Photo Credit: AFP PHOTO/JOHN THYS

In a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry obtained by The Cable, General Salim Idris, commander of the Syrian opposition fighting force, reiterated his request that the United States provide the opposition with weapons and suggested increased support was a precondition for participation in peace talks with representatives of Bashar al-Assad‘s government. For the U.S.-Russia backed negotiations to succeed, he explains, “we must reach a strategic military balance, without which the regime will feel empowered to dictate, or at least stall for precious time to achieve gains on the ground under the cover of diplomacy.” President Obama has, thus far, ruled out shipping any weaponry to opposition fighters, and has insisted a political solution must be achieved in order to resolve the conflict.

At a press conference with Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh yesterday, Kerry signaled that the U.S. will provide more aid to the opposition should Assad’s government refuse to participate in the international effort to bring both sides of the conflict together to negotiate a political transition. “Let me also make clear, in the event that we can’t find that way forward, in the event that the Assad regime is unwilling to negotiate Geneva 1 in good faith, we will also talk about our continued support and growing support for the opposition in order to permit them to continue to be able to fight for the freedom of their country,” he said, adding that inaction to end the fighting was “unacceptable.”

Kerry also expressed concern over the threat of sectarian violence spilling over into Lebanon. Since Sunday, 20 people have been killed in sporadic fighting in Tripoli between Lebanese fighters supporting rival factions in neighboring Syria. President Obama called Lebanese President Michel Suleiman Monday to urge the country’s armed forces to prevent Hezbollah fighters and weapons to flow across the border.

For POMED’s full summary continue reading or click here for the PDF.

The Budget and Performance Summary describes a new Department of State-USAID Joint Strategic Goal Framework where the old Strategic Goals 2,3 and 4 – Governing Justly and Democratically, Investing in People, and Promoting Economic Growth and Prosperity, respectively – are merged into a new Strategic Goal 3. The updated goal is to “expand and sustain the ranks of prosperous, stable and democratic states by promoting effective, accountable, democratic governance; respect for human rights, sustainable broad-based economic growth, and well-being.” The Agency Priority Goals within this Strategic Goal include democracy, climate change, food security and global health. Of the $47 billion total budget request, 5 percent is allocated to programs supporting Strategic G0al 3.

In the Performance Overview and Analysis section, CBJ notes: “In FY2014 the Department’s top priority in the Middle East is to promote continued political reforms across the region and strengthen civil society as a means toward realizing the aspirations of the people.”

The Bureau of International Organization Affairs

The Bureau of International Organization Affairs (IO) requests $70.2 million, a 0.02 percent increase from FY2012. Included in the list of IO’s priorities is “the continued emphasis on supporting successful political and economic transitions in frontline states.” The CBJ notes that while “frontline states” usually refers to Afghanistan and Iraq, “the U.S. must also consider the dramatic political upheavals in the Middle East and North Africa.” The CBJ also states that IO “will continue its investment in strengthening the [UN Human Rights Council], and will also reinforce its commitment to humanitarian response, gender issues, and democracy promotion.”

The Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs

The Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs (NEA) requests $585.8 million, a 25.5 percent decrease from FY2012 (this decrease is largely attributed to a reduction in Iraq-related spending). The CBJ states NEA’s top priority is “to support the democratic transitions and political reforms across the Middle East and North Africa and strengthen civil society actors as a means toward realizing the aspirations of the people.” Specifically, the CBJ states, “Nurturing nascent civil society organizations is a top priority,” and, “NEA will continue to encourage all governments to renounce violent responses to peaceful protests and to continue to pursue meaningful reforms that open political participation to all members of society, including women, youth, and minority groups.”

In Iraq, the CBJ describes a change from last year’s political stability and government effectiveness indicator:  “this year’s indicator does not measure the rule of law or control of corruption in Iraq. By focusing more in Iraq’s political stability and governmental effectiveness, we hoped to underscore the importance that security and internal cohesion play in ensuring Iraq’s development as a sovereign, stabile (sic) and self-reliant U.S. partner.”

Within the NEA’s budget is a $39.9 million request for “Arab Spring Regional Impact” for all NEA posts to “increase their engagement with a broader array of actors, especially outside governments and outside capitals.” This money includes “support for the Office of Middle East Transitions, mission operations in Tripoli and Yemen, growth in Tunisia, protective powers arrangements in Syria, and the creation of a Consulate General in Alexandria, Egypt. The request also includes coverage for unexpected increases in direct response to policy directives to advance support for the region’s democratic transitions, including the resumption of diplomatic activities in Syria.”

The Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor

The Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) requests $26.8 million, a 12.8 percent increase from FY2012. The CBJ states, “Events in the Middle East and North Africa remind the world of the challenges human rights defenders face. The U.S. Government is assisting more human rights activists and organizations through expanded rapid response funds that provide more targeted assistance to the needs of activists under threat.” The CBJ also points out “the continuing and growing backlash against civil society in other parts of the world means there will be a likely growth in the need of rapid response funds to human rights activists and organizations.”  $1.6 million in diplomatic policy and support for DRL is also included for DRL’s “diplomatic engagement in priority countries worldwide such as Bahrain, Burma, China, Egypt and Russia.”

Additionally, DRL “has primary responsibility for Leahy Amendment human rights vetting of hundreds of thousands of military training and military assistance cases each year, which is requested at $2 million for funding and staff… The Department is on target to process over 160,000 vetting requests annually.”

The Office of the Legal Advisor

The Office of the Legal Advisor requests $45.6 million, a 1.7 percent increase from FY2012. This request includes $200,000 “to support full U.S. participation in the Venice Commission, an expert advisory body on rule of law reform and compliance with fundamental rights. The Justification of Request states, “After the Arab Awakening the Commission is supporting constitutional and legal reform to Libya, Tunisia, Morocco and Jordan, countries where the U.S. has an interest in participating in assisting developing strong democratic institutions.

The Bureau of Political-Military Affairs

The Bureau of Political-Military Affairs (PM) requests $44.1 million, a 0.8 percent increase from FY2012. An example of PM’s “critical work” is the Bureau’s “efforts to reduce conventional weapons proliferation in North Africa and the Middle East.” Additionally, “PM will continue to ensure the sale and export of defense articles is transparent, consistent, and predictable, and is implemented in a manner that supports U.S. objectives, allies and friends, and the U.S. defense industrial base…”

Conflict Stabilization Operations

The Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations (CSO) requests $45.2 million, a 49 percent increase from FY12.  CSO’s past work includes “helping the Transitional National Council take charge in Libya” and offering “non-lethal support to the civilian opposition in Syria.”  The increased request will be “focused primarily on high-impact engagements… [that] may include Middle East and North Africa (MENA) transition countries…”

International Organizations and Conferences

For contributions to international organizations, the State Department requests $1.57 billion a 1.4 percent increase from FY2012. The CBJ notes several benefits to the United States from different international organizations. It pointed out that the United Nations “coordinated the humanitarian response effort to assist and protect over three million Syrians affected by the conflict both inside and outside of the county; played an integral role, via the UN Support Mission in Libya, in conducting the first democratic election in Libya in more than forty years; played a crucial role in brokering agreement in November 2011 in Yemen on a National Dialogue that will lead to the drafting of a new constitution and the taking of other critical steps in Yemen’s ongoing transition from decades of dictatorial rule to stable, democratic society;” and “continued monitoring Iran’s human rights violations through a Special Rapporteur on human rights, who issued a report in October 2012 documenting credible allegations of torture and cruel and degrading treatment executions of political prisoners, and mistreatment of prisoners.” The CBJ also noted that the International Labor Organization (ILO) identified “cases in which significant violations of labor rights have been alleged, including in Bahrain” and will continue to promote protection of labor rights as human rights.  In addition, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) “provided emergency support to Jordan’s Ministry of Education to help them cope with the influx of school-age Syrians.

The CBJ pointed out that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) “rapidly approved Turkey’s request for the deployment of Patriot missiles to defend against threats resulting from the Syrian conflict, and acted to protect civilians and enforce a ‘no fly’ zone and arms embargo in Libya.”   Finally, recent accomplishment of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) includes support to the G-8 Deauville Partnership with Arab Countries in Transition “through initiatives to promote good governance, improve business integrity, enhance anti-corruption efforts, modernize public governance structures, strengthen investment and promote tax reform…”

Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities

The State Department requests $2.1 billion for the Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities account, a 14.6 percent increase from FY2012. This budget will fund the U.S.-assessed share of UN peacekeeping operations for the UN Disengagement Observer Force on the Golan Heights, the UN Interim Force in Lebanon, the UN Mission Referendum West Sahara, and the UN Presence in Syria.

National Endowment for Democracy

The State Department requests $103.4 million for the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a 12.2 percent decrease from FY2012. The CBJ stats, “NED grantees are often at the forefront of meaningful democratic change around the world,” adding, “As a voice for women’s rights and freedom of expression, the organization has quickly become a media and women’s rights resource in the [Middle East].” The CBJ notes, “For FY 2012, NED originally set a baseline of awarding 1,225 grants. NED exceeded this total by awarding 1,392 grants in FY 2012. NED has planned targets of awarding 1,250 grants in FY 2013 and 1,260 grants in FY 2014.” In describing NED’s activities in MENA, the CBJ states, “NED will give priority to difficult transitions in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and Yemen” as well as a “lifeline for democrats in closed regimes such as Iran, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the Gulf.  Turkey will remain a priority as an example critical to transitions in the region.”

For full meeting notes continue reading or click here for the PDF.

Chairman Menendez opened the discussion on S.960, the Syrian Transition Support Act, by stating that the bill was not a choice between arming and not arming Syrian rebels, but a choice to allow U.S. intervention in a responsible fashion or “leaving it to others who will simply arm the extremists.” He said the bill “includes thorough vetting mechanisms to ensure that we are exceedingly careful about who we arm and train.” He pointed out that the legislation focuses a great deal on training, which would help build relationships and influence the groups the U.S. supports. Senator Corker, who co-sponsored S.960 with Menendez, said the bill would lay out a strategy to cause the balance to change. He argued that the bill “looks at the day after” the fall of Assad and would support moderate groups that would help lead the transition.

Senator Casey argued the “branding element” of S.960 was important because opposition groups should know the aid is coming from the American people. He stated his disappointment that no new assistance was proposed in the bill but said he would support regardless because it is “in our direct national security interests to address this.” Casey then said he would introduce amendments to address medical neutrality, the post-Assad democratic process, transitional justice, and accountability to uphold human rights. Senator Rubio also said the legislation was in the direct national security interest of the United States. He mentioned that America’s ally Jordan fears the “rise of an unfriendly government” in Syria, and argued that the fall of Assad would be one of the “most significant sanctions” on the Iranian regime. Senator Coons said he agreed with Casey and Rubio. Senator McCain argued that the U.S. should be doing more than what S.960 calls for, but said he would support because it will send a message to Assad, the opposition, and the Syrian people. Senator Kaine said he was pleased to support S.960.

Senator Risch said he would support the bill but that it wasn’t easy because he doesn’t have the “same level of confidence” his colleagues have in the Syrian opposition. He pointed out that Syrian society is very complex. Senator Udall said, “We have to ask: ‘who are we arming?’ I don’t think we know.” He asked for more hearings so the committee could hear from the experts. He also pointed out that the Obama Administration was hesitant to arm the rebels. Senator Menendez responded to Udall’s concerns stating, “We have had several hearings,” and argued that the committee knows certain elements of the opposition that it can support. He also called attention to the “strict vetting rules” laid out in S.960. Senator Murphy associated himself with the concerns of Udall. He said the American Congress and Senate Foreign Relations Committee needs to learn from history. “We are not very good at pulling political strings in a region we don’t understand,” he argued. Senator Boxer argued the legislation is clearly not an authorization of force. She said the bill was a way to “shape” the situation in Syria “just a little bit,” and added, “I feel good about it.” She also added that the bill would send a message to Russia that they cannot support a dictator.

The committee then held a vote on Senator Casey’s amendment ensuring protection of civilians, medical neutrality, and a democratic process that uphold human rights after Assad. The amendment was agreed to by a voice vote. Additionally, a Manger’s package of amendments was agreed to by a voice vote.

Senator Paul then stated his concerns with S.960. He said the Syrian conflict was a “murky war” and that it was not a good idea to get involved. He offered an amendment that would not authorize the use of force in Syria. He stated that while his colleagues had good intentions, “in your rush… you may be arming Islamic rebels” who could shoot Christians. Senator Corker responded to Paul’s concerns saying S.960 clearly does not authorize the use of military force but that Paul’s amendment to forbid it could lead to the creation of a terrorist safe-haven in the future. He challenged Paul’s remarks about rebels killing Christians saying the purpose of S.960 was to support moderates in order to avoid that exactly. Senator Rubio also responded to Paul, reiterating the point that S.960 clearly does not authorize the use of force. He added that the conflict was “not the War of 1812″ with two clearly defined sides. He said that currently the best equipped rebel fighters are the radical groups and this creates a “perverse incentive” for moderate rebels to align with the radicals. He noted that Assad was already killing Christians and that S.960 would try to stop that and does not support violence against civilians. Senator Paul’s amendment failed by a roll call vote of 2-15 with Senators Paul and Udall voting in favor.

Senator Udall then introduced an amendment limiting the arms provided to the opposition. It would allow small arms but category II and IV weapons would require a waiver. He said the opposition “must show they can manage and maintain” a chain of custody before heavier weapons are provided. Senator McCain voiced his disagreement with Udall saying, Udall “wants to use shotguns against scud missiles.” McCain said the amendment would limit the opposition to an unfair fight. He added that it would be better to not have S.960 at all if the opposition was restricted under the provisions Udall proposed. Senator Corker urged a “no” vote on Udall’s amendment. Senator Rubio pointed out that pro-Assad forces are well armed and radical Jihad forces are well armed, leaving the moderate opposition with little support. He argued that foreign policy “is about our national influence,” and said that if the U.S. was not involved at all then “we are guaranteed to have no influence in a post-Assad Syria.” Senator Udall argued that McCain’s remarks mischaracterized his amendment. Senator Menendez said the Udall amendment would “neuter” the purpose of S.960 and urged a “no” vote. Senator Udall’s amendment failed by a roll call vote of 4-14 with Senators Udall, Durbin, Murphy and Paul voting in favor.

Senator Paul then offered an amendment to strike Title V from S.960, the title that authorizes the President to provide lethal weapons. He acknowledged that it went “one step further” than the Udall amendment that had just failed but said it was important to get a vote on record. “You will be funding allies of al-Qaeda,” he warned. Senator Menendez rejected the idea of arming al-Qaeda rebels and pointed out that al-Qaeda is already well armed. Senator Rubio “categorically” rejected Paul’s claim. He said no one would vote to arm al-Qaeda, and said that moderate parties are the only ones under-armed at present. He pointed out that the vetting process is very strict in S.960. Senator Corker stated that the “thrust” of S.960 was to shift the strength away from Assad and al-Qaeda. Senator Paul’s amendment failed by a roll call vote of 2-15 with Senators Paul and Murphy voting in favor.

Senator Menendez then called for a committee vote on the bill. S.960, the Syrian Transition Support Act of 2013 was ordered reported by a roll call vote of 15-3. Senators Udall, Paul, and Murphy voted against. Senator Menendez then called for a committee vote on S.Res.143. The World Press Freedom Day Resolution was agreed to by voice vote.

For the full event notes continue reading or click here for the PDF.

In his opening statement, Chairman Royce said the hearing would look at the economic factors behind the unrest in the Middle East. He stated that a lack of property rights and rule of law, and endemic corruption, had contributed to the economic hardship of tens of millions. Royce said that the uprisings called into question American policies toward Arab governments and presented “an historic opportunity to advance reforms that would economically empower impoverished individuals.” He argued that economic repression led to the protests, which called for economic liberty. Royce said that if we don’t consider the economic forces behind the Arab Spring, “then no amount of U.S. aid will bring prosperity to the region…we need a major shift in how we view these countries.” Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL) entered Ranking Member Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY)’s statement into the record. Deutch recounted the barriers to registering businesses and economic struggles in MENA countries. He said the U.S. needs to make “a true commitment to promoting democracy and human rights, substantial economic investment, and a serious attempt to address corruption.” Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) said that there was “no one cause” of the Arab Spring and that tensions had been simmering for years. She cited poverty, unemployment, and most importantly, the lack of any real foundation of democracy as major problems. Ros-Lehtinen argued that the MENA countries cannot grow their economies and build wealth without drastically reforming their governments and laws. She concluded that “we’re stuck in a vicious cycle unless democracy comes to the Middle East.”

Hernando de Soto argued that entrepreneurs need things like titles, limited liability, and property to raise capital and get credit. He revealed that 85% of Arab enterprises did not have these things, with many of them only working in the informal economy, making unemployment numbers a sham. He noted that Bouazizi and other self-immolators were actually protesting the expropriation that is possible without rule of law. De Soto concluded that the U.S. can play a massive role in this area because it was born around the idea of freedom and property. Madeleine Albright stated that “People want to vote but they also want to eat and economic frustration has contributed much to the unrest we see in the Arab world.” She noted that there is an “an intimate connection between legal rights and economic development.” Albright argued that the U.S. can and should help the transitioning countries, including by “bringing people in the Arab region together with the authors of change” around the world. She emphasized that the U.S. “has neither the desire nor the power to dictate what happens in the new Arab democracies – but we can still exert a positive influence by fulfilling requests for technical aid and by remaining steadfast in support of democratic principles.” She concluded that “we will all do better if Arab societies are able to create a new model for governance in their region.”

Royce asked de Soto about his work in Egypt during Mubarak’s rule. De Soto stated that the issue in Egypt was not property rights, but the right to property rights. He added that if you are poor in MENA and truly not employed for more than three months, you would likely die, so most of the people listed as unemployed are actually working, just outside of the formal economy. He said that 380 million Arabs had invented ways of creating wealth. He argued that entrepreneurs are only as good as their legal environment, which is very bad in MENA where civilization was based on bad economic ideas.

Deutch asked Albright about the factors that contribute to successful transitions and what role the U.S. can play. She said that people need access to justice, and emphasized the legal empowerment of the poor. Albright said that elections are necessary but not sufficient, as democracies need rule of law, a legislative branch, and an opposition party. She noted that it is hard to have property rights if there is not a rule of law to enforce them. Albright argued that the U.S. needs to help with governance, and not just its own model. She said economic development has to be encapsulated within political development. She noted that the National Democratic Institute had brought people from Chile and Central Europe to North Africa to consult and help with leaders there, and that “imposing democracy is an oxymoron.”

Ros-Lehtinen, noting that Egypt President Mohammed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood had almost a year in power but failed to implement economic reforms, asked Albright if the U.S. should be conditioning its military and economic aid to Egypt. Albright said she would not withdraw funds from Egypt but would like to see more money go to various democratic forces, though the government is making it difficult for some groups to operate. Ros-Lehtinen asked if Albright would advocate for requiring certain benchmarks, and Albright argued that the U.S. should say what it wants, but that she would not have it be a way that the U.S. would cut off aid. Rep. Albio Sires (D-NJ) asked how the U.S. can pressure Egypt on issues like violence against Copts without leveraging the aid and threatening to cut it off. Albright said that by totally cutting off aid, you lose whatever leverage you have had. She said that instead, the U.S. must clearly say what it wants.

Rep. Tom Cotton (R-AK) asked if the U.S., World Bank, and IMF were focusing enough on constitutional issues. De Soto said that elections were important but probably not the most important, especially if they are not held by district. He emphasized the importance of getting voter lists right and getting meaningful feedback, for which there is no international formula. Rep. Ami Bera (D-CA) asked what the U.S. can do to help the Egyptian opposition. De Soto said the U.S. must understand that it is coming from the perspective of having property rights as a result of the development of common law. He added that property will change the relationship between people and government.

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) asked whether the MENA Incentive Fund requested in the president’s budget should focus on developing property rights rather than mainly governance. De Soto said yes, because property rights will make democracy viable, and that property the essence of a political issue. He added that the budgets for putting property rights into place at not that big, and emphasized that purely political reforms do not attend to the reason that people protested. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) noted that radical Islamists are not opposed to property rights and entrepreneurship, but de Soto said they will still be under fire if they don’t provide the conditions to allow those things to develop.

Photo Credit: Mohammad Hannon, File/Associated Press

At a meeting of the International Press Institute, Jordan’s Prime Minister Abdullah Ensour discussed Jordanians’ increased demand for freedoms of expression and press. Ensour stated that “the Arab Spring has opened new horizons and created more demands” for broadening these freedoms. He added, “Obviously, we’re not yet where we want to be, but we are determined to continue.” Ensour promised further liberalization and cited statistics of Jordanians’ internet use as evidence of increasing freedom. According to the prime minister, Jordan ranks third in active social network use in the Arab World and two-thirds of the population has access to the internet.

Participants in the meeting complained that Jordan’s reforms have been insufficient in addressing these demands. Nidal Mansour, head of the Amman-based Center for Defending Freedom of Journalists, said, “The Press and Publication Law has been and continues to be a sword on the necks of all journalists in Jordan.” The law requires websites dealing with “press materials” to register with the Department of Press and Publication, pay a fee, and appoint an editor who is accountable for all content, including reader comments. It also allows the department to block websites deemed to be in violation of the law. Although some limits on expression have loosened since the uprisings began, restrictions remain, including a ban on publicly criticizing the king, surveillance of journalists by intelligence agencies, and arrest of journalists and bloggers.

Last week, Congressman Gregory Meeks introduced a resolution recognizing the partnership and friendship between Jordan and the United States. The resolution praises Jordan’s cooperation in counterterrorism efforts and assistance with Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations and its  maintenance of open borders with Syria. The resolution also notes  that “Jordan is a leader for progress and tolerance in the Arab world and recently held parliamentary elections, as part of a political reform movement.” A bipartisan group comprised of Reps. Boustany, Deutch, Engel, Faleomavaega, Cleaver, Fortenberry, Grimm, Hastings, Lowey, Moran, Schiff, and Weber co-sponsored the resolution.

Photo Credit: AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

From May 21 to May 27, Secretary of State John Kerry will travel to the Middle East. His visit will begin in Oman, and then he will move to Jordan, Israel, the West Bank. In Jordan, Kerry will meet with international partners to discuss solutions for the conflict in Syria. While in Jerusalem and Ramallah, Kerry will meet with Israeli and Palestinian leadership, respectively, to discuss how the United States can support the two countries in returning to peace negotiations. After a two-day visit to Ethiopia, Kerry will return to Jordan to participate in the World Economic Forum on the 26th.

Secretary Kerry’s first stop in Jordan will include a meeting with the Friends of Syria. The foreign ministers of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Britain, France, Germany, Turkey, and Italy will attend. The discussions of Syria planned for the trip are part of the United States’ ongoing efforts to find a solution to the conflict in the country. Kerry recently visited Russia to discuss the conflict and announced an international conference co-sponsored by Russia after talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. President Barack Obama also discussed the conflict this week with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan during the minister’s visit to Washington.

For the full event notes continue reading or click here for the PDF.

Daniel Calingaert introduced the panelists and noted several recent news pieces on the Syrian conflict.

Kinda Kanbar focused on rape and sexual violence in Syria, citing the research of human rights lawyer Laila Alodaat. She began by stating that Syrian women are in crisis. Kanbar provided statistics from Alodaat’s work on sexual violence in Syria, saying that 81 cases were recorded in March 2011. She pointed to a political ideology that tolerates sexual abuse and discrimination as a central problem, saying that this ideology is enshrined in legislation and litigation. She noted specific laws that exempt men from prosecution for killing or raping women under certain circumstances. She stated that legal reforms directed at changing these laws will only be effective if they are accompanied by a social, cultural, and political movement that eliminates the ideology that supports discrimination throughout Syrian society. Kanbar called for a more proactive role for judges in order to change these laws, efforts to integrate women into Syrian society and politics, and an efficient policy for disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration of combatants.

Mohammed Aly Sergie described a surgical student enrolled in the University of Aleppo when the revolution began who has become deeply involved in activities related to the revolution. While many doctors left Aleppo as the area became more dangerous, this student remained in Aleppo to treat wounded rebels and regime soldiers. Through this role, he has built a reputation as an honest broker between the two sides. He was also elected to a position on Aleppo’s local administrative council. Sergie stated that the group of young doctors working in Aleppo has encountered the same problem faced by all organizations in Syria: a lack of funds. He noted the difficulty of establishing a transitional government and building legitimacy without funding. He argued that if organizations cannot deliver assistance to these doctors on the ground, they are “just an act of democracy” and do not change the situation.

Omar Hossino focused on relations between Syrian minorities. He noted the emergence of mediation groups addressing conflicts between minorities as reason for hope. These groups have emerged in areas of conflict between rebel groups and majority and minority groups. He cited two examples in which mediation between rebel ethnic groups and the Free Syrian Army has ended or prevented conflict between these rebel factions. He stated that these councils have forged mediated agreements in instances of ethnic fighting that did not include government forces. Hossino stated that efforts to solve local problems through a “local grassroots Syrian affair” have made him very hopeful for the future in Syria.

Oubab Khalil discussed stereotypes of the conflict in Western media, noting a tendency in the United States and the United Kingdom to characterize the situation in Syria as a conflict between Sunnis and Alawites and calling this characterization “disturbing” and “not true.” He stated that sectarian tensions exist but said, “We have not seen any systematic retaliations.” Khalil also emphasized the need for an interim government. He stated that “every struggle must end with a political solution, an enforceable one,” adding that once an enforceable political agreement is in place, they can move to a transitional government. On the subject of intervention, he praised the United States as the highest donor of humanitarian aid but stated that the U.S. and U.K. are not doing Syrians a significant favor by protecting civilians because this protection is an international responsibility. He also asserted the opposition’s belief in the Geneva Communique as a foundation for a solution to the conflict.

Opening the Q&A, Daniel Calingaert asked whether Hossino’s examples of mediation councils are isolated incidents and whether the work of these groups could be translated to a broader level. Hossino responded that they were not isolated examples but said the groups could not have a significant impact on national issues, arguing that it would be difficult to establish the legitimacy needed to act so broadly and would be difficult to translate their ability to address micro-level issues to a capacity for handling broad questions of war and peace. Calingaert also prompted Kanbar to discuss further the problem of reporting sexual abuse and the role of women in Syrian society. Kanbar agreed that there are difficulties in documenting rape, noting a particular reluctance of victims to come forward in certain areas of the country. She also called for greater representation for women, directing a call for a 30% quota for female representation in the opposition to Khalil. Khalil agreed that greater representation was necessary and responded by stating that a 60% quota that roughly matched women’s proportion of the population might be more appropriate. Kanbar agreed that this quota would be more desirable but expressed her belief that the National Coalition would not allow such a high quota.

On the issue of rape, Khalil emphasized empowering civil society to receive and assist victims of sexual abuse. On a related question on the role of women, Sergie described workshops hosted in southern Turkey by American organizations for young Syrian activists and recounted an encounter with two young men who were avidly “evangelizing” for women’s rights after attending a workshop. He claimed the U.S. is unable to create democracy but that “promoting values is probably the best avenue to go.”

Responding to a question on whether proto-ministry groups would remain active during and after the transition, Sergie stated, “These are the guys who are going to stay.” Hossino echoed this sentiment. Answering a question regarding the revolution’s chances for success without armed outside assistance, Khalil said, “If we had a level playing field, we could do it on our own.” He noted, however, that the opposition is fighting more than just Assad’s forces, pointing to Russian arms sales to the regime and the participation of Iranian and Iraqi forces in the fighting. He stated that the opposition may be able to dissolve the regime but they will not be able to return to the pre-war status quo without assistance and will eventually live in a failed state. Sergie agreed, adding that the weapons the rebels have received from other countries are “rudimentary” and are not a match for the capabilities of the regime. On the subject of foreign aid, Sergie stated that rebel groups are receiving money but the funds are insufficient. Khalil noted that there can be a substantial gap between when aid is pledged and when it is distributed.

When asked what concrete steps should be taken by the international community, Khalil called for stronger leadership, enforcement of a full or limited no-fly zone, lethal support, and increased humanitarian aid. He stated that balance of power on the ground must be achieved in order to achieve a political transition, saying it would change Assad’s calculus by showing the need for a power transition. Kanbar stated that they need to see a sign of goodwill from the regime that indicates it is ready for negotiations.

Photo Credit: Hamad I Mohammed/Courtesy Reuters

Bahraini authorities raided the home of a prominent Shia cleric, Ayatollah Sheikh Isa Qassim on Friday. Opposition group al-Wefaq said Qassim was not home at the time of the raid but there were women and children present. A leading human rights activist believes the house was raided in pursuit of fugitives who had fled from a neighboring house. Mohammed al-Maskati, president of the Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights, said this was the first time Qassim’s house has been raided and that it is “hugely offensive” for many in Bahrain. He added, ”People see him as a red line. I expect that this will cause a big reaction.”

Amnesty International called on the government of Bahrain to “immediately release five men sentenced to a year imprisonment for allegedly insulting the King of Bahrain in messages posted on Twitter.” Five men were tried separately and sentenced on March 15 to one year imprisonment. “The authorities in Bahrain seem to be using every trick in the book to stop people from expressing their views,” said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, Middle East and North Africa Deputy Director at Amnesty International.

Writing for Foreign Policy, Marc Lynch discusses the lack of international attention to Saudi Arabia’s protest movement, specifically the stories of imprisoned activists Mohammed Fahd al-Qahtani and Abdullah al-Hamed, and their lawyer Abd al-Aziz al-Hussan. He points to “generic concern” from the U.S. government in response to crackdowns and a government “offensive against human rights activists and Sunni protesters.” Lynch argues, “Even if a revolution isn’t on the immediate horizon, it would be dangerous to assume that Saudi Arabia will forever be a ‘Kingdom of No Surprises.’”  He says the Saudi government should be reaching out to reformists and ”Washington should more effectively support the opening of political space for reformist voices in Saudi Arabia and all of its regional allies.”

Photo Credit: Jacquelyn Martin/AP Photo

In a White House press briefing Thursday with visiting Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, President Barack Obama reiterated his calls for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to step down but offered no new details on the administration’s approach to hastening a transition of power to the opposition. Erdoğan has indicated he would like to see the U.S. “assume more responsibilities and take further steps” in supporting anti-Assad forces, including a no-fly zone, and is expected to urge Obama to escalate America’s role in the conflict behind closed doors. At the press briefing, Obama avoided discussion of a unilateral military option and repeated his call for mobilizing the international community to push Assad out. “There’s no magic formula for dealing with a extraordinarily violent and difficult situation like Syria’s…what we have to do is apply steady international pressure, strengthen the opposition,” Obama said, adding, “I don’t think anybody in the region, including the prime minister, would think that U.S. unilateral actions in and of themselves would bring about a better outcome inside of Syria.” Absent from his remarks was talk of the U.S.- and Russia-backed peace conference between Assad’s government and the opposition, simply saying that it “may yield results.”

The White House released an op-ed to the Turkish Daily Sabah Thursday before Erdoğan’s visit in which President Obama expressed interest in working closely with Turkey, and in particular finding a solution to the conflict in Syria. “Most urgently, we need to keep working together to end the Assad regime’s horrific slaughter of the Syrian people.  Prime Minister Erdoğan and I will discuss how we can keep increasing the pressure on the Assad regime, strengthening the moderate opposition, and preparing for a transition to a democratic Syria without Bashar Assad.”

Photo Credit: Reuters/Mladen Antonov/Pool

Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov expressed optimism Wednesday that the peace talks on the Syrian conflict they’re organizing will be successful. After a meeting with Lavrov in Sweden, Kerry said, “Both of us are … very, very hopeful that within a short period of time, pieces will come together so that the world, hopefully, will be given an alternative to the violence and destruction that is taking place in Syria at this moment.” Discussing the conference, British Prime Minister David Cameron said, “What is important here is to make sure we really put pressure on the participants to bring forward the necessary names for a transitional government and that we start proper detailed negotiations.” According to Kerry, the peace effort is based on the June 2012 Geneva communique, which advocated establishing a transitional government in Syria ”with full executive authority by mutual consent.”

Meanwhile, the United Nations passed a non-binding resolution urging a political transition to end the conflict in Syria. The resolution placed the onus of bringing an end to the civil war on President Bashar al-Assad‘s government. The resolution passed 107-12 with 59 abstentions, a drop in support compared to a similar resolution passed in August 2012 with only 31 abstentions. Some analysts say the number of abstentions indicate concerns in the international community about extremism among the Syrian rebels. Before voting began on the resolution, the U.N. raised the official death toll to Syria to 80,000, an increase of 20,000 since the beginning of the year. Vuk Jeremic, the president of the General Assembly, said, “most of these casualties [are] believed to be civilians.”