Skip to main content

Syria wants "excreting efforts" in Lebanon

DAMASCUS, (SANA) – Syria and Spain emphasized on Thursday the necessity of excreting efforts to realize a cease-fire in Lebanon. (see link for original press release)

This is perhaps a good example of the difficulties of communication. I have tried to find out what they mean by "excreting efforts". My Arabic is very bad and it takes me ages to read any text let alone try to translate it. I can cope with reading some Urdu (which is a very similar script), but only by recognising words such as "Birmingham". I think "making" is probably right from the contextual analysis.

Syria is very important from the viewpoint of the situation in Lebanon. If the dispute were to spread anywhere it would spread to Syria first.

Syria is still run by the Socialist Arab Renaissance Party (aka Ba'th party that used to run Iraq as Saddam Hussain inc.) Many of the Arab tribes that are influential in Syria spread into Iraq. There is a teeny weeny bit of Badinani territory (a type of Kurd) in Northern Syria. However, the government have a strong Alawite influence which is closer to Shi'a than Sunni.

The real tension, therefore, lies between the developing civil strife in Iraq and that in Lebanon. They work in different directions, however. The main strife in Iraq is between three main ethnic factions who of which are Sunni and one Shi'a. The Sunni Kurds, however, basically want Kurdistan on their own (with one government for the Badinani and one for the Sorani). That causes problems in Turkey, of course, and to some extent in Iran. The Fayli Kurds a Shi'a Kurd group have substantially been the victims of genocide.

Syria has had a tendency towards good links with Iran. Whether there would be any direct involvement of Syria in the current conflict, however, is not clear. If it continues over a longer period then that is more likely.

When I get a bit of time I shall read more of the SANA website. It appears to be a government agency and it appears that the French version is materially different to the English Version.

Edit: The French version is more up to date. There are releases dated today referring to the Lebanese Resistance (one presumes they mean Hizbollah).


Jock Coats said…
Well, of course they could just be taking GWB at his word.

Didn't he tell "Yo, Blair" in that overheard conversation that the solution was to stop Syria doing this "shit" and it would all be resolved?
Manfarang said…
Not much love lost between the Syrian Ba'athists and the Iraqi Ba'athists.
Simon said…
Jock, if Syria had resfused to help Iran supply Hizbollah with weapons I strongly suspect that the current conflict would not have been as bad as it is today, had it happened at all that is. So, whatever the language, on this particular issue I suspect that he might actually be right. Just because you dislike someone's politics or style does not mean that from time to time they are not correct.

There are plenty of reasons for disliking the politics of George W. Bush - I have always thought, however, that sneering at his use of langauge was to be superior, but more to the point ran the distinct risk of underestimating the man.
john said…
The real stress comes from the unresolved dispute as to whether a state named Israel has a right to exist whatever the borders might be.

Syria (as far as I can tell from translating the french press stories) publicly takes a position that Israel should not exist.

The solution of the "Right Wing" Israelis is to use any excuse to hit people who take that view as hard as they can until they accept that they cannot win. The consequence of this is greater hatred and less of a chance of solving the problem.

More immediately, then, there is the issue of the perspective of the other Arab nations.

It becomes a combination of military activity and a massive exercise of brinkmanship. The Jerusalem Post carried a story over the weekend indicating that the US would not mind Israel attacking Syria.

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.

I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…