Russia Sends Warships Toward Syria for Possible Evacuation

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
Russian officials began formulating plans during the summer for an evacuation, but have delayed announcements, analysts say, to avoid signaling a loss of confidence in President Bashar al-Assad, a longtime strategic ally. Moscow staunchly opposes international intervention in Syria and has blocked United Nations Security Council resolutions meant to force Mr. Assad from power. Officials have repeatedly said that Russia’s position has not changed.

However, Moscow has signaled in recent days that it sees Mr. Assad’s forces losing ground, and that it is beginning to prepare for a chaotic transition period. One immediate concern is the large number of Russian citizens scattered across Syria, as a result of decades of intermarriage and longstanding economic ties.

Late on Monday, Russian diplomats said that two Russian citizens had been kidnapped by an armed group. The two Russians, evidently workers in a privately owned steel factory, were seized as they traveled on a road between Homs and Tartus and were held for ransom. An Italian citizen, Mario Belluomo, was abducted with them, the Italian Foreign Ministry said.

Then on Tuesday, the Russian Defense Ministry announced that a flotilla of five ships — a destroyer, a tugboat, a tanker and two large landing vessels — was being sent from Baltiysk, a port in the Baltic Sea, to relieve ships that have been near Syria for months. At typical cruising speeds for such vessels, the ships would arrive on station around the beginning of January.

A naval official, speaking on the condition of anonymity as is customary, told the Interfax news service that the ships were “on their way to the coast of Syria for possible participation in the evacuation of Russian citizens” to a Russian port on the Black Sea. The official said that the mission had been planned swiftly but under total secrecy, and that the timeline for the ships’ return to port “depends on the development of the situation in Syria.”

Aleksandr I. Shumilin, a regional analyst and a foreign correspondent, said that Russian leaders had avoided openly taking steps toward evacuation until now, to avoid signaling that Russia was scaling back its support for Mr. Assad, but that they also risked public anger if Russians became targets of violence in Syria.

“It appears that some break has taken place, but whether that means a change of policy, or a modification of policy, that’s hard to say,” said Mr. Shumilin, who is head of the Middle East conflict analysis center at the Russian Academy of Science’s Institute for Canada and the United States. “The decision makers are now concentrating on humanitarian questions, the protection of Russian citizens.”

The Syrian rebels have been moving aggressively around the capital, Damascus, in recent weeks, and Mr. Assad’s forces have responded by firing Scud missiles. On Tuesday, Syrian fighter jets bombed the Palestinian refugee camp of Yarmouk for the second time this week, seeking to drive back rebel forces that had moved in, The Associated Press reported.

Iran, Syria’s last ally in the region, appeared to remain firmly committed to Mr. Assad. On Tuesday, Deputy Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian of Iran told reporters in Moscow, “The Syrian Army and the state machine are working smoothly.”

A planned visit by the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to Ankara, the capital of Turkey, was suddenly canceled on Monday amid tensions between Iran and Turkey over NATO’s decision to deploy Patriot antimissile batteries on the Turkish border with Syria.

Iranian leaders, politicians and commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps have denounced NATO’s decision on Dec. 4 to send six batteries of American, German and Dutch Patriot systems to intercept any Scud missiles that the embattled Syrian government may launch toward Turkey.

Iran fears that NATO will use the batteries, which are staffed by about 1,000 soldiers and can also be used against aircraft, to set up a no-fly zone and a rebel safe haven in northern Syria.

Iran’s top general, Hassan Firouzabadi, said at a meeting of senior commanders on Saturday that the deployment was part of a Western plan to start a “world war” and that Iran’s own ambitious missile program was the real target.

“They signify concerns over Iran’s missiles and the presence of Russia for defending Syria,” he said. “The sensible people in America, Turkey and Europe must prevent this situation from getting out of control.”

The mobile Patriot systems could technically be used to intercept Iranian as well as Syrian missiles. They are effective against missiles at a range of about 12 miles, and against aircraft up to 100 miles.

Iran has threatened to fire missiles at Israel if its nuclear installations come under attack.

On Tuesday, Iran’s defense minister, Brig. Gen. Ahmad Vahidi, said Israel was the winner in the Syrian conflict because it was witnessing the destruction of an enemy — the Assad government — while the Syrian people were being “manipulated” by “terrorists.”

Turkey’s foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, urged Iran to use its political clout with Damascus to end the violence in Syria, instead of making statements about the Patriot systems.

“Turkey and NATO have stressed over and over again that this system is solely for defensive purposes,” Mr. Davutoglu told reporters. “Turkey has the right to do what it wants in order to protect its territory. It is time for Iran to give a clear message to the Syrian regime.”

Ellen Barry reported from Moscow, and Thomas Erdbrink from Tehran.

View the original article here

Reporting conflict in Syria

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

Some months ago, I reflected on the difficulties of reporting from Syria. The deaths of Marie Colvin and a dozen other journalists in the country so far this year has given us cause to think long and hard about the very real dangers there. But so too does the complexity of the situation on the ground in Syria, and the need to try to separate fact from fiction.

Damascus prides itself on being the oldest, continually inhabited city in the world. It also has the longest history of rumours passing for fact.

I spent three days in Syria earlier this week, talking to all sides involved in the current conflict. Waking up on my first morning, social media was alive with reports that the mobile phone network was down. True enough, I could access the hotel wi-fi but not place a call. On Twitter and Facebook, people claimed the phones had been turned off as the precursor to a major military assault. The truth it seems was more prosaic. It's the high school exam season in Syria - diplomats claimed the real reason was the phone network had been turned off to prevent students cheating. Even in a conflict zone, good grades count for a lot.

In the aftermath of the massacre at Houla last month, initial reports said some of the 49 children and 34 women killed had their throats cut. In Damascus, Western officials told me the subsequent investigation revealed none of those found dead had been killed in such a brutal manner. Moreover, while Syrian forces had shelled the area shortly before the massacre, the details of exactly who carried out the attacks, how and why were still unclear. Whatever the cause, officials fear the attack marks the beginning of the sectarian aspect of the conflict.

In such circumstances, it's more important than ever that we report what we don't know, not merely what we do. In Houla, and now in Qubair, the finger has been pointed at the shabiha, pro-government militia. But tragic death toll aside, the facts are few: it's not clear who ordered the killings - or why.

Given the difficulties of reporting inside Syria, video filed by the opposition on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube may provide some insight into the story on the ground. But stories are never black and white - often shades of grey. Those opposed to President Assad have an agenda. One senior Western official went as far as to describe their YouTube communications strategy as "brilliant". But he also likened it to so-called "psy-ops", brainwashing techniques used by the US and other military to convince people of things that may not necessarily be true.

A healthy scepticism is one of the essential qualities of any journalist - never more so than in reporting conflict. The stakes are high - all may not always be as it seems.

Jon Williams is the BBC World News editor.

View the original article here