Humanitarian needs in northwest Syria have increased considerably as living conditions in most areas have declined-a situation sharply aggravated by the February 6 earthquake. ![]() Today, the necessity for such mechanisms is even more acute. A Security Council mechanism to enable cross-border aid became acutely necessary given repeated accounts that the regime was manipulating humanitarian assistance in its territory and across lines of control with opposition-held areas. Since 2014, the United States has rightly made unimpeded aid provision a priority at the UN given the Assad regime’s brutal suppression of the Syrian uprising and loss of control over northern border crossings with Turkey. Subsequent private consultations did not produce an alternative, however, so the issue was sent to the General Assembly for discussion earlier today. ![]() On July 14, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) noted that the regime’s letter provides a legal basis for delivering aid but rejected both of the above demands-a sound conclusion given the impermissibility of placing political conditions on humanitarian aid, not to mention the fact that the ICRC and SARC have not been active in northwest Syria in over a decade. The letter also insisted that the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the Syrian Arab Red Crescent (SARC)-essentially an Assad-controlled parastatal organization-be empowered to “supervise and facilitate the distribution of humanitarian aid in areas controlled by terrorist organizations in northwest Syria.” Two days later, the Assad regime issued a letter granting the UN permission to send aid via the northwest Bab al-Hawa crossing for six months, but only “in full cooperation and coordination with the Syrian Government.” The letter then laid out the terms of this cooperation.įor one, the UN must not communicate with “terrorist organizations.and their affiliated illegal administrative entities in northwestern Syria,” naming the “so-called ‘Interim Government or the Salvation Government’”-a reference to Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the jihadist group that controls much of Idlib province. On July 11, Moscow vetoed a draft Security Council resolution that would have extended cross-border assistance for nine months, while the United States, Britain, and France voted against a competing Russian draft. At the same time, it should develop plans with Turkey for delivering aid to northwest Syria even without a clear UN mandate, and for pushing back on recent Russian aggression in Syria, which has ramped up in the months since Washington issued a sanctions waiver for earthquake relief. ![]() Instead, the United States should use its political will at the General Assembly to keep aid provision unimpeded and impartial, especially given the region’s ongoing efforts to recover from February’s devastating earthquake in Turkey and Syria. ![]() deputy representative at the UN General Assembly gathering in New York urged the draft penholders at the Security Council to find a compromise, but this route has little chance of success and would be insufficient even if a renewal option is found. Without a Plan B for aid deliveries, Washington and its partners could be forced to accept this outcome. Seventeen Russian vetoes have hobbled the council’s ability to keep humanitarian assistance flowing, so Washington and its allies should look to the General Assembly instead-or take matters into their own hands on the Turkish border.Īfter nearly a decade of UN Security Council wrangling over the provision of humanitarian aid to opposition-held areas of Syria, Russia has vetoed a draft resolution to renew the assistance mechanism for the seventeenth time, turning the matter over to its client regime in Damascus.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |