Assad: Risk of regional war if West strikes Syria

France released an intelligence report on Monday alleging chemical weapons use by Syria's regime that dovetailed with similar U.S. claims, as President Bashar Assad warned that any military strike against his country would spark an uncontrollable regional war and spread "chaos and extremism."
The verbal crossfire, including a rejection of the Western allegations by longtime Syrian ally Russia, was part of frenzied efforts on both sides to court international public opinion after President Barack Obama said he would seek authorization from Congress before launching any military action against Assad's regime.
In an interview with French newspaper Le Figaro, Assad was quoted as saying that Syria has challenged the U.S. and France to provide proof to support their allegations, but that their leaders "have been incapable of doing that, including before their own peoples."
"If the Americans, the French or the British had a shred of proof, they would have shown it beginning on the first day," he said, deriding Obama as "weak" and having buckled to U.S. domestic political pressure.
"We believe that a strong man is one who prevents war, not one who inflames it," Assad said.
French President Francois Hollande and Obama have been the two world leaders most vocally calling for action against Assad's regime, accusing it of carrying out a deadly chemical attack against rebel-held suburbs of Damascus on Aug. 21.
The U.S. said it has proof that the Assad regime is behind attacks that Washington claims killed at least 1,429 people, including more than 400 children. Those numbers are significantly higher than the death toll of 355 provided by the aid group Doctors Without Borders.
It has marked an intolerable escalation in a two-year civil war in Syria that has left some 100,000 people dead.
The Syrian government denies the allegations, and blames opposition fighters. In the Figaro interview, Assad questioned whether an attack took place at all and refused to say whether his forces have chemical weapons, as is widely believed.
If the U.S. and France strike, "Everyone will lose control of the situation ... Chaos and extremism will spread. The risk of a regional war exists," he added.

View gallery."

A Syrian refugee uses a mobile phone as she walks with a child after crossing the Turkish Cilvegozu  …

To back up its case, the French government published a nine-page intelligence synopsis Monday that concluded Assad's regime had launched an attack on Aug. 21 involving a "massive use of chemical agents," and could carry out similar strikes in the future.
In all, though, the French report provided little new concrete evidence beyond what U.S. officials provided over the weekend in Washington. Along with it, the French Defense Ministry posted on its Web site six clips of amateur video showing victims, some of which has already been widely available online and in the international media.
In the Figaro interview, Assad said "all the accusations are based on allegations of the terrorists and on arbitrary videos posted on the Internet."
The French report made no specific reference to the agencies involved or how the intelligence was collected about the attack, aside from referring to videos of the injured or killed, doctors' accounts, and "independent evaluations" such as one from Paris-based humanitarian aid group Doctors Without Borders three days after the attack.
A French government official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to speak about the matter because of its sensitivity, said the analysis was written by the spy agency DGSE and the military intelligence unit, DRM, and was based on satellite imagery, video images, and on-the-ground sources — plus samples collected from the alleged chemical attacks in April.
The assessment said it was "very unlikely" that Syria's opposition had falsified images of suffering children that turned up online. It also said intelligence indicated the opposition "does not have the means to conduct such a large attack with chemical agents."
Around the time of the attack, Assad's regime feared a possible opposition strike on Damascus: "Our evaluation is that the regime was looking to loosen the vice and secure the strategic sites for the control of the capital," the report said.
The synopsis also said French intelligence services had collected urine, blood, soil and munitions samples from two attacks in April — in Saraqeb and Jobar — that confirmed the use of sarin gas.
France is "determined to take action against the use of chemical weapons by the regime of Bashar Assad, and to dissuade it from doing so again," Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault said after hosting lawmakers to discuss the intelligence on Syria. "This act cannot go without a response."
France won't act alone and Hollande was "continuing his work of persuasion to bring together a coalition," Ayrault said. French parliament will debate the Syria issue Wednesday, but no vote is scheduled. The French constitution doesn't require such a vote for Hollande, though he could decide to call for one.

View gallery."

In this citizen journalism image provided by the United media office of Arbeen which has been authen …

Russia, which along with Iran has been a staunch supporter of Assad through the conflict, brushed aside Western evidence of an alleged Syrian regime role.
"What our American, British and French partners showed us in the past and have showed just recently is absolutely unconvincing," Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Monday before the French report was released. "And when you ask for more detailed proof they say all of this is classified, so we cannot show this to you."
"There was nothing specific there, no geographic coordinates, no names, no proof that the tests were carried out by the professionals," he said, without identifying which tests.
Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed to send a delegation of Russian lawmakers to the U.S. to discuss the situation in Syria with members of Congress. Two top Russian legislators suggested that to Putin, pointing to polls that have shown little support among Americans for armed intervention in Syria.
On Sunday, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said Washington received new physical evidence in the form of blood and hair samples that show sarin gas was used in the attack. It wasn't immediately clear whether that evidence had been shared with Russia.
U.N. chemical inspectors toured the stricken areas last week, collecting biological and soil samples. A U.N. statement said the team "worked around the clock" to finalize preparations of the samples, which were shipped Monday afternoon from The Hague and would reach their designated laboratories "within hours," the statement said.
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon planned to brief the Security Council's 10 non-permanent members on the Syria crisis Tuesday morning. Angela Kane, high representative for disarmament affairs, planned a Tuesday briefing for member states that requested the investigation of alleged chemical weapons use in the Ghouta area outside Damascus on Aug. 21.
The Obama administration has failed to bring together a broad international coalition in support of military action, having so far only secured the support of France.
Britain's Parliament narrowly voted against the country's participation in any military strike last week, despite appeals by Prime Minister David Cameron. The Arab League has stopped short of endorsing a Western strike against Syria.
In an emergency meeting Sunday, the 22-state League urged the United Nations and the international community to take "deterrent" measures under international law to stop the Syrian regime's crimes. Russia or China would likely veto any U.N. Security Council resolution sanctioning a Western strike against Syria

Panama says Cuban weapons shipment violates U.N. arms embargo

Cuban weapons found in July aboard a North Korean ship trying to cross the Panama Canal violated United Nations weapons sanctions, Panamanian officials said, citing an unpublished U.N. report on the incident.

Cuban officials said Thursday that they had no comment on the Panamanian allegations.

In July, Cuba's foreign ministry issued a statement that said the undeclared shipment discovered aboard the ship consisted of obsolete weapons being sent to North Korea for repairs before being returned to Cuba.

But Panamanian officials have said that under 10,000 tons of Cuban sugar, they found operational weaponry, including MiG fighter jets, anti-aircraft systems and explosives.

Weapons found on North Korean ship

Cuba: Weapons on N. Korean ship are ours

Ship seized

"The Cuban weapons on the North Korean ship undeniably violated the U.N. weapons embargo," said a statement issued Wednesday by Panama's Ministry of Public Security, citing a preliminary report by U.N. weapons inspectors who inspected the ship.

Despite Cuba's assertions that the weapons were being sent for repairs, the shipment may have been intended to bolster North Korea's own defenses.

"North Korea is very interested in maintaining its MiG-21 fleet," said James Hardy, Asia-Pacific editor for Jane's Defence Weekly. "It may be a 50-year-old plane, but it's very fast and capable in a dogfight."

Still, Hardy said, if the shipment was part of an illegal arms deal, it remains to be seen what further sanctions Cuba or North Korea could face.

"The U.N. sanctions are very strict," he said. "But the consequences are not clear."

While authorities have not said what will become of the Cuban weapons, the North Korean crew may finally be heading home.

Panamanian authorities met Wednesday with North Korean diplomats and said they agreed to begin the process of repatriating the 35-member North Korean crew, who have been held in Panama after initially trying to prevent authorities from searching the ship.

That ship, the Chong Chon Gang, could also be returned to North Korea after repairs are made. According to the Panamanian statement, the crew rendered the ship inoperable during the struggle to keep customs authorities from boarding it.

Although secret shipments of arms between North Korea and Cuba were not previously well-known, they apparently have taken place for decades.

In July, former President Fidel Castro wrote that in the 1980s, North Korea sent Cuba 100,000 AK-47 rifles after the Soviet Union denied the island military aid that could be used to repel a feared U.S. invasion.

"They did not charge us a cent," Castro wrote of the North Korean shipments.

Syria allies: Why Russia, Iran and China are standing by the regime

Allegations of a chemical weapons attack carried out by the Syrian regime last week have heightened tensions internationally. There's been tough talk from Western leaders and a flurry of activity by the United States -- all of which seem to suggest that a military strike against the regime could be in the offing.

But through it all, Syria seems to retain the support of some good friends.

Why do Russia, Iran and China continue to support a regime that's accused of slaughtering tens of thousands of civilians in the 2-year-old civil war?

Here's why.

Who wants what after chemical weapons horror

Source: Intercept discusses Syria attack

Damascus prepares for airstrikes

Expert: This proves chemical weapons use

UK votes against action on Syria

RUSSIA

Why it cares:

Two main reasons: One has to do with economics; the other with ideology.

a) Economics: Russia is one of Syria's biggest arms suppliers.

Syrian contracts with the Russian defense industry have likely exceeded $4 billion, according to Jeffrey Mankoff, an adjunct fellow with the Center for Strategic and International Studies Russia and Eurasia Program.

He noted the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimated the value of Russian arms sales to Syria at $162 million per year in both 2009 and 2010.

Moscow also signed a $550 million deal with Syria for combat training jets.

Russia also leases a naval facility at the Syrian port of Tartus, giving the Russian navy its only direct access to the Mediterranean, Mankoff said.

b) Ideology: Russia's key policy goal is blocking American efforts to shape the region.

Russia doesn't believe revolutions, wars and regime change bring stability and democracy. It often points to the Arab Spring and the U.S.-led war in Iraq as evidence.

Russia also doesn't trust U.S. intentions in the region. It believes humanitarian concerns are often used an excuse for pursuing America's own political and economic interests.

"Russia's backing of (Syrian President Bashar) al-Assad is not only driven by the need to preserve its naval presence in the Mediterranean, secure its energy contracts, or counter the West on 'regime change,'" said Anna Neistat, an associate program director at Human Rights Watch.

"It also stems from (Russian President Vladimir) Putin's existential fear for his own survival and the survival of the repressive system that he and al-Assad represent. In Putin's universe, al-Assad cannot lose because it means that one day he, Putin, might as well."

McCain: There is no end game here

Source: Intercept discusses Syria attack

Gen. Hayden: We've got to act on our own

Analysis:Syria is a political chess game

What it's saying:

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov insists there's no proof yet Syria's government is behind the chemical weapons attack. And any plans to strike Syria would challenge provisions of the U.N. charter, the ministry said.

The ministry accused Washington of trying to "create artificial groundless excuses for military intervention."

On Wednesday, Russia walked out of a U.N. Security Council meeting where Britain was expected to pursue a resolution to authorize the use of force against Syria.

"The West handles the Islamic world the way a monkey handles a grenade," Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin tweeted.

Why it matters:

Russia is a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council. It has the power to veto Security Council resolutions against the Syrian regime and has done so repeatedly over the past two years. So, if the United States and its allies are relying on a U.N. mandate to greenlight a military strike, they may be waiting a long time.

Chemical weapons in Syria: How did we get here?

IRAN

Why it cares:

Iran and Syria are bound by two factors: religion and strategy.

a) Religion: Iran is the world's most populous Shiite Muslim nation. The Syrian government is dominated by Alawites, a Shiite offshoot, and the rebels are dominated by Sunnis.

That connection has bound them for quite a while. Iran counted on Syria as its only Arab ally during its eight-year war with Iraq. Iraq was Sunni-dominated.

The last thing Iran wants now is a Sunni-dominated Syria -- especially as the rebels' main supporters are Iran's Persian Gulf rivals: Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

b) Strategy: For Iran, Syria is also a strategically key ally. It's Iran's main conduit to the Shiite militia Hezbollah in Lebanon, the proxy through which Iran can threaten Israel with an arsenal of short-range missiles.

In 2009, the top U.S. diplomat in Damascus disclosed that Syria had begun delivery of ballistic missiles to Hezbollah, according to official cables leaked to and published by WikiLeaks.

So, it's in Iran's interest to see al-Assad's regime remain intact.

Western intelligence officials believe the Islamic Republic has provided technical help such as intelligence, communications and advice on crowd control and weapons as protests in Syria morphed into resistance.

A U.N. panel reported in May that Iranian weapons destined for Syria but seized in Turkey included assault rifles, explosives, detonators, machine guns and mortar shells.

Ayham Kamel of Eurasia Group believes the Iranians must be alarmed that the tide is turning against al-Assad.

"Iran probably has excellent information regarding Assad's position. That information would make clear that Iran is increasingly likely to lose its only ally in the region, greatly reducing its strategic reach," he said.

What's it saying:

Iran has cast events in Syria as part of a much broader ideological battle. It's a "war between the front of hegemony and the front of resistance," Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has said.

Iran's position, as outlined by Foreign Minister Javad Zarif and new President Hassan Rouhani, is that the Syrian government is a victim of international plots.

Iran believes the West and almost all Arab countries are in cahoots in an effort to implement regime change in Syria. Iran says the main objective of this plot is to make the region safer for Israel.

This week, Zarif warned of "graver conditions" in Syria is attacked.

"If any country attacks another when it wants, that is like the Middle Ages," Zarif said Wednesday.

Why it matters:

Many believe Iran is Washington's greatest threat in the region, especially with its nuclear potential. It's unclear how Iran might respond if Syria is attacked. But the rhetoric certainly has been ominous.

"Starting this fire will be like a spark in a large store of gunpowder, with unclear and unspecified outcomes and consequences," Khamenei told Iranian Cabinet members this week.

"The U.S. threats and possible intervention in Syria is a disaster for the region and if such an act is done, certainly, the Americans will sustain damage like when they interfered in Iraq and Afghanistan."

What justifies intervening if Syria uses chemical weapons?

CHINA

Why it cares:

China's relationship with Syria is more nuanced.

Some say it wants to maintain its financial ties. It was ranked as Syria's third-largest importer in 2010, according to data from the European Commission.

"Beijing's renewed interest in Damascus -- the traditional terminus node of the ancient Silk Road ... indicates that China sees Syria as an important trading hub," according to a 2010 report from The Jamestown Foundation, a Washington-based research and analysis institute.

But there's a bigger factor at play.

China has said foreign countries shouldn't meddle in Syria's internal affairs -- and perhaps for good reason. China has had its own share of international controversies over its policies with Tibet as well as allegations of human rights violations.

Finally, China doesn't want to reprise what happened with Libya.

It abstained from a U.N. Security Council resolution on that one, clearing the way for a NATO military intervention in Libya.

"It was rather disappointed with the payoff," said Yun Sun of the Brookings Institution, writing in the East-West Center's Asia Pacific Bulletin. "Neither the West nor the NTC (Libyan National Transitional Council) showed much appreciation for China's abstention."

So, he says, China has "formulated a far more sophisticated hedging strategy" when it comes to Syria.

"Rather than siding with either Assad or the opposition and standing aside to 'wait and see,' Beijing is actively betting on both."

What's it saying:

China said it is firmly opposed to the use of chemical weapons and supports the U.N.'s chemical weapons inspectors.

It also said it wants a political solution for Syria -- though some say hopes for such an ending have waned.

"A political solution is always the only realistic means to resolve the Syria issue," Foreign Minister Wang Yi said.

Like Russia, China also walked out of Wednesday's U.N. Security Council meeting where Britain planned to pursue a resolution on Syria.

Why it matters:

China is a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council. And like Russia, China has repeatedly blocked sanctions attempts against the Syrian regime -- leading to a perpetual stalemate at the U.N. body to take any serious action on Syria.

UK, U.N. and U.S. get jitters over intervention in Syria

Going it alone against the Syrian government is not what President Barack Obama wants, U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel said Friday.

But that scenario is looking more and more likely.

A day earlier, the United States' closest ally, Great Britain, backed out of a possible coalition. A U.N. Security Council meeting on Syria ended in deadlock, and in the U.S. Congress, doubts about military intervention are making the rounds.

Skeptics of military action are invoking Iraq, where the United States government under President George W. Bush marched to war based on a thin claim that former dictator Saddam Hussein was harboring weapons of mass destruction.

© SRTM V4, 2013, CIAT Terms of Use

 

Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria

White House's goal in Syria unclear

Ajami: I have faith in the Syrian people

What steps will the U.S. take in Syria?

McCain: Syria is different from Iraq

Opponents are conjuring up a possible repeat of that scenario in Syria, though the intelligence being gathered on the use of WMDs in Syria may be sounder.

An attack on President Bashar al-Assad may prove to be politically unpopular. The American public is not enthused by the prospect.

"Only 25% of the American people support military action in Syria," former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Bill Richardson told CNN's Piers Morgan Thursday.

Iran: U.S. military action in Syria would spark 'disaster'

Convincing evidence

To shake off the specter of the Iraq war, the public needs convincing that chemical weapons were used and that al-Assad's regime was behind it.

"You have to have almost incontrovertible proof," Richardson said.

It's there, said Arizona Sen. John McCain, and will be visible soon. He thinks comparisons with Iraq are overblown and that doubts are unfounded.

"Come on. Does anybody really believe that those aren't chemical weapons -- those bodies of those children stacked up?" he asked Morgan.

Al-Assad's government has claimed that jihadists fighting with the opposition carried out the chemical weapons attacks on August 21 to turn global sentiments against it.

Read UK intelligence on chemical weapons

McCain doesn't buy it.

"The rebels don't have those weapons," he said.

The president also needs to assure Congress that a possible intervention would not get out of hand, said Democratic Rep. Chris Van Hollen from Maryland.

"The action has to have a very limited purpose, and the purpose is to deter future use of chemical weapons," he said.

Why Russia, Iran and China are standing by Assad

Alone or together?

UK lawmakers say 'No' to military action

What intel does U.S. have on Syria?

Syrian group claims it hacked NY Times

U.N. Security Council deadlocked on Syria

After British lawmakers on Thursday voted down a proposal on military intervention, a senior U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told CNN that going it alone was a real prospect.

"We care what they think. We value the process. But we're going to make the decision we need to make," the official said.

A former director of the CIA believes Obama would face off with al-Assad alone.

"I can't conceive he would back down from a very serious course of action," retired Gen. Michael Hayden told CNN's Wolf Blitzer.

Hagel's response to the vote was more diplomatic.

The United States respects the results, Hagel told journalists in Manila, the Philippines. "Every nation has a responsibility to make their own decisions."

The U.S. will continue to consult with the British government and still hope for "international collaboration."

"Our approach is to continue to find an international coalition that will act together," he said.

Chemical weapons in Syria: How did we get here?

Haunted by Iraq

The parliamentarians in London shot down the proposal in spite of intelligence allegedly incriminating the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

Britain's Joint Intelligence Committee has concluded it was "highly likely" that Syrian government forces used poison gas outside Damascus last week in an attack that killed at least 350 people, according to a summary of the committee's findings released Thursday.

"There is no credible intelligence or other evidence to substantiate the claims or the possession of CW (chemical weapons) by the opposition," Britain's Joint Intelligence Committee concluded in a document released Thursday. "The JIC has therefore concluded that there are no plausible alternative scenarios to regime responsibility."

A yes vote would not have sent the UK straight into a deployment.

Cameron had said his government would not act without first hearing from the U.N. inspectors and giving Parliament another chance to vote on military action.

But his opposition seemed reminded of the Iraq war.

Opinion: For the U.S., Syria is a problem from hell

"I think today the House of Commons spoke for the British people who said they didn't want a rush to war, and I was determined we learned the lessons of Iraq, and I'm glad we've made the prime minister see sense this evening," Labour Party leader Ed Miliband told the Press Association.

The no vote came after a long day of debate, and it appeared to catch Cameron and his supporters by surprise.

For days, the prime minister has been sounding a call for action, lending support to talk of a U.S.- or Western-led strike against Syria.

"I strongly believe in the need for a tough response to the use of chemical weapons, but I also believe in respecting the will of this House of Commons," the prime minister said.

"I get that, and the government will act accordingly," he said.

The government of France supports military intervention, if evidence incriminates the government of using poison gas against civilians.

But on Friday, President Francois Hollande told French newspaper Le Monde that intervention should be limited and not include al-Assad's overthrow.

Letter from al-Assad

Before the vote, Syria's government offered its own arguments against such an intervention. In an open letter to British lawmakers, the speaker of Syria's parliament riffed on British literary hero William Shakespeare, saying: "If you bomb us, shall we not bleed?"

But the letter also invoked Iraq, a conflict justified on the grounds that Iraq had amassed stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and was working toward a nuclear bomb -- claims that were discovered to have been false after the 2003 invasion.

"Those who want to send others to fight will talk in the Commons of the casualties in the Syrian conflict. But before you rush over the cliffs of war, would it not be wise to pause? Remember the thousands of British soldiers killed and maimed in Afghanistan and Iraq, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi dead, both in the war and in the continuing chaos."

British Commons Speaker John Bercow published the letter.

UN deadlock

Lack of support for military intervention at the United Nations on Thursday was less of a surprise.

Russia, which holds a permanent seat on the Security Council, is one of Syria's closest allies and is most certain to veto any resolution against al-Assad's government that involves military action.

Moscow reiterated the stance Friday.

"Russia is against any resolution of the UN Security Council, which may contain an option for use of force," Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov said on Friday.

Map: U.S. and allied assets around Syria

A closed-door Security Council meeting called by Russia ended with no agreement on a resolution to address the growing crisis in Syria, a Western diplomat told CNN's Nick Paton Walsh on condition of anonymity.

U.N. weapons inspectors are now in Syria trying to confirm the use of chemical weapons. The inspectors are expected to leave the country by Saturday morning.

They are to brief U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who in turn, will swiftly brief the Security Council on the findings.

Congressional jitters

The president is facing doubts at home as well: More than 160 members of Congress, including 63 Democrats, have now signed letters calling for either a vote or at least a "full debate" before any U.S. action.

The author of one of those letters, Democratic Rep. Barbara Lee of California, said Obama should seek "an affirmative decision of Congress" before committing American forces.

More than 90 members of Congress, most of them Republican, signed another letter by GOP Rep. Scott Rigell of Virginia. That letter urged Obama "to consult and receive authorization" before authorizing any such military action.

Congress is currently in recess until September 9.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Obama was still weighing a potential response to the chemical weapons attacks.

The president has said that he is not considering a no-fly zone and has ruled out U.S. boots on the ground in Syria.

Al-Assad has vowed to defend his country against any outside attack.

Russia to send ships to eastern Mediterranean as US mulls Syria strike

Interfax news agency: two ships will be sent reportedly to strengthen naval presence in light of Syria crisis
Russia will send two ships to the east Mediterranean to strengthen its naval presence because of the "well-known situation" there, Interfax news agency said on Thursday referring to the Syria crisis, as the West prepares for possible military strikes and Russian citizens were evacuated from Syria.
"A large anti-submarine ship of the Northern Fleet will join [existing naval forces] over the next few days," a source in the Russian General Staff told Interfax.
The agency quoted a source in the armed forces' general staff as saying an anti-submarine vessel and a missile cruiser would be sent in the coming days because the situation "required us to make some adjustments" in the naval force.
In June, Russia's Navy Commander Adm. Viktor Chirkov announced that the missile cruiser, The Admiral Kuznetsov -- Russia's only missile cruiser -- would be deployed to the Mediterranean by the end of 2013. The latest report on Thursday seemed to push up that timeline. The Defense Ministry was not immediately available for comment.
State-run RIA Novosti news agency cited a high-ranking representative of the naval command who said the changes to the country's forces in the region were not linked to the current tensions over Syria and called them "a planned rotation."
Meanwhile, a group of 27 Russians, mostly women and children, was picked up on Wednesday from Latakia, Syria, the Moscow Times reported. On Tuesday, a plane brought 75 Russians in Syria back to Moscow.
U.S. President Barack Obama said Wednesday that he is certain that a chemical-weapons attack by the regime of Syria's President Bashar al-Assad caused the deaths of hundreds of civilians on the outskirts of Damascus last week, and warned that "international consequences" were required for such an act.
Russia, President Bashar al-Assad's main international ally, says it opposes any military intervention in Syria and that it has no plans to be drawn into any conflict. It says there is no proof that Assad's forces carried out the attack.

Muslims decry NYPD spying tactics

Community  leaders denounce mosque surveillance program newly uncovered by APCommunity leaders denounce mosque surveillance program newly uncovered by AP

Muslim civic groups condemned the New York Police Department’s (NYPD) surveillance program of city mosques and Muslim community organizations, Wednesday, and called for a federal investigation into the force’s policies after a report by The Associated Press revealed that it had secretly designated mosques as terrorist organizations.
At a press conference held outside police headquarters, representatives from the groups compared the NYPD’s targeting of Muslims to the city’s controversial stop-and-frisk policy, a police tactic that a federal judge and the city council struck down earlier this month for unfairly targeting black and Hispanic men.
Dr. Ahmad Jaber, president of the Arab American Association of New York, announced that he would be resigning his role as an advisor to the NYPD’s Muslim Advisory Council.
"When I hear about these things I feel betrayed, I feel stabbed in the back," Jaber told Al Jazeera, adding that he didn’t understand why immigrants who want to learn English or become citizens were considered legitimate targets for investigation by the NYPD.
"I would say I’m more disappointed than angry, but I’m not surprised," said Mariam Luqman, 23, from nearby Yonkers and a student in the city.
"There’ve been so much programs and talking but there’s been really no action on the NYPD part besides the spying," she added. "So I think that they really need to relook at what the purpose of this really is and be honest about it, because if it was really to protect the community then why would it they attack people in the community they’re trying to protect."
The NYPD’s classification of mosques as terrorist organizations allows it to employ informants, secretly record sermons and spy on religious leaders without clear evidence of criminal behavior, said the AP report.
Mohammed Shah Jahan, a community organizer and senior systems analyst at the New York Stock Exchange, said: "We are fighting right now [to learn] English, for jobs but they are spying on us. Of course we feel bad."
Lawyer and activist Lamis Deek, a board member of the Council on American Islamic Relations, denounced the NYPD’s spying program, comparing it with stop-and-frisk and calling for the federal government to intervene over the matter.
"We demand that the Department of Justice dispatch immediately a monitor to investigate what is happening and we demand full accounting for all of these crimes committed against the vast majority of the people of New York," she said Wednesday’s press conference.
New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, who has defended both stop-and-frisk and surveillance programs on Muslims as legal and necessary measures, has been mentioned in news reports as a possible nominee for Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. Deek said he should be out of the running.
"We also demand that Kelly’s name be removed from consideration," Deek told Al Jazeera.
Kelly responded to AP’s report on MSNBC’s Morning Joe program, Wednesday, describing it as "fiction."
"I haven’t seen the story, but they’re hyping a book that’s coming out next week," Kelly said, referring to a forthcoming book by AP reporters Adam Goldman and Matt Appuzzo, who broke the story on the NYPD’s Muslim-community surveillance programs.
"If it’s a reflection of the article, then the book will be a fair amount of fiction, it will be half-truths, it will be lots of quotes from unnamed sources," he added. "Our sin is to have the temerity and hutzpah to go into the federal government’s territory to go into counterterrorism and trying to protect this city by supplementing what the federal government has done."

North Korea leader Kim Jong-un's ex-girlfriend ‘executed by firing squad for appearing in porn films’

Reports indicate the dictator had been to see his former lover sing in a concert just nine days before she was arrested and killed

Kim Jong-un’s ex-girlfriend has been executed by firing squad along with a dozen fellow North Korean musicians charged with violating laws against pornography, according to reports in a respected South Korean newspaper.

The Chosun Ilbo said performers from a well-known orchestra and light music ensemble were arrested on 17 August, accused of filming themselves having sex and then selling copies of the tapes.
While this breached North Korean anti-pornography laws, some of the musicians were also found to have Bibles in their possession and all were treated as political dissidents, according to the newspaper’s unnamed source.
They were executed in public by machine gun fire three days later, reportedly as the rest of the Unhasu Orchestra and Wangjaesan Light Music Band were forced to watch.
In accordance with the country’s rules on guilt by association, their families were then taken away to detention camps, according to the reports.
Among those killed was said to be singer Hyon Song-wol, who reached an international audience when she won a Hungarian competition in 2005 and released the hit single “A Girl In The Saddle Of A Steed” – often mistranslated as “Excellent Horse-Like Lady”.
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un met Ms Hyon a decade ago, and they were reported to have been in a relationship until Kim’s father Kim Jong-il said he disapproved.
The South Korean reports included images showing the dictator attending a concert given by Ms Hyon and the groups on 8 August in Pyongyang, and there have been rumours that the couple continued their affair after both married other people.
The paper said Kim's current wife Ri Sol-ju was also a member of the Unhasu Orchestra before she married him. It said: “Whether she had any hand in the executions is unclear.”
Quotations from another source, again unnamed, indicated that the executions on 20 August were in keeping with the dictator’s recent activities, and “show that he is fixated on consolidating his leadership”. The source said: “Kim Jong-un has been viciously eliminating anyone who he deems a challenge to his authority.”
While it is often impossible to verify reports coming out of the closed-off communist state, an authority on North Korean affairs and professor at Tokyo’s Waseda University told the Daily Telegraph there seemed to be “a political reason” behind the killings.
Toshimitsu Shigemura told the paper: “If these people had only made pornographic videos, then it is simply not believable that their punishment was execution.
“They could have been made to disappear into the prison system there instead.
“There is a political reason behind this. Or, as Kim's wife once belonged to the same group, it is possible that these executions are more about Kim's wife,” he said.

 

UK says legally entitled to take action in Syria without UN approval

UK says evidence shows it is 'highly likely' Syrian government carried out alleged chemical weapons attack last week

The U.K government said Thursday that it is legally entitled to take military action against Syria even if the U.N Security Council blocked such action.
The statement came shortly after the U.K's intelligence committee said it had confirmed that a chemical attack took place in Syria last week, and that there is "some" intelligence to suggest that the Syrian government was behind the alleged attack.
The U.N. chemical weapons experts will wrap up their investigation Friday and leave Syria Saturday, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Thursday.
The U.N.'s team of experts is not mandated to conclude who perpetrated the alleged attack, just if it occurred.
British Prime Minister David Cameron has said he will wait for the U.N. report before taking military action against the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, but a U.K.-drafted resolution authorizing intervention against Assad to protect Syrian civilians is almost certain to be vetoed by Russia, Syria's staunchest ally in the Security Council.

Russia, along with China, has vetoed three resolutions on Syria in the last two years.

President Barack Obama, in an interview with "PBS NewsHour" that aired Wednesday evening, emphasized that he has not yet made a decision on military action in Syria, but said he is "certain" that Assad's government is responsible.
On Thursday, the office of German Chancellor Angela Merkel released a statement that Germany and French President Francois Hollande have agreed there must be a reaction to the suspected Syrian gas attack, and that they hope for a prompt report from the U.N.

Tension is heightening between the Western countries pushing for intervention, and Russia and China, who are opposed to any military action.

On Thursday, Russia's Interfax news agency said Moscow will send two ships to the East Mediterranean to strengthen its naval presence because of the "well-known situation" there, referring to the Syrian crisis.
The agency quoted a source in the armed forces' general staff as saying an anti-submarine vessel and a missile cruiser would be sent in the coming days because the situation "required us to make some adjustments" in the naval force.
Russia also began evacuated its citizens from Syria.
China's foreign minister, meanwhile, urged restraint Wednesday night, saying any military intervention in the crisis would only worsen turmoil in the Middle East.
Whether or not the U.S. and its allies take military action in the coming days or weeks, Obama made clear that such action would not be designed to bring an end to a civil war that has already claimed more than 100,000 lives. Its primary purpose would be to see that no more are killed by poison gas.

Former UN weapons inspector: West has 'no authority' in Syria

Amb. Richard Butler, an Australian national and expert in nuclear disarmament, was the chief U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq during the 1990s. He also served as deputy representative at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), chairman of the Canberra Commission on the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons and executive chairman of the U.N. Special Commission to Disarm Iraq (UNSCOM).
Butler spoke with Al Jazeera about the suspected chemical weapons attack near Damascus last week that left hundreds dead. Both the Syrian opposition and President Bashar al-Assad have denied responsibility for the attack, which crossed what President Barack Obama has called a "red line" that would necessitate a direct response from the U.S. The U.N. on Monday sent its weapons inspectors to examine the site of the alleged attack in Damascus, about which Butler is uniquely qualified to comment.
These interview highlights were edited for length.
Butler on whether U.N. weapons inspectors will be able to produce a comprehensive report on the suspected chemical weapons attack in Damascus:
"It will be difficult, because they were kept away from the site for five days. … And the chemicals involved degrade fairly rapidly … although they leave traces of having been there … but those five days make it difficult.
"Secondly, they would best have tissue samples … and the reports are Syrian authorities would not let them exhume bodies. … They were only allowed to take away limited quantities of blood and urine, so I’m a little bit pessimistic about the possibility the U.N. team will be able to bring back as detailed and as exclusive a report as we would have hoped.
"I know the leader of the team very well, and we worked together in the past. The inspectors who were there in Iraq with me were men and women of extraordinary ability and integrity … but no matter how good they are, they need proper access in a timely fashion, and I think they have been denied of that, so I am not terribly optimistic that the report will be as comprehensive as we would like it to be."
On determining responsibility for the alleged chemical attacks:
 "The first question that needs to be answered is whether those pictures and the numbers of those dead and injured, as presented by Doctors Without Borders and other groups, were those numbers as a result of the use of chemical weapons?
"There seems to be a widespread consensus available now even before the U.N. reports come back. The pictures seem very clear that chemical weapons do certainly appeared to have been used.
"But the second question … is that of provenance. Where do they come from, and who authorized or directed they be used? And in my mind now, that now has become the crucial question in determining what action should be taken, if the global norm against any use of chemical weapons has been violated, which appears that it has. Who violated it, and who is responsible? And already we hear widespread arguments developing.
"Just a few moments before coming here, V.P. of the U.S. Joe Biden said he is completely satisfied that this was directed by the Assad government. … I respect him, and he may well be satisfied, but I want to make this point to you. … Him being completely satisfied is not the same as the evidence being made available to the world public.
"If it is the case that the evidence exists, (then) the U.S. and all people who are interested in this terrible problem need to have it demonstrated, not just stated, but demonstrated, that it is beyond doubt, incontrovertible that this was directed by the Syrian regime. And if that proves to be the case, then the whole issue of what action to be taken gets to be a whole lot clearer."
On if action should be taken: 
"Let's say it's clear that chemical weapons were used. I am prepared to say that. It has all the appearance of that … and it would be best to verify that with a lot more hard evidence, but let's say that's a given. What we don't know is who directed that action, and that is crucial in determining what "punishment," as Joe Biden called it. The French minister has been saying there must be a consequence, a price to be paid for having done this.
"In principle, I agree with that, because the norm of the non-use of chemical weapons is so precious, but we must be sure we are punishing the right person, and I am taking the purely intellectual or perhaps political point that it's in everyone's interest that the identification of that person or that authority of the person who is responsible and not on the basis of gut feeling … we need hard evidence to show the world proof. Once that is done, the picture will look very different indeed. …
"The truth is, we in the West have no authority within Syria. The president of the United States has said today, he is not interested in and not contemplating regime change within Syria, and God bless him for that, because that in my opinion is the correct policy. …
"The (U.N.) Security Council is the framework of international law, and an incredibly important piece of that international law is the chemical weapons convention. And the charter of the U.N. and the chemical weapons convention both make it incredibly clear that the only authentic way in which military action could be taken to rectify a wrong is if the Security Council agrees to it, and we will never get that agreement … unless instead of claiming what we think to be the case, we can prove to the Council with fact that it is the case, that the Assad regime authorized this.
"And then the possibility of concerted international action with the correct authority, the authority of the Security Council and international law, it will put us in a very different situation from the very worrying one where a small group of countries might think that they can enforce the law."

Miami imam gets 25 years for supporting Pakistani Taliban

A Miami imam convicted of funneling tens of thousands of dollars to the Pakistani Taliban was sentenced Friday to 25 years in prison.

U.S. District Judge Robert Scola levied the sentence against Hafiz Khan, a U.S. citizen and Pakistani native who ran the Miami Masjid, also known as the Flager Mosque.

A jury in March found Khan, 78, guilty of four charges that accused him of supporting and conspiring to support terrorists and a terrorist organization.

The charges alleged Khan, who prosecutors said ran the Miami mosque since at least 1999, sent money and other support from the United States to the Pakistani Taliban and its supporters from at least 2008 to 2010.

The charges also accused Khan of using a madrassa, or Muslim religious school, that he founded in Pakistan to shelter and support Pakistani Taliban militants.