TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 10 °C Wednesday 19 June, 2013

The progression in world views on Syria’s conflict

Take a look at how the views of world leaders progressed since the start of the Syrian protests.

Image: Mohammad Hannon/AP/Press Association Images

YESTERDAY’S STATEMENT BY the International Committee of the Red Cross that it considers Syria’s conflict a civil war is the latest in the progression of sharpening world views of that country’s bloodshed since it began in March 2011 with the regime’s crackdown on protesters against the rule of President Bashar Assad.

Here is a glance at some key statements by politicians and international officials on the conflict.

MARCH, APRIL, 2011:

In early days of protests, US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton expresses hopes for reform from Assad, saying he is a “different leader” than Libya’s then leader Moammar Gadhafi and urging Assad to “be responsive to the needs” of Syrians. But by mid April, her tone toughens, saying, “We strongly condemn the abhorrent violence committed against peaceful protesters by the Syrian government over the past few weeks.”

AUGUST 3:

The UN Security Council issues its first presidential statement on the crisis — weaker than a binding resolution — urging Syrian authorities to end all violence and launch an inclusive political process. Ever since then, the council has been unable to pass a resolution on the crisis, with Assad’s allies Russia and China twice vetoing drafts, most recently in February.

AUGUST 18:

“For the sake of the Syrian people, the time has come for President Assad to step aside,” US President Barack Obama says in a call simultaneously echoed by British Prime Minister David Cameron, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel — their first outright demand for Assad to go.

Syria’s crackdown “may amount to crimes against humanity,” investigators from the UN Human Rights Council say in a report, noting a pattern “widespread or systematic attacks against the civilian population.” The report advises Syria be referred to the International Criminal Court.

The following day, the court’s prosecutor says it has no jurisdiction since Syria is not a member, unless the Security Council votes to refer it.

DECEMBER  2:

“The Syrian authorities’ continual ruthless repression, if not stopped now, can drive the country into a full-fledged civil war,” says Navi Pillay, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. She says the violence reinforces the need for the Security Council to submit the situation in the country to the ICC.

FEBRUARY 5, 2012:

After Russia and China veto latest attempt at a UN Security Council resolution on Syria, Clinton warns that a failure to act increases chances for “a brutal civil war” as Syrians move to defend themselves from crackdown.

“Based on definitions of war criminal and crimes against humanity, there would be an argument to be made that he would fit into that category,” Clinton says of Assad later in the month in Senate testimony.

MAY 31:

“The longer this goes on, the longer that Assad and his thugs are allowed to brutally murder the Syrian people, the more likely it becomes a sectarian civil war, ” White House press secretary Jay Carney says, also citing potential of a “proxy war” with Iran backing Assad and other nations backing insurgents.

JUNE 12:

UN peacekeeping chief, Herve Ladsous, says the Syrian conflict has escalated into civil war: “Yes, I think one can say that.”

Read:Russia says foreign partners in ‘blackmail’ over Syria>
Civil war declared in Syria as fighting escalates>

  • Share on Facebook
  • Email this article
  •  

Read next:

Comments (1 Comment)

  • Surprise, surprise.
    Russia again says that the U.N. should not boot out Assad from Syria.
    And again we are shocked, dismayed and disappointed.
    Why?
    Russia and China have their own reasons not to lift a finger in Syria — but we are not waiting for them anymore.
    Rather, we will join other countries willing help to take care of the necessary business in Syria — just as we had done in Libya.
    This time around, Russia and China had their chance to be part of the solution. Over and over, they have refused — less they ultimately rattle their own house of cards.
    Fine.
    But their inaction has committed them to getting out of the way. They can do so and save face, or that they can continue to be obstreperous and lose more face.
    Either way, we are moving forward without them.
    As for Lavrov’s claim that the West is blackmailing Russia, most countries see it the other way around.

    Reply

Add New Comment