Topic A: Situation in Syria (Biological warfare)

Brief Summary On 26 January 2011, Hasan Ali Akleh poured gasoline on himself and proceeded to set himself on fire. A year and a half later, the country exists in a state of civil war, with a drastically increasing death toll currently between 35,000 to 50,415 with no signs of slowing. With government troops and militia forces fighting a battle that claims more and more lives every day, the Syrian civil war is becoming a larger and larger problem on an international scale. One of the most prominent political events thus far of the 21st century, the civil war has garnered the attention of the international community and has sparked controversy, debate, and differing contentions all over the world. With very little international action taken, the situation seems grim and a resolution to the conflict seems distant.

History of Syria After the fall of Ottoman Syria in the early 1900s, Syria was placed under the mandate of France following the First World War and League of Nations agreements of 1920. Five years after the signing of this treaty, however, Syrian Sultan Pasha al-Atrash led a revolt that, despite failing, marked the beginning of the efforts toward Syrian independence. These revolts led to the
Location of Syria in the world

eventual

negotiations between the two countries and culminated with the withdrawal of French forces from Syria in 1946, granting the country the independence it had longed for.

Left as an independent state, Syria experienced both economic prosperity and political turmoil. With the occurrence of three coup dtats in 1949 alone, stability was virtually nonexistent in the country, a factor that led to the concentration of power shifting to the military and security establishment. It was this concentration that allowed several high ranking Syrian military officers to stage a coup dtat in 1963 that, at its end, placed Hafez Al -Assad at the vanguard of Syrian government.

With the Baath government in power, President Assad undertook drastic reforms including the passing of a new Syrian constitution and the implementation of socialist policies into Syria. Although it made many contributions to the country, President Assads government also faced open dissent from the population, in part due to the lack of representation of the Baath party in a primarily Sunni state. In a response to an attempted uprising in February 1982, Assad leveled the entire city of Hamas, leaving between 10,000 to 25,000 people dead or wounded. After the death of Hafez Al-Assad in 2000, his son, Bashar, assumed the position of President. The British-educated leader initially brought with him high hopes of reform, but as time went on it became increasingly clear that Assad would continue to enforce his fathers policies of authoritarian rule. With the onset of the Arab Spring and Syrian civil war, it has become even more evident that Assad is not willing to step down and will not consolidate his power, resulting in the ongoing conflict today.

The Arab Spring On 17 December 2010, Tunisian street vendor Mohamed Bouazizi set himself on fire under the pretense of unfair treatment by the Tunisian government. Igniting a series of protests that spanned not only his country but also much of the Middle East, Bouazizis sacrifice laid the foundation for the rebellions and regime changes of the last two years. Countries such as Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen all underwent dramatic revolutions made in the name of political freedom by the people of each respective country. In all four of these countries, regime changes were instated, and in countless others civil uprisings have occurred. Met with

widespread success, the Arab Spring at first seemed both contagious and unstoppable, destined to sweep across the entire Middle East. Although at the onset of the Arab Spring government responses to revolts had been primarily peaceful, over the past year the increased spreading of revolts has been met with increasing opposition ranging from the deployment of riot police to the full blown oppression of protestors in many countries currently undergoing the Arab Spring. As the profile of the revolts increases, so has the harshness in which governments fight to quell them in their countries. The Arab Spring first ran into turbulence with the situation in Libya, and more recently screeched to a stop with the civil war in Syria, culminating in a complete standstill of the international community and the United Nations that has lasted to this day. This situation brings about an integral questionhow much longer will the Arab Spring continue to enjoy its success, and what can be done to support it without international agreement?

The Syrian Civil War With the self-immolation of Hasan Ali Akleh, revolts advocating democracy and choice broke out within Syria. Despite organization via social media and other mediums used in the revolts in Egypt and Tunisia, the initial revolts in Syria were, by contrast, much smaller than those that occurred in many other areas of the Arab Spring. In the town of Al-Hasakah, only several hundred people marched, a group that was easily dispersed by government troops. Revolts remained relatively insignificant until the 15 March 2011, when the civil war officially began. From 15 March, revolts and unrest gradually increased and was in turn met with increased government opposition. Three days later, an organized protest known as the Friday of Dignity occurred in numerous cities such as Damascus, Hama, and Daraa was met with extensive government opposition, including the use of tear gas, water cannons, beatings, and live ammunition. Over the next few days, government security forces continued to oppress protestors and revolts, which ironically drew even more revolts into the street. The policy of the use of deadly force to quell revolts continued, and the death toll began to rise significantly. The situation, deemed a civil war from 15 March onwards, escalated with extensive controversy and condemnation from many countries around the world. Despite the best efforts of many

countries, the United Nations has yet so far been unable to pass any effective resolution to assist in either the resolution of the conflict or intervention into it. Although the United States, United Kingdom, and France all firmly condemn the conflict at hand, it is China and Russia that that stand opposed too many of these efforts, due to the fact that both have extensive economic and political relations they do not wish to jeopardize. With the international community at a standstill and an open war prevailing in Syria, President Assad has been thus far able to fight his war the way he sees fit, with almost no fear of international intervention affecting his actions. The current situation in Syria is a dire one. Tensions between the Baath Party, the governing political party of Syria, and the majority Sunni population have persisted for decades and, with the onset of the civil war, finally burst into open conflict. Despite having officially begun in March 2011, the Syrian civil war is currently in what appears to be a stalemate, with both sides taking and retaking towns, villages, and other strategic location advantageous to their cause. In order to fully comprehend the conflict, it must be understood that it is not simply a revolt over political rights, but also religious. On one side of the conflict lies the Baath Party, comprised predominantly of Alawites, an offshoot of Shia Islam, led by President Bashar Al-Assad. Alawites constitute approximately 12% of Syrias population, making the government unrepresentative, but have ruled for decades without significant problems. On the other side of the conflict lies the opposition, comprised of primarily Sunni Muslims and divided into four distinct groups. These groups are the primary hopes for a successful regime change in Syria, but as of yet, the situation remains at a stalemate and a resolution to the conflict does not seem in sight. The opposition in Syria, fighting for the basic rights of democracy and freedom for the people, is comprised of four main factions. The first, the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces (NCSROF), is the relatively new group that will hopefully allow for the organized control of opposition forces within Syria. The coalitions president is Moaz al-Khatib, a Sunni Muslim cleric with a history of government opposition. Currently, the situation portrays the coalition as the firm leader in the Syrian opposition forces, as supported by US Secretary of

State Hillary Clinton. The formerly leading committee of the opposition was the Syrian National Council (SNC), with a Christian leftist dissident known as George Sabra as its head. The SNC formerly led the opposition initiative and troops but as of late has been wracked by internal struggles and, as stated by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, *can+ no longer be viewed as the visible leader of the opposition. The National Co-ordination Council (NCC), on the other hand, is led by opposition figure Hussein Abdul Azim, and supports a radically different viewpoint that denounces international intervention and advocates for the withdrawal of military from the streets. The final faction consists of the Free Syria Army (FSA), led by Riyaad al-Asaad, a former Syrian Air Force colonel. The FSA has conducted most of the fighting in the conflict and collaborates with the NCSROF and SNC, and is currently believed to possess around 10,000 to 40,000 soldiers. The FSA is poorly armed but is receiving US support, and as a result is growing stronger due the increasing number of defections in the Syrian government. However, it remains uncertain how much more ability will be needed for them to be able to attain a victory in the conflict. It is important to recognize that although the FSA is mainly Sunni, the leadership is mainly Alawite, bearing a resemblance to the current Baath government rule. In addition, there have been reports of Al Qaeda involvement with many if not all opposition groups, a factor that may potentially lead to corruption in an imminent government if the opposition factions arrange a new government themselves. The civil war in Syria continues to persist amongst both the opposition groups and the government troops. With Bashar Al-Assad no longer marred by the fear of international intervention, he too has grown bold, increasing the severity of attacks from simply retaking a village to now flattening it. Firepower on both sides is seemingly even, and each day reports are made of a city being taken or retaken and the deaths of several people. There seems to be no end in sight to the Syrian conflict, and it remains to be seen what will occur in the future of Syria.

Biological Warfare "There is no civil war in Syria, but it is a war against terror that recognizes no values, nor justice, nor equality, and disregards any rights or laws," Foreign Minister Walid Moallem said.

Moallem did not discuss last week's resolution by the U.N. Security Council requiring Syria to eliminate its cache of chemical weapons. But he pledged that Syria would keep its word and fulfill the implementation of the chemical weapons convention. "Syria, by acceding to the Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, proves its commitment against the use of such weapons, while at the same time calls on the international community to shoulder its responsibility against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East," he said. "Syria is known for fulfilling its obligations and commitments; therefore, I assure you the Syria's commitment to the full implementation of the provisions of the convention." But there's an unknown factor, he said: "Whether those who are supplying terrorists with these types of weapon will abide by their legal commitments." He repeated his government's longstanding claim that rebels are using chemical weapons. "Terrorists who used poisonous gases in my country have received chemical agents from regional and Western countries that are well known to all of us," he said. "They are the ones using poisonous gases on our military and our civilians alike." Moallem said his government wants to reach to a political solution to the country's crisis. "But our commitment to a political solution does not mean allowing terrorism to hit innocent civilians; it does not mean watching our mosques and churches destroyed," he said. CNN world affairs correspondent Jill Dougherty said the "buts" in Moallem's speech are likely to face close scrutiny from U.S. officials in the coming days as they ask a key question about Syria: "Are they actually fully committed to this agreement or not?"

The hunt for evidence At the same time, inspectors from both the United Nations and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons are on the move. The U.N. team left Damascus on Monday after investigating a half-dozen claims of chemical weapons use -- some allegedly by the government, others allegedly by rebels.

The team has confirmed the August use of chemical warfare in a rural Damascus suburb, an attack that killed at least 1,400 people, according to U.S. estimates. The investigators will file a report on their findings. But once again, the U.N. inspectors aren't tasked with figuring out who might be responsible for unleashing chemical weapons in Syria, just whether the weapons were used.

The hunt for more chemical weapons As the U.N. inspectors leave, 20 investigators from the chemical weapons group will head from the Netherlands to Syria. Their job is to identify any gaps in Syria's initial list of the chemical weapons it has. It's all part of a plan laid out by the United States and Russia to get Syria to give up its chemical weapons. Syria has agreed to the plan, but it's difficult to know whether the regime is being completely up-front with where its stockpiles are located.

Sides of the Conflict Like in every problem, there are always supporters for both sides; in the case of Syria, they are divided between the supporters of the regime and the supporters of the insurgency. The main supporter of the insurgency is the Turkish Government, United States of America, Al Qaeda, and the Arab League (mainly the Gulf countries). On the other side, the main supporter of the regime is the Iranian Government, also the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, the Lebanese Government, the Lebanese Hezbollah, the Russian Government and Iraqi Government. The main reason that some countries support the regime, as the Russian Federation does, is because of the stability and the lay politics that al-Assad has applied in Syria, while the regime is disorganized and pretty unstable.

Specifically, Iran supports Syria because the presence of Western countries represents a threat to the regional stability. The presence of the NATO, or just the United States, threatens Iranian control of the area, as well, it would mean a drastic change in the Syrian religion, and Arab-Sunis would easily gain power and control over the region. Iran provides economic and military support to the regime, equally, the Russian Federation. Russia has provided maritime and anti-air armament to defend Syria from any NATO attack. The Peoples Republic of China and the Russian Federation have applied their veto against UNSC resolutions to enter Syria. Although Turkey supported the insurgency, it had not taken direct part in the conflict because of its position as a possible member of the European Union. Role of the OIC Being a committee formed with one purposethe formulation of one voice that represents the views of the Muslim world, the OIC has an advantage over the UN and many other international bodies in that it is almost unanimous in most of its decisions, being formulated, after all, by 57 members states all sharing similar if not identical interests. With this in mind, it is also important to consider that Syria is both a member of the OIC and is also an almost entirely Islamic state. The OIC thus far has suspended Syrias membership in the OIC and condemned President Bashar Al-Assads government and its actions. Like much of the world community, the OIC has condemned the violence and killing and has called for a stop in its actions, but thus far it has not been enough to significantly impede the war in any way.

Questions to Consider
Being a committee founded on united principles, how can the OIC affect the situation in Syria in a way that the international community cannot? How can the committee utilize these advantages? How can the OIC utilize its capabilities to alleviate the situation in Syria? What would be the repercussions of one side winning the civil war in Syria?

Should the OIC adopt a

hands-on initiative in this conflict or allow it to remain as a sovereign issue?

Topic B: Possible solutions for embassies and consulates that remain closed due to potential Al-Qaeda attacks in the Middle East and North Africa.
What is Al Qaeda? In approximately 1989, bin Laden and co-defendant Muhammad Atef founded "Al Qaeda," an international terrorist group ... which was dedicated to opposing non-Islamic governments with force and violence." * "One of the principal goals of Al Qaeda was to drive the United States armed forces out of Saudi Arabia (and elsewhere on the Saudi Arabian peninsula) and Somalia by violence." * "Al Qaeda had a command and control structure which included a majlis al shura (or consultation council) which discussed and approved major undertakings, including terrorist operations." Both Atef and bin Laden sat on this council. * Al Qaeda had ties to other "terrorist organizations that operated under its umbrella," including: the al Jihad group based in Egypt, the Islamic Group, formerly led by Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, and other jihad groups in other countries. "Al Qaeda also forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in Sudan and with representatives of the government of Iran, and its associated terrorist group Hezballah, for the purpose of working together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States."

* The named defendants, plus other members of Al Qaeda, "conspired, confederated and agreed to kill nationals of the United States." In furtherance of this conspiracy, * Bin Laden and others "provided training camps and guesthouses in various areas, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Kenya for the use of Al Qaeda and its affiliated groups," * Bin Laden and others provided currency and weapons to members of Al Qaeda and associated terrorist groups in various countries throughout the world. * Bin Laden established a headquarters for Al Qaeda in Khartoum, Sudan, in 1991, and established a series of businesses, including two investment companies, an agricultural company, a construction business and a transportation company, all of which were, "operated to provide income and support to Al Qaeda and to provide cover for the procurement of explosives, weapons and chemicals and for the travel of Al Qaeda operatives."

* Bin Laden issued a number of fatwahs (rulings on Islamic law) stating that US forces stationed in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and the Horn of Africa, including Somalia, should be attacked. * Al Qaeda members "provided military training and assistance to Somali tribes opposed to the United Nations' intervention in Somalia. ... On October 3 and 4, 1993, in Mogadishu, Somalia, persons who had been trained by Al Qaeda (and trainers who had been trained by Al Qaeda) participated in an attack on United States military personnel serving in Somalia as part of Operation Restore Hope, which attack resulted in the killing of 18 United States Army personnel. * Bin Laden and others attempted to procure components of nuclear and chemical weapons. Why might Al Qaeda attack now? While loose adherence to Operation Hemorrhage may be the norm for AQAP, prominent members of the Saudi faction likely desire to signal their groups capabilities and relevanc e to a wider audience and with greater impact. According to Dr. Christopher Swift of Georgetown University, AQAPs ability to mount large-scale operations has been reduced since losing control of strongholds in Abyan and Shabwa provinces to the Yemeni military last year. Launching an attack of international significance around the time of Yemeni president Abd Rabbuh Manur Hadis visit to the United States would prove to be a public -relations coup for the group. It may be for these reasons that Germany and France have closed their embassies in Yemen, and that the United States and United Kingdom have ordered their embassy staff to leave that country.

More generally, the beginning of August marks the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, which is often associated with increased militant activity. As Peter Bergen notes, it was at the end of Ramadan in 2000 (which that year fell in January) when al Qaedaassociated operatives launched a failed suicide attack against the USS The Sullivans, though later succeeding in striking the USS Colelater that year in October. While news outlets are quick to mention potential al Qaeda involvement in recent jailbreaks in terrorist hotbeds in Iraq, Libya, and Pakistan (where U.S. embassies and consulates remain closed), any connection to AQAP is purely speculative at this point. Though diffuse groups and individuals across the region may communicate regularly, they are likely unable to coordinate large-scale operations across the globe. Still, the potential injection of terrorists can have dramatic results. In 2006, a prison break in Sanaa, Yemen, freed two top Yemeni-born militants, enabling Nasir al Wahishi and Qasim al Raymi to relaunch al Qaeda in Yemen and later AQAP. (Wahishi has been cited as one individual linked to the chatter picked up by U.S. intelligence services. For more on Wahishi and AQAP, see Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.) Measures The Obama administrations decision to close nearly two dozen embassies and issue a worldwide travel alert was difficult to quarrel with. We obviously do not have access to the intelligence that was the basis for the extraordinary closures, but American officials who do claim that they uncovered one of the most serious plots against United States and other Western interests since Sept. 11, 2001. According to The Times, officials intercepted electronic communications in which the leader of Al Qaeda in Pakistan, Ayman al-Zawahri, who succeeded Osama bin Laden, ordered Nasser alWuhayshi, the leader of the terrorist groups most lethal branch in Yemen, to carry out an attack as early as this past Sunday. That day, the State Department extended the closing of 19 diplomatic posts in the Middle East and North Africa through at least Saturday. The information was credible enough that several European countries also closed embassies in the Middle East. It also was credible enough that Republican members of Congress who are among President Obamas harshest critics on security and other issues have endorsed the administrations response. Representative Peter King, the New York Republican who is chairman of the House subcommittee on counterterrorism and intelligence, told ABC News that the government would have been totally negligent if it did not take the actions taken.

Still, both the administrations acts, and the Republicans response are shaped by the recent political past. The administration, excoriated by Republicans for underestimating the deteriorating security environment in Benghazi, Libya, that led to the killing of four American diplomats last Sept. 11, is bending over backward to avoid a repeat. Republican lawmakers made such an issue of Benghazi and failed to prove any dark conspiracy that they can hardly fault Mr. Obama now for taking maximum precautions. Its no surprise that some politicians are trying to exploit the episode by arguing that it proves the value of the National Security Agencys domestic intelligence sweeps. On Sunday, Senator Saxby Chambliss, the top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said of the N.S.A. sweeps: If we did not have these programs, then we simply would not be able to listen in on the bad guys. No one has questioned the N.S.A.s role in collecting intelligence overseas, but the debate is about domestic efforts to vacuum up large volumes of data on the phone calls of every American that are legally questionable and needlessly violate Americans rights. A threat from Al Qaeda, no matter how serious, should not divert attention from a thorough investigation of the domestic spying. The United States cannot fail to take reasonable precautions at its embassies, but neither can it be paralyzed nor shut down its diplomatic functions for prolonged periods. The embassies should reopen as soon as possible and security should be hardened at high-risk stations. That will require Republicans in Congress, who have slashed embassy security budgets, to approve money for upgrades and other post-Benghazi recommendations. The challenge is to manage risk while staying involved in the world. Al Qaeda affiliates in Yemen and elsewhere will be a threat for the foreseeable future. List of some of the Embassies and Consulates that were closed U.S. Embassy Antananarivo, Madagascar U.S. Embassy Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates U.S. Consulate Dhahran, Saudi Arabia U.S. Embassy Amman, Jordan U.S. Embassy Djibouti, Djibouti U.S. Embassy Bujumbura, Burundi U.S. Embassy Cairo, Egypt

U.S. Embassy Dhaka, Bangladesh

U.S. Embassy Kuwait City, Kuwait U.S. Embassy Manama, Bahrain

U.S. Embassy Doha, Qatar U.S. Embassy Muscat, Oman U.S. Consulate Dubai, United Arab Emirates U.S. Embassy Port Louis, Mauritius U.S. Consulate Jeddah, Saudi Arabia U.S. Embassy Riyadh, Saudi Arabia U.S. Embassy Sanaa, Yemen U.S. Embassy Khartoum, Sudan U.S. Embassy Tripoli, Libya U.S. Embassy Kigali, Rwanda

Many of these embassies were closed when the Department of State released a press release stating the closures were due to an "abundance of caution" and not an "indication of a new threat." These precautions come a year after an attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya on Sept. 11, 2012, where Chris Stevens, the U.S. ambassador to Libya, his State Department colleague Sean Smith, and former Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed. The Department of State has issued a security warning for the attack, which was later found to be a terrorist attack, to other U.S. embassies in Muslim-majority nations ahead of the 9/11 anniversary. Questions to Consider How is your nation involve in this problem? How can the OIC utilize its capabilities to alleviate this situation? What would be the repercussions is this situation continues or expands to other nations?

Should the OIC adopt a

hands-on initiative in this conflict or allow it to remain as a sovereign issue? Is this the first time this occurs? When? Where? What happened?

References Yan, H. & Paton, N. (Mon September 30, 2013)Aviable:http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/30/world/meast/syria-civil-war/ Kofi Annan peace plan for Syria. (2012, December 11). Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kofi_Annan_peace_plan_for_Syria Kofi Annan's six-point plan for Syria - Middle East - Al Jazeera English. (2012, March 27). Kofi Annan's Six-point Plan for Syria - Middle East - Al Jazeera English. Retrieved from http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/03/2012327153111767387.html/ League of Nations mandate. (2012, December 11). Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Nations_mandate

Lebanese Civil War. (2012, December 11). Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanese_Civil_War 15. List of parties to the Geneva Conventions. (2012, July 11). Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_the_Geneva_Conventions Lynch, M. (2012). The Arab uprising: The unfinished revolutions of the new Middle East. New York: PublicAffairs. Quinton-Brown, P. (2012, August 14). Saving R2P from Syria. Canadian International Council . Canada's Hub for International Affairs. Retrieved from http://www.opencanada.org/features/the-think-tank/saving-r2p-from-syria/ Rebels say Iran supplies the Syrian government with drones. (2012, October 31). YouTube. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bw4kYn1B-iU Sherlock, R. (2012, November 4). Bashar al-Assad wants war not peace reveals Syria's former Prime Minister Riyad Hijab. The Telegraph. Retrieved November 13, 2012, from

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9654320/Bashar-al-Assadwants-war-not-peace-reveals-Syrias-former-prime-minister-Riyad-Hijab.html Syria. (2012, November 13). News. Retrieved from http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/syria/index.html . Syrian civil war. (2012, November 13). Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_civil_war Syrian conflict peace proposals. (2012, December 11). Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_conflict_peace_proposals DeNinno, N (August 05 2013) Al Qaeda Terrorist Threat: List of Closed US Embassies and Consulates As 'An Abundance of Caution Available: http://www.ibtimes.com/al-qaeda-terroristthreat-list-closed-us-embassies-consulates-abundance-caution-1371965 Thomas M. (AUG 6, 2013) Closing Embassies in the Middle East and the Threat from al Qaeda, Available: http://csis.org/publication/closing-embassies-middle-east-and-threat-al-qaeda