Overnight the US along with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab
Emirates (UAE), Jordan and Bahrain have launched a large air campaign in
northern Syria. This campaign has used dozens of attack aircraft
alongside Cruise missiles and according to some reports is still
ongoing. As a result it is quite difficult to assess what exactly has
happened meaning that this post should be considered a work in progress.
What is immediately obvious though it despite their claim that these
strikes have been carried out against the Islamic State of Iraq and the
Levant (ISIL) they have actually been focused on another group known as
the Khorasan Group who are a declared enemy of ISIL. The Khorasan Group
are also not members of Al Nusra Front (ANF) and as such are not covered
by United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 2170 (2014). As
such there appears to be absolutely no legal basis for this action. The
involvement of Saudi Arabia and Qatar who have been engaged in a
completely illegal war against Syria for the past three and a half years
is also deeply problematic.
We are currently at the start of the opening of the annual session of
the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). US President Obama has
already made it perfectly clear that he intends to use this two week
meeting to produce another UNSC resolution on the use of force on Syria
that goes far beyond 2170. As such the primary purpose of these strikes
appears to be to bully the UNSC into passing a resolution that will
allow Saudi Arabia and Qatar to bomb Syria at will.
You will of course note that the US is still refusing to use this level
of force against ISIL within Iraq. Therefore the intention appears to be
to force ISIL into a safe haven on the Syria/Iraq border from where
they can be used as an excuse to attack Syria whilst still destabilising
Iraq.
As such unless any proposed resolution strictly defines the groups that
can be attacked in Syria and excludes Saudi Arabia and Qatar from any
attacks I think I can hear Russia and China's veto pencils being
sharpened as I write.
10:35 on 23/9/14 (UK date).
Edited at around 12:15 on 23/9/14 (UK date) to add;
Very little is known about the Khorasan Group because they are so new
that US intelligence only acknowledged their existence five days ago on
September 18th (18/9/14). However it seems that the Khorasan Group
aren't in fact a terrorist group in their own right. Instead they appear
to be a number of almost special forces trainers that Al Qaeda have
sent to Syria to strengthen groups fighting ISIL. As such attacking them
obviously strengthens ISIL.
To say that attacking the Khorasan Group is a legal grey area is a
massive understatement. They are most certainly not covered by UNSC
2170(2014) meaning that the Arab states involved in the operation have
no legal basis to do so. The US however will attempt to argue that
because they are associated with Al Qaeda (ANF are a separate, allied
group) it has the authority to attack them under its 2001 Authorisation
of Military Force Against Terrorists. As that formed the basis for the
2002 Iraq resolution which was rejected by the UNSC this pretty much
puts international law back to the arguments that were being had at the
time of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
The name "Khorasan Group" also seems an extremely strange one for a
predominately Sunni group like Al Qaeda to be using because it actually a
Persian word meaning; "The place where the sun rises." As the main
Persian speaking country is Iran Khorasan is also the name of several
provinces in north-eastern Iran which until 2004 were known simply as
"Khorasan Province." As such the name appears to have been assigned to
the terror group by US or more likely Gulf intelligence in an effort to
strengthen ISIL by portraying them as the true Sunnis and anyone
fighting against them as Shia infidels because the majority of Persians
are Shia. By attacking them Saudi Arabia and Qatar in particular seem to
be attempting to use them as a metaphor for Syria's Shia dominated
government which it has long considered "Terrorists" because they simply
refuse to bow to Saudi Arabia or Qatar's dominance of the region.
Also I should point out that today's strikes have in no way been carried
out in response to ISIL's recent offensive against Syria Kurds. If that
was the case the attacks would have focused on frontline positions such
as artillery positions and armed columns. While this attack on ISIL's
rear echelon command and control structures is going to disrupt their
operations it is unlikely that effect will be felt on the frontlines for
days if not weeks.
Finally I have to say that what I wanted to be doing now was talking
about the Climate 2014 meeting on Climate Change that is taking place
today as part of the UNGA. I think it is fair to say that the attacks by
the oil producing nations on Syria are likely to disrupt this meeting
somewhat to the point that Obama may actually use them as an excuse not
to turn up to a meeting which he is supposed to be headlining.
(Originally Posted on 23/9/14 - UK date).
No comments:
Post a Comment