massacre of peaceful protesters in Syria: the international community must act urgently
27 April, 2011
While negotiations are underway among the members of the United Nations Security Council about a possible statement on Syria, the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) has decided to convene a Special Session on the human rights situation in Syria on April 29, 2011.
The situation in Syria has taken a turn for the worse in an unprecedented way since the beginning of the protests. According to FIDH and its member organisation in Syria, the Damascus Center for Human Rights Studies (DCHRS), it has become obvious that international crimes – that fall under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) - are being perpetrated by the Syrian authorities that fully justifies the awakening of the International community. However violent crackdown against protesters by army and security forces is not a Syrian exception. Bahrain and Yemen are also the scene of fierce repressions. “It is highly regrettable that Bahrain’s and Yemeni victims are still waiting for such consideration by the members of the Human rights Council. A selective approach cannot be a sustainable solution in any case” Souhayr Belhassen added.
Facing a peaceful protest movement since March 16, 2011 the Syrian authorities have responded to these calls for reforms with increased violence. As the protests have spread, the response of the security forces has hardened, leading up to the deployment of tanks in several cities (Deraa, Homs, Jabla, Douma, Banyas etc.). The use of live ammunition by security forces against demonstrators has led to the deaths of around 400 people since mid-March and hundreds are missing and more than 1700 have been detained over the last three days(1).
The UN Security Council should refer the situation in Syria to the ICC and take other appropriate measures, such as individual sanctions to halt massive targeting of civilians by the authorities.
FIDH welcomes the Special Session of the UN Human Rights Council.
Syria: This is no time for double standards
May 1, 2011
As Canadians head to the polls, throughout North Africa and the Middle East millions of people have taken to the streets … demanding democratic change and human rights reform.
What a chance for Canada to play a key role. However, Canada’s role in shaping these unparalleled events and in standing firm for democracy and human rights has been uncertain at best.
It should be so clear. Canada should be at the forefront of ensuring that this ferment leads to the changes being demanded. Not so — the clarity of Canada’s positions and the strength of Canada’s reputation in the region have both faltered significantly. That is troubling. Yet none of this has received more than a passing nod in the course of the election.
When it comes to human rights, there can be no room for double standards. But there always is. Human rights violations in some countries garner weeks of media headlines. Equally grave tragedies elsewhere are ignored. Some situations make it to the pinnacle of international concern when the UN Security Council gets involved. Others barely make it onto any international agenda at all, either because the country at stake is too powerful or too inconsequential. Or the politics too complicated.
To date, the world’s tepid response, including Canada’s, to the rapidly mounting human rights crisis in Syria has reflected the very worst of these disgraceful double standards.
The past weeks of courageous protests in various Syrian cities have been unprecedented. In a country ground down by decades of relentless repression, the bravery of thousands of Syrians has been breathtaking. They have taken their lead from the popular uprisings that led to dramatic changes in Tunisia and Egypt. But their struggle has become mired in the same vicious government crackdown that has led to bloodshed in Libya, Bahrain and Yemen. Still, they do not give up.
Nor should the rest of the world.
The UN acted fairly quickly when Libya’s protest movement became a human rights crisis in February. Security Council resolutions led to an arms embargo, a referral to the International Criminal Court and a “no-fly zone” for civilian protection, among other measures. The UN General Assembly revoked Libya’s membership in the UN Human Rights Council. The world demonstrated that it cared about human rights in Libya.
But what of Syria? World leaders have wagged their fingers at Syria’s President Bashar Assad. But in the end they spend more time explaining what they will not do than what they will do to address the crisis.
A special session of the UN Human Rights Council has been held to discuss the situation, which is welcome. But elsewhere in the UN system, including the Security Council, Syria is not even on the agenda. And there will be no decisions about getting the International Criminal Court involved, imposing an arms embargo, freezing the assets of Syrian leaders, or other steps to end these massive human rights violations, until that changes.
Canada is not a member of the Security Council. We lost that chance last year. But we have many close friends that are. We should be wielding that influence.
So what have we heard during the course of the election? Next to nothing. The Canadian government issued just one press release in recent weeks, expressing concern about the situation in Syria and offering consular advice to Canadians who may be in the country. One press release.
True, we were in the middle of an election. But wait a minute — that’s it exactly, we were in the middle of the election. What a lost opportunity for the current government to demonstrate principled human rights leadership. What an important opportunity for the contending parties to proclaim what they expect of the Canadian government, and explain what they would do to address the crisis.
An election is no time for silence about human rights, or inaction with respect to a crisis like Syria. That must change as of May 3. Canada’s voice needs to be heard — loud and clear; at a minimum backing an International Criminal Court referral, an arms embargo and an assets freeze. No double standards.
Alex Neve is secretary general of Amnesty International Canada.
Maher Arar is a Canadian human rights activist who has experienced the reality of human rights abuse in Syria first-hand.
Syria: Quickly Going beyond the Point of No Return
Brussels | 3 May 2011
The situation in Syria is quickly going beyond the point of no return. By denouncing all forms of protest as sedition, and dealing with them through escalating violence, the regime is closing the door on any possible honourable exit to a deepening national crisis. With little the international community can do, the optimal outcome is one whose chances are dwindling by the day: an immediate end to the violence and a genuine national dialogue to pave the way for a transition to a representative, democratic political order.
Over the past several weeks, a number of Syrians have taken to the streets chiefly to express frustration over their worsening economic predicament, outrage at the brutality and unaccountability of the security forces, and solidarity with parts of the country that have witnessed the fiercest forms of repression.
For a time, the regime acknowledged the existence of legitimate grievances. But it has now reverted to its initial characterisation of the protests as a global conspiracy, lumping together the U.S., Israel, Syria’s Arab enemies in Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Qatar in particular, former regime officials and home-grown fundamentalists. Official media tell a tale in which the security apparatus features as sole victim, persecuted by armed groups, innocent of any misdeed and striving to uphold national unity. The regime blames all casualties on its foes -- agents provocateurs and, more recently, jihadis. Gruesome pictures of dead (and sometimes mutilated) bodies of security officials lie at the core of this narrative. The regime once paid tribute to civilian casualties as well. Ominously, no more.
Although one cannot exclude possible foreign involvement in the ongoing crisis, credible evidence points to abundant instances of excessive and indiscriminate state violence, including arbitrary arrests, torture and firing into peaceful crowds. At its core, this is a spontaneous, peaceful, popular uprising, fuelled far more by the regime’s own actions than by any putative outside interference.
There are plausible reports of security forces being ambushed by unidentified armed groups, as well as of protesters firing back when attacked. But for those on the ground, there can be no doubt that the vast majority of casualties are the result of regime brutality. The regime is also fanning the flames of sectarianism, spreading rumours of impending attacks targeting specific groups. Sectarian tendencies no doubt exist in parts of the country. But the authorities’ tactics betray a determined and cynical attempt to exploit and exacerbate them.
At this point, moreover, questions are being raised both about the authorities’ ability to control and discipline the security apparatus and about the security forces’ willingness to convey to their political leadership a truthful picture of what is happening on the ground. Even at the best of times, large segments of the security services have been plagued by sectarianism, corruption, incompetence and a sense of wholesale impunity. These features are all the more likely to surface amid a crisis. To date, the leadership has evinced no readiness to impose clarity of mission, discipline or accountability on its security apparatus; there is, for example, not a single known instance of meaningful sanctions to punish unlawful or excessive use of force.
The regime’s violent, unlawful and disorderly response has only further deepened a pervasive sense of chaos. In turn, this has discredited the reforms it announced in hopes of defusing the situation and shoring up its political base. However meaningful or promising they might have been on paper, they have proven worthless in practice. The regime has lifted the emergency law but has since allowed the security services to conduct business as usual, thereby illustrating just how meaningless the concept of legality was in the first place. It authorises demonstrations even as it claims they no longer are justified and then labels them as treasonous. It speaks of reforming the media and, in the same breath, dismisses those who stray from the official line. It insists on ignoring the most outrageous symbols of corruption. Finally, and although it has engaged in numerous bilateral talks with local representatives, it resists convening a national dialogue, which might represent the last, slim chance for a peaceful way forward.
The regime’s hope appears to be that a massive crackdown can bring the protesters to heel. Some claim that a show of force is required to restore calm and provide the room necessary to carry out reforms. Such a course of action would entail loss of life on a massive scale. It could usher in a period of sectarian fighting with devastating consequences for Syria. It could destabilise its neighbours. And, ultimately, it is highly unlikely to work.
Even if massive repression were to succeed in the short term, any such victory would at best be pyrrhic. In the wake of the crackdown, the security services would rule supreme. President Assad’s domestic and international credibility would be shattered. Few countries would be willing to lend a hand to redress a devastated economy. Major investments, development projects and cultural ventures would find few foreign partners. Assad might well prevent forcible regime change, but the regime will have been fundamentally transformed all the same.
The only -- decreasingly realistic– chance to avoid this outcome would be for the regime to take immediate steps to rein in its security forces, take decisive action against those responsible for state violence and initiate a genuine, all-inclusive national dialogue. A halt to the cycle of violence could create the space necessary for representatives of the popular movement to articulate their demands and for negotiations on a real, far-reaching program of reforms to proceed. Most importantly, it would give the regime the opportunity to demonstrate it has more to offer than empty words and certain doom.
For the international community, the Syrian crisis poses a vexing challenge. Beyond denouncing the brutal repression, making clear to the regime that its conduct will lead to increased isolation, and urging it to implement long-overdue reforms and national dialogue, there unfortunately is little it can do. Outside actors possess little leverage, particularly at a time when the regime feels its survival is at stake. It has survived past periods of international isolation and likely feels it can weather the storm again. Even countries that have developed close ties to Damascus, such as Turkey, are viewed with growing suspicion by officials who are increasingly paranoid and consider anything short of outright support an act of betrayal. The sanctions targeting individual officials involved in acts of repression that have been announced are unlikely to have any effect; their impact would be maximised if, rather than simply naming individuals, the decisions were backed by solid, public evidence. Broader sanctions run the dual risk of serving the regime by bolstering the claim that it is facing a foreign conspiracy and of harming ordinary citizens, who are already paying a high price for their country’s dramatic economic downturn.
Neighbouring states have an enormous stake in averting enduring instability. Chaos in an ethnically and confessionally heterogeneous Syria would have swift and potentially devastating impact on Turkey – a country with which it shares an 877 kilometre long and porous border; Lebanon, whose fate historically has been tied to its neighbour’s; Jordan, a small state likewise at the mercy of Syrian developments; and Iraq, which is barely recovering from its civil war and can hardly afford sectarian fighting at its borders. As a result, they should strive to prevent any cross-border trafficking involving militants, weapons or money.
Some are calling for more from the international community. But a Libya-type military intervention is implausible, risky and undesirable, and any other form of direct outside help for the protesters inevitably would be used by the regime to depict them as foreign agents, thus exposing them to further repression without offering them any protection or materially affecting the outcome of the struggle.
In fashioning a proper international response, two more factors should be borne in mind.
First, although overall trends are increasingly clear, many specific allegations regarding developments in Syria (concerning for example possible dissent within the security forces; the scale of protests; the identity of those who have killed security officers) remain hard to verify. Because the regime has denied the international media access, many in the media have been forced to rely on uncorroborated material posted on the internet as well as on unvetted witness testimony. There is a risk in reacting immediately to such raw and inevitably partial accounts. It will be important for outside actors to base their actions on as thorough and level-headed as possible assessments of events on the ground.
Second, one should not ignore the views of many Syrians – even among those without sympathy for the regime – who continue to fear its precipitous collapse . They dread the breakup of a state whose institutions, including the military, are weak even by regional standards. They fear that sectarian dynamics or a hegemonic religious agenda could take hold. They are suspicious of possible foreign interference. And they distrust an exiled opposition that is all too reminiscent of Iraq’s. Short of the regime’s implosion, they seem persuaded that only an indigenous, negotiated solution can offer hope for a successful political transition.
The international community clearly has an important stake in the outcome of the current crisis, even if little capacity to influence it. That influence principally lies domestically: with the protesters, striving to claim their rights and whose greatest strength resides in their ability to remain peaceful, resilient and grounded in local support, and with the regime which must be brought to understand that continued resort to violence will only further deepen the crisis which it has brought upon itself
EU SYRIA SANCTIONS MUST PROMPT TOUGHER UN ACTION
23 May 2011
<EU sanction>
New European Union sanctions on President Bashar al-Assad of Syria should prompt the UN and Arab League to take tougher action against Syria over its violent crackdown against protesters, Amnesty International said today.
The European Union today imposed fresh sanctions on Syria, including personal asset freezes and travel bans on President al-Assad and other senior government figures.
“We welcome the measures that the EU and the US government have now taken against President al-Assad and those around him, but the danger is that this will prove to be too little too late,” said Malcolm Smart, Amnesty International’s Director for the Middle East and North Africa.
“The UN Security Council must now take more determined action on Syria and follow the precedent it set when Colonel al-Gaddafi’s government began attacking its own people in Libya.”
“This is precisely what the Syrian government has been doing for weeks and it is high time that the Security Council also referred Syria to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.”
“The Security Council’s failure to take similar action is sending entirely the wrong signal to the government in Damascus. Syria’s leaders must be told, and be told firmly, that they will not escape accountability and justice for the crimes that are now being committed under their authority in Syria.”
Amnesty International has the names of more than 720 people killed by the Syrian security forces during the past two months of unrest and demonstrations sparked by protests throughout the region. These included 60 people killed on Friday 20 May and Saturday 21 May.
Thousands more are believed to be detained incommunicado and to be at risk of torture, which has been used systematically by the Syrian government over many years.
“The Arab League must also step up and take firm action on Syria,” said Malcolm Smart.
“The UN and the Arab League need to take action to impose a comprehensive arms embargo on Syria, and global asset freezes on President Assad and those around him.”
mass grave uncovered in Syria
17 May 2011
The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the Damascus Center for Human Rights (DCHRS) have been informed by cross-checked sources that a mass grave containing the remains of at least 13 bodies was uncovered on May 16 morning near Daraa in area called Talit Mohammed Assarie.
FIDH and DCHRS stress that on April 24, tank-backed Syrian Security forces took siege over the city of Daraa for more than ten days, preventing residents from leaving their homes and resulting in very difficult humanitarian conditions. Security forces cut electricity, landlines, and mobile coverage before undertaking its attack on the city; furthermore, they took out water reservoirs on the tops of building by firing live bullets at them. Lack of food, water, and children’s milk remain serious concerns for residents in Daraa.
Already during the siege of Daraa, an eyewitness had told DCHRS that army and security officers were preventing residents from leaving their homes or even from removing dead bodies from the streets. “Dead bodies remain in the streets for more than 24 hours and then disappear.”, as recalled by our organisation in a statement dated May 4, 2011 (http://www.fidh.org/Daraa-Ten-days-of-massacres).
Already during the siege of Daraa, an eyewitness had told DCHRS that army and security officers were preventing residents from leaving their homes or even from removing dead bodies from the streets. “Dead bodies remain in the streets for more than 24 hours and then disappear.”, as recalled by our organisation in a statement dated May 4, 2011 (http://www.fidh.org/Daraa-Ten-days-of-massacres).
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/syria-death-toll-rises-city-placed-under-siege-2011-05-09
SYRIA DEATH TOLL RISES AS CITY IS PLACED UNDER SIEGE
9 May 2011
At least 48 people have been killed in Syria by the security forces in the last four days, local and international human rights activists have told Amnesty International, as the crackdown on the coastal city of Banias intensified.
More than 350 people – including 48 women and a 10-year-old child – are also said to have been arrested in the Banias area over the past three days with scores being detained at a local football pitch. Among those rounded up were at least three doctors and 11 injured people taken from a hospital.
