Syria Chemical Weapons Destruction Begins

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24423660

According to BBC, on the date October 6^th 2013 Syria chemical weapons destruction began. They have said that Syria has met their first requirement to supply their numbers in supplies and locations of chemical weapons. Even though they have cohered about their deadlines, there is worry about false information. This video expresses the thoughts that the weapons and sites of the weapons were incorrect and the government could be misusing the destruction process by transferring weapons in to Lebanon. Overall Syria has agreed to the destructions of its arsenal but there are international concerns about Syria completely following through with agreement.  I would be interested into how they found this information and why there is skeptical feelings about this subject. In further research most findings are also skeptical of this subject.

Private Industry may help get rid of Syria's chemical weapons

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/22/world/meast/syria-civil-war/index.html?iref=allsearch

This article touches base on a few factors that I was trying to research. One, who is doing the chemical bombing. Two, is the U.S. the only major government and administration trying to destroy, dispose of the chemicals and weapons. and Three, how will intervening either provoke other countries such as Russia and possibly the Free Syrian Army to then form a conflict with the U.S.

After reading a few other articles about disposing the chemicals that are in their substance form or still in a weapon I learned the Obama administration had been looking into disposing them by sea instead of land. This opens a large can of worms into environmental issues, ownership and responsibility issues and the lack of long- term effects that have yet to be researched. So reading an article that has shared private industries are now trying to find ways to dispose of the chemicals so that they pose minimal threats to our environment and people is a slight relief. The article also mentions the lack of response the Syrian government and President had been given in the beginning of the bombings. Ownership and responsibility was never claimed and maybe therefore the U.N. could not find any one person or party accountable. In my personal view the many different parts of the "rebels" could not have the ability to means to make such weapons without government help or funding. Therefore, I believe the government is responsible for the attacks on its own people. As Russia has funded weapons to Syria in the past why is now the time for conflict of support? Regardless that Russia is not being attacked by the Syrians other than those angry with the military and weapon support, Russia now would like to help diffuse the war and potential issues that come from chemical weapons.

Destroying Syria's chemical weapons on ship

Because of the disposal of chemical weapons on land or sea could have everlasting implication if not done properly the U.S. officials say, the government is aiming to dispose of Syrian weapons on a government-owned ship in international waters. The article states that "Under a plan yet to be approved, the chemicals would be transported to the MV Cape Ray in the Mediterranean Sea. The nearly 700-foot-long ship would be outfitted with a special system to neutralize the chemical material. U.S. warships would provide an escort and security." I feel that this plan for disposal is still not ideal. Though no country has really committed to disposal on their soil as the article says this option could be more suitable, but environmental effects could still pose a problem out on sea. To consider discharging poison gases into seas will affect the ocean but will eventually reach land. The fact that it has never been done on a ship poses great concern and risks that this could be done properly. In the accompanying vide oQueen's Univ. professor Stan Brown gives convincing difficulties in regards to disposing chemical weapons at sea

Article: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/u-s-considers-destroying-syria-chemical-weapons-ship-article-1.1532489

Read more here: http://www.theolympian.com/2013/11/29/2857050/sea-disposal-of-poisons-is-not.html#storylink=cpy

Video: http://video.theloop.ca/home/watch/weapons-disposal-at-sea-safe/2876550202001?sort=date&page=1&lineupid=1995280562001#.UpmTR8RDuSp

Power in Syria

This article spoke about Assad in Syria staying in power. The article did have some mental maps but overall the Middle East's people are seen sympathized, the article even compares Saddam Hussein with Assad, and that "it is like getting a fine for murder" paraphrased. The author of this article being American even knows the oil industry is a big part in American and Middle Eastern conflicts.  





http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/03/21290348-analysis-did-syrias-assad-get-away-with-chemical-weapons-attack

Connecting Syria's allies and enemies

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2013/08/201383111193558894.html

     This post gives you a chance to have an interactive look at the political and military positions for Syria’s allies and enemies. These positions include being for or against a military intervention in Syria. This interactive post was last updated on August 31^st 2013. It shows that there is two major divisions of countries opinions wither being for or against military intervention but is further broken down into other categories. The countries included that support military intervention include Israel, United States, United Kingdom, France, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey. The Countries that opposes military intervention are China, Russia, Egypt, Iran, Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq.  The circle size of each country is represented of their military capabilities base on the GFP power index. The larger the circle the more power that military has. The colors of the circle give each country a broad characteristic of why they are on whichever side. The underlining circles connect a few countries that have similar qualities regarding being members or the UN Security Council or being a supported to the rebel groups.  By clicking on each country there is a more detail description on the reasons why they stand for what they believe.

     When exploring through this interactive website I began to question why certain countries were located next to other countries; for example why Egypt and Israel were located in far left or right filed and not connected to other countries yet they do have some similar qualities. Another characteristic that was not written but given from this website was how the countries closer to the separation line seemed to be the key members in the outcome. The size of US, UK, France, China and Russia in fact represent their military power but this image suggests military power in fact the overall power to the outcome on involvement.

BBC News- Albania shuns Syria chemical weapons destruction

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24963241

I chose this article because I really liked another BBC article that was posted on this blog. This article, from November 15, talks about where Syria's weapons can be destroyed. Albania was a proposed venue, but the government stated that they would not participate. I never even thought about this problem. Obviously the weapons need to be destroyed, but where? Other possible locations are France and Belgium. Norway has elected to provide cargo ships to transport the 1,000 tonnes of chemical weapons but has not agreed to let them be destroyed on Norwegian soil because they do not have the skills needed. There are many countries involved in this decision. It's interesting to see the interactions between them. It has been agreed that the weapons should be destroyed outside the country, but it is not certain where.

Syria’s chemical weapons: Can it be done?

This article from the Economist dated Oct 5, 2013 touches upon the potential of Syria's use of chemical weapons. The article talks about how the OPCW teams "are expected, “using every means possible”, to have overseen the scrapping of the Syrian regime’s ability to manufacture such weapons." They could possibly destroy, dismantle and safe keep all of Syria’s 1,000 tonnes or so of chemical-weapons agents and precursors. With that how strong can Syria continue it's production? The article says that "unless temporary truces on the ground can be arranged between government and rebel forces, it may be unacceptably dangerous to reach those in contested areas, particularly given concerns over the agenda of some jihadist militias such as Jabhat al-Nusra, which has links to al-Qaeda." It also claims that 7 of the 19 declared stockpiles and facilities are in combat zones so there are still facilities that are active. OPCW’s spokesman, Michael Luhan reckons that the pitfalls are underestimated but the security counsel and all parties of interest need to use force in seeing the job done. The article closes that stripping Syria of chemical weapons is worth doing but it will not stop the regime "meting out death and destruction to civilians by conventional means."

http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21587239-destroying-chemical-arsenal-midst-civil-war-unprecedented-can-it

Syria's Chemical Weapons Stockpile

This BBC article explores the various chemical nerve agents used in the Aug. 21^st chemical attacks in Damascus, as well as the estimated size and scope of Syria's chemical weapons stockpile. One item worth noting: Syria has never signed the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OCPW) Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) Agreement, thus a formal declaration of its possessions and capacity for warfare has never been fully declared or documented. Some believe the country may contain the largest collection of chemical arms in the world. In 2002 the United States made a statement, based on a report from the US Congressional Research Service, which claims Syria likely began amassing its chemical weapons in 1972 or 1973, after the country was given a small number of chemicals and delivery systems by Egypt prior to the start of the 1973 Yom Kippur War. According to US, British, French, and Israeli intelligence, this was not the first time the Syrian government resorted to the use of chemical weapons to suppress internal upheaval. The editorial also highlights the primary locations where production, storage, and research of chemical agents were conducted within Syria. Creating a permanent prohibition on chemical weapons may be nearly impossible. Should more steps be taken by peace keeping organizations such as the UN to prevent emerging chemical and nuclear powers from amassing such alarmingly robust and dangerous weapon stockpiles? Even-though many of these emerging powers are simply catching up with the rest of the chemically and nuclear armed world.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22307705

Syria and the BBC standpoint

This article merely states that Russia and Syria denied government involvement. When obviously stated by human rights activists and the U.S.A., that Syria did in fact use Sarin nerve gas. Sarin is said by this site to be odorless and extremely lethal, if anybody has the time I recommend to listen to the audio sample, the sample is only just under two minutes long.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23927399

Al Jazeera article on the Chemical Attack

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/9/16/un-inspectors-submitsyriachemicalweaponsreport.html

This article came out in September when enough evidence unearthed to rule that there was indeed a chemical attack in Damascus. It also states that the weather was perfect for the most deadly effects of sarin, the chemical used. There is also insight into the views of the Syrian rebels whom aim to oust Assad. They don't support the plan entirely which aims to destroy Syria's chemical weapons by mid-2014, mostly, because it is a far away date. I understand their point, but Syria needs to start somewhere. I'm just worried that not all chemical weapons, or any substantial weapons for that matter, will be destroyed. Syria has informed the UN of all of its stockpiles, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did not want to give 100% of their weapons away.

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/10/27/syria-meets-deadlinetodeliverplantoremovechemicalweapons.html
To build on that plan, here is one more article about the plan if you are interested. It states that the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical weapons said that there is a declaration which is part of a strict timeline that deals with destroying chemical weapons by mid-2014. This article is from October.

Civilians in Ghouta's Opinion on the Attack

This article from Institutes for War & Peace Reporting deals with the civilians thoughts on Western intervention and how to stop President Bahar Assad. The civilians were in high hopes that the United States would attack militarily because they believe that they are the only threat to Assad. The civilians in Ghouta want Assad to be weakened and pray for an end to thee deadly chemical attacks. I found it really interesting that the civilians were in full support of the United States militarily attacking there land if it meant President Assad would be weakened. I agree with the one civilian, who said he didn’t feel an internationally brokered deal, because I think it would take much more to stop Assad. While the United States should take caution and think out how they should attack militarily, I do believe it will be the best way to bring Assad down. These chemical attacks need to stop and there is a need for outside support in the area.

http://iwpr.net/report-news/syrians-divided-western-intervention

Assabeel

Assabeel the newspaper talks about the chemical attack in not much detail. Basically the site talks about how "Turkey's report on the situation through their intelligence," paraphrased. The article is merely a report itself. The Syrian weapons seem very high tech, and it seems from this article that it was a very unfair fight.  The Syrian military is not painted in a good light regardless.


http://www.assabeel.net/syria/item/3020-%D8%AA%D9%81%D8%A7%D8%B5%D9%8A%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%87%D8%AC%D9%88%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D9%8A%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%88%D9%8A-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%81-%D8%AF%D9%85%D8%B4%D9%82

Vlog Brother's Take on Syria in 5 Minutes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exrqMPJ1Bts

I chose this source because I like media that is both informational but not too serious. I think it's a lot easier to watch a silly video than to read articles on a subject. For me, it helps the information stick. I looked this up because I wanted a little bit of background info before diving into our blog. He covers some stuff that we've already spoken of in class but I thought it was a nice little refresher. Also, when this whole chemical attack incident hit the news I had no idea why everyone cared about what Russia had to say about it. Now I know that Russia is a close ally with Syria an relies heavily on the country. Other than that, it was just a nice video to brush up on a very general idea of what happened. It's from September, so, obviously, more has happened since then. What do you guys thing? Did you like the video? Did you learn anything?

Project Outline and Timeline

In this online blog project you are being asked to search the web for information related to the chemical attack on civilians that happened in the summer of 2013 as a part of the Syrian civil war. I would like you to look at sources of media surrounding this particular instance of violence in Syria (before, during and after) to see how the country, combatants, 'the Middle East', human rights, democracy, etc were being portrayed. What can we learn about the place of Syria from this differing coverage of the attack and its outcomes? What can we learn about those who are writing about the countries from this coverage? In other words, how is media-even global media-place based? You will need to do 3 posts over 3 weeks. You can chose to structure your posts chronologically, or regionally, or just jump into whatever aspect excites you the most--this is YOUR blog. Timeline 11/14-12/05 post to the blog (original posts and responses) by 12/07 all posting and replies end 12/16 turn in write-up

The Directions

One of the themes of this course is how do we learn about other places, and particularly places in the Middle East. In this blog you will be discussing the coverage of, assumptions about, and [expected] outcomes of the chemical attack of civilians near Damascus in the summer of 2013. What can we learn about Syria? The combatants? The civilians caught in the middle? About geopolitics? Chemical weapons? And of course how our geographic imaginations of Syria are shaped by what is said about it in the wide world of media Here is what I will be looking for in your online participation: Regular participation!– I expect you to contribute your thoughts to your groups’ blog regularly throughout the 9 days of the project. Don’t just drop in once or twice and expect a good grade. You are expected at a minimum to upload 3 items (with a discussion of what you see) and respond to at least 3 posts by your groupmates. This level of participation, if done well, can earn you a B, but more is needed for that coveted A. Interesting and diverse postings—are you only looking at CNN? Not that CNN is wrong, their articles should be on the blog too, but try also looking farther afield. This could be news sources from around the world, or different types of media (cartoons, Youtube, mashups, flickr, etc) Depth of reflection and analysis– once you have found an item to share with the group, don't just state an opinion and stop, develop your ideas, show why you view the item the way you do. Don’t be afraid to share experiences where relevant, but always keep your tone and content respectful; A willingness to examine your own assumptions –the best way for YOU to get credit for examining your assumptions is if others (graciously and respectfully) point out the assumptions you are making. Thus don’t be afraid to disagree with each other. Or even if you do agree, can you find a source that wouldn’t? What are the assumptions that separate the two? Direct references to reading material when called for. Here is what to avoid: 1. Attacking another point of view or person; disagreeing is fine, but be respectful and give your reasons, simple yes or no responses; 2. Long winded responses in most cases a few well developed paragraphs should do, 3. Late responses be sure to participate in the dialogs during the time period in which the topic is up for discussion.

What to do

For every post, you will need to complete one of two following types of tasks keeping in mind the directions above. TASK ONE - ORIGINAL THOUGHTS, ORIGINAL POSTS The first task is to create at least three new threads (starting messages) over the project timeframe that pose significantly different points than those already offered. This is where you upload or post your media source and your original analysis of it. These must be completed by April 15th in order for your peers to have an opportunity to reply back to your ideas. It will be to your benefit to contribute your first thought early (to avoid having to read all other messages in order to see what points have not yet been made). TASK TWO - CARRYING AN IDEA FARTHER The second task is to make at least three new replies to blog threads started by other members of your group. The responses to others can answer questions posed, amplify and support points (with evidence and observations), or question and pose counter-arguments to points made by others (with evidence and observations). You can make your replies in text alone or add media your replies. These responses can diverge, reflect or support other statements already offered. However, each contribution must offer significant additional information (i.e. -- an "I Agree!" message will not earn points). When you are presenting any media, fact, or statements that state a conclusion, you are responsible for properly citing your sources so that the statements can be verified or clarified. This is particularly important with the media—let us see it, even if you just upload a picture from a news story include the link so that we can follow it back and see the image in its original context. You can link this information to the title of your post and/or list it in the "List of our Sources" widget at the bottom of the page. If you are using yourself and your personal experience as the source, then you must make this obvious, such as "based upon what (Iranian) friend's father told me, the city of Tehran is full of coffee shops where people talk about politics. This helps explain this sentence in my article_________." Or "After my mom explained how she felt when the American hostages were taken, this __________ sentiment made more sense to me." You are encouraged to bring your personal experiences into the discussions. The purpose of discussions within the course is to share experiences and backgrounds, as well as perceptions and ideas, so that we can learn in a peer-to-peer manner. Please realize that my role as the instructor is to monitor the discussions but I will generally refrain from participating unless the conversation needs guidance into another direction. Comments to the class will reflect the entirety of the discussions observed and your grade will be based on your successful completion of the requirements (specified above).

Questions to consider when looking at sources

Some questions that you may wish to consider as you look at the various texts include: a) What are the primary concerns of each author as revealed in the representation/text? b) Who or what are the author’s sources? How did he/she obtain the information? c) For whom is the author writing and how does this affect the themes discussed and the overall presentation? d) What is the general impression given? Can you identify a master metaphor? e) What kinds of details are given, what details are excluded, and why? f) Are the various representations consistent with one another? If not, why not? g) How has the representation of this place evolved over time?

Code of Conduct: The Rules

You are expected to treat your instructor and all other participants on the blog with courtesy and respect. Your comments to others should be factual, constructive, and free from harassing statements. You are encouraged to disagree with other students, but such disagreements need to be based upon facts and documentation (rather than prejudices and personalities). Students will need to contribute in intelligent, positive, and constructive manners within the activity. Unprofessional or disrespectful conduct will result in a lower grade for this assignment. Behaviors that are abusive, disruptive, or harassing will result in being denied further access to the blog and may result in further disciplinary actions. Warnings will not be given; part of the learning process in this course is respectful engagement of ideas with others.

Media sources (links on BB- but all can be googled)

Partial list of resources (includes only Internet-searchable resources) General World newspapers (sources list) Local media around the world (sources list) Arab Net TradeArabia.com Om al-Dunya (Arabic and English) Country by country profiles Commentaries Café Arabica Mid East Web (Multilingual Israeli site) Arabia.com Selected institutions Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies L’Institut du Monde Arabe (Paris) Khalil Sakakini Cultural center (Palestine) Newspapers and news sources Regional Al-Jazeera (English) As-Sharq al-Awsat (Arabic) Arabic News (English) Middle East Online (Arabic & English) Al-Hayat (Arabic) Dar al-Hayat (English) Algeria Al-Khabar (Arabic) El-Moujahid (French) El-Watan (French) Al-Youm (Arabic) Horizons (French) La Liberté (French) Le Matin (French) La Nouvelle République (French) Bahrain Al-Ayyam (Arabic) Gulf Daily News (English) Bahrain Tribune (English) Akhbar al-Khaleej (Arabic) Djibouti La nation (French) Egypt Al-Ahram (Arabic) Al-Ahram Weekly (English) Akhbar al-‘Ummal (Arabic) Al-Gumhuriyyah (Arabic) Al-Wafd (Arabic) Middle East Times (English) Al-Ahali (Arabic) Cairo Times (English) Al-Masa’ (Arabic) Ash-Sha’b (Arabic) Iraq Electronic Iraq (English) Iraq Press (English & Arabic) Iraq Today (English) Baghdad Bulletin (English) BBC Iraq (English) Institute for War and Peace Reporting (English) Kurdish Media (English) Kurdistan Democratic Party (English) Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (English) Jordan Jordan Times (English) Ad-Dustur (Arabic) Al-Ra’y (Arabic) The Star (English) Kuwait Al-Rai’ al-Aam (Arabic) Al-Watan (Arabic) Kuwait Daily (English) Lebanon The Daily Star (English) As-Safir (Arabic) Al-Anwar (Arabic) Al-Liwa’ (Arabic) An-Nahar (Arabic) Al-Mustaqbal (Arabic) L’Orient le jour (French) Libya Al-Fajr al-Jadeed (English) Al-Fajr al-Jadeed (Arabic) Al-Fateh (Arabic) Al-Jamahiriyyah (Arabic) Al-Shams (Arabic) Al-Zahf al-Akhdar (Arabic) Morocco Al-Anba’ (Arabic) As-Sabah (Arabic) Morocco Today (multi-lingual) Palestine The Electronic Intifada (English) Palestine News Agency (WAFA) (English, Arabic, Hebrew, French) Jerusalem Media and Communication Center (English) Al-Ayyam (Arabic) Al-Hayah al-Jadidah (Arabic) A-Quds (Arabic) Al-Manar (Arabic) Fasl al-Maqal (Arabic. Israeli-Arab) Qatar Al-Rayah (Arabic) Al-Watan (Arabic) Gulf Times (English) Saudi Arabia Aj-Jazirah (Arabic) Al—Mojaz (Arabic) Ar-Riyad (Arabic) Arab News (English) Al-Yaum (Arabic) Muheet (Arabic) Okaz (Arabic) Sudan Al-Ra’y al’Aam (Arabic) Al-Mehairah (Arabic. Islamist) Syria Syria Times (English) Tishreen (Arabic) Al-Thawra (Arabic) Al-Ba’th (Arabic) Tunisia Akhbar Tunis (Arabic) Al-Hurriyah (Arabic) La Presse (French) Le Renouveau (French) United Arab Emirates Gulf News (English) Al-Khaleej (Arabic) Khaleej Times (English) Dubai News (English) Yemen Yemen Times (English) 26 of September (Arabic) Al-Thawrah (Arabic)

Think tanks to look at

Think Tanks that might have Policy Papers to look at: Stanley Foundation Media Think Tanks Poynter Institute World Journalism Institute Robert C. Maynard Institute for Journalism Thompson-Reuters Foundation International Institute for Journalism World Press Institute (right in your own backyard!) Center for Public Media Non-Press Think Tanks Council on Foreign Relations Center for Strategic and International Studies Middle East Institute International Crisis Group Center for American Progress World Affairs Councils ISIS Woodrow Wilson International Institute for Strategic Studies

NAMES

This blog is for Alaina, Brittany, Andrew ZOC, Mark, Gabriele, Catherine, Alexandra, and Bradley