towns and cities across Syria have been destroyed

He said the images and videos of men, women and children dying in the suspected gas attack by President Bashar al Assad's regime were sickening and demanded a response.

But speaking from the East Room in the White House, he said he had asked Congress to postpone a vote on action in Syria while the possibility of a diplomatic solution is pursued.

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al Moallem said the regime was ready to co-operate fully with the Russian proposal to put its chemical weapons under international control, and would stop producing more.

Secretary of State John Kerry will travel to Geneva to meet his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov on Thursday.

But Mr Obama has ordered the US military to maintain its current posture to keep the pressure on Mr Assad's regime should diplomacy fail.

"It is too early to tell whether this offer will succeed," he said. "And any agreement must verify that the Assad regime keeps its commitments. But this initiative has the potential to remove the threat of chemical weapons without the use of force."

Poison gas canisters

Mr Obama once again ruled out putting American "boots on the ground", but added that with "modest effort and risks", limited strikes could make Syria safer.

"A targeted strike can make Assad - or any other dictator - think twice about using chemical weapons," he said.

He accepted that many Americans were weary of military action after the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mr Obama said the limitations he was imposing on the potential strike would ensure against the US sliding down a slippery slope into another prolonged war.

"The purpose of this strike would be to deter Assad from using chemical weapons, to degrade his regime's ability to use them and to make clear to the world that we will not tolerate their use," he explained.

Mr Obama insisted the US was not the "world's policeman", but said when ideals, principles and security are at stake, his country must act.

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was quoted by state TV as saying: "We hope that the new US attitude toward Syria would be a serious policy and not a media campaign.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said he hoped the US was serious about its stance

"The latest developments, if they can be taken seriously, show that they (US and its allies) have stepped back from the inconsiderate and mistaken actions that they had taken in the past few weeks."

At the United Nations, Britain, France and the US discussed elements of a draft Security Council resolution that would include a timeline for Syria to declare the full extent of its poison gas arsenal and to cede control of it to the UN.

An official close to French president Francois Hollande, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said tense negotiations had begun on a proposed resolution.

They said Russia objected not only to making the resolution militarily enforceable, but also to blaming the Syrian government for the chemical attack on August 21 that sparked the recent crisis.

The official said Russia also refused to agree on a demand that those responsible for the attack be taken before an international criminal court.

Russian President Vladimir Putin previously insisted the handover of weapons would only work if the US rejected a use of force against Syria.

Sky's Moscow Corrrespondent, Katie Stallard, said: "Russia would be quite content for this now to get bogged down at the UN Security Council, because they are keenly aware here that there's a clock ticking down all the while, that President Obama is making his case for military action now.

"As long as the perception remains that there is a peaceful solution available, whether or not in the long term that is enforceable, they will be satisfied that is taking the wheels off his argument and the momentum behind the calls for military action."

18.46 | 0 komentar | Read More

Philippines: Hostages Used As Human Shield

Rebel fighters have used hostages as a human shield during a stand-off with security forces in the Philippines.

Dozens of citizens were tied together and positioned between the rebels and government soldiers in the port city of Zamboanga, as fighting entered a third day.

The hostages waved white flags and sheets, and shouted "please don't shoot" as snipers positioned on the roof of a residential block fired at troops around 500m away.

The rebels, who belong to a breakaway faction of the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF), have brought much of Zamboanga to a standstill.

Schools, shops and offices have been closed, and flights and ferry services suspended, while an estimated 12,000 people have been displaced.

Army spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Ramon Zagala said government soldiers were "not launching an offensive", adding: "Our troops are only returning fire."

"Our mission is to contain (the rebels), not to rescue hostages," he said.

The rebels are attempting to declare an independent state a year after opposing a deal between the Moro Islamic Liberation Front and the government.

That agreement led to a new autonomous region and gave the rival group more political control.

Isabelle Climaco Salazar, the mayor of Zamboanga, urged the rebels to free their hostages and agree to talks with the government.

"This is no longer a local problem, this is an international problem," she said.

18.46 | 0 komentar | Read More

Syria: Rebels Give US Targets To Defeat Regime

'Unorthodox' Attacks Point To Militia

Updated: 9:09am UK, Tuesday 10 September 2013

By Stuart Ramsay, Chief Correspondent

Not a single person I have met in northern Syria has even the slightest doubt that Bashar al Assad's military has used chemical weapons against them on multiple occasions.

Many now in the border areas are there exactly because they witnessed the attacks and decided not to stick about for another.

The Damascus incident last month and who did it can be argued about of course, but chemical weapons experts working with Sky News are in no doubt that chemicals were used and have been on multiple occasions in the past.

The experts, using evidence available to them, advise that the delivery of these weapons was unorthodox; the Syrian regime has proper delivery systems for chemicals.

But, setting aside the Damascus incident, they conclude that someone was "freelancing" their use in other attacks.

They suspect it was militia working in tandem with the government.

Part of their reasoning is that the purchasing, handling and preparation of chemical weapons is extremely difficult and dangerous.

In one incident that they have specific knowledge of, Syrian soldiers and chemical experts working with them were all killed when a chemical bearing warhead was accidentally dropped.

One can conclude from this that the Syrian government, at the very least, is actively involved in preparation of chemical weapon use.

It is reported in Turkish media that jihadists have been arrested either in possession of chemicals or attempting to buy them.

One can conclude from that, if it is true, that some extreme elements of the rebel movement would like chemical weapons as well.

But there is not a single piece of evidence indicating that rebels have used chemicals or practised using them.

Nobody from Sky News or any other broadcaster or journalist, as far as I am aware, has witnessed chemical weapons or their use by the rebels throughout this war.

But is this really the point here? Few Syrians really draw a distinction between 100,000 dead from conventional fighting and between 400 and 1,000 dead from chemicals.

They are all dead and most because of Mr Assad's determination to ignore calls for change and the end of his dictatorship.

Right now Assad's planes are attacking villages across the north of the country. I saw the jets and heard the explosions.

The Free Syrian Army, the civilian leadership of northern Syria and the vast numbers of internally displaced and refugees want the United States to bomb the Syrian military.

The FSA says 13 brigades in northern Aleppo will become one and will lead the fight to Damascus.

They are confident that the myriad of Jihadi groupings will set aside differences and join them.

All accept that the regime will retaliate and probably at a terrible cost to those who have stayed behind.

But as the governor of Aleppo said to me: "We fight on."

While Moscow plots to undermine action against its ally and Washington decides to plot or not against its President, there is one absolute fact beyond all sceptical analysis: the Syrian government continues to kill its own people. Every day.

18.46 | 0 komentar | Read More