Citing Libya example, Russia rejects US-backed ‘friends of Syria’ group

Germany expels four Syrian embassy officials over espionage; China meets key opposition group.


Afp February 09, 2012

BERLIN/ BEIJING/ MOSCOW: Russia said on Thursday that it took a cautious view of US-backed attempts to forge a “friends of Syria” coalition that may soon meet in Turkey to coordinate humanitarian assistance for the embattled opposition.

The Russian foreign ministry’s chief spokesman said the idea appeared similar to the grouping of like-minded nations that Washington forged in advance of an air campaign on Libya that Russia strongly opposed.

“We take a generally cautious view of formats that we do not believe are legitimate for dealing with specific international disputes,” foreign ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich told a weekly briefing.

“We have had very a bad experience working in such formats, and take a cautious attitude to various contact groups and groups of friends,” said Lukashevich. “As you remember, we had such unsuccessful experience in Libya.”

He added that Russia remained opposed to any coalitions whose job was to “introduce foreign intervention” in another nation’s internal affairs.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton this week said she backed the coalition idea as the death toll spirals from Syrian President Bashar alAssad’s domestic crackdown.

Turkey on Wednesday said it planned to hold a meeting “as soon as possible” to forge a common approach between regional players and world powers towards the crisis. A US State Department official said the proposed Turkish meeting was “part and parcel” of efforts to form the “friends of Syria” group.

Germany expels four Syrian embassy members

Meanwhile, German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said on Thursday that Germany was expelling four diplomats from the Syrian embassy in Berlin after the arrest of two men suspected of spying on regime opponents.

“After the arrest of two people suspected of spying for Syria, I have decided to expel four members of the Syrian embassy in Berlin,” Westerwelle said in a statement. “The Syrian ambassador has been informed of this decision,” added the minister.

According to diplomatic sources, there were “clear indications” that the four had carried out “acts not in accordance with diplomatic law”.

The diplomats and their families now have three days to leave the country, the sources added.

Further steps against Syrian embassy staff could not be ruled out if it emerged that the Damascus regime was continuing to interfere with opposition figures and Syrian people in Germany, added the sources.

Two men, identified only as 47-year-old German-Lebanese citizen Mahmoud El A. and 34-year-old Syrian national Akram O., were arrested in Berlin on Tuesday.

Westerwelle summoned Syria’s ambassador following the arrests. “The position of the federal government was made unmistakably clear at this meeting that the possible action against the Syrian opposition in Germany will not be tolerated,” the ministry said.

In late December, a Berlin local politician active in the Syrian opposition was attacked by two men in his home in a case the German foreign ministry said it was following closely. The man’s party, the Greens, said it suspected the Syrian secret services were behind the assault. No suspects have been identified in the case.

China meets Syria opposition in Beijing

China said that it had held talks with a key Syrian opposition group this week, amid fierce criticism of its decision to block a UN resolution condemning a bloody crackdown in the Middle East country.

China and Russia drew international ire for blocking the UN Security Council resolution on Saturday, with Washington calling their rejection a “travesty” and another Syrian opposition group saying they had handed President Bashar alAssad’s regime a “licence to kill”.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Liu Weimin said the visit by the National Coordination Body for Democratic Change (NCB) had “long been scheduled” and was not linked to China’s controversial veto.

NCB representatives told Chinese officials they would like Beijing “to play a bigger role for an early resolution to the Syrian crisis,” Liu said.

But the NCB, one of the main opposition factions in Syria, staunchly opposes foreign military intervention in the conflict – which is in line with China’s long-standing policy of non-interference in other nations’ internal affairs.

The other main opposition group, the Syrian National Council (SNC), is widely regarded as the most inclusive of Syria’s opposition alliances and has previously called for foreign military intervention.

The SNC blasted China and Russia over their double veto and said they had given a “licence for the Syrian regime to kill without being held accountable”.

Liu said Vice Foreign Minister Zhang Zhijun met members of the NCB to discuss “the situation” in Syria. He urged both sides of the conflict to “cease all violence ... and avoid casualties among civilians”.

Liu reiterated that China was “the friend of all Syrian people” and did not “seek its own interests on the Syrian issue”.

The NCB was in Beijing from February 6 to 9 at the invitation of the Chinese People’s Institute of Foreign Affairs, a government-backed foreign policy organisation.

China said Tuesday it was considering sending envoys to the Middle East to help resolve the conflict, after Russia sent its top diplomat Sergei Lavrov to Damascus.

Thirteen countries voted for the UN Security Council resolution, which aimed to give strong backing to the Arab League’s plan to end a deadly government crackdown on protesters. More than 6,000 people have died in nearly a year of upheaval in Syria, as Assad’s hardline regime seeks to snuff out a revolt that began with peaceful protests in March 2011 amid the Arab Spring.

COMMENTS (1)

Mike | 12 years ago | Reply

What is the problem here? The Chinese and Russians were ready to agree to the UN Security Council peace proposal resolution last Saturday, assuming that any wording hinting at 1) "regime change as a predecessor to further discussions (either direct wording or indirect reference to Arab League proposal)" and 2) "foreign military intervention being an option as part of the proposal". If these statements were removed they would have both signed the agreement? If the west is so eager to stop the bloodshed then they should have agreed to remove these statements for this initial proposal, then move forward from there? Unless they were planning on playing another "spin the wording of the agreement to their own interpretation" game, like they did in Libya interpretting "establishing a no-fly zone" to mean authorization from the UN for regime change!

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ