Syrian Mess

Within the past three weeks, Syria has become more complicated. With Observer Forces going in to monitor the ceasefire, the call to protest and the formation of a new opposition group, Syria is running head long into stagnant chaos.

From the outset of the ceasefire we knew there were going to be breaches. In all honesty neither side (Syrian government or any opposition group) is trustworthy. Due to that, the claims about who is breaking the ceasefire can not be trusted, nor should it matter.  The only fact that needs to be heralded is that people are still fighting, from all sides.

The Observer Force is slow in being fully implemented. This is caused by the Permanent Five members of the United Nations Security Council dragging its feet. To be blunt, the entire situation in Syria was avoidable had those five worked together instead of playing politics from the outset. Now we are up to our waist in chaos. Nothing we can do about the past so let us focus on solving the situation.

There is a new group titled Transitional National Government seeking legitimacy. As events unfold there will be others as the bickering about who is legitimate and who is not. The reality is there is only one legitimate government and they are in power. It is not only the government in power, every other opposition group is also power hungry.

As it stands now, I do not see a way out of this situation unless a large peacekeeping force is brought in. The Observer Force is being implemented too slowly for what ever reason and with each day the ceasefire becomes less and less meaningful.  Furthermore, I have no idea why outside groups continue to illegally support the opposition forces with military equipment. Such countries should be held to account by the United Nations Security Council.

Another step forward is to grab hold of the 26 Feb referendum results. Those results are a bedrock for rebuilding Syria and yet no one is mentioning them. Those results were voted on by the people of Syria and called for electoral change. Why has no group bothered to press for those changes to be made? Why is it only focused on the ousting of the current government violently?

We have been witnessing how the opposition function and this is through the use of violence as well. With that in mind there is no clear peaceful solution if any of the current groups take power.  The best possible way forward is for a massive peacekeeping force to enter and patrol the entire country. While that is being done the constitutional talks can take place.

This will be a long process and more people will die before it is all over. This entire situation is a mess mostly because the leaders of the world have been fighting each other instead of working on a solution.

Syrian ceasefire

Finally a Syrian ceasefire agreement has been put in place. If history teaches us anything, we will have continuous breaches of the agreement and few complete breakdowns. There is no sense in debating who is at fault because the reality is both sides are. The one area that is of concern is the breach of the international border.

In truth, how that breach came to be will be a mystery. What we do know is that refugee camps have been safety zones and recruitment camps for rebel forces. Also we know that Turkey is on record supporting the opposition forces. With those two realities it is very easy to calculate that the camps in Turkey are opposition strong holds and military equipment is passing through this border.

What is the current government of Syria to do? Their neighbour is openly supporting the opposition groups and calling for the current leadership in Syria to step down. This situation is one that breeds mistrust and weakens the possibility of peace.

The only people that should be listened to are the Syrian people. Right now many media outlets are a mouth piece and the information is highly questionable from both sides. Most foreign news outlets focus on the Friends of Syria which openly supports more weapons, violence and the fall of government. The media inside Syria is state run and equal in bias as the opposition. Each point of accusation is one that can be made towards both sides.

With the ceasefire agreement there is to be an Observer Force. Now it is beyond my comprehension why such a force is still waiting for approval for the United Nations Security Council. This Council knew months ago of this condition and yet is only now putting the force together. This force should have been on the ground two minutes after the agreement went into force, not days or weeks.

When the Observers do land in Syria there will be more opportunity for balanced information. Again the opportunity will be there, let us hope that both sides allow the Observers to do their jobs openly and without hassle.

As mentioned before, Turkey is fast becoming a thorn in this situation. Turkey has called upon NATO to assist with border protection and security. To me NATO has about as much credibility as the Syrian government. Many of the NATO members have called for and supplied military equipment to opposition forces. Due to that fact there is little trust in NATO to be fair or equal in its operational ideology.

At the moment we have a very difficult spot when it comes to international intervention/observation. The people will all have issues of credibility that come to the task of intervention. However the focus has to be on the process more so than the people. With that understanding the ceasefire agreement needs to be strongly supported by all sides.

The next step is to focus on the discussion for peaceful society. The call to protest that was given by opposition forces was wrong. Such a tactic only ignites the flames of hatred. The call should have been for discussion of peace not protest. The focus of the discussions have already been pointed out and agreed to by the people of Syria and the current leadership. The referendum of 26 Feb is the starting point.

There is always a way towards peace. However it takes a great deal of effort to look past the injustices people feel have been incurred. The chance for peace is here if the people have enough wisdom to work together. Sadly it has been my experience that the desire to seek revenge will win for now. I sincerely hope the ceasefire agreement holds forever.

Strengthen the borders

Over the past number of years I have been developing the idea of using Peacekeepers for border security forces.

The security collapse of Libya is the largest contributor of the Mali government being taken over. The loose border around Iraq has made weapons flowing like water across those borders. We have known that the Syrian border has been breached many times as military equipment is carried through. Now we have the further breakdown of the Syrian border as fighting has occurred across the Turkish/Syrian border.

There are also the border issues along the Democratic Republic of Congo. The roads from Eastern Congo that connect with the ports in Kenya and Tanzania are routes are known to be used to transport illegal minerals, weapons and other contraband items. The exact same reality is taking place along the Afghanistan border. Weapons and drugs are crossing these borders.

As the borders become strong the noose can be tightened on the violence. The tightening by security forces can close in on the areas of violence and set up perimeters. This will limit the weapons if not the people fighting from entering.

Now this is not a new tactic of thought, obviously. We have borders and they must be patrolled, they have to be patrolled. We are seeing the results of poor border management in areas of conflict. In reality I have gone through more security checks going across the Canada/RUSA border than I have crossing almost any other border and those two countries are siblings.

Such a tactic will not stop all flow of weapons, militia or contraband items. However it will slow the transfer of such resources that fuel violent conflicts. It is a step towards the dream of ending violent conflict.

As I have mentioned before, the world is insane and such a tactic will not be utilized because it costs too much. That is the reality. No one knows how much each person is worth on an individual basis but when we start talking about entire nations and countries, the price of peace usually is said that it cost too much. Although in reality peace is better for economics than war ever has been or will be, in the long term.

It is a very important matter to understand that phrase, “in the long term”. Peace is very much a long term solution and task, where as war is a very short term solution. The issue of border security is also a long term solution as it can never be left unattended.

There is a great deal on information on this topic if you search Sector Security Reform. Every country knows this and we use this ideology daily. An example is the build up of security measures at airports due to the violence experienced. For some reason such efforts are not used in the most critical of situations, which Syria is dealing with now.

Syrian path to peace

Who started the fighting? That question is one that is often put to the world when we seek to bring order to the violence. In reality when the violence starts it rarely matters who started the fight. The first order of business is to stop the fight. However, we are hearing that question all too often in the case of Syria.

The recent fighting has now crossed into Turkey. Again we do not know who fired across the border first. Anyone with a small amount of tactical knowledge will understand how easy it is to stage such an event. A small group of five people can lure a tank within range, overtake it while ensuring it is operational and then fire all rounds off. Honestly, at this point it hardly matters as we can be sure that neither side will adhere to a ceasefire agreement. This is leaving the world few options. The one option that needs to be thrown out is the arming of the opposition forces. Arming the opposition will only ensure the chaos continues, death toll rise and more instability within the region.  

If the world is so concerned to bring peace to Syria, send peacekeepers, observers, medical aid and food aid. Enforce an arms embargo, tighten the borders as much as possible and put equal pressure on every side to stop killing each other. These are the measures that must be taken. However, I do not hold out much hope for such measures being taken.

It has been reported a great many times that the opposition a fragile coalition. There is less support within Syria for the opposition than the current government. Furthermore, the opposition is composed of known international terrorists with very little desire for peace. We also know that if the current leadership within Syria falls there will be a major power vacuum. That vacuum will be filled many groups all fighting for power. That is a scenario worse than what is currently taking place in Syria.

If the current leadership falls, Syria will be a haven for weapons smuggling in that region. Iraq is already a prime route for such. Syria will only provide more avenues for the destabilization of the entire region. Looking forward that would lead to attacks on Jordan, Israel, Iran, Lebanon and Turkey. Of course that is pure speculation as it points to a “what if” scenario. Yet that reality must be front on mind when looking at the current push for the leadership in Syria to step down.

At the moment there is no credible leadership to take its place. Despite what the Friends of Syria say. The world has been told that options in Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan were better than the old leadership. In each case those regions are no better today than they were fifteen years ago, perhaps worse.

As brutal as it seems, the current leadership in Syria must remain if peace is the true goal. The world needs to focus on the 26 Feb referendum that called for political change. That is the foothold for peace. It is a legally binding process that the people of Syria have asked for, the current leadership has endorsed and the international community would be wise in pursuing.

There is still a major need for peacekeepers, observers, humanitarian aid and international journalists to have access within Syria. None of these should be seen as a breakdown in sovereignty. To the contrary, such measures should be seen as a boost to Syrian sovereignty. There is an international campaign being waged inside Syria to topple the government and the international community should help to bring that opposition.

peace will return in Syria

Peace is best achieved through daily attention and regular work. When a situation gets to a point of chaos, the effort to get back to where peace was lost is even greater. In Syria the areas that are in chaos need to understand that peace is now on both the government and the peoples shoulders.

To get back to how society was a year ago, a ceasefire agreement must be produced. Such a thing can not take place without the two sides talking. Since the current government of Syria has stated they will not hold talks with the opposition forces, an option is Shuttle Diplomacy. This is what the United Nations Envoy is there to do so he best get on with it.

Pick a date to work towards implementing the ceasefire agreement. As that date draws near there must be a communication campaign that will keep the transition period as open as possible. People have to know what to expect when the guns stop. For those that have not experienced a ceasefire transition, the silence is very unnerving yet calming at the same time.

Protests and chaos will take place. However the need for order is an absolute. This has to be planned out and executed with as much perfection as possible. The right people must be used to bring order and it certainly can not be government forces, unless you want the ceasefire agreement to get cancelled. One option is the use of the Observer Forces and this must be a part of the ceasefire agreement.

As the days pass and the ceasefire agreement holds, the international aid organizations can go in do the assessments and write the policy options. The people in the conflict areas need to be tasked with cleaning up the mess, this will keep them occupied while the ceasefire is held. Also it provides a spark that the conflict is improving.

There are elements that must be held in check and these are the desire to finger point, claim victory and fall into the trap of blame. What needs to take root is the peaceful understanding that everyone is to blame, there is no victory in war and the finger can only point back into your own eye.

Government forces need to pull as far back as possible. If any force is needed it must be an unarmed force. Also the weapons that are held by opposition forces must be checked and cleared. There will be less chance of breaking the ceasefire agreement if the weapons are not there.  A ceasefire agreement is a very unstable situation and often they are broken due to carelessness. Someone has to fire a shot first and that person has to be kept in mind concerning how fragile the situation is.

One last item that needs to be understood, peace does not take orders from a clock. We can set timelines but these must be flexible to allow for conditions to be ripe for success.

Syria is in a very difficult spot but with some assistance, peace will return.

control the weapons or the mind?

Elections are an important part of a free society. When the people have trust in the system to choose who is going to be the leader, that feeling expands into everyday life of the people. Right now we have an election process taking place in Burma. This process is taking place after years of harsh political censorship and control.

The ability of a government to control the people in such a manner (as has happened in Burma), usually employs violence. As a country begins to come out of that situation of violence and fear there is still the threat of violence. Mainly the threat continues because the old power structure is still fighting. To decrease the violence there needs to be a concerted effort to eliminate the flow of weapons.

We are witnessing this flow of weapons in Libya, Syria, Yemen, Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan and many other countries as well. The flow of weapons keeps the society destabilized and in fear. To combat the destabilization of society, disrupt the flow of weapons and bring peace is a multi-level task.

The problem is international in scope.  During July 2012, UN member states will meet to negotiate a legally binding international instrument governing the transfer of conventional arms: the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). The problem is, will this stop the weapons trade?

The war in Sierra Leone and Liberia was fuelled by diamonds and timber. As the war became as savage as a war has ever been, the world took measures to end the trade in “blood diamonds”. The measure taken is known as the Kimberely Process. This process did stem the flow of diamonds for a time. What we have to realize is that the people engaged in trading diamonds for weapons are criminals.  They will continue to work outside of treaties and laws.

The concern is that we must know the Arms Trade Treaty will not end the illegal trade of weapons. Of course having these laws is better than not. The largest demon in all of this is the desire to grab power/control through the use of fear, violence and oppression. The quick demise of peace in Cote D’ivoire is another example in the use of fear, weapons and oppression.

The battle of human relations is the largest demon we have to tackle. All the weapons in the world will have no bearing if the people who own them have no desire to use them. However, we live in a world where insanity is present, people will kill for power and build weapons to instil fear.

The positive element rests in the balance of peace. Most of us are peaceful. We wish to trust each other and enjoy the many differences of the world. We enjoy the process of debate, the camaraderie of sport and the challenge of opposition. Elections are filled with such elements. Furthermore, All of these elements in society are positives. It stops to be positive when fear, violence and oppression are used to gain power and control over another and that is where war begins to be fought ultimately  in the mind.

The insanity of international relations

The insanity of international relations has no limits. For example, Israel has made it clear to the entire world that it would attack Iran giving 15 minutes warning. This is just nuts because under international law Iran is now justified in doing the very same act to Israel in self defense. This scenario is a perfect example of why words, diplomacy, trust and international relations are very important.

The consequence of either country initiating an attack is truly unknown. No one has a clue as to what would transpire under such circumstances, other than all hell breaking loose. Due to that unknown we must take every measure possible to ensure neither country pursues those tactics.

This region of the world has been a powder keg of turmoil for centuries and it appears nothing will change for the next century. However with the proper care and unity this region could be a paradise of peace. Alas, at some level that reality of peace is not seen or wanted.

The same situation has taken place with the RUSA openly supporting illegal arms smuggling into Syria. Just turn the tables around and ask yourself, “What it Syria openly supported the supply of weapons to an opposition group inside the RUSA?” Furthermore the current government of the RUSA has openly supported the call for war crimes against the Syrian President. However their own former President is not held to such a standard for the illegal invasion of Iraq causing more death than we will ever know.

We have basic international laws that must be obeyed. We can not pick and choose which laws to obey and which laws to ignore. Well actually we can because we do, but we should not do such things. A wise society would not tolerate such childish actions.

The use of threats, supplying weapons and interventions are not easy topics nor are they clear. Humanitarian aid and the protection of people can bring extremely difficult issues. For example, the world would have been justified in the act of breaking sovereignty in Cambodia during the leadership of Khmer Rouge. But the United Nations Security Council never allowed such action. Similar example is the lack of support for Rwanda when the world could have stopped that genocide but decided to ignore it.

We have systems in place to deal with almost any situation that comes our way. It is not the United Nations failing, the failure rests squarely upon the members of the United Nations. Even more direct, the permanent five members(P5), (Russia, Republic of the United States, United Kingdom, France and China)  have let the world down.

The P5 need to work together and condem any and all acts such as the one Israel has uttered. Such a threat to tell the world that you will attack another country is in no way helpful to maintaining peace. Urging Israel to stand down is not enough, they must be told of consequences other than Iran retaliation and further endless war, death and possible complete destruction. The same goes for the RUSA and their open support of arming oppostion in Syria.

I know the world is insane but do we have to act so stupid?

Elections are sacred to the people

Syria just finished the referendum and the results indicate that the people wish to have a multiparty political system. Yemen just had their one candidate election as well with a 60% turnout. One candidate, why bother voting?

One of the fundamentals of life is personal choice. At the base of choice is the option we all have to continue living. Even then we have that choice taken away in certain circumstances. Going deeper into our existence we have society which has limits to what we should and should not do. Acts such as violence against another and theft are two examples of limits most societies discourage.

Another element society discourages has many names which is best described as dishonesty. These other named acts include fraud and corruption. With these examples the limits we put on each other are there to ensure a peaceful society. No matter what system people choose, these elements are quite universal. Whether the system is a democracy, dictatorship, monarchy or fascism, most systems have limits or guidelines for the general population to follow. Even then it is a personal choice to follow these limits or not.

On the topic of choice there will always come a time to choose those that will lead. The process of elections is a vital component to a legitimate government. When the process is tampered with to force a certain outcome, this act of corruption needs to carry as much weight as murder. In the world of politics, the punishment for murder is loss of power.

If the publics’ trust is diminished, rebuilding that trust will take more effort than it took to destroy it. For a peaceful society to flourish, the elements of trust and freedom to choose are corner stones to build on. There will be times when the people may not like the options but if they trust the information provided they will follow the decisions made.

The electoral process is the most sacred part of any legitimate society. If that process can not be trusted, the entire society will crumble. We are witnessing this very thing all over the world.

Egypt and Libya will be going through elections very soon. Each will have a very difficult time with ensuring the peaceful transition. There will be many calls of voting fraud because such tactics point to legitimacy of government. if the trust of the process is questioned the entire government and the system in place is questioned.

Here in Canada we are dealing with our own issues of election fraud. Not if fraud happened but why. To me this is act should bring down the political party holding power in government. For such an act to take place is nothing short of spitting on the graves of every person who paid their lives in Afghanistan. Such an act is illegal and people need to serve jail sentences. The system has been tampered with and it is in question. The line of chaos is still very far off in Canada but if such acts are not treated with great severity we will march closer to chaos. This entire situation is an example of the hypocrisy in which societies fall.

Without trust in society and trust in the systems to assist society there is no peace in that future.

Today is referendum day in Syria. 26 Feb 2012

Today is referendum day in Syria.

I am still wondering how such an undertaking can be anywhere near fully independent and free of tampering in this atmosphere. No matter though, the process sometimes is more important than the outcome and this is one of those moments.

It is possible that this vote is a sham, understood. However, even a sham has some truth in it otherwise no one would fall for it. The important question concerns the benefit of a multiparty system. Basically the people need to have options when choosing/voting. Sounds stupid but if there is no choice why even have a process to vote?

I live in Canada and I am disgusted with the tactics the west are using in Syria. For one, the confirmed reports of Al-Qaeda being armed by the west is below ridiculous and worse than frustrating. Bringing weapons into this situation is about the most stupid tactic that could have been made. Sarcasm would say, carpet bombing the country would be a better tactic. The hypocrisy of the west is simply, disgusting.

The best part of all is that peace is always possible. For that to happen the United Nations Security Council has to act as one. The division within this world body is negligent and should be reprimanded for dereliction of duty. If the permanent Five members and Syria can not come to a unified plan, this world is in big trouble.  There is no reason why Syria should be experiencing this level of violence this long.

All in all we need better leaders. This cycle of violence is a waste of time and completely manageable, better managed than it is now.

Well we have the Russian elections coming up, let us watch the issue of Syria be debated – if at at.

if you are intersted in my plan to deal with Syria I have written such a plan in many of the past articles, here are a few posting dates  2/9/12, 1/17/12,  9/27/11

Syria, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Bahrain are all on a similar path.

What happens in Syria if the current government is toppled?

We have many examples to look at, Egypt and Libya are two.  There will be a struggle of communicating effectively and making progression swift enough. Both of these will combine to erode the legitimacy of any new government.

In Egypt the military is still in power. In Libya the government is an ad hoc group that was a natural progression. Now in Libya the international support has dried up leaving it twisting in the wind. In both situations the people are left to seek other options other than what is being offered at the moment. These options will come from armed groups because we live in a reality where might makes right.

This might makes right attitude can only be culled by the mass peaceful rally of the people. We have learned from Poland, Czech Republic and Egypt that if the people stand united in peaceful mass rallies, the use of violence is defeated. The defeat of violence will give space for peace.

Next there needs to be a strong effort to communicate the planning process. This process has to have a constant avenue for public inclusion. Such inclusion provides transparency, legitimacy, stability, and unity. With these four elements, society will hold a great deal of patience as a new government is brought to power.

There is no mystery to how or why revolutions take place. The people simply no longer trust the leaders, they feel alienated by their own government and they lived with fear of the government too long. This combination of reality factors in every revolution. At the moment mistrust and alienation are quickly rising in Libya.

A peaceful transition is still very possible in Libya. What needs to be done is a major show of support by the international community in the form of leadership visits, major funding of programs, and infrastructure building. Within this support, armed groups will have a point of reference to hold trust in as the governance processes are continually worked on.

The capacity is there and so is the determination of the people to achieve peace. What is missing is the work needed to connect the people with the government on a unified vision of the future. At the moment there is no such unified vision, nor is there an avenue for dialogue to discuss this vision.

Communication builds trust, it can also destroy trust as well though. Due to that, the communication must settle on finding a cohesive and agreeable path forward to peace. At the moment the communication between the government and the people of Libya needs greater support and effort.

With all of the above, we can see exactly the same situation in Syria. Poor communication, mistrust, no clear vision of the future, alienation of the people and ultimately violence can be mapped out to see how Syria fell into such chaos. The road back to peace will begin with lowering the weapons, increased communication, inclusion of the people and building a common vision of the way forward.

Chaos and insanity are now the norm in Syria.

How many does it take to lead a country to complete chaos? For Syria, that number is still being counted as it appears everyone is jumping on that band wagon. The craziness has only just begun. Within a few months there will be no way of distinguishing who is on what side and of course no one will have the courage to do what is necessary to stop any of this.

I spent a great deal of time looking at reports and emails to gather information about the situation. With each piece of information I grew more and more frustrated. We have known for months that there are extremists inside Syria fighting the government. Some reports indicate that the Syrian government has brought them in and other reports indicate that a weakening of the border is a factor.

To be as clear as I can, the fact that civilians will die by the thousands should be more important than who or what crazy bastard organization is involved. What we have here is a classic bar room brawl. The situation is already so mixed up that no one has a clue as to what side anyone is on.  This is going on now in Syria. With that understanding, does anyone think the government in Syria has any control?

We are looking a failed state very soon. With that destabilization, the surrounding countries are in grave danger. Due to this danger, the sovereignty argument for non-intervention is no longer valid because the threat to international peace is now within reach. Easing the violence is not even possible for the Syrian government anymore. Two months ago they could have but not now and with each passing day, controlling the peace becomes more and more difficult.

As it stands right now China is the wild card among the Permanent Five members of the Security Council. Russia has stated that force will be used if the Syrian government does not quell the violence. The other three, France, RUSA and UK have already voted in favour of intervention. Tougher Sanctions, more observers will most likely be the next move. What should be done?

Well if I were in charge, demand China, Russia and a host of other countries to build a peacekeeping force of no less than 60 000soldiers. March them in and secure the border as soon as possible, no one gets in or out. This will stop or at least slow the flow of weapons and extremists. As soon as the border is secured, get the negotiations going.  Have the Peacekeepers enforce the current laws of Syria that pertain to breaches of the peace. This will help sweep the country clean of any and all small to medium weapons.

Will that happen, never. The world just does not have the will to actually do such a thing. Basically civilian lives are not worth the time, effort or cost. The funny part is the time factor. No one is willing to engage in a peacekeeping mission if they have no sense of how long it will take. However, many countries are willing to get into a huge fight without a sense of how long that will take to end. The frustration I feel because of that mentality leaves me speechless at times.

Syria is without a doubt a perfect example of the term “cluster fuck” and it is going to get worse. Sanctions and observers will not stop this war in Syria any more than it has stopped the shit show between Palestine and Israel. We need a complete lock down accompanied by the largest disarm, demobilize and reintegration program ever thought possible.

Biased Media or Lazy Readers?

Going about my day I was reading stories about the countries that are experiencing the Jasmine Revolution ripple effect/Arab Spring. I hit upon a few news items that discussed the number of countries impacted. As I looked at this list I began to feel information overload, it is quite a list of countries. Then I thought of the great equalizer of quick information, Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Spring#Others

Take a look at that.  Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and Syria are the most often referred to but somehow Yemen has stayed off the watch list. So has a Bahrain and I recall protests in China as well. After a bit more searching I came across one opinion for the lack of information on all the other protests. It was biased media.

http://rt.com/news/bahrain-iran-double-standards-us-319/

The two links above provide information as do the websites of the United Nations, Alertnet, ReliefWeb, and others.

Now I have been very harsh towards the media and sometimes I am overly critical. As I search, there are reports from each country that are experiencing protests. The media is doing their job. Here in Canada I would have to say that few know we have imposed sanctions on Syria. My point here is that the media needs our help to dig for information as well.  

I do wish there was a one site for all news but there is not. Multiple sites have to be searched. This is no different than the fact that any large city usually has three or more daily newspapers. Each has its own identity or bias and with each you should delve into that understanding of the world.

There is a great deal of life going on in the world and no one news outlet can handle all of it. This is very much a case of the individual having the intelligence to seek out all the sources they can. The capability to do that is exactly why technology has been pushed on us. The crazy part is that we are still too lazy to do the work.

Imagine the person that only gets their news from one source? Now imagine having a conversation about world events with that person. Is it the of fault media for not presenting more information to its readers? There was a time when I would have given a large yes to that question. Now I am a great deal more understanding because doing such a thing is near impossible. However I am sure that each news outlet will defend their balanced news reporting.

On another point, the media is not just newspapers and websites. There are academic papers, documentaries, government websites and of course the blogs.  There is a wide spectrum of thought out there, some insane, some perplexing, some compelling and others you just wonder who even needs to know such things. Happy news searching.

Talk or Shoot?

One of the great sources of frustration in the minds of peace activists is the fact that every violent conflict ends with a negotiated settlement. For example, during the early stages of the Afghanistan war Canada sought a strategy of communication with locals and Taliban forces. This strategy was soundly rejected as futile. Almost ten years later that very strategy is now being used even though the situation in Afghanistan is no better than it was ten years ago.

Another example is in Syria. The people of Syria asked for a democratic method of governance. That request was met with bullets and here we are today. Alas, the government of Syria has set 26 Feb as a day of referendum. This vote will seek to change the constitution of Syria.

Now in both examples why was the communication efforts denied at those early stages? Okay, I know that such a question solves nothing and really only cements hatred because the past is unchangeable. We can do nothing about those decisions even if we had answers. However, what we can do is focus on the efforts now. The past is something we must learn from and those answers must be viewed as positives to peace not crutches to death. Although I am deeply sorry for the lives lost because of the missed opportunity to negotiate peace rather than kill for it.

The referendum in Syria is to be held on 26 Feb. That is eleven days away. To be honest I have no idea how anyone can accomplish that feat, even in a peaceful country. Polling stations need to be organized, ballots printed, questions formulated, debate, voter registration compiled and then distribution of information and resources to hold the referendum. To me this is not possible in such a short time, unless the entire event is a smoke screen.

As a person that operates within a peaceful mindset, I have seen such ploys before. A person that is willing to talk will always be trusted and therefore seen as easy prey. This is a reality of peaceful existence. The peaceful person is often brought into an ambush under such a smoke screen. These are very difficult moments for a peaceful person. If they stand up and say that the offer of peace is just a ploy/ambush they are branded as being uncooperative. If they go along they risk being killed. What do you do in such a situation?

For the peaceful person they realize that the current situation has already killed them. The offer is agreed to but with a great deal of trepidation. International media must be allowed in as well as any other observer forces that are willing to monitor, document and witness the entire event. With that can anyone see such a situation taking place in Syria?

When dealing with such a situation the only thing you can trust is the fact that someday you will die and today might be that day.

Going back to the situation in Afghanistan, the Taliban are in the stages of opening a political office so that negotiation can take place. This was a similar tactic used by the Irish Republican Army and Sinn Fein. Such a step needs to take place for discussions because those that employ such tactics need to be at least one step removed from the battle field.

In the case of Syria who will lead the opposition? There have been a wide range of religious groups tied to the opposition as well as economic alliances. To me, both of these connections should take their ideology and shove it. The religious groups in this area have only prolonged the torture and the economic groups will be happy with anything as long as the attention is gone. In my mind neither the religious or economic groups are interested in peace. They are more interested in power and control.

As the event unfolds we are going to hear more about which religious group is seeking to rule, which economic group is backing who and all the while people will die as the cities are destroyed. For what? All because a bunch of stubborn idiots. Well is that not what religion and politics has been all about? My way is better than your way and to prove that I will kill every last one of you. And they preach peace. What a pile of dog shit.

As the violent situation continues the people will fight until enough are dead. Finally, as the grave yards fill someone will  make a connection with the other side who has a great idea, Why not stop shooting each other, sit down and find a way to co-exist? I guess that is just too difficult for some at this moment. Shooting is the only option because talking will only lull you to death.

Syria and holistic approach to peace

First off I want to thank everyone that has visited this site. I hope I have been helpful or at least entertaining enough to gain further attention.

The holistic approach to peace is the foundation of my thoughts. The holistic approach is best understood in the cliché, “be the change you wish to see”. It can also be described as the waves caused by a single drop in calm waters. That single drop is the individual and the impact reverberates throughout your surroundings.  On a more complex definition or maybe more clear, the issues in your life that cause frustration for you will reflect the changes you wish to make to yourself and the world. As you look at any situation, be it in your relationships or how you view events in Syria, Columbia, Sri Lanka, RUSA, Russia or Canada. The problems you wish to change reflect changes you wish to make in your own life on a personal level.

For me, I have been involved in many violent situations. Due to those experiences, I have grown very frustrated at such actions. That is why I am focused on such places as Syria because the violence was/is avoidable. Again there is a cliché that states, “no one dislikes war more than the warrior”. However, most warriors only have a few methods of dealing with their opposition. Add to that the psychology of leaders that wish to be seen as strong warriors yet have little experience of war, the current leader of Syria fits that definition.

I have no idea what the personal issues are for the current leader of Syria. I am sure this uprising is seen as a personal challenge. The current leader in Syria for some reason has decided to use extreme measures to supress the challenge of his authority. There are reports that he sees this uprising as a push to change the religious composition of Syria. There are also reports of a proxy war between Russia, Iran, RUSA, Israel and all the underpinnings of those relations.

For most of us we are outside looking in. There are very few reports on the ground but news is getting out to the mainstream media. Even though there are few reports we all know the situation is getting worse. It has come to a point where Russia had to make a personal visit to this country. This visit may be seen in a number of ways.

It may be seen as support for the current leader of Syria but it may also be a show of warning. We have no information as to what the conversations were like other than the media reports. In one report the Russian delegation made it known that international force was going to be used if Syria does not resolve this issue soon.  

We can not ignore the issue of sovereignty. In stark contrast though, if Canada ever has to deal with such an internal problem at this level, I hope to god the United Nations would send in a peacekeeping force to help settle the violence. I personally do not see the presence of such a force as a threat to sovereignty. I see it more as a group of friends coming in to help put things back in order. Others may not see it as that but then again I see no reason to fear a peacekeeping force.

Also in comparison to Syria we can look at Egypt, similar challenge and similar reaction. To some degree the people and the government forces in Egypt realized the uselessness of violence. They are still waging a battle but at least there is a modicum of civility.

Going back the issue of sovereignty. Look at the case of Britian and Ireland. For years these two waged a brutal civil war and yet no one even thought the need for a UN peacekeeping force would or should be deployed. For more examples we can look at Tibet in China, Chechnya in Russia, drug war in Mexico where in each case thousands have been killed as well. The international community steps back from these cases because of sovereignty.

Even more perplexing is how the UN Security Council did not prevent the war between Britain and Argentina in the Falkland Islands? This war was in direct conflict with all articles of the UN Charter that relate to the use of force. That is another issue.

Back to the holistic approach, we can see the struggle for power being played out in the streets of Syria and how that relates to the leaders. Next we can see the struggles for unity in the UN Security Council as well as fingers point blame and each country saying that it the other side that is causing all this. Same argument, different sphere and that is the ripple effect of holistic understanding.

Oh and if anyone wishes to look up the Peacekeeping Missions of the United Nations, here is a link.

http://www.un.org/en/sc/repertoire/subsidiary_organs/peacekeeping_missions.shtml

Going to hell in Syria

Anyone shocked at what is taking place is Syria has not paid attention.  Perhaps shock is not the reaction as it may be more disgust. All in know for sure is that more people will die as the world drags its feet to sort out a solution. Again the leaders of the world will argue as to what should be done and under what terms. The arguing will most likely end up with the allowance of an international observer force to go into Syria.

An observer force is a good step and it is a step but really, an observer force? What that amounts to is a person standing with a clip board writing down that they just witnessed someone being killed. For example the United Nations Peacekeeping force in the Democratic Republic of Congo is an observer force. They have been there off and on since 1956 and they have been yelling since day one that the observer mandate is almost useless. Sending in an observer force is more a lack of leadership than anything.

What is taking place in Syria reminds me of Vedran Smailović - the Sarajevo Cellist. This is a man that I have not thought of for some time and really he is a symbol of peace during a time of absolute hell. His story has been wildly expanded but the truth is that he did play his cello in the ruins of the city despite the threat of being shot.

No one should be shocked to hear that foreign assistance is getting in to arm either the government or the citizens. As with any uprising there are factions that fight just to cause chaos. Syria has enemies and no doubt they are in there fighting. With that it looks as though a civil war will breakout before June if nothing is done.

From what I have read, Russia has given notice that there will be international force coming soon if the situation is not calmed down. Even if an observer force is sent in, I would have to say that civil war would still breakout. I really hope I am wrong and a further slip into chaos is prevented.

It is really astounding that an area of such political, religious and economic importance lives in a constant state of upheaval. How long has it been since there was no war in that region? Add to that the complete and utter failure of the permanent five members of the United Nations Security council to solve anything. As a security group they should not be allowed to watch over school kids in a sand box.

Syria and United Nations Security Council (UNSC)

Down goes a resolution from the UNSC that deals with Syria. Now the blame for who killed it goes around. Both China and Russia did vote no on the resolution so they are the ones that will take the brunt of the blame. However as such things go, why table a resolution that was doomed before the vote was taken?

As the news reports come out we are hearing the reasons for the failure is premised upon the yes side seeking to blame the government of Syria and the no side seeking to blame everyone. Another reason is the yes side wanted to enforce a regime change and the no side wanted that to be left out as it is a decision of the people, not outsiders. There it is. The entire reason more people will die in Syria because the UNSC can not decide who to blame and support the government to step down.

This may sound harsh but I do agree with Russia and China that the UNSC should not enforce the government to step down. Now before you get all indignant, realize that sovereignty is a crucial element of being. Also realize that just because that point is not in the resolution does not mean it will not happen. Furthermore, the entire point of regime change is not possible at the moment considering the fact that the country is heading towards collapse.

At best, international politics is not an easy situation to grasp. People die and that is a fact, which I would rather not have happen. However, in the reality of international politics sovereignty matters. The two countries that have continued to uphold that are Russia and China, at the peril of many lives lost.

In my view I would not care who is to blame or what the future holds, the only concern is to stop the killing, return of peace and allow the Syrian people to figure out what to do next.

If the countries of the UNSC who voted yes cared about those that are killed they would not bother with who to blame. If the countries that voted no cared they would see that the current government in Syria at the very least, needs to be shaken up. The diplomats of the UNSC once again dug their heels in to show more care for their own politics than the lives of civilians.

Now, to be a bit of an ideologist here, this lack of concern for lives is in contrast to the very constitution of the United Nations and it spits in the face of the Responsibility to Protect.

What will happen now? More people will die, more weapons will flow into Syria, More rhetoric and words will spill out in the media as fingers point to blame.

What should happen? Someone should take all five permanent members of the UNSC outside, tie them to any peace  monument and give them a good smash upside the head, in hopes that some sense will go in.

These are the leaders we have. What a bunch of knobs.

Decline in Syria

The world has no idea how to deal with the situation in Syria.  The Security Council is dead locked on what to do as there are two differing approaches being debated. The Security Council is so useless that they can not even convince themselves that monitors should be sent in. With each passing day more and more weapons are building up in both the military and the civilian rebel groups.

All of this was preventable with a small force of one thousand peacekeepers to be sent in last November to enforce the rule of law as stated under the current Syrian system. A complete lock down and use of small arms and light weapons needs to be enforced as the Peacekeepers patrolled with the current Syrian army. Batons, shields, water cannons, pepper spray and riot gear would be allowed only.

At each protest both the current Syrian army and the UN peacekeepers would work to control crowds and enforce the rule of law. At the same time the ruling party must obey the wishes of the people and if the people choose to hold massive strikes, rallies or protests, they must be allowed to do so.

Also foreign media should be allowed in as well to report. No embedding reporters, that is just a strong move for covering up lies.

The world has no idea how to deal with this.  That is only because the world is full of shit.

Syrian Intervention

The revolutions that are ongoing in Syria have been deemed an internal problem by almost every world leading organization.  The UN Security Council quickly decided that Syria is experiencing a civil war.  As I have mentioned before that designation allows the Security Council the moral standpoint of non-intervention.  However, there still exists the pesky ideology of “Responsibility to Protect”.

The Responsibility to Protect (R2P), ideology was born in 2001.  It was the brain storm of the “soft” or “smart” power countries.  The crux of this ideology is that sovereignty can be broken if there is cause enough to do so. Criteria for breaking sovereignty would be a ruling government failing to stop a violent uprising or conducting a violent rampage upon its own people, for example Yugoslavia and Rwanda.  There are other cases that can be pointed to as well such as Cambodia and Somalia. 

There is no magical number or line in which we can point to and say this is the line for action.  The world is just not that easy or simple.  Also there are many scales of account to consider.  A civil war is by nature a challenge to the ruling government.  As brutal as it may seem such a condition of chaos must be allowed to play itself out, case in point is Ireland, Egypt, Tunisia and Georgia.  The murky cases are Libya, Kashmir Region, Sri Lanka and others.  Even the countries named here are debated whether or not they indicate civil war, terrorism, gang violence, failing states or what have you.

 With all of this judging of circumstances we have the politics of intervention.  The questions swirl around about; why should we intervene, is there capacity to intervene and who should lead the intervention.  In addition to those questions there is always predicting how long it will take to quell the violence.  I myself have come to understand that the only answer is – as long as it takes.  It may take months, years or even decades.  To be completely honest time is a reason the UN Security Council stays out.  Well not just time but the longer the war the higher the death count.  Few countries have the will to be engaged in a single combat for extended periods of time, unless it is happening in their own area. 

With the case of 5 000 dead in Syria and counting, is a significant portion of the population.  The Arab Observers have seen enough and are being recalled due to an unsafe environment.   The Arab Council had seen a need for intervention as it did with Libya.  The different between Libya and Syria is the location of Syria, the area is extremely volatile.

Now on the surface of all that is peaceful this would be the exact area where the UN Security Council should deploy.  This region holds the crucible of tension in most wars today – religion/ideology.  The only reason I can see for not having a greater presence is the hypocrisy in political will of the world leaders.  Killing 5 000 people because they asked for a different government is a crime against humanity in my view.

The debate about who fired the first shot will forever go on.  In some sense that is an important fact yet, the thousandth shot is just as important.  In such a debate this is called “stacking bodies”.  The side that has the most bodies is the side that has incurred the most harm, therefore is justified in all their actions.  In the world of peace relations, justification is not an excuse for killing.  Killing is part of the “eye for and eye” game theory.  In the end we are all dead if we follow that theory through. 

I say it is time that the people of Syria be relieved and the world step in to stop the killing.

Peaceful game theory

Last night I got into a discussion on what game theory is.  Now I have been a student of theories my entire life, as I see it.  All that information got snarled up before I could say a word, so it was not easy to define game theory in a flash. However I did realize that we were playing a card game so I used that as my analogy.

Game theory is the study of strategy used to get results.  It is a plan to win a chess game, to win a hockey game, an election, war or even to get a job.  The strategy you employ (whether you know your strategy or not) is the game theory you use to obtain your goal.   Everyone uses game theory.  One of the most popular theories is fight or flight.  That has been changed to fight, freeze or flight due to the fact that some people get so nervous that they can do nothing but collapse/freeze.

When we have events such as the Jasmine Revolution, we can look to see what the theory was and map it out.  Did Mohamed Bouazizi know that his actions would spark the Jasmine Revolution, would cause a number of other events in Libya, Egypt, Syria, Yemen and the Occupy movement all over the world?  You would have to believe that he did not.  However his own personal actions had been rooted in the theory that if he set himself on fire the government would take notice and make changes to the current system.  That was his game theory and he was right.

Now this is a very simple example of game theory.  There are much more complex psychological strategies which have been studied.  Yet the currents and streams of thought on the subject all deal with plans that a person or group uses to achieve a goal.

Game theory is often studied along with the art of decision making and information gathering.  These three elements are all part of strategy.  You need the right information to make the best decision so that the correct strategy is used.

For example we can ask why a government would rather shoot its people than allow protesting.  The initial reason is to gain control of the populous.  Governments feel threatened by large mobs of protesters so that mob has to be put down.  That is one level.  The other level is the personal one where the person in charge, Prime Minister, President or General also feels that their life is in danger or their job.  This personal level hinges on dignity, power and self-image.  The leader feels that the people should be grateful for the life provided and a large protest is a slap in the face.  Also the leader sees a possibility that they will be ousted from power so that has to be fought.  Next there is the image that no one else has the right to hold the position that the leader now holds, it is theirs and the mob is trying to steal it.

How leaders deal with these perceptions is where game theory comes in.  They must ask themselves, what is the best method to end the protest, to retain power and to regain the admiration of the people.  Shooting them is a popular choice because it does work, for a time.  Shooting and killing is the theory employed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Burma, Columbia, Libya, DRC and the list goes on.

For peaceful examples we have Poland Solidarity Movement 1980, Czechoslovakia Velvet Revolution 1989 which lead to the peaceful 1993 seperation of the Czech Rebublic and Slovakia, and the Ukraine Orange Revolution 2004.  Each has taken place in the last few decades.  We can go further back for examples of peaceful revolutions yet these are perfect enough.  As you can see the use of peace as a strategy is a successful game theory and it often results in a stronger country.  Of the peaceful examples Ukraine had a number of setbacks, yet the initial game theory of peaceful demonstration worked. 

That is a quick summation of game theory.  My theory in the game of understanding is that by using such broad examples it is easily understood. 

Just as I was writing this I have learned that Vaclav Havel has died this morning.  He was the person put up as the leader for the Velvet Revolution. Rest in peace my friend you did a great job, we need more like you. 

Egypt, peace was taken away

Complete breakdown in peaceful transformation.  At some point there had to be an equal group of citizens and government forces that caused enough damage for the situation to deteriorate into the use violence.  At the moment we are in the status of blame.  Who did what to cause the other to use violence?

We all have a desire to find the people or person responsible for the chaos that cripples relationships.  When the relationship involves a people and those that lead, the chaos is deadly.  At some point there was a breakdown in the vision that linked the hopes of the people and the hopes of the leaders.  The massive rallies this past summer were truly inspirational.  The people had peacefully taken the leader out.  The military stood down and would not fire upon them because they knew as individuals that peace is much easier when physical violence is not a threat.  However that understanding of peace broke down.

There are a number of elements that breakdown.  The Egyptian riots have broken down due to the death of trust, the desire for power, the loss of dignity and too many visions of how Egypt should progress.   

We know that someone in a position of great responsibility/power gave orders to shoot.  Someone that provided enough push to the right people so that the military would fire upon the people.  It is odd that the military did obey the orders this time when they had stood down before.  This is the exact leadership that Egypt will have for the coming months or perhaps years. 

Wisdom tells us that all decisions ultimately come down to one person.  Someone has to make the decision to act.  Now that is the birth of conspiracy and truth finding.  In reality it may have played out that the one person was a foot soldier who panicked and fired a shot.  That first shot can quickly get lost in cacophony of the ripple effect.   I am not saying that is what happened in Egypt but it has happened.

Looking back to Yugoslavia just after Tito died; we have a map to how a country that was ruled by a dictator slowly breaks down.  In 1984 the world was invited to Sarajevo for the Winter Olympics.  Within a few short years those same stadiums were used as shelters from war.  At the time no one could tell who was working behind the stage.  Right now we know who is in charge in Egypt, but are there others working underneath as well to ensure chaos reigns for the time being?

When such a game is played the end is only a prediction.  Death brings new twists of fate.  In chaos fate swirls around picking at random.  Right now Egypt is within the grasp of chaos, much like Syria.  The beginning provided so much hope for peace.  Now we are living on the edge of complete failure for Egypt.  Why is it so difficult to not shoot, kill, destroy each other?  Why do people so easily give up on peaceful relations?  Egypt had peace within its sights and now we are further away than we were one year ago. 

Well, all we can do is work even more than we have in the past to ensure that the threat of violence is not part of the children’s day.