Un Envoy Says Destruction In Syria Is Reaching 'catastrophic Proportions'

[News_Editor]

UN envoy says destruction in Syria is reaching 'catastrophic proportions' < br />

2012-09-05 09:08:13 GMT+7 (ICT)

NEW YORK (BNO NEWS) -- The new Joint Special Representative of the United Nations (UN) and the Arab League on the Syrian crisis, Lakhdar Brahimi, on Tuesday said the death toll as a result of the ongoing civil war is "staggering" and the destruction is reaching "catastrophic proportions."

Brahimi made the comments to the UN General Assembly in New York in his first formal speech since assuming the role on August 17. "The death toll is staggering. The destruction is reaching catastrophic proportions, and the suffering of the people is immense," he said in the brief statement.

The Algerian diplomat, who has served the UN in various high-level roles over the past two decades, said he is looking forward to visit the Syrian capital of Damascus later this week. "And also, when convenient and possible, to all the countries who are in a position to help the Syrian-led political process become a reality," he said.

Brahimi said such a political process should lead to a transition that respects the "legitimate aspirations" of the Syrian people and enables them independently and democratically to determine their own future. "The future of Syria will be built by its own people and none other," he said. "The support of the international community is both indispensable and very urgent."

In his own speech to the UN General Assembly, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned the conflict is intensifying. "The longer it goes on, the more difficult it will be to contain. The more difficult it will be to find a political solution. The more challenging it will be to rebuild the country and the economy," he said.

Ban also said UN agencies need to expand their presence in Syria. "The humanitarian situation is grave and deteriorating, both in Syria and in neighbours affected by the crisis," he said. "However, we are constrained by underfunding. The $180 million Humanitarian Response Plan is only half-funded. Some critical sectors have received almost no funding at all, while overall needs are growing."

Ban said the most pressing needs are water and sanitation, shelter, essential items such as blankets and hygiene kits, as well as emergency medical assistance. The UN now estimates more than 2.5 million people in Syria need assistance, including Palestinian and Iraqi refugees. More than 1.2 million people are displaced inside the country.

The call for additional funding to address the humanitarian situation comes as the UN Refugee Agency UNHCR confirmed that the number of refugees fleeing Syria rose sharply in August, with more than 100,000 people seeking asylum in surrounding countries - the highest monthly total of the Syria crisis to date.

"The number of Syrian refugees registered in Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq is now more than 225,000 and rising," Ban said. "These Governments have generously opened their borders and accepted their responsibility to shelter those who have sought refuge. They urgently need support. Just this weekend Jordan increased its appeal for funding to meet the growing demands."

The crisis in Syria began in March 2011 as a pro-democracy protest movement, similar to those across the Middle East and North Africa. The Syrian government violently cracked down on the protests, setting off an armed conflict between pro-Assad forces and anti-government forces.

The United Nations estimates that more than 18,000 people, mostly civilians, have been killed in Syria and more than 1.2 million have been displaced since the uprising against President al-Assad began 1.5 year ago. The opposition believes the number of deaths has already surpassed 20,000.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2012-09-05

[maidu]

Let's trot out the adjectives, shall we. Those of us following the awful news from Syria, could have used that word 'catastrophic' months ago. When it goes beyond 'catastrophic' what words shall we use? 'earth-shattering'? 'mind-boggling'? 'totally immense' ?

I think it's time we put the words aside and get a coalition of western countries (Asians and Middle Easterners are too meek to act), - and just roll on in to Damascus and either kill, arrest, or run the butt plugs out of power.

[Steely Dan]

If 18,000 deaths is catastrophic what term do you use for the 25-40,000 deaths caused a generation ago when Assad Snr raised Hama? Imho the only thing that could be more catastrophic would be intervening and putting the Muslim brotherhood in charge, but this may indeed happen as Nato are doing the heavy lifting for the Sunni oil cartel these days, the same people who try to undermine western nations by using every means they possess.

[Scott]

Jr. is getting there, numbers wise. Give him some more time and he may catch up with his father.

I note your disagreement with what is going on, but I note nothing about what you think should happen.

[simple1]

The only constructive contribution that I can think of to help the civilians, that wouldn't kick off a large regional military escalation with Russia and China involvement, is unilateral action by the US, with NATO country flagged aircraft, not US, would be no fly zones, that also excludes Syrian assault helicopters. This would assist with humanitarian supply chain activities, medical supplies etc I guess the question is would Turkey, a NATO member, permit access to their airfields as using US aircraft carriers would only increase tensions.

[Scott]

Unfortunately for the Syrian people, the US has very little to gain and a great deal to lose by any involvement other than humanitarian, IMO.

I doubt that this will end well by Western perceptions of what 'well' means. I hope I am wrong though.

[Steely Dan]

I think you need the wisdom of Solomon to decide what to do. What worries me is the so called Arab spring, which was aided and abetted by the west has resulted in anything but the democracy we hoped for. The reasons for this are imho twofold. First we misunderstand the very nature of our own democracy in thinking it can come into being spontaneously just by having a vote to see who the majority vote for. Second, we misunderstand the nature of Islam when it manifests itself as a political movement as oppose to solely a religion. Therefore we intervene to replace secular tyrants not understanding that religion based tyranny will likely take it's place, albeit after a token election such as there was in Egypt.

I don't doubt that given a chance Assad would eventually surpass the death toll his father caused, however already Christians and Shiites are being murdered by the 'rebels' and should they prevail I suspect there may be an even larger humanitarian crisis.

If under the badge of the U.N we were prepared to intervene and impose a secular constitution on the people and stay till it matured then intervention would be imho a good option, but the Arab league and Muslim brotherhood in Syria would not go for this I suspect. I know this sounds like reasserting colonial rule, but religion is the catalyst to the existing tribal and ethnic divisions and without removing this root cause there is no solution to be had, so keeping out of things may seem callous, but would be the least bad option IMHO.

[koheesti]

Goodbye, Middle East

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/09/01/goodbye_middle_east_america_doesnt_need_the_grief_115297.html

[simple1]

I think you need the wisdom of Solomon to decide what to do. What worries me is the so called Arab spring, which was aided and abetted by the west has resulted in anything but the democracy we hoped for. The reasons for this are imho twofold. First we misunderstand the very nature of our own democracy in thinking it can come into being spontaneously just by having a vote to see who the majority vote for. Second, we misunderstand the nature of Islam when it manifests itself as a political movement as oppose to solely a religion. Therefore we intervene to replace secular tyrants not understanding that religion based tyranny will likely take it's place, albeit after a token election such as there was in Egypt.

I don't doubt that given a chance Assad would eventually surpass the death toll his father caused, however already Christians and Shiites are being murdered by the 'rebels' and should they prevail I suspect there may be an even larger humanitarian crisis.

If under the badge of the U.N we were prepared to intervene and impose a secular constitution on the people and stay till it matured then intervention would be imho a good option, but the Arab league and Muslim brotherhood in Syria would not go for this I suspect. I know this sounds like reasserting colonial rule, but religion is the catalyst to the existing tribal and ethnic divisions and without removing this root cause there is no solution to be had, so keeping out of things may seem callous, but would be the least bad option IMHO.

The Syrian Christians are supporters of Assad so if the Assad regime falls they will be in for a very hard time.

[Exsexyman]

I think you need the wisdom of Solomon to decide what to do. What worries me is the so called Arab spring, which was aided and abetted by the west has resulted in anything but the democracy we hoped for. The reasons for this are imho twofold. First we misunderstand the very nature of our own democracy in thinking it can come into being spontaneously just by having a vote to see who the majority vote for. Second, we misunderstand the nature of Islam when it manifests itself as a political movement as oppose to solely a religion. Therefore we intervene to replace secular tyrants not understanding that religion based tyranny will likely take it's place, albeit after a token election such as there was in Egypt.

I don't doubt that given a chance Assad would eventually surpass the death toll his father caused, however already Christians and Shiites are being murdered by the 'rebels' and should they prevail I suspect there may be an even larger humanitarian crisis.

If under the badge of the U.N we were prepared to intervene and impose a secular constitution on the people and stay till it matured then intervention would be imho a good option, but the Arab league and Muslim brotherhood in Syria would not go for this I suspect. I know this sounds like reasserting colonial rule, but religion is the catalyst to the existing tribal and ethnic divisions and without removing this root cause there is no solution to be had, so keeping out of things may seem callous, but would be the least bad option IMHO.

A good, reasoned post, and your conclusion is right, it would be the least bad option. But sadly i think it is too late for that, the genie cannot be put back in the bottle. The rebels in Syria, a mixed bunch of Islamic insurgents from various countries, who may have competing interests but when push comes to shove all have one thing in common if they prevail. They would never allow a secular society to remain, as is the case now. They are being armed and supported by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other gulf states who have their own interests at stake. The Saudi support for the Syrian insurgents is motivated by a decades long desire to break the alliance between Syria and Iran,Saudi Arabia's chief rival for dominance in the Persian Gulf and the wider Middle East. This of course coincides with the geopolitical interests of the US and their allies, hence their 'non lethal aid' support for the rebels. For all the talk about having a Western style democracy in Syria, hand on heart does anybody really believe the Wahabi dictatorship in Saudi Arabia would desire or allow this to happen. It is the last thing they would want, it might give their own subjects ideas! The Western intervention in Iraq has resulted in a Shiite government in Baghdad with close ties to Iran, which has unnerved the Saudis considerably, surely not the result they, or the West banked on. The consequences are now being seen in Iraq with suicide bombings etc on practically a daily basis.

Syria is rapidly spiralling into an unholy mess, with Islamic fundamentalist fighters from many countries joining the fray, some even from the UK with British passports. An unholy alliance of Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaida and the like, all now being paid, their wages probably covered under the definition of 'non lethal aid'. The question any journalist worth their salt should ask the British Foreign Secretary is this. Are the Islamic insurgents in Syria being paid more or less than the average British squaddie is being paid to fight the same ideologues in Afghanistan!

The situation in Syria is very depressing, and it is very difficult to see a positive outcome which will benefit ALL the citizens there.

[Chicog]

Syria is rapidly spiralling into an unholy mess

No offence intended, but I'm afraid it did that a long time ago. It's now an outright sectarian civil war.

What's sad is that no-one wants to stick their fingers in the fire, so they are all waiting for it to burn outself out - while quietly pouring petrol on the flames.

[thenervoussurgeon]

Such a shame but thats what happens when terrorists try to take over a country ,because that is all these "rebels" are, terrorists.

[Ulysses G.]

With Islamic terrorists on one side and a barbaric dictator on the other, this is a mess indeed, but a mess is pretty much situation normal in the Middle East.

[Chicog]

Such a shame but thats what happens when terrorists try to take over a country ,because that is all these "rebels" are, terrorists.

Been watching Press TV have we?

So when your government opens fire on peaceful protests and bombs civilian areas with tanks and planes, fighting back is called "terrorism"?

What a ridiculously simplistic comment.

[Morch]

So easy to put the "Islamic Terrorists" tag on the rebels.

Even previous links provided by members holding this view state that the majority of those taking part in the fighting are home-grown rather than "imported", and that while the AQ presence is there - it's more about quality than quantity (which, btw, is consistent with AQ tactics, as opposed to the Muslim Brotherhood's).

That the foreign involvement and radical Muslim elements from within might steal this uprising as they did in other places is possible, even probable. It does not, however, make all those fighting AQ supporters, anti-west, or terrorists.

Unless there will be some fundamental change in circumstances (such as Assad's regime losing control of bio/chem weapon storages), it doesn't seem likely that there will be any massive form of intervention.

[maidu]

The opposition to the Assad regime are a motley bunch, ranging from regular citizens yearning for a democratic system, to hard liner opportunists. That's why they can't even agree on who should represent them. The hard-liners (Islam extremists insisting on Sharia Law, etc) are not going to declare themselves at this point. They'll express themselves later, when it's time to try and take control in the vaccuum left when Assad and his henchmen are forced out. I agree with the above post: the current situation is awful, but it's probably better than any alternatives.

I don't agree with someone saying western powers are too meek to enter the fray or they're fanning the flames. They're wisely staying at arm's length, to see how screwed up the situation gets. Anything America does, even if it just sends care packages, will be crapped on my others. Someone mentioned 'no-fly zones'. I think that's next, probably with a Nato coalition, because Middle Easterners are too hamstrung to do anything constructive. China certainly won't enter to assist, but they and the Russians will certainly be there with contracts and smiles, when the smoke starts to clear. If extremist women & children killers take over, the Chinese won't care a bit, as long as their compatriots are safe.

[thenervoussurgeon]

Such a shame but thats what happens when terrorists try to take over a country ,because that is all these "rebels" are, terrorists.

Been watching Press TV have we?

So when your government opens fire on peaceful protests and bombs civilian areas with tanks and planes, fighting back is called "terrorism"?

What a ridiculously simplistic comment.

No its not , they are terrorists ,just like the I R A were when they were fighting and bombing the English on the mainland ,so dont stand up for these terrorists Assad may be a dictator but life was not anywhere near as bad as it now is ,this is what happens when terrorists start fighting ,the innocent get killed and they do not care.

and for you Irish out there i have nothing but respect for the Irish people.

[Scott]

Stay on topic and keep it civil. I am getting a little tired of people adding the 'terrorist' tag to everyone they don't like or don't agree with. It is baiting other posters into unnecessary, off-topic arguments.

[Chicog]

The opposition to the Assad regime are a motley bunch, ranging from regular citizens yearning for a democratic system, to hard liner opportunists. That's why they can't even agree on who should represent them. The hard-liners (Islam extremists insisting on Sharia Law, etc) are not going to declare themselves at this point. They'll express themselves later, when it's time to try and take control in the vaccuum left when Assad and his henchmen are forced out. I agree with the above post: the current situation is awful, but it's probably better than any alternatives.

I don't agree with someone saying western powers are too meek to enter the fray or they're fanning the flames. They're wisely staying at arm's length, to see how screwed up the situation gets. Anything America does, even if it just sends care packages, will be crapped on my others. Someone mentioned 'no-fly zones'. I think that's next, probably with a Nato coalition, because Middle Easterners are too hamstrung to do anything constructive. China certainly won't enter to assist, but they and the Russians will certainly be there with contracts and smiles, when the smoke starts to clear. If extremist women & children killers take over, the Chinese won't care a bit, as long as their compatriots are safe.

Depending how it turns out of course, if Assad is deposed and the majority Sunni take over, be under no illusions that Russia will be told to pack up its naval base and bags and be on the next Aeroflot to Moscow.

The Syrian people are quite aware of who is propping up the regime and opposing any useful Security Council resolutions. Same goes for Iran.

[maidu]

The opposition to the Assad regime are a motley bunch, ranging from regular citizens yearning for a democratic system, to hard liner opportunists. That's why they can't even agree on who should represent them. The hard-liners (Islam extremists insisting on Sharia Law, etc) are not going to declare themselves at this point. They'll express themselves later, when it's time to try and take control in the vaccuum left when Assad and his henchmen are forced out. I agree with the above post: the current situation is awful, but it's probably better than any alternatives.

I don't agree with someone saying western powers are too meek to enter the fray or they're fanning the flames. They're wisely staying at arm's length, to see how screwed up the situation gets. Anything America does, even if it just sends care packages, will be crapped on my others. Someone mentioned 'no-fly zones'. I think that's next, probably with a Nato coalition, because Middle Easterners are too hamstrung to do anything constructive. China certainly won't enter to assist, but they and the Russians will certainly be there with contracts and smiles, when the smoke starts to clear. If extremist women & children killers take over, the Chinese won't care a bit, as long as their compatriots are safe.

Depending how it turns out of course, if Assad is deposed and the majority Sunni take over, be under no illusions that Russia will be told to pack up its naval base and bags and be on the next Aeroflot to Moscow.

The Syrian people are quite aware of who is propping up the regime and opposing any useful Security Council resolutions. Same goes for Iran.

That might be how reasonable people would see it, but there's a dearth of reasonable people in that part of the world. Few businessmen have any moral compass about silly things like human rights and environmental destruction. If they see a deal that will make a profit, pow, they're on it.

[Yahooka]

The opposition to the Assad regime are a motley bunch, ranging from regular citizens yearning for a democratic system, to hard liner opportunists. That's why they can't even agree on who should represent them. The hard-liners (Islam extremists insisting on Sharia Law, etc) are not going to declare themselves at this point. They'll express themselves later, when it's time to try and take control in the vaccuum left when Assad and his henchmen are forced out. I agree with the above post: the current situation is awful, but it's probably better than any alternatives.

I don't agree with someone saying western powers are too meek to enter the fray or they're fanning the flames. They're wisely staying at arm's length, to see how screwed up the situation gets. Anything America does, even if it just sends care packages, will be crapped on my others. Someone mentioned 'no-fly zones'. I think that's next, probably with a Nato coalition, because Middle Easterners are too hamstrung to do anything constructive. China certainly won't enter to assist, but they and the Russians will certainly be there with contracts and smiles, when the smoke starts to clear. If extremist women & children killers take over, the Chinese won't care a bit, as long as their compatriots are safe.

+1 . I only wish some of the western news media would try to get some depth in their reporting soon.

[Chicog]

The opposition to the Assad regime are a motley bunch, ranging from regular citizens yearning for a democratic system, to hard liner opportunists. That's why they can't even agree on who should represent them. The hard-liners (Islam extremists insisting on Sharia Law, etc) are not going to declare themselves at this point. They'll express themselves later, when it's time to try and take control in the vaccuum left when Assad and his henchmen are forced out. I agree with the above post: the current situation is awful, but it's probably better than any alternatives.

I don't agree with someone saying western powers are too meek to enter the fray or they're fanning the flames. They're wisely staying at arm's length, to see how screwed up the situation gets. Anything America does, even if it just sends care packages, will be crapped on my others. Someone mentioned 'no-fly zones'. I think that's next, probably with a Nato coalition, because Middle Easterners are too hamstrung to do anything constructive. China certainly won't enter to assist, but they and the Russians will certainly be there with contracts and smiles, when the smoke starts to clear. If extremist women & children killers take over, the Chinese won't care a bit, as long as their compatriots are safe.

Depending how it turns out of course, if Assad is deposed and the majority Sunni take over, be under no illusions that Russia will be told to pack up its naval base and bags and be on the next Aeroflot to Moscow.

The Syrian people are quite aware of who is propping up the regime and opposing any useful Security Council resolutions. Same goes for Iran.

That might be how reasonable people would see it, but there's a dearth of reasonable people in that part of the world. Few businessmen have any moral compass about silly things like human rights and environmental destruction. If they see a deal that will make a profit, pow, they're on it.

Quite the opposite. The Arab ability to bear grudges often goes beyond reason.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Thaivisa Connect App

[maidu]

The opposition to the Assad regime are a motley bunch, ranging from regular citizens yearning for a democratic system, to hard liner opportunists. That's why they can't even agree on who should represent them. The hard-liners (Islam extremists insisting on Sharia Law, etc) are not going to declare themselves at this point. They'll express themselves later, when it's time to try and take control in the vaccuum left when Assad and his henchmen are forced out. I agree with the above post: the current situation is awful, but it's probably better than any alternatives.

I don't agree with someone saying western powers are too meek to enter the fray or they're fanning the flames. They're wisely staying at arm's length, to see how screwed up the situation gets. Anything America does, even if it just sends care packages, will be crapped on my others. Someone mentioned 'no-fly zones'. I think that's next, probably with a Nato coalition, because Middle Easterners are too hamstrung to do anything constructive. China certainly won't enter to assist, but they and the Russians will certainly be there with contracts and smiles, when the smoke starts to clear. If extremist women & children killers take over, the Chinese won't care a bit, as long as their compatriots are safe.

Depending how it turns out of course, if Assad is deposed and the majority Sunni take over, be under no illusions that Russia will be told to pack up its naval base and bags and be on the next Aeroflot to Moscow.

The Syrian people are quite aware of who is propping up the regime and opposing any useful Security Council resolutions. Same goes for Iran.

That might be how reasonable people would see it, but there's a dearth of reasonable people in that part of the world. Few businessmen have any moral compass about silly things like human rights and environmental destruction. If they see a deal that will make a profit, pow, they're on it.

Quite the opposite. The Arab ability to bear grudges often goes beyond reason.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Thaivisa Connect App

Yes, you're right about that. Bearing grudges, non-forgiving, vindictiveness, fatwa, ....they're all enshrined in the Q'ran.

[midas]

Such a shame but thats what happens when terrorists try to take over a country ,because that is all these "rebels" are, terrorists.

Been watching Press TV have we?

So when your government opens fire on peaceful protests and bombs civilian areas with tanks and planes, fighting back is called "terrorism"?

What a ridiculously simplistic comment.

No its not , they are terrorists ,just like the I R A were when they were fighting and bombing the English on the mainland ,so dont stand up for these terrorists Assad may be a dictator but life was not anywhere near as bad as it now is ,this is what happens when terrorists start fighting ,the innocent get killed and they do not care.

and for you Irish out there i have nothing but respect for the Irish people.

I would like to ask NATO if they condone this kind of behaviour by the people they are funding?

http://vimeo.com/49328855

Edited September 13, 2012 by midas

[simple1]

Such a shame but thats what happens when terrorists try to take over a country ,because that is all these "rebels" are, terrorists.

Been watching Press TV have we?

So when your government opens fire on peaceful protests and bombs civilian areas with tanks and planes, fighting back is called "terrorism"?

What a ridiculously simplistic comment.

No its not , they are terrorists ,just like the I R A were when they were fighting and bombing the English on the mainland ,so dont stand up for these terrorists Assad may be a dictator but life was not anywhere near as bad as it now is ,this is what happens when terrorists start fighting ,the innocent get killed and they do not care.

and for you Irish out there i have nothing but respect for the Irish people.

I would like to ask NATO if they condone this kirennd of behaviour by the people they are funding?

http://vimeo.com/49328855

Disgusting, but we don't know if this is a propaganda film and the torture and killings are actually being carried out by the regime militia in disguise. The current regime also tortures and kills it's civilian opponents, including children; refer URL below. However "two wrongs do not make a right"

http://www.rferl.org...n/24611518.html

Edited September 13, 2012 by simple1

[harryfrompattaya]

After the trouble now in the Mid East who will dare to enter Syria to help any side. The Western country will only be a loser. Let China or Russia waste their time money and men.

[Asiantravel]

After the trouble now in the Mid East who will dare to enter Syria to help any side. The Western country will only be a loser. Let China or Russia waste their time money and men.

there is one nation I can think of

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/16/us-iran-syria-presence-idUSBRE88F04C20120916

[Chicog]

They want a Sunni Buffer zone between Lebanon and Iraq/Iran.

Trust me, a few protesting zealots and the odd death do not have any impact on that ideal.

[Baloo22]

Here is a good lesson for anyone thinking that we can go in to Syria and change anything about how the people there will act. I was doing a web search and ran into the Wikipedia page for the Hama massacre that occurred in February 1982. At the top of the page it had the following note:

Not to be confused with 2012 Hama massacre or 1981 Hama massacre.

I’m fairly confident that in 2015 we will see something like “or the 2014 Hama massacre” added to the end of that note. And later added "or the 2019 Hama massacre". You get the picture.

[Chicog]

Bashar is certainly doing his level best to overtake his dad's total, that's for sure. But I can only see it ending with him leaving.

Everyone but Russia and Iran want him out, China is just agreeing with Russia because it's tradition. If it looks like it might have a negative impact on their interests in the region, I can see them pulling the plug, but at the moment they are getting so much cheap oil from Iran they probably quite like the status quo.