The Week in Syria

There seems to be no let up for the people of Syria after another brutal week. Even Foreign Secretary William Hague described the situation as “bleak” and said that a peaceful resolution to the 17-month conflict looked “unlikely”. Kofi Annan quit as United Nations’ envoy to Syria.

Hague spoke as Syrian forces clashed yet again with rebels in Aleppo. Hague has yet to persuade Russia and China to back any international efforts for a path to peace.

Hague did not dismiss talks of Tony Blair to replace Kofi Annan. Annan said that his mission had failed.

Hague told Sky News: “It is a bleak time for Syria. This is, I’m afraid, the situation we warned about for some time. We won’t give up on the diplomatic work but given the situation we will of course step up our humanitarian assistance.

“We don’t want the situation to be resolved by violence. We want a peaceful transition in Syria. Sadly, we do not have the unity in the [UN] Security Council to put the decisive pressure on the Assad regime.

“Kofi Annan will be carrying on with this work until the end of August. Whoever takes on that role, it is going to need some change in the circumstances on the ground for Russia and China to change their position.

“If persuasion and argument was going to achieve a change of position, we would have done it by now.

“It might only be a further change of the circumstances – the further collapse of the regime, greater bloodshed – which brings Russia and China to change their mind.”

Hague said that the support Britain has given to Syria so far has been “non-lethal” and that Syria is now in a full-scale civil war.

“Here is regime that for 17 months now has waged war against its people. It has in many cases driven people to warfare and conflict.

“The prime responsibility for this situation lies on the regime. We are on the side of people who seek their freedom anywhere in the world.

“I do think it is right to support democratic movements in favour of the people.”

Meanwhile things have gotten worse in Aleppo as more than 20,000 government troops amassed around Syria’s second city, as the government warned the “main course” was yet to come.

Government artillery bases have fired mortars and rockets into the rebel held districts and in rebel-held Saheddin district, jet planes dropped bombs.

“The battle for Aleppo has not yet begun, and what is happening now is just the appetiser… The main course will come later,” a senior government security figure warned.

“All the reinforcements have arrived and they are surrounding the city… The army is ready to launch its offensive, but is awaiting orders.”

Wikileak in Afghanistan {Carl Packman}

Julian Assange won’t find himself on any leaked document, but he should be under no illusion: he is enemy number 1 now. The owner of Wikileaks may have just tickled a ball too many with his latest release; 90,000 records of incidents and intelligence reports about the conflict in Afghanistan.

Homeless Assange, whose profile on the Guardian notes him as confessing a genetic disposition to rebel, has spent the last 24 hours justifying his acts, in light of fierce criticism from the White House, who have said the leaks – probably the result of hacking (their assumption) – which contains classified and sensitive information could put the war effort in jeopardy.

The twitter hashtag #warlogs has had discussions ranging from whether to see Wikileaks forever more as a champion of free speech, or as a danger, more intent on causing naive damage and anarchy rather than any grown up appeal to classical liberal motifs.

Having seen a sample of the records myself I can conclude one thing for the nice readers at Frost Magazine: we are at war.

If you want to find out anymore, say if you want to see what Osama Bin Laden told intelligence in his poetic, tyrannical phraseology, or perhaps you’d like to see how much carnage the Taliban have caused with roadside bombings, go and see the files for yourself.

Though when you see them remember one of the main reasons why this stuff isn’t on public display (other than the issue of a national threat, or sensitivity to families): war is rubbish, people die, and it is often better to put it to the back of one’s mind, for otherwise the emotional proximity to what is really going on can have deleterious effects on a reasonable and rational opinion of the war effort in Afghanistan.

I call this the problem of overproximity, and I first spoke about it last year with regard to the camps in Calais that were home to many migrants. Photojournalist Jason Parkinson, a good guy, was frustrated by then immigration Minister Phil Woolas’ response to the camp. He wrote in the Guardian:

It is easy for Woolas, back in London, to arrogantly state these men don’t deserve asylum in the UK. But in doing so he exposes his distance from the issue. If he had bothered to go to the camps and squats around Calais and talk to these people, hear their stories first hand – perhaps then he would remember they are human beings and not just a statistic or price tag on a government spreadsheet.

It is my contention that it didn’t matter where Woolas made the decision if it involved taking a look at what the UK could do, but certainly visiting the camp was not going to help, only other than putting Woolas in a situation where his proximity to the problem would influence his reponse (we all know his stomach for pressure, just see Joanna Lumley take him down).

The leaked documents have the potential to change people’s mind in the wrong way, it will remind people that death is common to war, and that strategy has not always been good in Afghanistan.

The shock of the reality has the potential to delete from our emotional minds the cost of not challenging the Taliban – this network of extremists will not stop until every son of every scared parent in Afghanistan has forcefully been signed up to fight in their fascist wars.