Conditions Grow Harder in Syria While Policy Grows Softer

First Published for Human Rights First. July 27th, 2011

While conditions on the ground in Syria deteriorate, the Obama administration’s position seems to be growing softer. As it stands now, almost 1,500 people are confirmed dead, 12,000 arrested and thousands more forced out as refugees to Lebanon and Turkey fleeing their own government. Over a week ago the administration stated that Assad had “lost legitimacy” and there were hints that a tougher stance was to come. While the most recent release condemns the abuses, since last week, rather than take a tougher stance – call for Assad to step down – the United States  has backtracked.

The United States’ stance towards the Assad regime needs to get stronger, not weaker. The crackdown has not let up and in many places has gotten worse. In the past few days alone security forces have arrested hundreds in Damascus, tanks have been deployed in Homs, where more than 50 people have been killed. Assad has also replaced the governor of Deir az-Zor, an eastern province bordering Iraq, after an estimated 500,000 people marched against the regime.

We have multiple clear recommendations for U.S. policy in Syria. The most visible of these calls for the continuation of actions like Ambassador Robert Ford’s visit to Hama. That action, in line with our recommendations for State Department guidelines on human rights defenders, needs to be repeated. Ambassador Ford should be routinely sent to sites in Syria experiencing attacks by security forces. He visited Hama, now Ford should go to Homs, and he should be seen in Damascus, and talking with owners of shops closed in protest. The Assad regime has threated Ford with expulsion should he travel at all, but here the risk is worth the penalty. By expelling the U.S. Ambassador Assad will further lose credibility. Ford’s visits, as we’ve discussed previously, lend direct U.S. support to human rights defenders and very well could serve to physically protect peaceful protestors from assault through his presence.

In addition to increasing Ambassador Ford’s trips, the United States must directly lead multilateral diplomatic action aimed at stopping the crackdown and ensuring human rights activists a safe environment for them to pursue their goals. The most obvious way to do this would be in the U.N., where the Security Council has yet to adopt any resolution critical of the Assad regime. A strong, public push led by the United States, something that has yet to happen, could spark the attention of the international community and change the direction in which national governments are currently betting on Syria. Given the continued, unjustifiable opposition such a measure faces due to the Russian and Chinese vetoes, the United States should also pursue alternatives.
Turkey and other nations in the region must be engaged in an effort to show public rejection of Assad’s actions and regional solidarity with the Syrian people. Turkey has already moved in this direction, condemning the continuing violence. Qatar, by withdrawing their ambassador, is a clear example that Arab opinion is not unanimous on the issue and shows that with a strong diplomatic push, Assad can be further isolated and the violence put to an end.

The situation in Syria is not the same as it was in Libya. The military option that presented itself in Libya has not and will not present itself in Syria.

Furthermore, given the already strained relations before the start of the crackdown, U.S. policy options are severely limited. All of that being said, the United States is still not doing all it could prudently be doing. Targeting Syria’s energy sector (in a similar manner as suggested here) with sanctions would damage the regime and limit its ability to carry out violence against its people. While sanctions already exist in Syria, the energy sector can be targeted to a much greater extent than it is now. Also, the United States could be convincing allies in Europe to adopt similar sanctions against the Assad regime. The European Union has implemented some, but the sanctions in the United States are stronger and a public diplomatic push, coupled with the existing support for human rights enforcement in Europe can make this possible.

Secretary Clinton’s shift on Syria policy, from resolve that Assad will not reform to patient hope that he will, and will peacefully, is problematic. From what we see on the ground in Syria there is no reason to believe that real reform will come out of this regime, as they have not yet stopped the violence – a basic first step to any progress. The recent announcement of the legalization of political parties is to be welcomed in spirit, but in reality the law, even if implemented, means nothing as the constitution still forbids any party other than the Baath to rule. As with the talks in Damascus a few weeks ago, Assad is buying time with this distracting move in order to continue his campaign of violent repression. The position of Assad’s regime on human rights is not softening, and the United States’ policy on Assad shouldn’t either.

U.S. Ambassador Doing the Right Thing in Syria

First for HRF 7/8/11

U.S. Ambassador Robert Ford is to be commended for visiting the city of Hama yesterday. His visit, expressly in solidarity with protestors, is exactly the kind of action the US should take in Syria, where policy options are limited but serious human rights violations are taking place. As the death count rises in Hama and protests continue, outreach by the international community to Syrian protesters  and activists will demonstrate that the legitimate demands of protesters calling for basic rights and freedoms have international support.
Ambassador Ford was joined in his visit by the Ambassador of France.  Such visits should continue and other nations should  follow suit to demonstrate international solidarity with the Syrian people.
The Syrian authorities were quick to criticize the visit. Following the foreign conspiracy playbook, the Syrian Foreign Ministry stated that Ford’s visit was unmistakable evidence that the US is  orchestrating the nationwide protests. Syrian state television reported an unnamed Foreign Ministry official as saying:
“The presence of the US ambassador in Hama without previous permission is obvious proof of a clear evidence of the United States’ involvement in current events in Syria and its attempt to incite an escalation in the situation, which disturbs Syria’s security and stability,”
The U.S. State Department was right to back up Ambassador Ford.  State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland said “The fundamental intention was to make absolutely clear with his physical presence that we stand with those Syrians who are expressing their right to speak for change.”

Justice Delayed in Egypt Could Mean Justice Denied

First on HRF 7/8/11

Thousands are gathering in Egypt today demanding justice. It’s not hard to see why.
Since the revolution, thousands of Egyptians have been arrested and tried in military trials. The Supreme Council of Armed Forces (SCAF) conducts the trials through use of the much hated emergency law, which is still in effect. These trials are unfair, violate due process and deliver swift, harsh punishment for what are often petty offenses.
While the need for law and order in post-revolution Egypt is essential to stability, a recovering economy, and political development, the SCAF should move away from Mubarak era practices and embrace true justice. Ending the unfair trials of civilians by military courts is necessary to continue Egypt’s move to democracy.
In stark contrast to the swift pace of Egypt’s military trials is the slow grind of justice for the families  of  the 846 victims of violence killed during the revolution. No Mubarak regime official has been convicted for any of these deaths, and the only individual convicted, a low level police officer, is still at large. All individuals currently charged with violence are being tried under Egypt’s civilian system, which allows for greater flexibility and defendant rights. While the use of civilian courts is commendable, the delays experienced are inexcusable. Multiple trials, including that of the former Interior Minister Habib al-Aldy, have been delayed. Most recently, the delay in the trial of  police in Suez accused of killing protesters led to clashes between protesters and police.
Delays now mean that trials will not resume until after the month of Ramadan, in September. The danger is that with parliamentary elections scheduled for September and the Egyptian judiciary likely to be assigned to supervision of  the elections, the trials could well be delayed again. Following elections, it is possible that the political climate will be more sympathetic to former regime officials and security forces, leading to mounting concerns that justice delayed now will mean justice denied later.
A more imminent  danger of  delay has been seen recently in Suez and is on display now in Tahrir Square. After the announced delay of the Suez trial, protestors stormed the streets and were in turn met with violence. This also occurred in Tahrir last week when a demonstration by victims’ families sparked clashes with police. The snowball effect of street demonstrations can be dangerous. The outrage of victims’ families, who have yet to see justice, is a cause that many  Egyptians can sympathize with, and protests will continue to gain widespread support until these trials move forward. The SCAF must prove that, unlike under the previous regime, security forces, including police and army, are not above the law by vigorously pursuing these prosecutions. The recent announced shake-up of the police force is a positive step, but comprehensive reform—making all security forces subject to the  law—is necessary to build confidence in the transition to a democratic, just state.

Sham Trials in Bahrain Prove Need for Greater U.S. Pressure

From: HRF 6/28/11

On Wednesday a military court in Bahrain announced its latest outrage. Twenty-one activists were sentenced in a “sham trial” with eight receiving life sentences and the remanding 13 given between two and 15 years. Among those sentenced was Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja, a prominent human rights activist.

There has been word from family members that he had been beaten both before and after his sentencing. His daughter was violently removed from court after she shouted in response to the sentence. She was charged with contempt of court and later released. In a recent Twitter post she says: “Just got news that my father was severely beaten after court yesterday! He was hit mostly on his face, on the already fractured bones!” Other defendants also show evidence of torture on their bodies.
A national dialogue is set to begin on July 1^st, but former MPs have already denounced it while the Bahraini government continues to sentence and arrest human rights activists, host Gulf Cooperation Council troops (mostly from Saudi Arabia), and violently put down protests. Trials are continuing around the country, with an estimated 400 people charged in relation to calls for democracy, including 47 doctors and nurses arrested for treating those assaulted by security forces. Human Rights First’s Brian Dooley was refused entry to one of these trials on his recent visit to Bahrain on May 12^th.
The U.S. Government has continued its relatively muted line on Bahrain. While many say the United States has privately increased pressure, it’s time for that pressure to become public. Naming Bahrain as a violator of human rights is one good step, but another could be a discussion of the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet. It has been previously suggested that the fleet be moved or even disbanded.
The U.S. Government must make clear that its relationship with Bahrain is not unconditional – that it does not want to be seen as friends with torturers. And that to be a partner of the United States, Bahrain must act in a responsible way.  The partnership needs renegotiating, and the future of the Fifth Fleet ought to be part of that discussion.