Why We Should Never Pay Ransoms

In 2013 G8 leaders agreed that they would not pay ransoms for captured citizens. Recently it has emerged that Italy, Germany and France may have renegaded on their promise and paid ransoms to the terrorist organisation ISIL. Considering that other countries have decided to pay the ransoms, should Britain and America follow suit? The short answer: No.

By paying ransoms to terrorists you endanger other westerners by making them bigger targets. The terrorists know that governments are prepared to pay ransoms, and so they will go out of their way to capture more westerners in the hopes of making more money. Different groups have been demanding money for hostages from the American and British governments for decades with little success. The last known case of either government paying ransoms for hostage was the Iran-Contra Affair that nearly got Reagan impeached in the 1980s. So why do Brits and Americans continue to be taken hostage if their governments refuse to pay ransoms? Well sometimes families manage to raise enough money to pay the ransom, helping to maintain the cycle. Another reason is that they put themselves in a win-win situation. If they get the money, then they have more money to fund their activities. On the other hand if they don’t receive the money and they kill the hostage, then they receive a huge amount of publicity, which is exactly what they want.

The more important reason why you shouldn’t pay the ransoms is that the money paid is financing terrorists. ISIL demanded $132million (£80 million) for the release of American journalist James Foley. If the American government had given ISIL that money, they would have used it to fund their war in Iraq and Syria. This would have resulted in hundreds of people dead and ISIL would have been in a stronger position.

Thankfully the British public understand this, in aYouGov poll conducted in early September 68% of respondents said that it was wrong to pay the ransoms, compared to 9% who said it was right and 24% who said that they “don’t know”. This is encouraging as it means there is no pressure from the public to do the wrong thing. 

Civil War Returns to Iraq

Civil War has returned to Iraq as the sectarian and ethnic conflict between Sunni Muslims, Shia Muslims, and the Kurds, takes a turn for the worse. The Jihadist organisation ISIL (Islamic State in Iraq andthe Levant)* has taken large portions of the north and west, including Iraq’s second city Mosul.

So far ISIL has encountered very little resistance from the Iraqi Army, when ISIL came to take the city of Mosul the Army fled so quickly that they left behind all of their equipment! This becomes even more shocking when you realise that the ISIL contingent had less than 1000 men andthe Iraqi Army had over 60,000! They ran away so fast that they left behind tanks and military jets! So why on earth did the Army run away when they outnumbered the enemy 60:1 and has massive technological superiority? The answer lies in the sectarian makeup of Iraq, and its institutions. The army, like the government, is mostly Shia, whilst Mosul is dominated by Sunni Muslims.

The soldiers had no interest in defending Mosul from a Sunni organisation like ISIL. They are not going to risk their lives ‘protecting’ people who at best, they don’t care about, or at worst they hate. That is why the fighting so far has produced fewer casualties than you might expect. The bloodbath will truly begin when ISIL attempts to take territory that is disputed or majority Shi’ite. This could come sooner than you think. ISIL is less than 50km from Baghdad and Baghdad is mostly Shi’ite. When the Battle for Baghdad starts you will not see the army fleeing, instead they will fight and thousands will die.

The ethnic/sectarian divisions of Iraq
source: The Economist

Another piece in this complex puzzle of Iraq are the Kurds. The Kurds are an ethnic group in the region that have been persecuted for a long time. Although they are Sunni, they are often thought of as being primarily Kurdish and secondarily Sunni. They form a majority in north eastern Iraq, and for the past several years have had some de facto independence. They have their own army, the Peshmarga, which has over 200,000 soldiers which is why ISIL has not tried to take Kurdish territory. In fact this has worked out well for the Kurds, so far, as the Iraqi Army flees the north, they have been able to capture more territory that was formerly in dispute, including the oil rich city of Kirkuk.

There is no easy solution to the chaos that has engulfed Iraq. What I currently favour is sending UN peacekeepers to Iraq to split the country into three new countries, Sunni Iraq, Shi’ite Iraq and Kurdistan. Obviously this is easier said than done, and will involve blood being spilt on all sides. I do believe that the partition of Iraq holds the best hope of achieving some form of peace and stability in the country.

*sometimes referred to as ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria)

The Bloodshed in Syria Continues

The Civil War in Syria has been raging for almost three years and doesn’t look like it is ending anytime soon. So far an estimated 165,000 people have been killed in the bloodshed that has created 3,000,000 refugees.

Fighting continues across the country between the rebels and the government for control of land. As the horrors of the war become more and more vivid, and especially after President Bashar Al-Assad used chemical weapons, the West began to prepare for war. Going to war because of suspected chemical weapons? For many in the West this brought back horrible memories of the Iraq War, an invasion that was built on the lie that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). In September a poll showed 72% of Europeans and 62% of Americans opposed military intervention. Nonetheless, the march to war has begun and surely nothing could stop it!

Wrong! It turned out that war was not inevitable! In Britain war was surprisingly stopped by Parliament of all places. What was meant to be a largely symbolic vote in favour of intervention if Syria turned out did use chemical weapons, turned into one of the biggest news stories of the year. The vote failed 285-272, the first time Parliament had voted against any sort of Act of War in centuries. This did major damage to Britain’s prestige and to the war movement. Despite this setback, America and France continued to gear up for war. What really rocked the military, and averted Western intervention, was thanks to American Secretary of State John Kerry. It was also a complete accident on Kerry’s behalf.

In a news conference, Kerry was asked by Margaret Brennan of CBS News if there was anything the Syrian government could do to prevent an American bombing. Kerry said that the only way for Syria to prevent intervention would be for it to give up its chemical weapons immediately. Kerry immediately derided it as impossible and moved on to the next question. Well that off-hand comment ended up being the most important in all of 2013 (well at least the most important one that’s publically known). Almost as soon as that clip was aired around the world, the Syrians and Russians pounced on it.

Seeing it as the only opportunity to prevent a Western intervention, Syria promised that it would allow United Nations weapons inspectors into the country. Syria would then hand over all chemical weapons to be safely destroyed! By September an agreement was reached that would result in the elimination of all Syria’s chemical weapons by mid-2014. In October the UN declared that all of Syria’s facilities that could create chemical weapons had been destroyed.

Despite the success with chemical weapons, Syria is far from resolved. Removing chemical weapons does nothing to reduce the death and destruction occurring in the Middle Eastern country. Unfortunately there seems to be very little chance of the Civil War easing up at all this year. I am making the rather horribly prediction that the Syrian war will continue as bloody as ever. By the end of the year at least 200,000 people will be dead.

Egyptian Revolution: Round II

In the Arab Spring of 2011, Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak was forced to resign following mass protests and the desertion of his army. Following democratic elections in 2011/2012 Islamist Mohamed Morsi became the first democratically elected President of Egypt. Naturally the election of an Islamist angered and scared secularists and Christians in Egypt, who feared that society might end up looking like Iran.

After Morsi was elected, he began to take more and more powers for himself. He arrested more people for the ‘crime’ of insulting the President than Mubarak had done in his entire run as President! He also gave immunity to those working on drafting the new constitution, who were only Islamists by this stage.

Protests against the leadership and actions of President Morsi began in late 2012 after Morsi’s government effectively gave the President unlimited power. This may have seemed like a good idea to the Islamists, but considering that Egyptians had proven themselves adept at revolutions, it was actually a monumentally stupid one! The protesters simply would not go away. Protests intensified in late June 2013 as the one year anniversary of Morsi’s inauguration approached. Eventually the army intervened and deposed President Morsi on the 3^rd of July 2013. The Army’s leader, General al-Sisi announced that Adly Mansour, Chief Justice of the Supreme Constitutional Court would become interim President.

Despite Morsi’s unpopularity with many Egyptians, particularly secularists, liberals and Christians, he still had many supporters. As well as being President, Morsi was leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist organisation that has been banned in Egypt for most of its existence. After Morsi was deposed several other leaders were arrested and the Muslim Brotherhood was made illegal once again in September. Naturally the Muslim Brotherhood protested against their treatment, but they experienced a bloody crackdown. Despite the bloodshed, they are still protesting.

Egypt has had a tumultuous few years since the 2011 Revolution, and it certainly won’t become a stable democracy overnight. The future is unclear, it will be difficult, but if good Egyptians work hard, they can prevent Egypt from stumbling back into dictatorship.

Protesters in Tahrir Square, Cairo in 2013
source: freethoughtblogs.com

No Intervention?

It all seemed set, the US was going to bomb Syria with French help and without the British. Although Obama decided to ask Congress, he refused to say whether or not he would bomb Syria if Congress said no.  Then Secretary of State, John Kerry, made some off the cuff remarks whilst in London that changed everything. In response to a reporter's question Kerry said that the only way Syria could prevent the bombings would be to hand over all its chemical weapons.

Now all of a sudden 'peace' seems to be an option. The Russians and Assad jumped at the opportunity to prevent the strikes. If Assad does hand all his chemical weapons to the international community then this saga will have been a success (in a way). It was the credible threat of force that made Assad agree to this and could save Obama a lot of face. Intervention in Syria is unpopular and Obama's reputation was on the line. Now he may have removed chemical weapons from Syria without a single bomb dropped.

Yet we have to be careful, as the old Russian proverb says; trust, but verify. As we do not know how many chemical weapons Assad has, it will be difficult to confirm that he has gotten rid of all of his them. We must not get overexcited either, the situation in Syria is terrible at the moment; after all it is a Civil War. It won't be easy getting UN inspectors into Syria to remove the chemical weapons and even harder for them to prove that they have taken them all. Nonetheless this must be done to get rid of some of these horrifying weapons.

Don't get me wrong, I still favour intervention. But my will to intervene has very little to do with chemical weapons. I've been advocating for a no fly zone for a while now to even the fight between rebels and the Assad regime. Removing chemical weapons will not do this but it still a good move and I applaud it.

Britain Won't Intervene

Syria has dominated the headlines over the past few days and for good reason. It was announced that the UN inspectors would be finished and out of Syria by Saturday, the BBC revealed a new regime-committed atrocity, and France and America will likely intervene in Syria. But the biggest news came out of the UK.

Last night the House of Commons rejected David Cameron's proposal that we should have some form of limited intervention in Syria. This was despite Cameron conceding that intervention would have to follow the UN inspectors' report, that there would be a second vote in the House of Commons and we should at least try to go through the UN. The pro-intervention side said that we must show Assad that we are serious and that intervention would be perfectly legal from a humanitarian standpoint. Unfortunately Labour won the vote, 285 against intervention, 272 in favour. This means that Britain will not be able to intervene in Syria and it sends the message to Assad that Britain will not act against him if he uses chemical weapons again.

As this vote was taking place last night, the BBC was releasing evidence of a new atrocity in Syria. A Syrian air-force jet dropped, what is believed to be, some form of incendiary bomb on a school playground. The BBC reported that the injuries from nearby victims was consistent with that of napalm. So far, ten have died.

Meanwhile the US has revealed that it is certain that Assad used chemical weapons earlier this month. The report claimed that the US knows exactly when the attack took place and where the chemicals were launched from. The report claims that 1,429 people were killed and 426 were children. So the US and France are intervening, whilst Britain sits on the sidelines and Russia raises tensions by sending a warship to the eastern Mediterranean.

Watch this space folks.

Intervention is Coming

It looks like the world may finally take action in Syria, despite the conflict starting almost 900 days ago. The rhetoric has began to get really angry across the West as the evidence for a chemical attack became more and more concrete. On the 25th Medecins San Frontieres announced that they had treated around 3,600 people that showed signs of 'neurotoxic symptoms', later 355 died.

The US Secretary of State, John Kerry, said in a press conference that the attack was "a moral obscenity that should shock the world." He also added; "make no mistake, President Obama believes there must be accountability for those who would use the world's most heinous weapons against the world's most vulnerable people." According to current reports, the US military reaction will occur in the next few days, before Congress returns from holiday.

In Britain the reaction has been even stronger with David Cameron returning early from his holiday and recalling Parliament on Thursday. Foreign Secretary, William Hague, said in an interview that Britain would be prepared to intervene in Syria without UN authorisation - by far the strongest language so far.

In Russia and Syria, the opinion is very different. The Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, called an unauthorised intervention "a very grave violation of international law." The Russians have also claimed that there never even was a chemical attack - a ridiculous claim considering the overwhelming evidence.

So we have finally arrived at the point where Western military action is not only a possibility, but likely. France and Britain seem very willing to intervene in some form without a UN resolution. The USA is certainly a lot more timid about intervening but the chemical attacks appear to have persuaded America to act. We don't know quite how the West will react, it will almost certainly be a coordinated response, most likely through NATO. Stay tuned folks, the next few days will be very important. 

Chemical Weapons Must Force West to Act

The crisis in Syria has (somehow) gotten even worse with more reports that the Assad regime has allegedly used chemical weapons. The accusations come as UN inspectors arrive in Syria to inspect its chemical weapons stockpile. The chemical weapon in question? Sarin gas, the same chemical that Saddam Hussein used against the Kurds in 1988. At the moment the reports are not verified, but there has been footage showing piles of dead bodies with no wounds, indicating some form of chemical weapons being deployed. The problem for the West is that verifying the use of sarin gas is extremely difficult, in 1988 it took four years to confirm its use and the compounds break-up rapidly.

I have been writing about the Syrian crisis for over a year and a half now and I feel that most posts boil down to the same storyline: Assad does something terrible, the West condemns it, Russia ignores it, Assad denies it and nothing changes. This post largely seems similar but there is a difference; the West (and Obama in particular) could have made the entire situation worse.

Earlier this year Western intelligence agencies confirmed that they had a "high degree of confidence" that Assad had used chemical weapons. This was met by the usual condemnation by the West and denial by Syria and Russia. The big question at the time was; what would the West do? Obama had called the use of chemical weapons a red line. So when Assad, according to the intelligence community, crossed the line, what did Obama do? Well he gave us a few good speeches and possibly did some minor things behind the scenes, but nothing overt. Obama's inaction turned out to be very important as then Assad knew that he could do anything he wanted, with little fear of Western retaliation. It emboldened him to use chemical weapons, which it looks like he just has.

By now we must realise that going through the UN is useless. Russia has a veto on the United Nations Security Council and US-Russia relations are at a low point over Snowden and Syria. The chances of a deal are low. The Western powers, in particular Britain, France and the US, must act without the UN. We must create a no-fly-zone to start with. We can use Turkey and Israel as our allies to help enforce it. Britain already has a large presence in the area due to massive bases at Akrotiri and Dhekelia on Cyprus and America has massive bases in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. This could be started very quickly, and every day we wait, more people die.

Chaos Returns to Egypt

Egypt has been plunged into chaos since President Morsi was deposed earlier this week and much of the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood was arrested. Egypt is split over whether to support the actions of the army, initially Morsi opponents spilled onto the streets, letting off fireworks and cheering with joy. The Muslim Brotherhood and its supporters are distraught and have since poured onto the streets to show their rejection of the army's actions. Some protests have turned violent and over 70 protesters have been killed in clashes with the army and security forces. The next few weeks will be extremely important for Egypt's future as the Muslim Brotherhood continues to protest and the army continues to crack down on them. The army has called for fresh elections to the presidency and parliament and a re-drawing of the constitution.

New elections will give the secularist left a chance to steal the revolution back from the Islamists. The left was totally disorganised at the last election in 2012 with no uniting candidate for President. This meant that the run-off for president was between Ahmed Shafik and Mohammed Morsi. Shafik had been the final Prime Minister under Mubarak and Morsi had the backing of the 85 year old Muslim Brotherhood, so both were considerably better organised than the disorientated left.

If Egypt actually makes it to the next election in a peaceful state then we can only hole that the President Egypt chooses is not an Islamists or a Mubarak crony but rather a force for change.

North Korea Vs. Iran

In the past couple of years we have heard a lot about the nuclear programmes in North Korea and Iran, yet the public in the West only seems to take Iran seriously. Here are some similarities and differences between the two countries.

Both countries have issued serious threats to nearby countries. Iran has threatened to wipe Israel off the map, North Korea has threatened to turn South Korea into a "sea of fire".

Both nations have active nuclear programmes.

Both are dictatorships.

Both countries suppress free speech.

Both countries are currently under sanctions from the UN.

Both countries frequently threaten the West.

Only one has tested nuclear weapons - North Korea

Only one has nuclear weapons - North Korea

Only one has 'declared' war on its sworn enemy - North Korea

As you can see both countries are very similar in how they approach the world, yet only one of them is taken seriously by the Western Public. Despite the fact that we take North Korea less seriously, it has the more advanced nuclear programme! So why do we take Iran more seriously than North Korea? I will try and help you out.

One of the primary reasons is the culture of islamophobia in the West, particularly in the United States. The failed states, such as Afghanistan, have been breeding terrorists for decades that attacked Westerners living in the area. After Al Qaeda turned global in 2001, the fear the West had for Muslims went sky high causing many people to fear Muslims. The fact that Iran is a Muslim country fuels peoples' fears and means we take Iran more seriously. There is also the more rational fear that if Iran develops nuclear weapons, and the weapons fall into the hands of Al Qaeda, then the risk to the West would be massive.

Iran and North Korea both know that if they attack the USA, or its allies, with nuclear weapons, then the USA will retaliate with nuclear weapons, annihilating their countries. This is another reason why people are more fearful of a nuclear Iran; Iran is fun by Muslim fundamentalists and the fear is that they might decide that annihilation is worth it for 'Jihad'. On the other hand the regime in North Korea is the most important thing to North Koreans, annihilation is the last thing they want.

The last reason we take North Korea less seriously than Iran is about the image portrayed by both nations and their leaders. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is older and looks more serious than the podgy, young Kim Jong-Un. North Korean propaganda also makes North Korea look like a joke, the little we hear about them is simply hilarious. According to North Korean propaganda, Jim Il-Sung (the original dictator) had a "supernatural" birth,  Jim Jong-Il was a worldwide fashion trend setter and people loved him globally and he invented the hamburger. Less is propaganda is known about Kim Jong-Un, apart from the 'fact' that he found a unicorn lair. Seriously. And North Korea wonders why we won't take them seriously.

The Next Failed State?

It seems that Syria may become the world’s latest addition to its failed states list. The violence that has been raging for two years has torn the country apart, the UN estimates over 70,000 Syrians have been killed, 1.2 million internally displaced and around 500,000 have fled to neighbouring countries. Unfortunately for the Syrian people, the end is nowhere in sight. The rebels have grabbed control over vast proportions of the north and east of the country, whilst the government still controls most of the major cities as well as the southern and coastal areas. Whereas the Assad loyalists have aircrafts and tanks, the rebels mostly have AK-47s and other small weapons. The international community has been totally inept in dealing with Syria, the UN Security Council won’t ever be able to act as Russia (which can veto any resolution) remains an ally of Syria. America and Britain both back the rebels over Assad but remember vividly the spectacular failure of the Iraq War and subsequent violence. Russia and Iran still back the Assad regime, providing him with arms and money which render Western sanctions largely ineffective.

The West must change its position on Syria, our current approach is simply not working, to many Syrians have died already. A good start would be to create a no fly zone over Syria and enforcing it, this would help the rebels deep in rebel held territory as the regime would find it harder to attack them. It would also give Syrians fleeing Assad’s henchmen a safe haven and it would give the rebels a chance to gain strength. Limited arming of the rebels should be carried out, strictly to non-Islamist/Salafist groups, this would give the rebels a better chance of winning against tanks and other heavy machinery. Over the past decade the West has tried to stamp out terrorism wherever it finds it, if Syria were to fall into pure and unadulterated chaos, then we would have another area of the world perfect for breeding terrorists.

Tomorrow a group of countries called the “Friends of Syria” will meet in Rome along with leaders of the Syrian opposition. The group contains over 100 countries, including America, France and Britain and aims to help the rebels. Previous meetings don’t seem to have had much effect on Syria, let’s hope this meeting goes better.

Whilst the world watches and discusses action in Syria, many more will die. We must act soon, to save lives.

Tunisian Democracy in Peril?

Tunisia is the birthplace of the Arab Spring, the protests that began there and toppled a government quickly spread throughout the Middle East. Unfortunately Tunisia’s fledgling democracy is looking increasingly unstable. Following the assassination of the opposition leader, Chokri Belaid, on the 6^th of February mass protests began and numerous politicians resigned. The latest to go is the Prime Minister, Hamadi Jebali, who resigned on Tuesday after he was unable to form a coalition and refused to create a government of technocrats. The political tensions following Mr Belaid’s assassination and the completely paralysed economy means that more protests and more violence will soon follow. Others will try and form a coalition government, but it will not be easy as tensions go and more people resign. Although still several months away, these sort of problems could prove detrimental to the smooth running of the general election scheduled for summer.

All throughout the Middle East countries that overthrew dictators look increasingly likely to relapse into autocracy, their economies are struggling due to the revolutions and their politics are increasingly tense. At a time of austerity, this may not be welcomed in the West, but we must help them out. A triad of democratic states (Tunisia, Libya and Egypt) could prove invaluable as allies and would help to stabilise the region and oil supply lines (an appeal to conservatives). We’ve already seen the invaluable work a democratic Turkey has done, adding three more nations to the list would be brilliant. We must help these nations in any way possible.

Jebali announcing his resignation
source: www.bbc.co.uk

Review 2012

Well what a year we’ve had! There has been the most expensive Presidential Election of any country ever, Greece has gone from bad to worse, the Arab Spring continues in Syria and here in Britain we entered into a double dip recession. Although I don’t feel that 2012 was the year of change that 2011 was, it will still go down as important in the history books. The shooting of a 15 year old girl by the Pakistani Taliban sparked outrage in the country. The attack could help to stop people joining the terrorist organisation! The Palestinian-Israeli conflict took a turn for the worse after Israel killed one of Hamas’ leaders and Israel was furious when Palestine had its status upgraded in the UN.

The year saw a change of leadership in China and France and Greece choose a new government for its sinking economy. It was confirmed that in 2013 the EU will get a new member, Croatia, whilst the Eurozone crisis continued to rattle on.  

The year ahead of us will be the sixth since the economic crisis began and still there is no light at the end of the tunnel. Predictions are that the Eurozone economy has shrunk by a small amount in the past year, the same is true for Britain. What stopped the crisis that began in 2007 being worse than the 1929 crash was the economies of the developing nations, particularly Brazil, China and India. Unfortunately their economies are beginning to slow down, China has stopped producing double digit growth for the first time in a decade and India and Brazil are below 5%. Although European countries would kill for growth figures like those, the world economy depends on them being very high. The US has just fallen off the fiscal cliff (although a deal should be one the way) and Europe’s economy is expected to shrink again this year, if the developing nations’ economies do start to slow this could have cataclysmic knock on effects.

We are living in a time of change, what happens over the next year could prove very important in the long run.  

Syrian Civil War

Days since it began: 658

Dead: 42,000+

It has been almost two years since anti-regime protests began peacefully. Unfortunately Syria has subsequently descended into Civil War and change is a long way off. Despite this there is some hope for the Syrian people, when protests began they had no arms or real organisation, the majority of the army remained loyal to Assad and the regime knew that it could always find an ally in Russia. Things are very different now, the rebels have taken control of vast swathes of the country, particularly in the north and the east. They now have an organisation to  co-ordinate the rebellion and is recognised by 19 countries as the legitimate government of Syria, Russia’s support for Assad is also weakening. Now Syria’s only real ally is Iran, which is currently one of the most isolated countries due to UN sanctions.

Despite the advances for the Free Syrian Army there have been terrible atrocities committed by Assad. In May 108 people were killed by Shabiha militia loyal to the government near the town of Houla. Later in June at least 78 people were killed by government forces in Hama, in July between 38 and 220 people were killed in Tremseh and in August government forces attacked the Darayya suburb of Damascus and killed over 600 people! In all these massacres it was mostly innocent civilians killed , in the Houla massacre almost half killed were children. To mark matters worse NATO confirmed that just last month the Syrian government began using Scud missiles. Sucds are ballistic missiles developed by the Soviets during the Cold War, and now Assas is using them on his fellow Syrians. Some fear it is only a matter of time until he uses chemical or biological weapons.

Yet despite all these atrocities associated with the Assad regime, little can be done within the UN. Russia continues to exercise its veto when it comes to the Syrian question. Although its support is weakening, it still exists and as long as it does the international community will be powerless. The Western and Arab powers must try and persuade Russia to stop blockading progress and help the Syrian people.

Palestinian-Israeli Conflict

The relationship between Israel and Palestine is no better at the end of 2012 than it was at the start. Israel continued with its, illegal, settlement program in the West Bank, forcing Palestinians off their land. The Israelis suffered two major defeats at the UN this year, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) voted by a very wide margin to allow Palestinian membership of the club. Naturally Israel and the US voted against, but only 12 other nations joined them whilst 52 abstained and 107 voted to allow it membership. On the 29^th of November the UN took a vote on whether to upgrade Palestine to “non-member observer state”, a title also held by the Vatican. The vote went even better for Palestine, 138 nations voted for the measure whilst 41 abstained and only nine nations voted against.

The relationship between Israel and Gaza, the thin strip of land bordering Israel, Egypt and the Mediterranean Sea, flared up again after Israel assassinated Ahmed Jabari, a leading member of Hamas. The ensuing attack and counter-attack resulted in hundreds of deaths (nearly all of which were on the Palestinian side) and there were fears that Israel was going to launch a ground invasion of Gaza. Thankfully a deal was brokered between the two, but a lasting ceasefire is a long way off.

In my opinion, the only way that this conflict will ever get sorted is if the UN gives Palestine full recognition. The US and Israel claim that this will make relations more difficult, but their point doesn’t make much sense. How can a deal really be reached when Israel is on a higher footing than Palestine, until both sides are even a deal will not be reached. The votes in the UN show that Israel is losing international support, Israel kills many more civilians than Palestine, Israel constantly breaks UN rules; most notably the settlements. I do appreciate that Israel is surrounded by hostile neighbours, but treating the Palestinians the way they do only weakens support for Israel in Europe and around the world. If Israel truly wants deal, they should start negotiating with the Palestinian leaders.

Egypt's Chaotic Year

It’s been a rocky year for Egyptians in 2012, but there is some hope for the future. It started off well in January when parliament sat for the first time, the army subsequently handed over legislative authority to the parliament. This was a sight that Egypt may indeed be moving forward, progress seemed to occur again when the presidential election took place. Although people were not pleased with the choice in the second round of voting, the Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohamed Morsi and ex-dictator Mubarak’s last Prime Minister Ahmed Shafik. Things began to look a bit more like a rollercoaster after that, later in June the army declared that it had picked the people who would sit on a 100 member assembly that would draft a new constitution and the next day it dissolved parliament. On the other hand on the 26^th of June the courts revoked a decree allowing military personnel the right to arrest civilians and on the 30^th the army handed power to the newly elected President, Mohamed Morsi.

Right from the start Morsi faced problems, the economy was (and still is) in tatters and foreign investors are wary of putting any money into Egypt. Over the coming months there was a struggle between Morsi, allied with the Islamists and Salafists, the army and a coalition of secularists, Christians and women. Unfortunately for the final group they have no power, they were outnumbered on the Constitutional Assembly and the President is an Islamist. They fear the introduction of even parts of Sharia Law, Coptic Christians account for 10% of Egypt’s 80 million citizens. The Army hopes to remain powerful, and it may get its wish! When Morsi issued his controversial decrees in November, one of them stated that the minister of defence must come from the army. This basically means that army lacks civilian oversight. The November decrees that broadened Morsi’s powers were met with anger on the streets of Egypt as people feared a return to dictatorship.

The coalition of anti-Islamists decided to boycott the referendum on the new constitution which led to the low turnout of only 33%. In the end the constitution passed with around 64% of people voting to adopt it. Next year will be very important for the direction of the country, whether it does liberalise as many people had hoped originally or does it go down the route of Sharia law?

A poster comparing Morsi to Mubarak
source: theatlantic.com

Terrorism

Terrorism did not slow down in 2012 unfortunately, thousands of people were killed across the globe in terrorist atrocities. Yet most of those attacks took place in just a handful of countries:

Country	Attacks*	Dead
Iraq	55	1,676
Afghanistan	35	543
Nigeria	21	511
Pakistan	30	425
Yemen	14	328
Somalia	11	78
Russia	9	51
Kenya	8	47
Colombia	5	31
China	2	26

*Co-ordinated attacks that take place on one day are counted as one attack.

Looking at this rather horrifying table you can see that Iraq had the worst year of any country. Terrorists killed over three times as many people as in Afghanistan, the second worst affected country. One of the most prominent terrorist attacks of the year was not in Iraq or Afghanistan, but Pakistan; the shooting of 15 year old Malala Yousafzai. Thankfully Malala survived and is recovering well in a British hospital. There were protests all across Pakistan against the assassination attempt and 50 Islamic clerics issued a fatwā against the perpetrators. Despite this the Taliban claim they still want to kill her and her father. So what was her ‘crime’? Trying to get young girls into education in Pakistan, this infuriated the Taliban who are anti-education especially when it comes to women. As Malala rose to fame in Pakistan, the Taliban increasingly sent death threats to her home and on the internet. But she continued in her struggle, in 2011 Desmond Tutu nominated her for the International Children’s Peace Prize and later won Pakistan’s first National Youth Prize. Time magazine recently selected her as the runner up of Time Magazine’s person of the year.

There was some pleasant news on the terrorist front, Anders Breivik, was finally sentenced to Prison for this mass shooting and bombing in July 2011.  There is finally closure for the families of the 77 killed and those that were on the island of Utøya on that fateful day.

Up until November 2012, Northern Ireland was relatively quiet on the terrorism front, apart from the odd bomb scare. Then on the 1^st of November a prison officer was shot dead. Then trouble began after Belfast City Council voted to fly the Union flag on certain days of the year. That seriously upset some unionists who for the past few weeks have been causing chaos across Northern Ireland, but particularly in Belfast.

Terrorism is something that will likely always exist, it will never go away but certain places such as the Basque region, Northern Ireland and Sri Lanka all prove that things can be done to improve the situation, to show the terrorists that talking produces better results. The West should learn from these if it ever wants to truly ‘defeat the Taliban’.

Malala Yousafzai's page in Time Magazine

Morsi Bows to Pressure

Early this month I posted about Egypt’s democracy being on a knife edge, the President Mohamed Morsi had issued a number of decrees with massively expanded his authority. This sparked massive protests, the biggest since last year’s revolution, under pressure Morsi has cancelled some of the controversial decrees. Morsi has cancelled the decrees which block judges from challenging his authority and give him the ability of pass ‘emergency laws’. Yet this does not mean that the protests will end and everyone will go home happy, the opposition protests also want the constitutional referendum cancelled. The constitution is not very popular with the opposition; they claim that it ignores the needs of women, secularists and the country’s significant minority.

The protests have resulted in seven deaths and over 700 injuries, the Cairo headquarters of the Muslim Brotherhood (Morsi’s party) have been set on fire and protesters have threatened the Presidential Palace. Morsi has been forced to retreat behind barbed wire, police, militias and tanks as the protests have become increasingly violent. Some of the protesters have begun calling for Morsi to resign.

Egypt’s powerful army has warned against the country entering a “dark tunnel” and have called for the two sides to meet and broker a compromise. Despite Morsi’s repeal of a decree, a compromise is looking increasingly unlikely. Just today an opposition group has announced that they will boycott the referendum, which is scheduled to take place next Saturday. This doesn’t seem like the best idea, in boycotting the referendum they will not register a vote against it and therefore make the constitution more likely to become the law. It is a dangerous game they are playing, both sides argue that they have the ideas of the revolution at heart but they seem unable to agree on anything.

The events of the following week will be extremely important for the future of Egypt and the chances of its democracy surviving.

Syria Crisis: Day 716

In the 716 days that have succeeded the 15^th of March 2011 roughly 40,000 Syrian civilians have been killed in the Syrian Civil War that threatens Bashar Al-Assad’s regime. Despite set-backs in the early parts of the War, more recently it would seem that in recent months the Syrian opposition has been slowly gaining ground and possibly the upper hand. On the international stage the Syrian opposition is continuously gaining ground over the Assad regime, with the formation of the ‘National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces’, the revolution gained on a key diplomatic front. Since then 11 countries (Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, France, Turkey, UK and Italy) have recognised the National Coalition as the ‘sole legitimate representative of Syria’, most of the rest of Europe and the United States have given the NC at least some recognition.

Inside Syria things are looking darker for the regime; rebel forces have taken a number of military bases, including an airport, in the eastern province of Deir Ez-Zor. The rebels have also made some significant advances in Syria’s second city of Aleppo, capturing at least five army bases in the past few weeks. Capturing these bases not only provides the rebels with good morale, but with crucial tanks, heavy weapons and anti-aircraft missiles. High profile defections seem to happen every couple of weeks, this helps to weaken Assad politically.

Yet it’s not all over for the Assad regime, international allies in the form of Iran and Russia are proving vital for the regime. There have been reports that Russia has been supplying Assad with tonnes of banknotes to prevent the economic collapse of the Syrian government. Russian made weapons have also allowed the regime to gain a significant advantage over the rebels in technology.

Despite this, the odds are stacked against Assad, what worries many people are the possibility of the use of chemical weapons. The international community does know that the Assad regime has many chemical weapons; if Assad chose to use them they would devastate Syria. Releasing just one chemical weapon in a densely populated city such as Aleppo would kill thousands of civilians in one fell swoop. Although the Assad regime has promised never to use them, we know he is not a trustworthy person.

If Assad did choose to use chemical weapons, it would be the end for his regime. There is no way Russia could justify supporting his regime if he used this form of attack. It would spark such an outrage in western countries that military intervention could become a possibility, President Obama and David Cameron have both spoken about how the use of chemical weapons would be a red line. If Assad chooses to use chemical weapons, his end would be swift 

Democracy in Egypt on Life Support

When Hosni Mubarak was ousted as dictator of Egypt last year there was a wave of hope that change was coming. In the past year and a half there were the first elections to Egypt's parliament and the position of president was actually elected. Yet Egypt's fledgling democracy now lives on a knife edge. Riding on a wave of praise due to his involvement in the Gaza-Israeli ceasefire, Morsi decided that it would be a good time to give himself radical new powers and issue other decrees that infuriated Egyptians. The resulting fury spilt into protests across Egypt and the largest (as always) was in Tahrir Square, Cairo. The protests, which are the largest since the 2011 Revolutionary Protests, should remind Morsi that he only has weak support. Although Morsi did win the Presidential election, he only received 51.7% of the vote and the only other candidate was a Mubarak ally. Many Egyptians chose Morsi, not because they liked him by because he was the lesser of two evils. Ordinary civilians aren't the only ones angry at Morsi, frightful investors cause the stock market to plummet by 12%, Egypt's judges have gone on strike an basically every Christian, secularist and female representative in parliament has resigned.

For many Egyptians the decrees prove their extreme suspicion of Morsi and his party, the Muslim Brotherhood. One of the more controversial decrees is to put the president above the law until a constitution imposes a limit! Morsi had also decreed that there can no longer be any legal challenges to the body that drew up the constitution. Not all the decrees have caused anger, the decision to fire the public prosecutor, a Mubarak appointee and allowing the retrials of Mubarak's allies were welcomed.

The constitution going forward to a referendum could easily be defeated by a coalition of secularists, Christians, women and trade unions. Many fear the constitution puts too much power in the hands of the executive and the military (a combination which ruled with an iron grip for 40 years). The decision that the defence minister must also was be in the army had worried many that without civilian oversight, the army will be as powerful as ever. If Egyptians reject the constitution it gives hope that a new one will be fairer and less Islamist. The opposition needs to form a strong coalition to fight back against the powerful Muslim Brotherhood.