Syrian opposition expects Arab recognition

2012-02-10 22:10

Paris - The opposition Syrian National Council, an umbrella body grouping parties in revolt against Bashar Assad's regime, said on Friday it expects to be recognised within days by several Arab states.

Currently meeting in Qatar under its Paris-based leader Burhan Ghalioun, the SNC is hopeful that it will win a diplomatic breakthrough on Sunday at meetings of the Arab League and Gulf Cooperation Council in Cairo.

"There should be an official recognition of the SNC by several Gulf countries," said Imad Hussari, a spokesperson for the group and leader of the "Local Coordination Committees" which mobilises protests inside Syria.

Another SNC figure, Istanbul-based Khaled Khoja, confirmed he expects recognition "by several Arab states in the coming days".

Currently, only Libya's post-revolutionary interim government recognises the SNC as its sole legitimate Syrian interlocutor, but the Gulf states decided on Monday to expel Syrian ambassadors from their capitals.

The SNC groups parties from different backgrounds, including Islamists from the Muslim Brotherhood and liberal nationalists. Officials said it will meet in Cairo or Istanbul on February 15 to choose a new chairperson.

  • Fred - 2012-02-11 01:14

    Good move. Arab countries are still xenophobic and believe the land of their countries is "Arab Land". I doubt God thinks of it that way. The point being the flip side of this xenophobia is to be responsible for dealing with bloody tyrants in their midst. Recognition of the Syrian Council is a good solid move in that direction. Threat of military action unless Assad stands down would be the next one. Modern-day Arab countries, with glaring exceptions growing fewer by the day, have declared their intent to make the Middle East a peaceful, harmonious, democratic place. It's their primary responsible. But the world should stand right with them in this regard. Heart-weak technocrats like Bashar must be dealt with square on.

      Pierre - 2012-02-11 15:17

      It sounds all so nice, only so very one sided. Syria must be rained in, but why the silence on Saudi-Arabia and Bahrain. (You probably did not even know there were protests in both these countries with equal harsh suppression?) I don’t like dictators either, but one must tackle the bigger evil first. I stand with Russia and China here. The US is the bigger instigator of war in current times and their military aggression needs to be stopped; even if that means a veto in the UN Security Council to intervene in Syria. (A UN vote for humanitarian assistance in Libya quickly resulted in a military invasion, with more killing, torture, incarceration and displacement than they tried to solve.)

      Fred - 2012-02-11 15:33

      Because this article is about Syria not Saudi Arabia and there is a crisis happening right now in Suria in which hundreds of people are being killed almost daily by a violent dictator using the state machinery to attempt to hold onto power. To not take a stand on Syria because there are other places that are less than perfect is being weak and silly. To confuse the forces for good with the forces of evil is just plain dumb. The crux of your stupidity is summed up in your phrase: a UN vote for humanitarian assistance in Libya quickly resulted in a military invasion, with more killing, torture, incarceration and displacement than they tried to solve. What do you imagine would have happened if the world did nothing?

      Fred - 2012-02-12 00:12

      Gaddafi's Libya and the word liberated do not go together. Everyone except the delusional and stubborn know that. Most of all, almost six million Libyans know it (leaving room for the very few who were Gaddafi cronies).

  • Nyiko Ngobeni - 2012-02-11 02:18

    Even a blind man would see this coming

  • Fidel - 2012-02-11 07:26

    The Arab tyrants of persian gulf aren't going to bring democracy to Syria. They need to slow down, they live in castles made of sand and glass.

      Fidel - 2012-02-11 09:00

      Kan jy nie lees nie?

      Fred - 2012-02-11 09:34

      What does this mean?

      Fidel - 2012-02-11 09:47

      Really Fred? You and Frank seem to suffer from a serious lack of brain activity - embarrassing. If only you'd have one of your brains removed, you'd be less confused.

      Pierre - 2012-02-11 15:24

      @ Frank – Nobody here likes dictators, torture or live ammunition on civilians. The problem is one of context. For one the US has killed more civilians in Iraq than Syria has killed thus far. Secondly the US is misusing “human rights” to topple governments they don’t like. Saudi-Arabia and Bahrain used equally harsh military force to stamp down protests in their countries, however with no US outcry. We need to have international law under which all countries are accountable and all judged equally. In the absence of international law I agree with Russia and China to curb the US’s military ambitions in the middle east with a security council veto. (No I am not Grazella either.)

      Fred - 2012-02-11 15:36

      I get it now: you believe the Arab League are the tyrants, not the actual tyrants like Gaddafi and Assad. At least you're consistent in your delusion. :)

      Fred - 2012-02-11 15:51

      Pierre, i wonder what the Syrians think about your idea. Its truly weak and heartless, dumb really to stop help for the Syrian people who are trying to defend themselves against a tyrant who's killing them. As to Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, the Arab League and Western world acting together have been very actively involved in stopping the killing there and adopted a strong stance against that dictator too. The result is he's handed over power. That dictator engaged with the world leading up to this, and there was a longer history of dialogue between the two on which to rely to bring change. Not so with Bashar Assad. While the situation in Saudi Arabia is less than perfect, anybody can see that hundreds of being are not being slaughtered almost daily. Far from it. The Western world is clear about the unacceptability of the lack of human rights in Saudi Arabia. You squarely oppose the forces for good confusing them for the forces of evil, and enable the forces of evil. This makes you evil whether you know it or not.

      Fred - 2012-02-11 15:53

      My third paragraph above is about Bahrain, not Saudi Arabia.

      Fidel - 2012-02-12 00:35

      @Fred Which of the Arab League countries is a democracy? And you call me delusional, do you know what the word means? Do you know what tyranny is? Try not to impose your own views of how the world should be organised onto other cultures. The most undemocratic thing is to assume you have the complete answer and insist everyone else does democracy your way. This neo-con conceit is inherently totalitarian.

      Pierre - 2012-02-12 00:38

      @ Fred - Just because you don't understand another's argument does not make them stupid. You might be the stupid one. So please read the posts carefully and try to understand what is written. The clue is; some try to take the lesser of two evils and US or Nato military intervention in the middle east was especially destructive thus far.

      Fred - 2012-02-15 08:09

      No Pierre, your perspective is superficial and largely stupid. Civilian deaths caused by Nato in Iraq have been unintentional. Assad has intentionally killed civilians. You fail to see this difference. The US does not use human rights to topple governments. This is a stupid uninformed idea. If it did it would have intervened in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. It intervened in Afghanistan after being attacked by Al-Quaeda that used that country as a base of oerations. It intervened in Iraq (mistakenly in my opinion) also after 9/11. There was a fundamental shift in foreign policy following that event to be defensively proactive against threats. This is very different to "using human rights to topple governments". Geez, what a stupid idea. You hold the US and Nato responsible for the killings and torture committed not by them, but by terrorists and dictators. Thus you would leave terroists and dictators in their place, without acive opposition. This is also stupid. You see the US and Nato as the "bigger evil" relative to the neo-Soviet Russian regime and China, both of which have the worst, most evil histories and worst huma rights records of any country on Earth. This is stupid. So, many stupid ideas, clearly.

      Fred - 2012-02-15 08:12

      Fidel, you're talking into a mirror, almost certainly without knowing it.

  • Nyiko Ngobeni - 2012-02-11 08:42

    American stooges. They will use any amount of violence to quell any protests themselves

      Fidel - 2012-02-11 08:59

      Those bastion of democracy called the Arab League!

      Fred - 2012-02-11 09:32

      Again, in one ignorant phrase by one small person, 350 million Muslims have been demeaned.

      Fidel - 2012-02-11 09:43

      I am convinced that your brain does not have the intelligence or ability to expend the mental energy needed to comprehend and process print, ideas, thoughts and opinions. It is an extremely lazy and trouble free way to live one's life.

      Fidel - 2012-02-11 12:38

      Maar, jy is baaie baaie dom!

      Fidel - 2012-02-11 14:48

      A pseudonym is a name that a person or group assumes for a particular purpose, which differs from his or her original or true name (orthonym).[1] Popular pseudonyms include stage names, noms de plume (pen names), aliases, gamer identifications, anagrams, Graecisms, Latinisations, mystifications, nicknames, and assumed names (and orders) of popes and monarchs.[2 Your are trully daft Frank, everything needs to be spelled out for you.

      Pierre - 2012-02-11 15:28

      @ Frank - I don't understand your obsession with a name. Debating a commentator's name is irrelevant to the discussion on the article.

  • pages:
  • 1