You Did It! Senate Takes Action on Syria 30NOV12

IT took a while, too long actually, but we finally have a victory in the US Senate thanks to Rep Jim Moran D VA and Sen John Cornyn R TX. Here is a report on the unanimous vote in the Senate barring the purchase of weapons from Rosoboronexport, the Russian weapons supplier to the murderous regime of assad in Syria. Thank you to all who participated in their calls to action to bring this about!

		Victory against Rosoboronexport Photo credit: (UPI) Dear supporter, Thanks to over 50,000 people like you, our voices were heard loud and clear on Capitol Hill. Last night we won an important victory in the Senate — there was a unanimous vote on an amendment barring the Pentagon from purchasing any weapons from the Russian company arming the murderous Syrian regime, Rosoboronexport. Can you take a minute to thank our champions in the House and Senate Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA) and Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) by sending a tweet? Share on Twitter Thanks @JohnCornyn for standing w/ the Syrian people by cutting US ties with Syrian weapons dealers @endgenocide pls RT Share on Twitter Thanks @Jim_Moran for standing w/ the Syrian people by cutting US ties with Syrian weapons dealers @endgenocide pls RT Our campaign — and this legislation targeting Rosoboronexport — will add critical economic pressure on Russia who is providing direct aid and assistance to Assad's murderous regime. Russia is one of the main reasons why there hasn't been stronger international action on Syria. Not only have they sold the Assad regime attack helicopters, they've blocked action at the UN, delivered planes with 200 tons of "bank notes" for Assad, and Russian made cluster bombs were used in a Thanksgiving day attack that killed 11 children who were gathered in a field where kids regularly play. We know the Syrian people are still at risk. Even as we are celebrating this victory, the Syrian regime has cut off internet access to the entire country. But with this legislation — and strong support from people like you — we've taken an important step forward and we will continue to seek opportunities for us to stand with the Syrian people. Thank you for all you do, Tom Andrews President United to End Genocide
		ABOUT UNITED TO END GENOCIDE We are United to End Genocide, the largest activist organization in America dedicated to preventing and ending genocide and mass atrocities worldwide. We are faith leaders, students, artists, investors and genocide survivors, and all those who believe we must fulfill the promise the world made following the Holocaust — "Never Again!"

Olympic Action Makes Mark 1AUG12

THE PR campaign agains weapons sales and shipments to Syria's bashar al-assad by United to End Genocide and other human rights groups is being felt at the 2012 London Summer Olympics and by Russia's arms dealer to bloody dictators vladimir lisin and the equally complicit rosoboronexport. See my earlier post on this action at DOW CHEMICAL, BOPHAL, INDIA AND THE 2012 LONDON OLYMPICS & PBS SYRIA VIDEO & Terror Games: Syria, Russia and the Olympics 26,27&28JUL12 ( http://bucknacktssordidtawdryblog.blogspot.com/2012/07/dow-chemical-bophal-india-and-2012.html )
This update from United to End Genocide....
By Bama Athreya
Last week, we asked our activists to call attention to Russian shipping magnate Vladimir Lisin’s prominent role in the Olympic Games. Lisin’s vessels were alleged to be shipping equipment for military helicopters to Syria, enabling mass atrocities by Syria’s dictator, Bashar al-Assad.
We called off the action on the opening day of the Olympics after hearing directly from Lisin’s representatives with detailed information regarding the shipments. Thanks to all of you who took action. Vladimir Lisin took notice of your actions, and his representatives felt compelled to respond! We are continuing to dialogue with them and hope to share more information on this issue with our supporters soon.
We hope that you will join us as we continue our work to stem the flow of arms into Syria. Our effort includes targeting enablers like Russia’s state-owned weapons company, Rosoboronexport, which is responsible for selling billions of dollars in arms to the Syrian regime.
http://blog.endgenocide.org/blog/2012/08/01/olympic-action-makes-mark/

Syria: Farewell to Arms 16JUL12

AS the fighting rages across Syria and intensifies in Damascus Russia decides to end weapons sales to the government of bashar al-assad. Russia and the prc continue to block Chapter 7 resolutions in the UN Security Council, but this unilateral action by Russia, if true, could be the action that brings the fall of assad. From United to End Genocide.....

By Bama Athreya

Military helicopter similar to the ones reportedly being delivered to Syria by Russia.

The following originally appeared on the Connect U.S. Fund blog.
The Russians will sell no new weapons to Bashar al-Assad’s murderous regime in Syria. This is a significant shift in Russia’s stance. The time is ripe to push even harder to end any provision of arms, by any government, to those forces in Syria committing human rights abuses.
By some estimates, over 17,000 people have died since the inception of violence in March 2011 – most innocent civilians, and a number of them children. Over the past sixteen months, the international community has attempted to find a path to implement its responsibility to protect civilian lives from the Assad government’s violent assaults. Governments have imposed harsh economic sanctions on Syria. The Arab League sent in a human rights observer mission. When that failed, the United Nations sent in a mission headed by former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan with the intention of monitoring a cease-fire and brokering peace. The cease-fire never occurred, sanctions were increased, a number of countries severed diplomatic relations, and a Friends of Syria group was established to coordinate an international response to the Syria crisis. Yet, large numbers of civilians continue to be killed – a few now by opposition fighters, but in far greater numbers at the hands of Assad’s forces.
Since the violence began sixteen months ago, United to End Genocide has advocated for the use of economic and diplomatic pressure on Syria. By restricting Assad’s access to international capital through the sanctioning of lucrative sectors such as oil and gas, we hoped to see both restrained capacity of the regime to arm and pay its soldiers, and the reduction of support for Assad from Syria’s business community. Over the past several months, we have also pushed for an end to Russian arms sales – in particular, targeting Russia’s state-owned weapons dealer Rosoboronexport.  We have no illusions about the company’s morality, but guess that—between Assad’s diminished ability to pay lucrative contracts, and the threat of loss of sales elsewhere— pressure on the Russians may be working given the latest announcement.
Despite this victory, a protracted civil war in Syria now seems inevitable. This will undoubtedly lead to the loss of many more civilian lives and risks escalating delicate regional tensions even further. The ‘military option’ has been discussed with proposals for safe zones, no-kill zones and the direct arming of the Syrian opposition. At the other end of the spectrum, some human rights groups have called for a total arms embargo – both to stop the flow of weapons to the Assad regime, and to any opposition forces. Would any of these options really serve the need for civilian protection in the cities of Syria, where it is most needed?
In the midst of this, Annan has been clearly calling for a stronger UN mandate for the international mission. The current mandate will expire on July 20, and at this point it must be both renewed and strengthened. While Russia and China vetoed an earlier UN Security Council measure, perhaps Russia’s recent change of heart on new weapons sales suggests that stronger action is now possible.
In response to Annan’s call for ‘strong consequences’ for Syria’s intransigence, some Security Council members want to authorize a measure under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter. This would enable, among other possible actions, an arms embargo on Syria. Now that the Russians have conceded the issues with selling weapons to Syria, can they be convinced to endorse a condition that military assistance will not be provided to forces known to have committed human rights violations (something similar to the Leahy provisions mandated in U.S. law)?  Here, credible monitoring will be key, and could be the justification to insist that human rights monitors—in the form of an expanded, and protected, Annan mission—be given enough access and resources to determine which forces should be sequestered.
The world also needs to convince the opposition’s armed combatants that it will not serve their cause to target civilians. Some governments are now providing military and non-military support to the armed opposition. Regardless of whether this is something that should be encouraged or discouraged, it is happening.  At a minimum, the necessity then becomes working to ensure that groups receiving arms do not turn around and target civilians. As a measure to ensure this, what if the provision of supplies to armed opposition groups was conditioned upon those groups adopting clear pledges to adhere to international human rights and humanitarian law, and to allow international human rights monitors to work in close proximity to their operations to monitor that this pledge was being honored?
While it may be too late to succeed in bringing peace in the short term, the Annan mission can succeed in preventing further escalation and reducing the harm to civilians if it is backed by strong commitments and consequences for violations by the UN Security Council. The new mission should include an arms embargo, in particular applied to all forces known to have committed human rights violations, international monitors to verify that combatants adhere to the Geneva Conventions and other applicable international human rights and humanitarian laws, and consequences for those who do commit violations. This may not avert civil war, but perhaps this approach can rein in the human costs of conflict.
http://blog.endgenocide.org/blog/2012/07/16/syria-farewell-to-arms/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=syria-farewell-to-arms

Tell Sec. Panetta: Stop the Arms Flow to Syria! 5APR12 & Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout handed 25-year federal sentence 6APR12

THE U.S. government sentences viktor bout, the Merchant of Death, to 25 years in prison for arms trafficking but continues the Pentagon's contract with rosoboronexport, supplier of weapons to assad of Syria. It is no wonder the Russians won't "cooperate" with us on Syria, our blatant hypocrisy is reason enough for them to just tell us no! Please participate in Human Rights First's campaign to get Sec of Defense Panetta to end the contract with rosoboronexport now, click the link....

Rosoboronexport. This state-run Russian arms dealer has shipped $1 billion worth of weapons to the Assad regime, which has slaughtered more than 9,000 Syrians since March 2011. And the death toll is mounting. While the United States has to its credit imposed sanctions on the Assad regime, it continues to do business with Rosoboronexport—subsidizing the mass atrocities unfolding in Syria. This is happening even though the U.S. government could purchase the same equipment through other companies. Tell U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta to stop the arms flow to Syria by cancelling the U.S. arms contract with Rosoboronexport! In the face of Syria's bloody crackdown, Rosoboronexport recently described its business with the Assad regime as "active and dynamic," solidifying its role as one of Assad's most significant enablers of mass atrocities. President Obama says that preventing and halting mass atrocities is both a core national and moral interest of the United States. Now the United States government should make sure its actions match its rhetoric: it should cancel its contract with Rosoboronexport. Tell Secretary Panetta to stop the arms flow in Syria now! Sincerely, Sadia Hameed Human Rights First Human Rights First is an independent advocacy and action organization that challenges America to live up to its ideals. We believe American leadership is essential in the struggle for human rights so we press the U.S. government and private companies to respect human rights and the rule of law. When they don't, we step in to demand reform, accountability and justice. Around the world, we work where we can best harness American influence to secure core freedoms.

Human Rights First, 333 Seventh Avenue, 13th Floor, New York, NY 10001-5004 www.humanrightsfirst.org Join us on Facebook, Follow us on Twitter Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout handed 25-year federal sentence By the CNN Wire Staff updated 2:34 AM EDT, Fri April 6, 2012 Reaction to Viktor Bout sentencing STORY HIGHLIGHTS Viktor Bout is sentenced to 25 years in prison Bout was convicted last year on four counts stemming from weapons deals His lawyer wanted the conviction overturned and said the prosecution was 'political' (CNN) -- Convicted Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout was sentenced Thursday to 25 years behind bars by a federal judge in New York. "I am not guilty," Bout said through a translator. "I never intended to kill anyone. I never intended to sell any arms to anyone. God knows this is the truth." Last year Bout, who was dubbed "the merchant of death" by his accusers, was convicted on four counts of conspiracy to kill Americans, acquire and export anti-aircraft missiles and provide material support to a terrorist organization. He had faced the possibility of life in prison. "Viktor Bout has been international arms trafficking enemy number one for many years, arming some of the most violent conflicts around the globe," said Preet Bharara, the U.S. attorney in Manhattan. "He was finally brought to justice in an American court for agreeing to provide a staggering number of military-grade weapons to an avowed terrorist organization committed to killing Americans." Bout's wife, Alla, said after the hearing that her husband "said few words" in reaction to the sentence. "The war is not lost yet," Alla Bout said, speaking in Russian. She said she and her husband could see each other once a week and "yesterday we had a very serious conversation regarding him speaking in court -- there was a very long speech written ... Viktor together with his defense decided that he did not have anyone to prove himself to in that courtroom or accept his guilt or say anything else regarding the reliability of this case because he did not accept this case from the beginning as a lawful case, starting from the process in Thailand to his extradition to United States." Bout guilty conspiring to kill Americans Viktor Bout atty: 'We intend to appeal' At the trial, the prosecution said that during a 2008 sting operation by U.S. drug enforcement agents in Thailand, Bout believed he was selling weapons to Colombian guerrillas. His lawyer, Albert Dayan, filed a letter last week asking Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, who presided over the trial and who set Bout's sentence, to set aside the guilty verdict. Dayan urged the judge not to "become an unwilling party" in what he called a "wrongful prosecution" for "purely political reasons." He argued that the conviction is a "product of malice" and that Bout has been an "object of private politics" coming from Washington. The lawyer claimed that Bout was picked out by the United States government and lured into a crime manufactured by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, in which the agency played "the role of judge, jury and executioner. " In his claim, Dayan insisted that Bout did not intend to sell any arms to the agents, that he had not sold any arms for several years and that the only thing he wanted to sell were two cargo airplanes, worth $5 million. Dayan stood by the claim that DEA officers baited his client into illegal activities. "I do not profess, I do not argue that he's an angel, but he is innocent of these charges," Dayan wrote. "I felt it was my duty to speak out and let the world know." According to a federal indictment, Bout was suspected of creating front companies that used his planes to deliver food and medical supplies, as well as arms. After a sting operation in 2008, he was arrested in Thailand and in 2010 was extradited to the United States following a protracted court proceeding. He was convicted in November after a three-week trial in New York. Before his arrest, the DEA had struggled to draw Bout out of his Russian homeland, which is long thought to have sheltered and defended him. Undercover agents met with Bout's associates the world over, from Curacao to Copenhagen, in an attempt to set up a meeting with their target, according to the indictment. The Russian businessman also has been accused of assembling a fleet of cargo planes to traffic military-grade weapons to conflict zones around the world since the 1990s. Allegations of trafficking activities in Liberia prompted U.S. authorities to freeze his American assets in 2004 and prohibited U.S. transactions with him, according to the indictment. Bout has maintained that he operated legitimate businesses and had acted as a mere logistics provider. His exact age is unclear, but he is believed to be in his late 40s or 50s, with his age in dispute because of different passports and documents. The U.S. attorney's office said it had no confirmed age. Critics have accused Bout of providing arms to rebels in several countries and fueling bloody conflicts in places such as Liberia and Sierra Leone. In 2000, then-British Foreign Office official Peter Hain branded him "Africa's chief merchant of death" at a time when Bout is believed to have supplied arms to officials in Sierra Leone, a former British colony then embroiled in civil war. CNN's Michael Tang and Julia Talanova contributed to this report. http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/05/justice/new-york-viktor-bout-case/index.html

China in a tug of war between two Sudans 23MAR12

THE government of South Sudan is already flexing it's muscles on the international stage by shutting off the oil from their fields to punish the government of Sudan for fraud and theft. It is too bad the Arab League and the Persian Gulf oil producers are too greedy to take the same action against the prc for their support of Syria's assad. South Sudan's oil embargo in defense of their political and economic independence has the prc over a barrel, so to speak (something the Gulf oil producers could do as well), and we can only hope the South Sudanese government and people come out on top with more development revenue from their oil from both the prc and Sudan.

By Sudarsan Raghavan and Andrew Higgins

JUBA, South Sudan — On the day South Sudan became independent last year, China opened an embassy here, eager to protect its oil interests. It quickly dispatched its foreign minister and began discussing a huge aid package for this destitute land.
Just a few months later, Beijing finds itself trapped in a bitter wrangle between South Sudan and its former rulers in Sudan, with both countries pressing Beijing to take their side.
The dispute has cut off a significant source of oil to fuel China’s booming economy and imperiled billions of dollars in Chinese investments. It has also threatened Beijing’s diplomatic and economic relations with both the countries and strained the boundaries of a long-standing Chinese policy of noninterference in the internal affairs of other nations.
“This new reality has left China uncomfortably stuck in the middle of a tug of war,” said Zach Vertin, a Sudan analyst with the International Crisis Group, a nonprofit think tank. “Both sides have attempted to leverage the Chinese oil interest and draw them in line with their own interests.”
The saga playing out in one of the world’s poorest regions highlights the troubles an increasingly prosperous China faces as it tries to adjust to tumultuous change: from Sudan to Libya, Syria and Burma, Beijing has resisted what it portrays as Western-style meddling. But by staying on the sidelines, China has jeopardized its interests and image as a friend of the developing world. Many Arab nations, for example, were furious when China joined Russia in blocking United Nations action on Syria.
At the center of the struggle between the two Sudans is oil, which until last summer was controlled by Khartoum but which now lies mostly within the borders of the world’s newest state, the Republic of South Sudan. China is the biggest player in the oil industry on both sides of the frontier: It holds big stakes in the main oil fields in the south and in pipelines and other infrastructure in the north.
After years of providing diplomatic cover and weapons to a regime in Khartoum ostracized by the West, China must face up to a simple fact, said Pagan Amum, the secretary general of South Sudan’s ruling party: “The master has changed. It was Khartoum. Now it is Juba.”
China’s efforts to shift gears in Sudan began in 2005, with the signing of a peace deal between Khartoum and southern rebels. The agreement ended what was Africa’s longest civil war and paved the way for South Sudan’s independence in July. But officials today say that the Chinese have not done enough to erase suspicions rooted in Beijing’s long support for Sudan’s president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, an indicted war-crimes suspect who used Chinese-supplied arms in trying to prevent the south from seceding.
South Sudan, which depends on oil for 98 percent of its revenue, insists that it wants to remain partners with China. But South Sudanese officials warn that if Beijing does not align its interests with their country, they will seek out U.S. and Western oil companies.
In testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee this month after a trip to South Sudan, Hollywood star George Clooney, a longtime critic of Bashir’s regime, noted that China’s massive investment in Sudan makes Beijing crucial to settling continuing violence in the region. China, he said, has invested about $20 billion, but “right now they are getting nothing from this” because of feuding between Khartoum and Juba. Clooney and several members of Congress were later arrested during a protest at the Sudanese Embassy in Washington.
Khartoum, which depends heavily on Chinese investment, trade and aid, is determined to keep Beijing on its side. The government dispatched a senior envoy to Beijing last month and has exerted influence over Chinese-led oil consortiums, which pump most of their oil in the south but still need the north to get it to China.
The south has refused to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in royalties for using Sudan’s pipelines, saying that the fees were exorbitant. Sudan responded by seizing oil tankers carrying South Sudanese crude and imposed a blockade on the export of the oil. Last month, South Sudan shut down its oil production, roughly 350,000 barrels a day, after accusing Sudan of stealing $815 million worth of its oil.
South Sudan says it will pay less than $1 a barrel in fees to transport oil through the north’s pipelines. Khartoum says it wants $36 a barrel and $1 billion in back payments. The two sides are even fighting in a London court, as South Sudan seeks to recover money from the sale of the seized crude.
South Sudan said recently that it intends to build a pipeline that would head south to Kenya. It is not clear who would fund such a massive project, but, if built, the pipeline would sharply reduce Juba’s dependence on the north — and the value of China’s huge investment in existing pipelines to Sudan’s Chinese-built oil export terminal on the Red Sea.
An old alliance under threat
It was inevitable that China would get tangled in the dispute. The state-owned China National Petroleum Corp., or CNPC, has a big stake in most of the biggest oil concessions. The oil from both Sudans represents at least 5 percent of China’s global crude imports.
This is much less than what China imports from Angola but is still important, especially as it is produced mainly by Chinese companies that are controlled by the state and, thus, in Beijing’s view, are more reliable. Angola’s oil, by contrast, is largely pumped by Western companies.
China also has great leverage over Sudan. Beijing provides massive loans to the north; oil and trade bring in billions more in foreign currency, vital to run Sudan’s economy and to buy weapons.
CNPC, whose boss in Beijing is appointed by the ruling Communist Party, declined to comment for this report. The company requested and received written questions but did not respond. In public comments, Chinese officials have sought to maintain neutrality, saying that both Sudans “can only achieve common development through peaceful co-existence.”
In Juba, officials stressed that China should make greater efforts to persuade Khartoum to accept South Sudan’s position. “We are not asking China to help us. We are asking China to help itself with its friend,” Amum said. He made clear that Juba would no longer tolerate China’s alliance with Khartoum.
“They are used to looking north,” he said. “They are now being told to turn around, southward.”
There are signs that China’s previously rock-solid support for Khartoum might be softening. In a recent interview with Qatar’s al-Raya newspaper, Bashir complained that Beijing had cancelled a loan to his government for a big agricultural development project. China pulled out, the Sudanese president said, because Khartoum was due to repay the money with oil shipments, which had been disrupted by the south’s independence.
Even so, it is unlikely, analysts said, that China would jilt Khartoum for Juba — that would probably alarm other repressive and corrupt regimes, such as those in Angola and Equatorial Guinea, where China has forged highly profitable oil relationships.
“The Chinese are not going to throw away old friends,” Vertin said. “They won’t abandon Sudan. That would be a bad precedent for them.”
Sudan also has some powerful and so far loyal friends in Beijing, though how long this lasts may depend as much on the labyrinthine internal politics of the Communist Party as events in Africa. One of Khartoum’s biggest backers in Beijing for years has been Zhou Yongkang, a member of the party’s Politburo Standing Committee responsible for security. In recent days, however, rumors — all unconfirmed — have swirled in Beijing that Zhou is in deep political trouble after the purge last week of a senior party official with whom he is thought to have been allied.
Zhou used to be the head of CNPC, the state oil company, and led its push into Sudan’s oil sector in the 1990s after American and other Western companies pulled out. He has visited Khartoum repeatedly.
China’s predicament
Amid mounting anger in Juba over China’s continuing coziness with Khartoum, South Sudan on Feb. 20 expelled Liu Yingcai, the head of Petrodar, a consortium that is majority owned by CNPC.
In a letter, the Juba government accused Liu of colluding with Khartoum to steal South Sudan’s oil and of not fully cooperating with orders to shut down oil production. Petrodar, in a statement, denied the allegations. The consortium said it had ordered staff members “not to comply with the forced lifting” of oil, which it said was done by members of Sudan’s national security forces.
Now, South Sudan has launched an investigation of Petrodar to determine the extent of its role in the oil theft. Juba is also probing the actions of the Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Co., an oil consortium that is 40 percent owned by China and that also may have helped Khartoum steal oil. If the consortiums are found sufficiently guilty, Amum said, their contracts could be terminated.
“It will be an opportunity for others, with possibly even better technology, to come in,” Amum said. “If the Chinese are not with us, we will have another very good story, too. With the Chinese or with others, we will prosper.”
As tensions between the two Sudans grow, China’s predicament becomes more precarious. Last month, Sudan allegedly bombed an oil field at El Nar in South Sudan, nine miles from the jagged, contested border between the two countries, sending Chinese and other foreign workers maintaining the oil wells scrambling for their lives.
“They bombed this place because of the oil,” said Miakol Lual, a local tribal chief. The attack destroyed portions of the oil infrastructure.
“It’s a message to all foreigners: ‘You deal with us, not the other side,’ ” said a foreign supervisor who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not allowed to talk to the media. Khartoum has denied attacking the field.
In Juba, Chinese expatriates are growing anxious. In January, rebels linked to South Sudan kidnapped 29 Chinese workers in Sudan, releasing them last month. The Chinese Embassy has ordered all its nationals to stay in at night and not discuss anything sensitive with locals.
“Everyone is worried about the situation,” said a Chinese telecommunications worker who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he feared he would get fired. “If things get worse, we have made preparations to move out of here.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/africa/china-in-a-tug-of-war-between-two-sudans/2012/03/07/gIQAQUUrWS_print.html