Showing posts with label White phosphorous. Show all posts
Showing posts with label White phosphorous. Show all posts

Sunday, 18 July 2021

July War Diary: More Surprises Disclosed as Haifa Enters the Equation

 July 16, 2021

Israeli enemy went ahead with its aggression on Lebanon on the fifth day, with the Lebanese Resistance continuing to surprise the Zionist occupation by expanding the range of rocket fire targeting the occupied territories.

Lebanon witnessed on that day (Sunday, July 16, 2006) the largest displacement since 1982 with Lebanese civilians fleeing southern towns and Beirut’s southern suburb (Dahiyeh) to Beirut, Mount Lebanon and even to Syria.

Media reported that the Western countries were evacuating citizens outside Lebanon, in a clear indication that the United States had given the Zionist entity the green light to destroy Lebanon and kill Lebanese civilians.

Meanwhile, the diplomatic efforts aimed at reaching a ceasefire were reportedly halted, and the final say was only for the battlefield.

Israeli warplanes pounded on Sunday (July 16) the residential areas in Dahiyeh and the southern towns, razing hundreds of housing units in that areas.

Lebanese military sources stated that Israeli occupation had used white phosphorus incendiary bombs against civilian targets on villages in the Arqoub area in the South, accusing the Zionist entity of using banned weapons against Lebanese civilians.

On the other hand, the Lebanese Resistance surprised the Israeli enemy by targeting a railway maintenance depot in Haifa by unguided rockets, killing at least eight Israelis and injuring several others.

In addition to Haifa, Katyusha rockets also hit the northern cities of Acre, and Nahariya.

In an address via Al-Manar, Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah stressed that the battle is going ahead and vowing more surprises. He threatened that the Israeli chemical factories in the occupied territories were under the reach of Resistance rockets.

Source: Al-Manar Eglish Website


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Sunday, 15 April 2018

An Excessive Emphasis on Theatrics Exposes US Hypocrisy on Syria



An Excessive Emphasis on Theatrics Exposes US Hypocrisy on Syria
PETER KORZUN | 15.04.2018 |

Is the US sincere in its fury about the alleged chemical attack in Syria? If this were more than theatrics, it would repent of its role in the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war. More than 30 years ago the Iraqi regime was regularly delivering devastating chemical barrages against Iran. The US knew all along that Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi leader at the time, had been using mustard gas and sarin since 1983. Roughly 20,000 Iranian troops were killed by chemical weapons (CW) in that war.
No emergency UN Security Council meetings were convened, no warships capable of striking land targets with cruise missiles rushed toward Iraqi shores, no belligerent statements were issued, and no sustained military operations were announced. Quite the opposite, the US provided the regime with intelligence. This is an example of how satellite imagery was used to violate human rights. The US assistance was not limited to providing just military data. Arms were funneled in via Middle East allies.
Donald Rumsfeld, then special envoy to the Middle East, visited Baghdad in 1983 to shake hands with Saddam Hussein. It was the US and only the US that protected Iraq in the UN against Iran’s charges of CW use. The 1925 Geneva Protocol states that the signatories are to induce other states not to use CW.
In 1988, the Iraqi regime killed 5,000 of its own citizens in Halabja, Iraqi Kurdistan. The US sought to obscure Baghdad’s responsibility by falsely accusing Tehran, despite the fact that Iran did not possess CW.
Washington turned a blind eye toward the use of CW by jihadists in Syria. It did not react when members of the UN independent commission of inquiry warned of its “strong suspicions” that it was the rebels, not the government, who had used CW in that war-torn country.
The US used deadly substances in Syria and Iraq, such as , breaching International Humanitarian Law. The use of white phosphorus munitions in the Iraqi city of Fallujah in 2004 has been acknowledged by US officials. That is an incendiary weapon prohibited by the 1980
The use of US cluster bombs against civilians in Yemen is a violation of the Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM). Unlike Russia, the US has failed to comply with the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). It has also refused to join the 1997 Ottawa Convention, which bans antipersonnel land mines (the Mine Ban Treaty).
The US never stopped working on its biological programs. It operates 25 bio-labs around the world in violation of the UN Biological Weapons Convention. Russia is concerned about the fact that the US has bioweapons programs in place near its borders in Ukraine and Georgia. A leak could lead to mass epidemics that would spread to Russia. No borders exist for killer insects.
The State Department described the alleged CW attack in Douma as “horrifying”. It said so even before the OPCW experts arrived there on April 13. Its statement claims that Russia’s support of the Syrian government is a betrayal of the CWC. No statement coming out of Foggy Bottom has ever declared that the US government is sorry for its multiple violations of international agreements, universally accepted norms of conduct, or for the people who have died or suffered as a result of its misdeeds. Perhaps American diplomats see nothing “horrifying” here.
The State Department fails to explain why a multinational invasion of Syria could be justified by something that might prove a hoax. Besides, no one has proved that anything like a CW attack took place in Douma at all. Should multinational forces invade the US because of its violations of international law? Could anyone in his right mind believe the US is really worried about the Syrian civilians who allegedly suffered as a result of the attack it says has taken place?
Last year, it took the US military about 48 hours to kill 100 civilians in Raqqa. One thousand eight hundred civilians overall lost their lives over the course of the US-led offensive to oust Islamic State fighters during that operation. There was no State Department comment on what happened. Were those civilians different from the ones in Douma?
State Department Spokeswoman Heather Nauert believes Russia bears responsibility for the CW attack because it “shields” Syria. By doing so, it “has breached its commitments to the United Nations.” She has a lot of nerve saying that, given all the numerous violations and illegal activities her country conducts practically in broad daylight. People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Saturday, 30 September 2017

Uranium and microfission in Gaza, a particular case / Uranium et microfission à Gaza, un cas particulier [français plus bas]

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Sunday, 24 September 2017

Syria reserves right to respond any violation to territorial unity of country


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Sunday, 18 June 2017

US Fails to Comply with Chemical Weapons Convention While Using Internationally Banned Weapons


US Fails to Comply with Chemical Weapons Convention While Using Internationally Banned Weapons

PETER KORZUN | 16.06.2017 | WORLD

US Fails to Comply with Chemical Weapons Convention While Using Internationally Banned Weapons

Russia strictly complies with its commitments in accordance with the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction (the Chemical Weapons Convention – CWC). On June 12, it announced that all sarin chemical agent stockpiles had been destroyed. Before that Russia had also eliminated the stockpiles of mustard gas and soman. All in all, Russia has destroyed 99% of all stockpiles. The ones left are sophisticated munitions; it takes time to eliminate them. The remaining 1% of stockpiles is to be destroyed till the end of the year.
The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) is an international arms control treaty that outlaws the production, stockpiling, and use of chemical weapons and their precursors. It is administered by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), an intergovernmental organization based in The Hague, the Netherlands. The OPCW receives states-parties’ declarations detailing chemical weapons (CW)-related activities or materials and relevant industrial activities. After receiving declarations, the OPCW inspects and monitors states-parties’ facilities and activities that are relevant to the convention, to ensure compliance.
The CWC entered into force in 1997. 192 states have joined the convention.
The United States promised, but failed, to destroy its stocks by 2012. The complete destruction is expected to take place only by the end of 2023 at best. The efforts to neutralize the remaining munitions have slowed to a trickle in recent years. The Army’s Pueblo Chemical Depot in southern Colorado still has a long way to go to full operational capacity expected to be reached no earlier than 2018. The Blue Grass Army Depot near Richmond, Kentucky, is being built and is expected to start operations only somewhere in 2023 – roughly eleven years after the date the US promised to destroy all the stockpiles, and eight, may be nine, years after the Russian Federation.
While raising ballyhoo over chemical weapons in Syria, the US fails to meet its international obligations. Other nations have also asked for extensions of deadlines but the United States is evidently not in a hurry to comply with the CWC and the delays are really impressive. If the US finally meets its promise of destroying all chemical weapons by the end of 2023, the process will have taken more than a quarter of a century and cost an estimated $40bn.
Meanwhile, technological and political challenges have resulted in lengthy delays. The snags on the way are multiple.
Unlike Russia, the US does not hesitate to use white phosphorus munitions. The weapon does not fall into the category of chemical weapons but as an incendiary weapon. Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons «prohibits the use of said incendiary weapons against civilians (already forbidden by the Geneva Conventions) or in civilian areas».
In fragrant violation of international law, the United States used white phosphorous shells in Iraq during the assault on Fallujah in 2004. At present, the incendiary munitions are used in Mosul, Iraq and Raqqa Syria. In 2015, the United States used depleted uranium (DU) in Syria. It promised not to use DU but did it.
Although no sole treaty explicitly banning the use of DU is yet in force, it is clear that using DU runs counter to the basic rules and principles enshrined in written and customary International Humanitarian Law (IHW). Article 36 of the Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions requires to ensure that any new weapon, means or method of warfare does not contravene existing rules of international law. General principles of the laws of war/IHL prohibit weapons and means or methods of warfare that cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering, have indiscriminate effects or cause widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment.
Banned by more than a hundred nations, US cluster bombs are used against civilians in Yemen.
In April, President Trump said the alleged Syria’s chemical attack «crossed many, many lines» to justify the US cruise missiles’ strike. Today, the reports about white phosphorous shells used by the US in Iraq and Syria are coming in. What about the US crossing the lines? Is there a better example of hypocrisy?
Police used tear gas and other chemical irritants against Occupy protesters in 2011. Tear gas is prohibited for use against enemy soldiers in battle by the Chemical Weapons Convention. The protesters in Oakland were civilians, so, formally, the police action did not constitute a breach of international law! It’s just that the police failed to give them the protection required for those who oppose the US military on a battlefield.
Known for its penchant to moralize and teach others, the United States is the biggest international law violator in the world. It uses banned weapons and ignores humanitarian norms and principles. It has already crossed all the possible lines implementing the policy of double standards but nothing stops it from high fallutin’ accusations against others. The pot just can’t stop calling the kettle black.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Thursday, 18 August 2016

THE DAY ISRAELI TERRORISM STOLE MY LIFE





River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!