Syrian views on international agreements regarding Syria: Cessation of hostilities, Geneva III, and any upcoming elections under UN supervision
- Plurality of respondents do not have high hopes regarding the international agreements that have taken places regarding the Syrian situation and for the most part are not convinced that the representatives of states on the negotiation table will bring Syria any closer to a democracy. Only 8.5% of the participants expressed conviction in the agreements, whilst the larger contingent of participants said they see the situation remaining unaffected by the agreements, and if anything, will lead the country to the worst yet, or to how Syria was before the revolution, or believed that Syria will become a split country across sectarian and geopolitical lines.
- The larger percentage of participants, 40.5%, believe ceasefires serve the regime more than opposition factions, whilst 37.1% believe they changed little in the existing balance of power in the country. A small percentage believe the ceasefires served opposition factions.
- There is a general consensus among participants over the nature of the agreements regarding ceasefires between the regime and the opposition. Only 14.7% of participants, most of which lived in regime-held areas, classified the nature of agreements as settlement or reconciliation.
- Across all areas, the Syrian regime was viewed as primarily responsible for the catastrophic situation in the country, closely followed by Russia and the United States.
- The number of voters who participate in the upcoming elections which will take place a year and half from the Geneva three talks as proposed in UNSC resolution 2254 increase with age. The youth who participated in the survey of 25 years or under were largely against the elections at 41.3%, in contrast with the 10.2% of those against the elections at the of 56 and above.
آراء وتوجهات سورية في الاتفاقات الدولية حول سوريا: وقف إطلاق النار ومفاوضات جنيف (3) والانتخابات الرئاسية
المقبلة برعاية الأمم المتحدةتركيا – اسطنبول:أجرت اليوم التالي” خلال الفترة الممتدة بين 1 آذار/مارس و19 نيسان/ أبريل 2016 مسحاً اجتماعياً، بهدف التعرف على أبرز الآراء والتوجهات حول الاتفاقات الدولية للحل السياسي في سوريا، وقام فريق الباحثين الميدانيين بإجراء مقابلات وجهاً لوجه مع مواطنين سوريين داخل سوريا، شملت (3183) شخص: 2113 رجل و1070 امرأة.إن ظروف الحرب والنزوح التي تعيشها البلد تجعل من غير الممكن الحصول على عينات تمثيلية، لكن فريق البحث تمكن من الحصول على عينات ذات تركيبة متنوعة، وكافية تسمح بإجراء مقارنات بين مختلف المتغيرات الديمغرافية والاجتماعية، قادرة على التزويد ببيانات مهمة عن أبرز الآراء والتوجهات حول الاتفاقات الدولية تمت دراستها (وقف إطلاق النار، مفاوضات جنيف 3، الانتخابات المنصوص عنها في قرار مجلس الأمن ٢٢٥٤).بالإضافة إلى ذلك، تم الأخذ بعين الاعتبار ظروف وشروط الحياة المتفاوتة جداً والتي يعيشها السوريون في ظل الحرب الدائرة منذ سنوات، فتم التمييز بين مناطق محاصرة، وأخرى تحت هدنة، وأخرى تحت سيطرة قوى المعارضة أو النظام، وتم التمييز أيضاً بين أولئك الذين اختبروا معاهدات واتفاقات مشابهة سابقة لوقف إطلاق النار (المدنيين أو المقاتلين وعائلاتهم الخارجين من مناطق هدن) وغيرهم من السكان الذين لم يسبق لهم أن عاشوا تجربة مماثلة.أهداف البحث:يهدف هذا البحث إلى التعرّف على أبرز الآراء في سوريا بخصوص الاتفاقات والتفاهمات الدولية حول سوريا، الأمر الذي يساعد على فهم بعض تبعاتها وآثارها المباشرة وغير المباشرة، بالإضافة إلى ذلك، ستساهم هذه الدراسة في إيصال صوت السوريين المغيبين عن طاولة صناع القرار، وصانعي السياسات الدولية.أهم النتائج:
- لا يبدو أن المستجيبين يعقدون أمالاً كبيرة على ادعاءات القوى الدولية والأمم المتحدة بأن مفاوضات جنيف ستكون بوابة انتقال سوريا إلى الديمقراطية. فقط 8.5 % قالوا إن سوريا ما بعد جنيف ستدخل في مرحلة انتقال ديمقراطي، بينما اختار حوالي نصف المستجيبين إجابات متشائمة تجاه مستقبل سوريا بعد جنيف، حيث قالوا إن الأمور ستذهب نحو الأسوأ، أو سيعود الحال لما كان عليه قبل الثورة، أو سيبقى الوضع على حاله، أو أن سوريا ستصبح بلداً مقسماً.
- النسبة الأكبر من المستجيبين تعتقد أن وقف إطلاق النار سيكون في صالح النظام (40.5 %) أو أنه لن يغير من التوازن العسكري القائم (37.1 %)، نسبة قليلة قالت إنه سيكون في صالح المعارضة.
- هناك شبه إجماع بين المستجيبين على وصف الاتفاقات التي جرت وتجري بين النظام والمعارضة بالهدنة أو وقف إطلاق نار، فقط 14.7 % تصفها بتسوية أو مصالحة، ويبدو أن هاتين التسميتين الأخيرتين تنتشران بشكل رئيسي في مناطق سيطرة النظام.
- يأتي النظام وحلفاءه الإقليميين في المرتبة الأولى في كافة المناطق كمسؤول عن هذا المآل الكارثي لسوريا ويأتي بعده كل من روسيا والولايات المتحدة الأمريكية.
- تزداد نسبة المشاركة في الانتخابات المزمع عقدها بعد عام ونصف من انطلاق جنيف (3) بحسب قرار مجلس الأمن 2254 مع التقدم في العمر، فالشباب في العينة (أقل من 25 عام) هم الأكثر رفضاً لهذه الانتخابات 41.3% مقابل 10.2 % عند الذين تجاوزا ال 56 عاماً.
The Day After (TDA) is a Syrian civil society organisation working towards democratic transition in Syria, and focuses on work in the following sectors: rule of law, transitional justice, security sector reform, constitutional design, electoral system design, and post-conflict social and economic reconstruction.
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect: Atrocity Alert: South Sudan, Burma/Myanmar and Iraq
Atrocity Alert is a weekly publication by the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect highlighting and updating situations where populations are at risk of, or are enduring, mass atrocity crimes.
South Sudan
The UN Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, Adama Dieng, visited South Sudan from 7 to 11 November to meet with government officials, and religious and community leaders amidst ongoing reports of targeted ethnic violence throughout the country. Since widespread fighting broke out between the army and rebel soldiers in Juba between 7 and 11 July this year, there has been growing ethnic polarization, with increasing use of hate speech in the media, as well as targeted killings and rapes. Following visits to Juba and Yei, Special Adviser Dieng released a statement emphasizing that, “the signs are all there for the spread of this ethnic hatred and targeting of civilians that could evolve into a genocide, if something is not done to stop it now.” The UN, African Union and Inter-governmental Authority on Development must urgently engage with the government of South Sudan to ensure immediate action is taken to end violence, prevent further fracturing of South Sudanese society, and protect populations from atrocity crimes, regardless of their ethnic or political affiliation. The UN Security Council should impose a long overdue arms embargo to halt the flow of weapons to South Sudan and into the hands of those who target and kill civilians.
Burma/Myanmar
The situation in Burma/Myanmar continues to deteriorate following the start of a joint army-police operation in Arakan/Rakhine state on 10 October. Violence between the army and the Rohingya population – a distinct Muslim ethnic minority group – has escalated while humanitarian assistance for more than 150,000 people remains suspended. On 12 and 13 November the army responded to an attack that killed two soldiers by deploying helicopter gunships to several Rohingya villages, resulting in the death of more than 30 people. There are reports of the widespread destruction of Rohingya buildings and mosques in army-led “clearance operations” as well as ethnically-motivated attacks on Rohingya civilians, including allegations of rape and sexual assault of women and young girls. Under existing discriminatory laws in Burma/Myanmar, the Rohingya minority have been systematically disenfranchised and marginalized.
Iraq
On 14 November Human Rights Watch released a report detailing a pattern of unlawful demolition of buildings, homes, and entire villages within Kirkuk and Nineveh governorates between September 2014 and May 2016 by Kurdistan Regional Government security forces and Peshmerga fighters in areas where they have defeated the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). The report follows the 11 November announcement by the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights of alleged revenge killings and home demolitions in Kirkuk by civilians and members of the Iraqi security forces since the start of the Mosul offensive on 17 October. While the offensive has revealed further atrocities perpetrated by ISIL, forces combatting the group must ensure their own actions consistently comply with international humanitarian and human rights standards. As the military campaign to liberate Mosul from ISIL continues, it is essential that all parties take effective measures to ensure the protection of civilians and uphold their obligations under international law.
Connect With Us
ICTJ: New Accord Consolidates Path to Peace in Colombia
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Colombia Signs Revised Peace Deal
By Cintia Garcia
Impunity Watch Report, South America
BOGOTA, COLOMBIA—The President of Colombia, Juan Manuel Santos and FARC leader, Rodrigo Londono, also known as Timochenko, signed a revised peace deal ending fifty-two-years of war. The new signing comes after the previous deal was rejected by the citizens of Colombia on October 2. The new deal will not be put to a popular vote, instead the deal will be given to Congress for approval.
Unlike the previous signing of the deal, which was attended by 2,500 people including dignitaries, the new signing took place in a ceremony of 800 attendees in Bogota at the Colon Theatre. The revised deal includes the concerns of the citizens who voted against the previous deal. President Santos reminded Colombia of the urgency to approve the deal and ending Colombia’s civil war. He stated, “This new accord allows us to work together as a nation to recover the most affected regions due to conflict, to reconcile ourselves, to make use of new opportunities for growth and progress.”
The revised deal includes changes to fifty-seven points in the original document such as: the FARC will need to hand over its assets to the government, which the government will use to compensate victims of the war; Family values were addressed in accordance to the concerns of religious communities; a 10 year limit was put in place for the transitional justice system; FARC must provide information in connection to drug trafficking; the deal will not be integrated into the constitution.
The deal did not include tougher penalties and sentences for the FARC nor did it bar the FARC from political participation.
Congress is expected to vote on the deal within the next week. The deal must receive majority votes. Former president Uribe and his party, the Democratic Centre, will cast a No vote. They claim that the revised deal does not address their concerns, including harsher penalties against FARC members. They are also demanding for a popular vote. It is believed that the deal will pass since the president’s party holds the majority within Congress.
For more information, please see:
Wall Street Journal—Colombia’s Santos Inks New Peace Deal With FARC—25 November 2016.
AL Jazeera—Colombia Signs Revised Peace Deal With FARC Rebels—24 November 2016.
BBC—Colombia Signs new Peace Deal with FARC—24 November 2016.
Egyptian Human Rights Activist Banned from Travel
by Yesim Usluca
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East
CAIRO, Egypt — On Wednesday, November 23rd, a prominent Egyptian human rights activist was banned from leaving the country as she attempted to board a plane.
Ms. Aida Seif Al-Dawla, Director of the El Nadeem Center for Rehabilitation Victims of Violence, was attempting to board a flight before she was stopped by Egyptian authorities. A statement released by the Center indicated that she was traveling to Tunisia to attend a conference bringing together NGOs working on rehabilitating victims of violence in North Africa.
An airport security official stated that the travel ban was implemented because of Ms. Al-Dawla’s involvement in the “ongoing trial implicating the majority of the most active human rights groups in Egypt.” Ms. Al-Dawla issued a statement in which she indicated that the travel ban is aimed at “eradicating the rights movement” in an attempt to cover up the government’s systematically committed violations. Her statement further indicated that the government’s attempt to “prevent individuals who dedicated their efforts to support and alleviate the pain” of violence victims “will not work.” Egyptian human rights activists stated that the travel bans are “part of the authorities’ attempts to silence criticism from civil society groups.”
The Egyptian government had attempted to shut down the Center earlier this year. In February, the Health Ministry had threatened to close the Center due to “violations,” which included “shifting its focus from operating as a medical facility to working in human rights and advocacy.” The threat had attracted local and international criticism and outcries from rights groups. In early November, Egypt’s Central Bank had ordered the freezing of the El Nadeem Center’s bank account. The Bank had lifted the freeze shortly thereafter when the Center documented that it does not fall under the authority of the Social Solidarity Ministry.
Ms. Al-Dawla is one of many human rights activists who have been banned from travel for their involvement in the country’s pending foreign funding case. Earlier this week, the Egyptian legislature also ordered issued travel bans for Ms. Azza Soliman, lawyer and head of the Center for Egyptian Women Legal Assistance, and Mr. Ahmed Ragheb, lawyer and Director of the National Community for Human Rights and Law. Both were on their way to attend international conferences, and were informed that the ban was the result of a judicial order, issued without their knowledge, regarding the case involving illegal foreign funding of NGOs.
For more information, please see:
Ahram Online—Egyptian activist Aida Seif El-Dawla banned from travel: Nadeem Centre—23 November 2016
All Africa—Egypt: El Nadeem Center Director Aida Seif El Dawla Banned From Travel—23 November 2016
New York Times—A Top Egyptian Human Rights Activist Banned From Travel—23 November 2016
Financial Times—Egypt imposes travel bans on human rights activists—23 November 2016