sábado, 10 de diciembre de 2016

UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY URGES COMPLETE END TO ATTACKS AGAINST CIVILIANS IN ALEPPO

Chart on the proportion between airstrikes in Syria launched by United States (blue color) and “Arab allies and Canada” (in red) from December 2014 to August 2015, taken from this report of Airwars entitled:"First year of Coalition airstrikes helped stall Islamic State – but at a cost"

UN General Assembly on December 9, 2016 adopted a resolution expressing “outrage” due to the violence in Syria, particularly during what some observers consider the last assault in Aleppo initiated a few days before on the groundbattle. The first operative paragraph states that the General Assembly "1. Demands an immediate and complete end to all attacks on civilians and civilian objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, as well as an immediate end to all sieges in Syria, including in Aleppo; ".2. Also demands the immediate cessation of hostilities, as described in Security Council resolution 2268 (2016), as well as rapid, safe, sustained, unhindered and unconditional humanitarian access throughout the Syrian Arab Republic for the United Nations and its specialized agencies, and all humanitarian actors";

The text has been presented by the Permanent Mission of Canada. Last December 3rd, a letter circulated from the Permanent Representatives of Canada, Costa Rica, Japan, the Netherlands and Togo in which they request on behalf of 74 Member States, the holding of a formal Plenary meeting of the General Assembly on the situation in Syria, under agenda item 31.

The resolution (see full text of Resolution ate the end of this note, to be compared with the last draft circulated among Permanent Missions at the end of this note, with some of the PP bis and PP still not agreed as well as OP) was adopted by 122 votes in favour, 13 against and 36 abstentions (see UN official press release on Resolution A/RES/71/130 entitled "The Situation in the Syrian Arab Republic").

Picture of airstrikes on Aleppo, from the article: End Abusive Invocation Of 'Self-Defence' In Response To Terror, published in Canada



DOCUMENT ONE

---------------Text of Resolution A/RES/71/130------------------------- The situation in the Syrian Arab Republic

The General Assembly,

Guided by its strong commitment to the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations,

Reaffirming its strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic,

Recalling its resolutions 66/176 of 19 December 2011, 66/253 A of 16 February 2012, 66/253 B of 3 August 2012, 67/183 of 20 December 2012, 67/262 of 15 May 2013, 68/182 of 18 December 2013, 69/189 of 18 December 2014 and 70/234 of 23 December 2015, as well as Human Rights Council resolutions S-16/1 of 29 April 2011,1 S-17/1 of 23 August 2011,1 S-18/1 of 2 December 2011,2 19/1 of 1 March 2012,3 19/22 of 23 March 2012,3 S-19/1 of 1 June 2012,4 20/22 of 6 July 2012,5 22/24 of 22 March 2013,6 23/1 of 29 May 2013,7 23/26 of 14 June 2013,7 24/22 of 27 September 2013,8 25/23 of 28 March 2014,9 31/17 of 23 March 2016, 10 32/25 of 1 July 2016, 11 33/23 of 30 September 2016 12 and S-25/1 of 21 October 2016,13

Recalling also Security Council resolutions 2042 (2012) of 14 April 2012, 2043 (2012) of 21 April 2012, 2118 (2013) of 27 September 2013, 2139 (2014) of 22 February 2014, 2165 (2014) of 14 July 2014, 2175 (2014) of 29 August 2014, 2191 (2014) of 17 December 2014, 2209 (2015) of 6 March 2015, 2235 (2015) of 7 August 2015, 2254 (2015) of 18 December 2015, 2258 (2015) of 22 December 2015, 2268 (2016) of 26 February 2016, 2286 (2016) of 3 May 2016 and 2314 (2016) of 31 October 2016, and expressing outrage that these resolutions have not been fully implemented,

Recalling that, amid expressions of popular discontent over restrictions on the enjoyment of civil, political, economic and social rights, civilian protests erupted in Dar’a in March 2011, and noting that the excessive and violent oppression of civilian protests by the Syrian authorities, which later escalated to the direct shelling of civilian population areas, fuelled the escalation of armed violence and extremist groups, including so-called Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (also known as Da’esh),

Expressing outrage at the escalation of violence in the Syrian Arab Republic, in particular in Aleppo, and the extensive and persistent violations of international humanitarian law and violations and abuses of international human rights law, including those involving the indiscriminate killing and deliberate targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure, notably through shelling and aerial bombardment, the use of chemical weapons, as concluded by the Joint Investigative Mechanism, and other prohibited weapons, and the use of siege and starvation of civilians as a method of warfare, which have caused profound suffering and loss o f life, have created conditions conducive to the rise and spread of terrorism and violent extremism conducive to terrorism and have caused an exodus of Syrian refugees,

Recalling the primary responsibility of the Syrian Arab Republic to protect its population, and condemning the repeated disregard of the purpose and principles of the Charter, and violations of international humanitarian law and of international human rights law, throughout the conflict in the Syrian Arab Republic, and recalling also the need for all parties to the conflict to fully comply with their obligations under international law, in particular the Charter, international humanitarian law and international human rights law, and expressing deep concern at the lack of compliance with these obligations,

Expressing alarm at the failure to implement relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions and the continued disregard for international humanitarian law and international human rights law, and expressing alarm that the responsibility of the Security Council to ensure prompt and effective action has not been further discharged with regard to the Syrian Arab Republic,

Expressing grave concern at the continued deterioration of the devastating humanitarian situation in the Syrian Arab Republic and the fact that more than 13.5 million people are now in need of humanitarian assistance in the Syrian Arab Republic, expressing grave concern at the increasing number of refugees and internally displaced persons caused by the conflict in the Syrian Arab Republic, including the nearly 6.3 million people who are internally displaced, in addition to the half million Palestinian refugees in the Syrian Arab Republic, expressing the gravest concern at the destabilizing effect of the crisis on the region, underlining the extreme urgency of finding a political solution, and reiterating its appreciation for the significant and admirable efforts that have been made by the countries of the region, notably, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey, to accommodate the more than 4.8 million registered refugees who have fled the Syrian Arab Republic as a result of the ongoing violence,

Expressing grave concern also at the dire situation of the civilian population, in particular of the 974,080 people trapped in besieged areas, as well as the dire situation of nearly 3.9 million people in hard-to-reach areas, Strongly condemning and deploring all acts of violence, attacks and threats against the wounded and sick, medical personnel and humanitarian personnel exclusively engaged in medical duties, their means of transport, equipment and supplies, as well as hospitals and other medical facilities, and deploring the long - term consequences of such attacks for the civilian population and the health-care system of the Syrian Arab Republic,

Strongly alarmed that attacks against schools, schoolchildren and teachers are commonplace, risking losing a generation as a result of the over 2 million out-ofschool children and adolescents and the one in three schools being damaged, destroyed or occupied,

Deeply concerned by the situation of vulnerable persons, including women and children, who are subjected to discrimination, sexual and gender-based violence, abduction, physical abuse, violation of their privacy and arbitrar y arrest and detention, deploring all violations against children, including the recruitment and use of children, and condemning the use by the Syrian authorities and all other parties of enforced disappearances, extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executi ons and torture,

Recalling the report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic of 11 August 2016, 14 which reiterated key recommendations calling for all parties to, inter alia, restore and revitalize the cessation of hostilities, minimize civilian casualties and end indiscriminate attacks, allow rapid, safe, sustained, unhindered and unconditional access for humanitarian aid and end all sieges immediately,

Deeply concerned by the presence of terrorist organizations in the Syrian Arab Republic and the spread of violent extremism conducive to terrorism, strongly condemning all terrorist attacks, abuses of human rights and violations of international humanitarian law carried out by so-called Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Da’esh), Al-Nusrah Front and all other individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with Al-Qaida or Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Da’esh), and other terrorist groups, as designated by the Security Council, and reiterating the call on all parties to commit to putting an end to terrorist acts perpetrated by such organizations and individuals, while reaffirming tha t terrorism in all its forms constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security and that any acts of terrorism are unjustifiable, regardless of their motivation, wherever, whenever and by whomsoever committed,



Recalling the importance of the principles of distinction and proportionality, which, inter alia, refer to the obligation under international humanitarian law to distinguish between civilian populations and combatants, the prohibition against indiscriminate attacks, and the obligation to do everything feasible to verify that the objects to be attacked are neither civilians nor civilian objects and are not subject to special protection, and recalling further the obligation to take all other feasible precautions with a view to avoiding, and in any event minimizing, harm to civilians and civilian objects, including schools, water, medical facilities as such and all other objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population,

Deeply disturbed by the continued denial of access to urgently needed humanitarian relief, particularly the denial of authorization by the Syrian regime, and the persistent lack of security and lack of freedom of movement and the presence of any other conditions that impede the delivery of humanitarian assistance and supplies, as assessed and provided by the United Nations, its implementing partners and all other humanitarian actors, to destinations within the Syrian Arab Republic, including to besieged and hard-to-reach areas, and stressing the need to strengthen a gender perspective in all humanitarian efforts,

Recalling that all Syrian parties to the conflict shall enable the immediate and unhindered delivery of humanitarian assistance, and stressing that the arbitrary denial of humanitarian access, depriving civilians of objects and assistance indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies such as food aid and lifesaving medical supplies, and the use of starvation as a method of warfare may constitute a war crime,

Stressing the need to end impunity for serious violations of international humanitarian law and for violations and abuses of international human rights law in the Syrian Arab Republic, some of which may constitute war crimes or crimes against humanity, and re-emphasizing the need for all those responsible to be held accountable,

Emphasizing that the humanitarian situation will continue to deteriorate further in the absence of a political solution, and reiterating that the only sustainable solution to the current crisis in the Syrian Arab Republic is through an inclusive and Syrian-led political process that meets the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people, Reiterating its determination to seek ways and means to protect the Syrian civilian population and persons hors de combat,



1. Demands an immediate and complete end to all attacks on civilians and civilian objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, as well as an immediate end to all sieges in the Syrian Arab Republic, including in Aleppo;

2. Also demands the immediate cessation of hostilities, as described in Security Council resolution 2268 (2016), as well as rapid, safe, sustained, unhindered and unconditional humanitarian access throughout the Syrian Arab Republic for the United Nations and its specialized agencies, and all humanitarian actors;

3. Further demands that all parties to the Syrian conflict immediately comply with their obligations under applicable international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law, including with respect to all besieged and hard-to-reach areas inside the Syrian Arab Republic;

4. Demands that all parties take all appropriate steps to protect civilians and persons hors de combat, including members of ethnic, religious and confessional communities, and stresses that, in this regard, the primary responsibility to protect its population lies with the Syrian authorities;

5. Also demands that all parties to the conflict fully and immediately implement all the provisions of Security Council resolutions 2139 (2014), 2165 (2014), 2191 (2014), 2199 (2015), 2209 (2015), 2254 (2015), 2258 (2015), 2268 (2016) and 2286 (2016);

6. Highlights its demand for the full and immediate implementation of Security Council resolution 2254 (2015), which, inter alia, reiterates that the only sustainable solution to the current crisis in the Syrian Arab Republic is through an inclusive and Syrian-led political process that meets the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people, with a view to full implementation of the Geneva communiqué of 30 June 2012, as endorsed by the Council in resolution 2118 (2013), including through the establishment of an inclusive transitional governing body with full executive powers, which shall be formed on the basis of mutual consent while ensuring continuity of governmental institutions;

7. Reaffirms its support for a credible, inclusive and non-sectarian Syrianled political process, involving women and civil society, facilitated by the United Nations, requests the Secretary-General, through his good offices and the efforts of his Special Envoy for Syria, to resume the formal negotiations between representatives of the Syrian authorities and the opposition under the auspices of the United Nations, based on the Geneva communiqué of 30 June 2012 and relevant Security Council resolutions, with a view to a lasting political settlement of the crisis, as soon as possible, and urges the representatives of the Syrian authorities and the opposition to engage in good faith in these negotiations;

8. Condemns the reported forced displacements of the population in the Syrian Arab Republic and the alarming impact thereof on the demography of the country, and calls upon all parties concerned to cease immediately all activities related to these actions, including any activities that may constitute crimes against humanity;

9. Emphasizes the need to ensure accountability for crimes involving violations of international law, in particular of international humanitarian law and international human rights law, some of which may constitute war crimes or crimes against humanity, committed in the Syrian Arab Republic since March 2011, through appropriate, fair and independent investigations and prosecutions at the domestic or international level, and stresses the need to pursue practical steps towards this goal to ensure justice for all victims and contribute to the prevention of future violations;

10. Urges the Security Council to further exercise its responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security by taking additional measures to address the crisis in the Syrian Arab Republic, in particular the devastating humanitarian crisis, and stresses in this regard Article 11 of the Charter of the United Nations;

11. Requests the Secretary-General to report on the implementation of the present resolution, including the implementation of the cessation of hostilities, in accordance with paragraph 2 of the present resolution, the extent to which all parties to the Syrian conflict, in particular the Syrian authorities, are complying with their obligations under international humanitarian law and international human rights law and progress towards a genuine political transition, and to provide recommendations on ways and means to protect civilians in the Syrian Arab Republic, within 45 days of the adoption of the present resolution.





DOCUMENT TWO

---------------Text of last draft of Resolution A/RES/71/130------------------- ------

The General Assembly,

PP 1: Guided by its strong commitment to the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations,

PP1bis: Reaffirming its strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic,

PP 2: Recalling its resolutions 66/176 of 19 December 2011, 66/253A of 16 February, 2012, 66/253B of 3 August 2012, 67/183 of 20 December 2012, 67/262 of 15 May 2013, 68/182 of 18 December 2013, 69/189 of 18 December 2014, 70/234 of 23 December 2015, as well as Human Rights Council Resolutions S-16/1 of 29 April 2011, S-17/1 of 23 August 2011, S-18/1 of 2 December 2011, 19/1 of 1 March 2012, 19/22 of 23 March 2012, S-19/1 of 1 June 2012, 20/22 of 6 July 2012, 22/24 of 22 March 2013, 23/1 of 29 May 2013, 23/26 of 14 June 2013, 24/22 of 27 September 2013, 25/23 of 28 March 2014, 31/17 of 23 March 2016, 32/25 of 1 July 2016, and 33/23 of 30 September 2016, S-25/1 of 25 October 2016;

PP 3: Recalling also Security Council Resolutions 2042 (2012) of 14 April 2012, 2043 (2012) of 21 April 2012, 2118 (2013) of 27 September 2013, 2139 (2014) of 22 February 2014, 2165 (2014) of 14 July 2014, 2175 (2014) of 29 August 2014, 2191 (2014) of 17 December 2014, 2209 (2015) of 6 March 2015, 2235 (2015) of 7 August 2015, 2254 (2015) of 18 December 2015, 2258 (2015) of 22 December 2015, 2268 (2016) of 26 February 2016, 2286 (2016) of 3 May 2016 and 2314 (2016) of 31 October 2016, and expressing outrage that these resolutions have not been fully implemented,

PP3bis: Recalling that, amid expressions of popular discontent over restrictions on the enjoyment of civil, political, economic and social rights, civilian protests erupted in Dar ’a in March 2011, and noting that the excessive and violent oppression of civilian protests by the Syrian authorities, which later escalated to the direct shelling of civilian population areas, fuelled the escalation of armed violence and extremist groups, including so-called ISIL (also known as Da’esh),

PP 4: Expressing outrage at the escalation of violence in the Syrian Arab Republic, and in particular in Aleppo, and the extensive and persistent violations of international humanitarian law and violations and abuses of international human rights law, including those involving the indiscriminate killing and deliberate targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure,notably through shelling and aerial bombardments, the use of chemical weapons, as concluded by the Joint Investigative Mechanism, and other prohibited weapons, and the use of siege and starvation of civilians as a method of warfare, which havecaused profound suffering and loss of life, have created conditions conducive to the rise and spread of terrorism and violent extremism conducive to terrorism, and have caused an exodus of Syrian refugees,

PP4bis: Recalling the primary responsibility of the Syrian Arab Republic to protect its population, and condemning the repeated disregard of the purpose and principles of the United Nations Charter, and violations of international humanitarian law and of international human rights law, throughout the conflict in Syria, and also recalling the need for all parties to the conflict to fully comply with their obligations under international law, in particular the United Nations Charter, international humanitarian law and international human rights law, and expressing deep concern with the lack of compliance with these obligations,

PP4ter: Expressing alarm at the failure to implement relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions and the continued disregard for international humanitarian law and international human rights law, as well as expressing alarm that the Security Council’s responsibility to ensure prompt and effective action has not been further discharged in regards to Syria;

PP5: Expressing grave concern at the continued deterioration of the devastating humanitarian situation in Syria, and the fact that now more than 13.5 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance in Syria, expressing grave concern at the increasing number of refugees and internally displaced persons caused by the conflict in Syria, including the nearly6.3 million people whoare internally displaced in addition to the half a million Palestinian refugees in Syria, expressing the gravest concern at the destabilizing effect of the crisis on the region, underlining the extreme urgency of finding a political solution, andreiterating its appreciation for the significant and admirable efforts that have been made by the countries of the region, notably Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, Iraq and Egypt, to accommodate the more than 4.8million registered refugees who have fled Syria as a result of the ongoing violence,

PP6: Expressing further grave concern at the dire situation of the civilian population, in particular of the 974,080 people trapped in besieged areas, as well as the dire situation of nearly 3.9 million people in hard-to-reach areas,

PP8: Strongly condemning and deploring all acts of violence, attacks and threats against the wounded and sick, medical personnel and humanitarian personnel exclusively engaged in medical duties, their means of transport, equipment and supplies, as well as hospitals and other medical facilities, and deploring the long-term consequences of such attacks for the civilian population and the healthcare system of Syria,

PP8bis: Strongly alarmed that attacks against schools, school children and teachers are commonplace, risking losing a generation as a result of over 2 million out-of-school children and adolescents and one in three schools being damaged, destroyed or occupied,

PP 9: Deeply concerned by the situation of vulnerable persons, including women and children, who are subjected to discrimination, sexual and gender-based violence, abduction, physical abuse, and violation of their privacy and arbitrary arrest and detention, deploring all violations against children including the recruitment and use of children and condemning the use by the Syrian authorities and all other parties of enforced disappearances, extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and torture,

PP10: Recalling the Report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic of 11 August 2016 which reiterates key recommendations calling for all parties to inter alia restore and revitalize the cessation of hostilities, minimize civilian casualties and end indiscriminate attacks, allow rapid, safe, sustained, unhindered and unconditional access for humanitarian aid and end all sieges immediately,

PP11:Deeply concerned by the presence of terrorist organizations in Syria and the spread of violent extremism conducive to terrorism, strongly condemning all terrorist attacks, abuses of human rights and violations of international humanitarian law carried out by so-called ISIL (also known as Da’esh), Al-Nusra Front (ANF), and all other individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with Al Qaeda or ISIL (also known as Da’esh), and other terrorist groups, as designated by the Security Council, and reiterating the call on all parties to commit to putting an end to terrorist acts perpetrated by such organizations and individuals, while reaffirming that terrorism in all its forms constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security, and that any acts of terrorism are unjustifiable, regardless of their motivation, wherever, whenever, and by whomsoever committed,

PP12:Recalling the importance of the principles of distinction and proportionality, which inter alia refer to the obligation under international humanitarian law to distinguish between civilian populations and combatants, and the prohibition against indiscriminate attacks, and the obligations to do everything feasible to verify that the objects to be attacked are neither civilians nor civilian objects and are not subject to special protection, and recalling further the obligation to take all other feasible precautions with a view to avoiding and in any event minimizing harm to civilians and civilian objects including schools, water, medical facilities as such and all other objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population,

PP13: Deeply disturbed by the continued denial of access to urgently needed humanitarian relief , particularly the denial of authorization by the Syrian regime, and the persistent lack of security, lack of freedom of movement and the presence of any other conditions that impede the delivery of humanitarian assistance and supplies, as assessed and provided by the United Nations, its implementing partners and all other humanitarian actors, to destinations within Syria, including to besieged and hard-to-reach areas, and stressing the need to strengthen a gender perspective in all humanitarian efforts,

PP14: Recalling that all Syrian parties to the conflict shall enable the immediate and unhindered delivery of humanitarian assistance and stressing that the arbitrary denial of humanitarian access, depriving civilians of objects and assistance indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies such as food aid and life-saving medical supplies, and the use of starvation as a method of warfare can constitute a war crime,

PP15: Stressing the need to end impunity for serious violations of international humanitarian law and for violations and abuses of international human rights law in Syria, some of which may constitute war crimes or crimes against humanity, and reemphasizing the need for all those responsible to be held accountable;

PP16: Emphasizing that the humanitarian situation will continue to deteriorate further in the absence of a political solution, and reiterating that the only sustainable solution to the current crisis in Syria is through an inclusive and Syrian-led political process that meets the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people,

PP17: Reiterating its determination to seek ways and means to protect the Syrian civilian population and persons hors de combat,



1. Demands an immediate and complete end to all attacks on civilians and civilian objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, as well as an immediate end to all sieges in Syria, including in Aleppo,

2. Further demands the immediate cessation of hostilities, as described in Security Council resolution 2268 (2016), as well as rapid, safe, sustained, unhindered and unconditional humanitarian access throughout Syria by the United Nations and its specialized agencies, and all humanitarian actors,

3. Demands that all parties to the Syrian conflict immediately comply with their obligations under applicable international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law, including with respect to all besieged and hard-to-reach areas inside Syria;

3bis. Also demands that all parties take all appropriate steps to protect civilians and persons hors de combat, including members of ethnic, religious and confessional communities, and stresses that, in this regard, the primary responsibility to protect its population lies with the Syrian authorities,

4. Further demands that all parties to the conflict fully and immediately implement all the provisions of Security Council resolutions 2139 (2014), 2165 (2014), 2191 (2014), 2199 (2015), 2209 (2015),2254 (2015), 2258 (2015), and 2268 (2016); and 2286 (2016);

5. Highlights its demand for the full and immediate implementation of Security Council resolution 2254 (2015),which inter alia reiterates that the only sustainable solution to the current crisis in Syria is through an inclusive and Syrian-led political process that meets the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people, with a view to full implementation of the Geneva Communiqué of 30 June 2012 as endorsed by resolution 2118 (2013), including through the establishment of an inclusive transitional governing body with full executive powers, which shall be formed on the basis of mutual consent while ensuring continuity of governmental institutions,

6. Reaffirms its support for a credible, inclusive and non-sectarian Syrian-led political process, involving women and civil society, facilitated by the United Nations, requests the Secretary-General through his good offices and the efforts of his Special Envoy for Syria to resume the formal negotiations between representatives of the Syrian authorities and the opposition under the auspices of the United Nations, based on the Geneva Communiqué of 30 June 2012 and relevant Security Council resolutions, with a view to a lasting political settlement of the crisis, as soon as possible, and urges the representatives of the Syrian authorities and opposition to engage in good faith in these negotiations,

6bis: Condemns the reported forced displacements of the population in the Syrian Arab Republic and the alarming impact thereof on the demography of the country, and calls upon all parties concerned to cease immediately all activities related to these actions, including any activities that may constitute crimes against humanity;

7: Emphasizes the need to ensure accountability for crimes involving violations of international law, in particular of international humanitarian law and international human rights law, some of which may constitute war crimes or crimes against humanity, committed in the Syrian Arab Republic since March 2011, through appropriate, appropriate fair and independent investigations and prosecutions at the domestic or international level, and stresses the need to pursue practical steps towards this goal to ensure justice for all victims and contribute to the prevention of future violations,

7bis:​ Urges the Security Council to further exercise its responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security by taking additional measures to address the crisis in the Syrian Arab Republic, and in particular the devastating humanitarian crisis, and stresses in this regard Article 11 of the United Nations Charter,

8. Requests the Secretary-General to report on the implementation of the present resolution, including on the implementation of the cessation of hostilities, in accordance with operative paragraph 2 of this resolution, the extent to which all parties to the Syrian conflict, in particular the Syrian authorities, are complying with their obligations under international humanitarian law and international human rights law, and progress towards a genuine political transition, and to provide recommendations on ways and means to protect civilians in Syria, within 45days of the adoption of this resolution.

viernes, 2 de diciembre de 2016

THE DECISION OF DENMARK TO WITHDRAW FROM AIRSTRIKES ON SYRIA AND IRAQ



Picture taken form this article of July 28, 2016, published bay Middle East Monitor and entitled "Experts unite to say that it is an ‘abuse’ to invoke ‘self-defence’ in response to terrorism"



The decision of Denmark to withdraw from airstrikes on Syria and Iraq



Abstracts: Denmark has announced last Friday 2 its decision to suspend military operations of its seven F-16 fighter jets in Syria and Iraq. At the beginning of the very same week, a military investigation indicated that Danish fighter jets were involved in a September 17 airstrike of the coalition, where a series of "unintentional human errors" killed fighters aligned with the Syrian government instead of the targeted Islamic State (ISIS) militants. After Canada (February 2016), Denmark is the second member of the so called "coalition against ISIS" withdrawing its participation in airstrikes on Syria and Iraq, whose legal basis is not as solid as argued by France, United Kingdom and United States. It must be recalled that since August 2014, the so called "coalition against Islamic State (ISIS)" led by US has decided to bomb Iraq and Syria territories. In the case of Syria, without the consent of Syrian authorities: this last point is a controversial issue, from international legal perspective as well as from the angle of United Nations Security Council´s practice.



Picture taken from Airwars.org report entitled: "US remains only one of 13 Coalition allies to admit causing civilian casualties"

Last Friday December 2th, Denmark has announced officially that it will suspend its participation in airstrikes on Syria and Iraq. This note of Altinget entitled "Danmark trækker kampfly ud af Irak og Syrien" gives some precisions. In this press note of The Local, we read that Danish Foreign Ministry Anders Samuelsen stated that "We have decided to withdraw the Danish fighter jets as planned". The official statement in Danish indicates that: "Medio december returnerer de danske kampfly og det danske transportfly som planlagt til Danmark. Efter hjemtagelsen af de to flyvende bidrag vil Danmark fortsat levere en markant militær indsats til støtte for kampen mod ISIL" (see full text of the official statement in Danish reproduced at the very end of this note). It must be noted that no reference is made in this official statement of last December 2th to past missions to which Danish aircrafts participated.



A simple coincidence or a decision taken after the publication of investigations ?

A few days before, press releases dated November 30 informed that top officials from United States recognised after military investigations some errors during a mission held on September 17th: an internal memorandum dated November 29 with a report with the mention "approved for release" of CENTCOM (US Central Command) dated November 2nd is available here. As predictable with CENTCOM reports and internal memoranda on military operations, no all the text can be read. In a note of The Local (Denmark) related to this report, it is written that the reaction of Danish authorities were the following: "Defence Command Denmark, the command centre for the Danish armed forces, released a short statement following the attack that confirmed that Danish fighter jets were part of the mission. The Danish forces said it was "of course unfortunate if the coalition mistakenly struck anything other than ISIL forces".

The results of the investigation on this particular mission in Syria last September 17th are the following, according to this note of September 19, 2016 published by Military.com:

"British, Danish and Australian warplanes took part in the U.S.-led coalition's airstrike Saturday that reportedly killed more than 60 Syrian government troops and threatened to unravel the "cessation of hostilities," military officials said Monday. The Syrian army and a key rebel leader declared that the cease-fire had collapsed and blamed each other for violations, but U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said he was working for a possible extension of the seven-day-old cessation period that ended Monday".

On the same day of November 30, a note published in Australia entitled "Syria campaign: Lessons from botched air strikes revealed in US review"stated that: "The United States-led review into the air strike released early Wednesday morning highlights two key points about the international coalition air war over Syria: first, that even the best planned military campaign will make mistakes and kill innocents, and second, that the Coalition air campaign has been one of the most tightly controlled in the history of air power. The remarkable thing is that more people haven’t been wrongly killed by Coalition strikes. This constraint on air operations is legally and morally right, but the effect has been to render much of the Syrian air campaign useless. The review makes it clear that a number of factors contributed to inadvertently targeting a position near Dayr az Zawr, on 18 September occupied by Syrian Army or militia forces. For some reason intelligence reporting incorrectly identified the position as occupied by so-called Islamic State fighters".

In this very same article we can also read that:

"The review finds that some overlooked intelligence reporting cast doubt on whether the position was IS controlled. There seems also to be been confusion over map coordinates between digital and paper maps. After the air strikes began a Russian officer called the coalition’s Combined Air Operations Centre but the requested contact was not present to receive the call. A second Russian call was made, some 27 minutes later, presumably after the strikes had destroyed their target. If that sounds messy, it is".

Denmark and Belgium, as well as France, The Netherlands and United Kingdom are the only European countries engaged in airstrikes operations in Syria and Iraq of the so called "coalition against ISIS":

- Danish first airstrikes in Syria took place last August 5, 2016 (see note);

- in the case of Australia, its first airstrikes were launched on September 16, 2015 (see BBC note);

- in the case of France, the first bombs dropped on Syrian territory from French aircrafts exploded on September 27, 2015 (see note of The Guardian), 24 hours before the planned speech of President Hollande at the United Nations in New York. On this interesting coincidence that seems to do with a political "mise en scene" of French President, we have had the opportunity to indicate that:

"En ce qui concerne les frappes de la France en Syrie, les premières bombes françaises ont été lancées par ses avions il y a exactement deux mois, le dimanche 27 septembre 2015. Peu d’informations ont été apportées par les autorités françaises concernant le choix et l’opportunité de cette date pour procéder à ces premiers bombardements en Syrie. Coïncidence (heureuse ou malheureuse), dans son allocution prononcée devant l’Assemblée générale des Nations unies 24 heures plus tard, le chef de l’État a simplement mentionné que « La France /…/entend prendre ses responsabilités. Elle les a prises, encore récemment, y compris par une action armée, une action de force » (see our article published in Voltairenet of December 1st, 2015).

Almost one year after, in his last speech at the UN General Assembly, French President reiterated his strong opposition to current authorities of Syria (see note of Le Monde of September 22, 2016).

- concerning United Kingdom, on December 3rd, 2015, the first UK ´s airstrikes took place in Syria.

- concerning Belgium, the exact date of its first airstrikes in Syria is unknown: Belgium is one the most discrete member of the coalition concerning its military missions on Syria.

Coming back to the Danish decision itself, it is the first time that a European country decides to suspend its engagement in this kind of military operations. However, it is no the first time that airstrikes in Syria and Iraq are suspended by a State: last February 22, 2016 Canada officially suspended all operations consisting in bombing targets in Iraq and Syria, ending a controversial action inherited from Prime Minister Harper administration (see press note).



The international context: Aleppo final battle and France´s last efforts at UN Security Council

As well known, Aleppo (حلب or "Halab" in Arabic) is the largest city in Syria and the country's industrial and financial center. It is also "one of world's oldest continually inhabited cities, mentioned in Egyptian texts from the 20th Century BC" as indicated in this BBC note of November 2016. Since 2012, Aleppo is a battleground.

Picture of the Khan al-Shounah market, Old City of Aleppo, 2009, taken from the article entitled "Pictures of splendors past: Aleppo before the war"

For some observers and analysts, the arrival of Russian warships at Syrian coasts at the middle of November 2016 announced the final assault on Aleppo. On November 29th, France asked for an urgent meeting of the United Nations Security Council on the battle in Aleppo to consider humanitarian situation, among other points (see note of Reuters). On December 5th, 2016, a draft resolution on Aleppo battle establishing a seven-days-ceasefire presented by France, United States and United Kingdom has been vetoed by China and Russia. Immediately after the vote, French Minister of Foreign Affairs stated that:

"The UN Security Council failed to adopt a draft resolution aimed at establishing a ceasefire and restoring immediate and unrestricted access to humanitarian assistance due to a new veto by Russia. In the face of an exceptionally serious humanitarian situation in Syria, marked by the tragic situation in Aleppo, France supported this text without any hesitation. I deplore the fact that, as a result of Russian obstruction, the UN Security Council is still not able to assume its responsibilities with respect to the civilian populations in Syria who are facing the destructive folly of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, as well as the terrorist groups, starting with Daesh. France has believed since the start of the Syrian crisis that the only way to put Syria back on the path toward peace and stability is through a political solution. On the contrary, military escalation results in deadlock which only serves to exacerbate the suffering of the people and fuel terrorism
" (see official statement).

It must be noted that the Syrian delegate indicated to his colleagues in New York that: "... the United States, France and the United Kingdom were the “three musketeers” defending terrorism, with the support of Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, demanding to know where the “three musketeers” had been when so-called moderate armed groups had bombed a Russian Federation field hospital in western Aleppo. Those three Governments should have welcomed Syria’s fight against terrorism now that the threat was present in every corner of the world" (see UN press release).

24 hours after the vote that took place in New York, BBC entitled its note "Aleppo battle: Syria rebels 'withdraw from old city'" (see BBC note) while The Guardian´s note was edited with the following tittle: "Syrian troops in control of Aleppo's Old City after rebels withdraw" (see note). In this note of Telegraph dated December 6th, we read that "the appeal looks likely to be ignored by the Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad and his Russian and Iranian allies as they continue to make rapid progress in what may be the final days of the four-year battle for Aleppo". On December 8th, Russia announced a provisional suspension of hostilities in order to allow evacuation of civilians in the East of Aleppo (see note of Le Nouvel Obs) while, 24 hours after, on December 9th, French President considered usefull to be personnally onboard of the Charles de Gaulle in the Mediterranean (see note of La Croix), recalling some attitudes after 9/11 in United States (Note 1). .

As pointed out by the author of this article published on December 6th in Asia Times, "The fall of Aleppo, therefore, means much more than the fall of just one city; it may trigger significant policy changes and determine the final outcome of the war".



Who are really members of the "coalition against ISIS" ?

It must be recalled that in a report of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons entitled “The extension of offensive British military operations to Syria“, information was provided in order to know which were the States involved in airstrikes in Syria (and in Iraq). At note 22, page 9, we read the following data, that refers to Denmark withdrawn: “Airstrikes in Iraq: US, UK, Australia, Belgium (withdrawn), Canada (expected to withdraw), Denmark (withdrawn), France, Jordan, The Netherlands (9). Airstrikes in Syria: US, Australia, Bahrain, Canada (expected to withdraw), France, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, UAE (9). Total of 13 states overall”.

The decision of Denmark to "withdraw" airstrikes in Iraq has been revised after been registered by the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons at the end of 2015. On April 20, 2016, we read from US Defense Secretary the following statement:

"Statement from Secretary of Defense Ash Carter on Denmark's Decision to Expand Role in Counter-ISIL Campaign Press Operations Release No: NR-139-16 April 20, 2016

This week's decision by the Danish Parliament to approve an expanded role in the fight against ISIL is a welcome contribution from a valued partner in the counter-ISIL coalition and another sign of the growing momentum for the campaign to defeat ISIL. Denmark is a steadfast partner in global coalition efforts. Its contributions, including strike aircraft, air defense radar, and training and assistance to Iraqi forces, have already been significant."

Concerning the participation of others members of the so called "coalition against ISIS", on Nov. 30, 2015 The Washington Times informed (see note) that some members of the coalition have stopped flights against ISIS positions: “One Pentagon official directly involved in the counter-Islamic State fight told The Washington Times that the Saudis haven’t flown a mission against the group in nearly three months. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that Bahrain is still involved, but confirmed that Jordan stopped flying sorties against the extremists in August and the UAE hasn’t flown one since March”.

Curiously, in its presentation at the “Sénat” in France, on November 25, 2015 French Minister of Foreign Affairs declares publicly that: “Si la France est aux avant-postes du combat, elle ne le mène pas seule. Le combat contre le terrorisme est aussi celui des Nations unies. La France a obtenu le vote de la résolution 2249 à l'ONU, qui appelle à amplifier la lutte contre Daech. Une trentaine d’État sont engagés militairement dans la coalition“. The number 13 is a number of member States quite far from 30. But visually speaking (mainly if you are an urged person acting as a French Minister of Foreign Affairs asking to your Senate a special authorisation) the number 13 is quite close to 31.



Danish involvement in the coalition against ISIS

In the last report of Airwars.org (see report on November 2016 operations) the last mission held by Denmark is dated December 1st, "Update from Danish MoD on December 1st: [For Wednesday November 23rd to Wednesday November 30th, Denmark report 11 missions over the Iraqi province of Nineweh and the Syrian governorate of Ar Raqqah. They dropped eight precision bombs, launching attacks on ISIL roadblocks, buildings and facilities that manufactured improvised explosive devices to vehicles.]"

We read in this report of Airwars of October 2015 that Denmark initially asked not to identify Danish operations in press releases: "Colonel Andersen confirmed that the Danish military had asked CENTCOM not to identify Danish actions in its press releases, though argued that the introduction of the ‘partner nation’ term was a result of “several interests that had to be united” rather than a Danish request exclusively. A FOIA request by Danish reporter Charlotte Aagaard later confirmed the Danish policy of rendering it impossible to identify Denmark’s role in strikes, “neither directly or by through deduction”, specifying that “the Danish contribution should not be mentioned in Coalition press releases if fewer than three nations are mentioned in relation to the activity in question.” Under pressure from Danish media, mission updates were initially expanded in November to include the names of provinces and cities targeted – although dates and locations of attacks were still withheld."

In this other report on The Netherlands transparency on airstrikes, it can be read that Dutch extreme discretion has suffered indiscretions twice: "On only two occasions have the locations and dates of Dutch airstrikes in Iraq been revealed – on neither occasion by the Netherlands itself. Following a strike on Fallujah on July 25th 2015, France later reported it had carried out the mission with Dutch assistance: “Cette mission fut réalisée conjointement avec des avions américains et hollandais.”5 And in September 2015, Airwars in collaboration with RTL Netherlands was able to show that according to a declassified CENTCOM document, Dutch aircraft had been implicated in a possible civilian casualty incident ten months earlier".

In this report or Airwars.org, entitled "Cause For Concern Hundreds of civilian non-combatants credibly reported killed in first year of Coalition airstrikes against Islamic State", we read that, concerning Denmark information on civil casualties in Iraq: "In a written response to questions from parliament’s Defence Committee, thenDefence Minister Nicolai Wammen suggested that in the case of civilian deaths or injuries from Danish strikes, affected family members could seek redress in Denmark’s courts: ‘Compensation lawsuits [in relation to the Danish contribution to the war on ISIL] can be filed at the Danish courts in accordance with The Danish Administration of Justice Act.’ Wammen also confirmed that no agreement had been made between the Danish and Iraqi governments to ensure compensation for civilians killed by Danish air strikes. When asked what options were open to relatives of civilian victims in seeking to clarify whether an attack had been carried out by Denmark, Wammen responded that ‘relatives can contact the Iraqi authorities, a Danish authority or the Coalition.’

Recommendation: That Denmark adopts Canada’s best-practice, reporting regularly on where, when, and with what assets it carries out airstrikes in Iraq.

Danish response: Did not reply to queries from Airwars"
(p.30)

Belgium is another State extremely discrete on its airstrikes in Syria and Iraq, maybe the most discrete of the 13 members of the coalition engaged in airstrikes operations on Syria and Iraq (Note 2).

Recently, Amnesty International issued a report entitled "USA must come clean about civilian deaths caused by Coalition air strikes in Syria" calling US and its allies to be much more precise concerning civilian deaths caused by coalition airstrikes in Syria (see AI report dated October 26, 2016). The report states that: "It’s high time the US authorities came clean about the full extent of the civilian damage caused by Coalition attacks in Syria. Independent and impartial investigations must be carried out into any potential violations of international humanitarian law and the findings should be made public".

Picture of airstrikes on Aleppo, from the article: End Abusive Invocation Of 'Self-Defence' In Response To Terror, published in Canada



Lack of information as official information

Lack of transparency of States involved in airstrikes in Syria and Iraq is questionable, and local lawyers, professional associations, journalists and NGO should try to obtain more information from their reluctant States and military authorities. Precise information on airstrikes, chain of command and many other details can allow some of the victims to try to seek justice and to obtain compensation after long years before national courts of the States involved in what are officially called "civilian casualties". Recently we read in a note of Independent that "“Although the Coalition makes extraordinary efforts to strike military targets in a manner that minimises the risk of civilian casualties, in some cases casualties are unavoidable. “We regret the unintentional loss of civilian lives resulting from Coalition efforts to defeat Isil [Isis] in Iraq and Syria and express our deepest sympathies to the families and others affected by these strikes“.

On this very particular point, the Kunduz affaire is an extremely interesting case (see BBC note of 2012). In a recent article on a German decision of October 2016 related to the death of civilians in 2009 in Afghanistan, entitled "The Kunduz Affair and the German State Liability Regime – The Federal Court of Justice’s Turn to Anachronism", we read that:

"The death of their relatives was the result of a fatal airstrike ordered by Colonel Klein who was in charge of the Provincial Reconstruction Team in Kunduz in the northern part of Afghanistan. The PRT was institutionally embedded in the framework of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). Whilst Klein was operationally subordinated to the ISAF commander and in the end the NATO Commander-in-Chief he remained within the chain of command of the German Federal Army ultimately being subject to orders of the German Ministry of Defense".

We also read that for the author of this article, national judges are ignoring the European Court of Human Rights ´s jurisprudence (ECtHR):

"In light of the effective control exercised by Germany in Kunduz, the ECHR is applicable to the case at hand and Klein’s order remains attributable to Germany as the sending state due to his effective control of the events in question irrespective of the overall institutional embedding of the deployment of the German army (ISAF/NATO). As Art. 15 of the ECHR purports guarantees of the Convention do not lose their obliging force in the context of armed conflicts, even though a need for systemic integration with the rules of the ius in bello might arise (see only ECtHR, Case of Hassan v. UK, Application no. 29750/09). The Court – which was constitutionally obliged to take a closer look at the normative commands of the Convention – however remained ignorant of a long series of judgments in which the ECtHR asserted by reference to Art. 13 ECHR that states are obliged to install a compensatory mechanism in cases of “arguable claims” with regard to violations of Art. 2, 3 ECHR".





Airstrikes in Syria and Iraq: numbers and statistics to understand how really works the so called "coalition"

It must be noted that, generally speaking, information provided officially by members of the so called "coalition" is not necessarily very clear, and numbers differ from one official source to another one, but data base and reports elaborated by Airwars.org allow to have a better idea of the logic behind airstrikes campaign launched by the so called "coalition against ISIS".

Chart on the proportion between airstrikes in Syria launched by United States (blue color) and “Arab allies and Canada” (in red) from December 2014 to August 2015, taken from this report of Airwars entitled:"First year of Coalition airstrikes helped stall Islamic State – but at a cost"

An updated chart shows that at the date of November 27, 2016,

5673 airstrikes in Syria were launched by US, and 306 by Canada, Australia, France, UK, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Jordan, Bahrein and Turkey (see Chart "Cumulative US and allied airstrikes in Syria" available here).

These numbers, poorly reported in media and press releases, show that the "allies" launched 5,4% of the airstrikes in Syria, and United States, 94,6% of airstikes in Syria.

In a recent special report from US Defense Secretary (see text), we read also that: "As of 6:45 a.m. EST Dec. 2, 2016, the U.S. and coalition have conducted a total of 16,592 strikes (10,590 Iraq / 6,002 Syria).

U.S. has conducted 12,876 strikes in Iraq and Syria (7,183 Iraq / 5,693 Syria).

Rest of Coalition has conducted 3,716 strikes in Iraq and Syria (3,407 Iraq / 309 Syria).

The countries that have participated in the strikes include: In Iraq: (1) Australia, (2) Belgium, (3) Canada, (4) Denmark, (5) France, (6) Jordan, (7) The Netherlands, and (8) UK.

In Syria: (1) Australia, (2) Bahrain, (3) Canada, (4) Denmark, (5) France, (6) Jordan, (7) The Netherlands, (8) Saudi Arabia, (9) Turkey (10) UAE and (11) UK.

Between Aug. 8, 2014 and Nov. 28, 2016, U.S. and partner nation aircraft have flown an estimated 127,764 sorties in support of operations in Iraq and Syria
".



One year ago: the discussion at British Parliament

One year ago, British Prime Minister appealed to Parliament Members to vote in favor of Royal Air Forces (RAF) airstrikes against Islamic State (ISIS) in Syria, in order to “keep the British people safe” from the threat of terrorism. At the opening of a 10-hour Commons debate on December 2, 2015, he said the country had no other choice. In the report presented to the Parliament he stated that: “I believe that the UK should now join Coalition airstrikes against ISIL in Syria” and pointed out that “On 20 November 2015, the UN Security Council unanimously called on Member States to use all necessary measures to prevent and suppress terrorist acts committed specifically by ISIL, and to deny them safe haven in Syria and Iraq”.

We have had the opportunity to clarify some of the very simple (and quite questionable) arguments presented by Primer Minister in our article entitled:"The UK Parliament’s Decision to Bomb Syria is ILLEGAL Arguments based on UN resolution 2249 in Prime Minister´s report on airstrikes in Syria: some clarifications needed".

A few hours after the vote, early on December 3, 2015, first UK ´s airstrikes took place in Syria (see note of France24).



Ambiguity of UN Security Council Resolution 2249 adopted in November 2015

As known, Security Council 2249 (see full text) resolution does not provide any legal basis for airstrikes in Syria. A careful reading of the text shows that Resolution 2249 does not mention Article 42 of the UN Charter, which allows Security Council to authorize States to the use of force, or even Chapter VII generally; nor does use the verb “decide“, used when Security Council adopts a resolution on the use of force.

However, this text has been presented as a solid legal basis for airstrikes in Syria by France and United Kingdom.

In November 2015, two distinguished international lawyers entitled their analysis of Resolution 2249 (see article): “The Constructive Ambiguity of the Security Council’s ISIS Resolution“. For the authors of this article, the legal basis on which military actions can be taken in Syria is totally absent of the text:

Resolution 2249, on the other hand, is constructed in such a way that it can be used to provide political support for military action, without actually endorsing any particular legal theory on which such action can be based or providing legal authority from the Council itself. The creative ambiguity in this resolution lies not only in the fact that it does not legally endorse military action, while appearing to give Council support to action being taken, but also that it allows for continuing disagreement as to the legality of those actions”.

With respect to the vote that took place on December 2nd 2015 in London, and, in particular to the arguments presented by Prime Minister concerning UNSC Resolution 2249, another distinguished professor of international law at Nottingham wrote in his article entitled “How the Ambiguity of Resolution 2249 Does Its Work” the following conclusion:

Calling this particular resolution “clear and unambiguous” is, with respect, a real howler. But nonetheless we can see how the ambiguity of the resolution also did its magic in internal UK politics, and not just on the international plane – I very much doubt that without it the Prime Minister could have obtained the necessary majority for the air strikes, or even if he did that majority would have been slim indeed”.

Legal arguments to justify military operations in Syria in 2015 recall discussions that took place a few weeks after 9/11. In an article of November 2015, entitled "Interventions en Syrie : entre légitime défense individuelle, collective et contournement des autorités syriennes" , wer read that "Olivier Corten, Professeur de droit international à l’Université Libre de Belgique, estime qu’elle est la manifestation d’une nouvelle doctrine française d’unilatéralisme qui renvoie aux guerres préventives de l’administration américaine de l’ancien Président Georges W. Bush. Elle s’inscrirait dans la « culture de l’intervention » développée au cours de la décennie de la « guerre contre le terrorisme » des années 2 000, en rupture avec le texte et l’esprit de la Charte des Nations Unies".



A collective call against abusive invocation of self defense to justify airstrikes in Syria and Iraq

Last July 2016, we have had the opportunity to refer to a collective call against the abusive invocation of self-defense in the fight against ISIS, signed by more than 240 international law professors and experts around the world. The text of this global call (available here ) in French, English, Portuguese, Spanish and Arabic) considers, among other arguments, that:

« Thus, numerous military interventions have been conducted in the name of self-defence, including against Al Qaeda, ISIS or affiliated groups. While some have downplayed these precedents on account of their exceptional nature, there is a serious risk of self-defence becoming an alibi, used systematically to justify the unilateral launching of military operations around the world. Without opposing the use of force against terrorist groups as a matter of principle — particularly in the current context of the fight against ISIS — we, international law professors and scholars, consider this invocation of self-defence to be problematic. In fact, international law provides for a range of measures to fight terrorism. Priority should be given to these measures before invoking self-defence ».

This collective text concludes that:

"Finally, self-defence should not be invoked before considering and exploring other available options in the fight against terrorism. The international legal order may not be reduced to an interventionist logic similar to that prevailing before the adoption of the United Nations Charter. The purpose of the Charter was to substitute a multilateral system grounded in cooperation and the enhanced role of law and institutions for unilateral military action. It would be tragic if, acting on emotion in the face of terrorism (understandable as this emotion may be), that purpose were lost".

On this global call, we refer to our modest article entitled "Against the abusive invocation of self-defence against terrorism" and to the updated list of signatures collected, available here.



Conclusive remarks

As shown, Danish decision (after Canada´s one), shows the limits of the so called "war against ISIS" declared by some States led by US. The fact that three Permanent Members of UN Security Council are trying to force a UN Charter´interpretation to justify their actions in Syrian case has to be taken into consideration. Despite their influence, the discussion is still open, and for many States, the questionable practice and legal arguments to justify military actions of the "coalition against ISIS" in Syria constitute a dangerous exercise for the basements of international legal order established since 1945. In a recent article published in Belgium, the author analyses the position of the members of the international community on this very specific point. In the abstracts of his detailed article, we read that:

" If we turn to the legal positions expressed by States within the UN since the beginning of 2014, scepticism prevails. The opinio juris both of the intervening States themselves and of the “international community of States as a whole” is characterised by ambiguity. Political pragmatism seems more the order of the day than any clear legal conviction. It must be stressed, however, that, leaving aside the specifics of the Syrian situation, the majority of States have expressed the view that Article 51 of the Charter should not be rewritten or reinterpreted" (p. 32).

The author concludes its demonstration stating that : "On aurait ainsi pu imaginer que la lutte contre l’État islamique, désigné comme une menace exceptionnelle contre la paix et la sécurité internationale, soit menée sous l’égide de l’ONU, et non par le biais de coalitions of the willing composites et incontrôlées. Tel n’a pas été le cas et, après le précédent de la guerre contre le terrorisme menée en marge des Nations Unies depuis 2001, l’internationaliste soucieux du maintien d’un authentique jus contra bellum ne pourra sans doute que le regretter" (p. 68).



----------------

OFFICIAL STATEMENT FROM DENMARK, 2/12/2016

NYHEDER 02.12.16 Regeringen vil fortsat levere et markant bidrag i kampen mod ISIL

Udenrigsministeriet

Forsvarsministeriet

Regeringen har i dag på et møde i Udenrigspolitisk Nævn rådført sig med Folketinget om en udvidelse af den danske træningsindsats i Irak med et ingeniør- og konstruktionshold.

”Kampen mod ISIL er en af mine – og regeringens – vigtigste udenrigspolitiske prioriteter. Vi skal bekæmpe ISIL og deres ligesindede militært, økonomisk og på deres fortælling. Og vi skal sikre, at befolkningerne i befriede områder hurtigt hjælpes på fode igen. Jeg er stolt af den indsats Danmark og de udsendte danskere har gjort indtil nu," siger udenrigsminister Anders Samuelsen og fortsætter:

"Jeg er tilfreds med, at der i Udenrigspolitisk Nævn var opbakning til, at Danmark nu tilbyder koalitionen et nyt bidrag, så vi nu samlet kommer op på et træningsbidrag på cirka 150 personer. I dag har vi samtidig orienteret Nævnet om, at regeringen i 2017 fastholder de eksisterende bidrag til koalitionen, men at vi som planlagt trækker flybidraget hjem.”

Forsvarsminister Claus Hjort Frederiksen udtaler: ”Regeringen lægger nu op til at udvide den danske træningsindsats i Irak med et ingeniør- og konstruktionshold, som er en af de efterspurgte kapaciteter. De skal træne irakiske styrker i bl.a. minerydning og hjælpe vores nuværende træningsbidrag. Som planlagt tager vi nu også vores kampfly og transportfly hjem, og jeg vil derfor sige de danske udsendte stor tak for deres vigtige indsats, der har haft stor effekt for koalitionens indsats.”

Medio december returnerer de danske kampfly og det danske transportfly som planlagt til Danmark. Efter hjemtagelsen af de to flyvende bidrag vil Danmark fortsat levere en markant militær indsats til støtte for kampen mod ISIL.

Der er i løbet af det seneste år gjort betydelige fremskridt i kamp mod ISIL, men det er nødvendigt, at koalitionen også i den kommende periode fastholder et markant militært pres på terrororganisation i Irak og Syrien. I takt med udviklingen vil koalitionen løbende tilpasse sin indsats, så den bedst muligt understøtter det overordnede mål med den militære kampagne: At besejre ISIL.

Udvidelsen med et ingeniør- og konstruktionshold skal tjene til, at det danske bidrag får styrket evnen til at uddanne og træne de irakiske sikkerhedsstyrker inden for eksempelvis håndtering af improviserede sprængladninger og feltmæssig ingeniørtjeneste.

Fra januar 2017 vil Danmarks militære bidrag til indsatsen mod ISIL således bestå af et radarbidrag på op til ca. 30 personer, et kapacitetsopbygningsbidrag i Irak på op til ca. 150 soldater, et styrkebidrag omfattende specialoperationsstyrker på op til ca. 60 personer samt op til ca. 20 stabsofficerer tilknyttet koalitionens hovedkvarterer.



Note 1: In an article on strange similitudes between US attitudes after 9/11 and French President "poses" after November 2015 Paris attacks, we have had the opportunity to write that:"La stratégie US dans sa « guerre contre le terrorisme » semble donc avoir de nouveaux adeptes en France, même si ses échecs sont largement connus. Sur ce point précis, le rapprochement n’est pas seulement une simple vue de l’esprit : le premier diplomate étranger à s’être rendu personnellement au palais de l’Élysée suite aux attentats de Paris fut le secrétaire d’État états-unien John Kerry, le 17 novembre ; la première destination à l’étranger du président François Hollande suite aux attentats fut la visite rendue le 24 novembre 2015 à son homologue à Washington"

Note 2: Concerning Belgium and available information on its airstrikes in Syria, a report of Airwars of October 2016 on the crisis originated by Russia with Belgium, states that: "Le démenti belge des allégations est compliqué par les mauvais résultats de la Belgique du point de vue transparence : le pays est l’un des moins transparents des 13 membres de la Coalition. Au cours des deux dernières années, la Belgique n’a publié ni les dates, ni les lieux de l’une de ses frappes aériennes en Irak ou en Syrie. Les informations de cette semaine ont seulement été dévoilées dans le contexte de « l’accusation par la Russie », a dit Laurence Mortier".

















domingo, 27 de noviembre de 2016

REACCIONES OFICIALES A LA MUERTE DE FIDEL CASTRO EN AMÉRICA LATINA



El fallecimiento, el pasado 25 de noviembre, del lider cubano Fidel Castro Cruz, ha dado lugar a diversas muestras de solidaridad para con el pueblo cubano por parte una gran cantidad de Estados en el mundo, así como por parte de algunos Estados de América Latina. Este tipo de manifestaciones oficiales forman parte del abanico de gestos políticos que los Estados tienen a su disposición. Cada cual escoge el formato, la extensión, el estilo y el contenido de su comunicado, y podemos desde ya distinguir al respecto comunicado breves, menos breves y comunicados extensos. Hace pocas semanas, tuvimos la oportunidad de proceder a similar ejercicio con relación a los comunicados oficiales enviados con motivo del sorprendente resultado electoral en Estados Unidos (ver nota publicada en el sitio DebateGlobal).
Foto de Fidel Castro alzando en su brazo a Michel, hermano de Justin Trudeau, actual Primer Ministro de Canadá, durante una visita oficial de sus padres a Cuba en 1976. Foto extraída de artículo de prensa.

Al momento de redactar esta breve nota (27/11/2016) sobre la muerte de Fidel Castro, no se registran comunicados de las cancillerías de Bolivia, Panama, Paraguay, Perú, República Dominicana y Uruguay. Los comunicados oficiales registrados que a continuación se reproducen llevan todos la fecha del 26/11/2016, con excepción del de El Salvador, con fecha del 27/11/2016. Si bien en Nicaragua se anunció una serie de actos oficiales, incluyendo la declaratoria de nueve días de duelo nacional mediante Decreto Presidencial (ver nota del sitio el19digital), no se ha logrado acceder a algún comunicado oficial de su Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores.



I. Comunicados oficiales breves:

El comunicado oficial de Argentina se lee así:

Fallecimiento de Fidel Castro. Información para la Prensa N°: 416/16

El Gobierno argentino lamenta el fallecimiento del ex Presidente Fidel Castro y hace llegar sus condolencias al Gobierno y pueblo cubano por quien ha tenido un rol relevante en la historia del siglo XX y recuerda su apoyo irrestricto y permanente sobre la cuestión Malvinas.

El Gobierno argentino desea reafirmar, en estos momentos de duelo, su voluntad de continuar estrechando los profundos vínculos de amistad y cooperación que unen a ambos países


El comunicado de Costa Rica se lee como sigue:

"Costa Rica expresa condolencias por el fallecimiento del Ex Presidente de la República de Cuba PUBLICADO EL 26/11/2016 11:18 AM

El Gobierno de la República de Costa Rica expresa sus más sentidas condolencias al Honorable Pueblo y al Ilustrado Gobierno de Cuba por el fallecimiento, el 25 de noviembre de 2016, del señor Fidel Castro Ruz, Comandante de la Revolución Cubana, Expresidente de los Consejos de Estado y de Ministros de la República de Cuba.

Hacemos extensivo el pésame al Presidente del Consejo de Estado y de Ministros del Gobierno de la República de Cuba, señor Raúl Castro Ruz y a su familia.


Es de notar que el Presidente de Costa Rica acudió personalmente a la sede de la Embajada de Cuba en San José el 28 de noviembre en horas de la mañana para firmar el libro de condolencias, acto reportado por el Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de Cuba (ver nota oficial del MINREX).

El comunicado de prensa circulado por Colombia se lee de la siguiente manera:

El Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, en nombre del Gobierno de Colombia, expresa sus sentidas condolencias por el fallecimiento del expresidente Fidel Castro


El Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, en nombre del Gobierno de Colombia, expresa sus sentidas condolencias por el fallecimiento del expresidente Fidel Castro.

Hacemos extensivo este mensaje a su hermano, el Presidente Raúl Castro, a su familia, al Gobierno y al pueblo de Cuba. El Gobierno colombiano agradece el apoyo del expresidente y del Gobierno de Cuba a la paz y a la terminación del conflicto armado en Colombia.


El comunicado de Chile señala por su parte que:

Gobierno de Chile expresa sus condolencias por fallecimiento de Fidel Castro

Ante el sensible fallecimiento del ex Presidente del Consejo de Estado de la República de Cuba, Fidel Castro Ruz, el Gobierno de Chile hace llegar sus más sentidas condolencias al pueblo y Gobierno de Cuba, expresiones que hace extensivas a su familia, en particular al Exmo. señor Presidente del Consejo de Estado de la República de Cuba, Raúl Castro Ruz.

Fidel Castro luchó por los ideales de la dignidad de su pueblo y la justicia social, marcando indeleblemente la historia de América. El siglo XX lo tendrá como figura histórica de relevancia e influencia mundial.




II. Comunicados oficiales menos breves:

El comunicado de Brasil es el siguiente:

Nota 462 Fallecimiento de Fidel Castro 26 de noviembre del 2016 - 18:09

El gobierno de Brasil ha tomado nota con pesar de la muerte del líder cubano Fidel Castro.

Como dirigente máximo de su país por cinco décadas, marcó profundamente la política cubana y el escenario internacional. Entra para la historia como uno de los líderes políticos más emblemáticos del Siglo XX. No es posible entender la historia de nuestro continente sin hacer referencia a Fidel, sus ideas y acciones al frente de la revolución cubana y del gobierno de su país.

Su carrera resume los dolorosos conflictos y contradicciones de un período histórico agitado, en el que ideas de desarrollo y justicia social no siempre se conciliaron, en nuestra región, con el respeto a los derechos humanos y a la democracia.

El gobierno se solidariza con el pueblo cubano y presenta sus sentidas condolencias al gobierno de Cuba y a la familia de Fidel Castro.

José Serra Ministro de Relaciones Exteriores


Es de notar que las autoridades cubanas fueron particularmente vehementes hace unos meses, al calificar lo ocurrido en Brasil en mayo del 2016 de la siguiente manera: "El Gobierno Revolucionario de la República de Cuba ha denunciado de manera reiterada el golpe de estado parlamentario-judicial, disfrazado de legalidad, que se gesta desde hace meses en Brasil. Hoy se consumó un paso fundamental para los objetivos golpistas". Al respecto remitimos a una breve recopilación de las diversas manifestaciones oficiales por parte de Estados de América Latina a lo acaecido en Brasil, publicada en el sitio de GlobalResearch.

El comunicado de El Salvador por su parte señala que:

Cancillería de El Salvador lamenta profundamente el fallecimiento del expresidente cubano Fidel Castro

El Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de El Salvador expresa su pesar y sus condolencias al pueblo y al Gobierno de la República de Cuba, ante el sensible fallecimiento del expresidente Fidel Castro Ruz, reconocido líder latinoamericano, quien deja un invaluable e histórico legado por su aporte a las transformaciones sociales, la lucha por la justicia, la soberanía y la autodeterminación de los pueblos, así como por la promoción y la práctica de la solidaridad entre las naciones.

Producto de ese legado, El Salvador y Cuba han desarrollado y consolidado un estrecha colaboración en diversos ámbitos como: salud, agricultura y educación, entre otros, la que ha generado amplios beneficios a muchos salvadoreños y contribuido significativamente al desarrollo de nuestra nación.

Por lo anterior, la Cancillería de El Salvador manifiesta su profundo agradecimiento por la solidaridad y la cooperación de gran trascendencia recibidas por el pueblo salvadoreño de quien fuera en vida el expresidente Fidel Castro Ruz
.

El comunicado de Guatemala se lee de la siguiente manera:

El Estado de Guatemala lamenta la muerte de Fidel Castro Ruz, líder de la revolución cubana

El Estado de Guatemala, a través de su Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, lamenta el fallecimiento de Fidel Castro Ruz, ex jefe de Estado de Cuba y ex líder histórico de la revolución de su país, acaecida en La Habana. Su hermano, el Presidente de Consejo de Estado de la República de Cuba, lo anunció de manera oficial la noche del viernes 25 de noviembre.

La República de Guatemala mantiene unas excelentes relaciones bilaterales con la República de Cuba, y se solidariza con todo el pueblo y Gobierno cubano ante esta irreparable pérdida, extendiéndoles las más sinceras condolencias.

El pueblo y el Gobierno de Guatemala estarán eternamente agradecidos con el comandante Fidel Castro por la cooperación que Cuba ha brindado a Guatemala, con particular atención a la cooperación médica que sigue activa, y que a través de la cual se ha visto beneficiado un buen segmento de la población más vulnerable del país.

¡Descanse en paz!


El comunicado de México se lee de la siguiente manera:

México lamenta el fallecimiento del Comandante Fidel Castro Ruz

Comunicado No. 539.- El Comandante Fidel Castro, líder de la Revolución Cubana, fue una figura central en la historia del siglo XX

El Gobierno de México, por conducto de la Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores (SRE) lamenta profundamente el fallecimiento del Comandante Fidel Castro Ruz y extiende al pueblo y al gobierno cubano sus más sentidas condolencias.

El Comandante Fidel Castro, líder de la Revolución Cubana, fue una figura central en la historia del siglo XX. Hombre de profundas convicciones y gran amigo de México, deja una huella imborrable en Latinoamérica y el mundo.




III. Comunicados oficiales extensos:

El texto circulado por Ecuador se lee de la siguiente manera:

El Gobierno del Ecuador expresa sus más sentidas condolencias al pueblo de Cuba y a su Gobierno por el fallecimiento de Fidel Castro Ruz, Comandante en Jefe de la Revolución cubana y héroe de la lucha antiimperialista mundial.

El inmenso legado de Fidel Castro no solo abarca los logros de la Revolución Cubana, que a través de un proyecto nacional soberano y socialista, acometió la transformación radical de las estructuras sociales, económicas, culturales y políticas de Cuba. Con el objetivo irrenunciable de alcanzar la emancipación de su pueblo, la Revolución dirigida por Fidel Castro priorizó la consecución de la justicia social a través de la educación, la salud, el deporte y el desarrollo científico. Todo ello se ha traducido en avances sociales que hacen de Cuba, hoy en día, referencia regional y mundial.

La política exterior cubana, profundamente influida por el ideal emancipatorio e internacionalista de Fidel Castro, se desarrolló en un tiempo histórico marcado por la Guerra Fría entre las dos superpotencias del siglo XX, Estados Unidos y la Unión Soviética. Ello planteó a Cuba la necesidad de contrarrestar la amenaza permanente de los Estados Unidos, cuyos sucesivos Gobiernos se embarcaron en una constante campaña de agresión contra la Revolución Cubana, que aún hoy continúa.

Fidel Castro hizo de la solidaridad de Cuba hacia los pueblos del Sur un pilar fundamental de la política exterior de la Revolución. El apoyo militar a los movimientos de liberación nacional surgidos en el contexto de la descolonización del Tercer Mundo fue clave para la consecución de la independencia de varios países africanos, siendo de importancia fundamental la victoria militar sobre las fuerzas de ocupación del Apartheid surafricano en Angola. Por otro lado, Cuba ha ofrecido durante décadas una generosa y sostenida ayuda internacional en las áreas de salud, educación y cultura, en pleno respeto a la soberanía de los países receptores. Los grandes contingentes de médicos cubanos desplazados por todo el mundo, que garantizan el acceso a la salud de millones de personas, son un símbolo universal de esta cooperación fraterna.

Durante décadas, la Revolución Cubana y Fidel Castro han sido referentes en la lucha por la soberanía y la dignidad de los pueblos oprimidos del mundo, en particular de la América Latina y el Caribe. El peso político gravitante de la diplomacia cubana después del triunfo de la Revolución ha posicionado a su Gobierno como un motor fundamental de la integración regional en América Latina y el Caribe, en procesos como el ALBA y la Celac, y a través de la estrecha relación con el Caricom.

La histórica participación de Cuba en la Cumbre de las Américas de 2015, fruto de la postura común de los pueblos del continente en favor de su inclusión en este foro, y la reciente votación en la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas contra el bloqueo estadounidense, que por primera vez en la historia no registró ningún voto en contra, atestigua el consenso universal a favor de Cuba y en contra de las medidas unilaterales de agresión.

En un momento histórico de las relaciones diplomáticas entre los Estados Unidos y Cuba, caracterizada por el acercamiento entre ambos Gobiernos, es preciso recordar la tenaz e inclaudicable defensa de la independencia y la soberanía de Cuba sostenida por Fidel Castro, como Primer Mandatario de Cuba. El Gobierno y el pueblo ecuatoriano seguirán uniendo su voz a la de América Latina, el Caribe y el mundo entero para seguir reclamando a los Estados Unidos el fin de todas y cada una de las medidas de presión y agresión contra Cuba, como el criminal bloqueo económico y comercial, la legislación migratoria –Ley de Ajuste Cubano; Pies Secos, Pies Mojados–, así como la ilegal ocupación del territorio de la Base de Guantánamo.

El Gobierno y el pueblo de Ecuador se suman al profundo dolor y al homenaje del pueblo cubano a Fidel Castro, gigante latinoamericano y universal, arquitecto de la Patria Grande e incansable luchador por la justicia, la independencia y la soberanía de los pueblos del Sur.


El comunicado oficial de Venezuela por su parte se lee de la siguiente manera:

Venezuela expresa su afecto y solidaridad a Cuba por la partida física del Comandante Fidel Castro Ruz

El Presidente de la República Bolivariana de Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro Moros, en nombre del Gobierno y el pueblo de Venezuela expresa, en este día de dolor, todo su afecto y solidaridad al Presidente de Cuba, Raúl Castro Ruz, a Dalia, sus hijos, familiares, pueblo y Gobierno de la hermana República de Cuba, ante la partida física del Comandante Fidel Castro Ruz, líder histórico de la Revolución Cubana y Padre fundador de la nueva historia latinoamericana y caribeña, sin duda alguna, el americano más importante de la historia del siglo XX y ejemplo de generaciones para todos los tiempos. El Comandante Fidel Castro Ruz fue y será para siempre el gigante martiano y bolivariano que inició un cambio de época y mostró, con certeza y lealtad a sus ideales, el camino de construcción del proyecto humanista y socialista en nuestra Patria Grande.

Tuvo Venezuela en Fidel Castro el más grande, solidario y afectuoso de los amigos; un maestro y un guía que diseñó, junto al Comandante Hugo Chávez, la nueva arquitectura de la integración regional, basada en la solidaridad, la complementariedad, el trato justo y la visión humana. A ambos le debemos no sólo la creación de la Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra América y Petrocaribe, sino la edificación de las Misiones Sociales en Venezuela, ejemplos hermosos que implicaron el despliegue de miles de médicos, educadores y hermanos cubanos por todo el extenso territorio de la Patria venezolana, conformando la más profunda experiencia de solidaridad que haya conocido la historia de la Humanidad y que implantó la atención médica, la lucha contra el analfabetismo y el acompañamiento a millones de venezolanos que habían sido relegados al olvido por groseros gobiernos del pasado.

No nos alcanzará la vida para agradecer al Comandante Fidel Castro, a nuestro eterno Comandante Hugo Chávez y al pueblo cubano, tanto amor en obras expresado hacia nuestro pueblo.

Deja el Comandante Fidel Castro una Cuba de pie victoriosa. Un pueblo digno y radiante, que se empina por encima de las dificultades hacia el futuro. Con su ejemplo deja también abonado que el camino de la liberación de nuestros pueblos es el camino de la autodeterminación y la soberanía.

Como revolucionario, como Presidente Constitucional de la República Bolivariana de Venezuela, repito junto a nuestro Comandante eterno lo que una vez dijo del gran líder cubano: "Tú, forjador de historia, maestro. Lo digo sin complejos. Tú eres el padre de todos los revolucionarios. Eres el padre nuestro".

Hacemos nuestro el grito de combate que tantas veces voceó su Cuba querida: "¿Qué tuvo Fidel, que los imperialistas nunca pudieron con él?"

Hoy decimos al Padre, al sabio constructor de ideas para el bien de la humanidad: Fidel, la historia y los pueblos del mundo te absolvieron. Misión cumplida, Comandante de los humildes, soldado de nuestros pueblos. Seguimos en lucha. Y te decimos también, después de tantas veladas y conversaciones, de tantos planes junto a nuestro Comandante Hugo Chávez, tantas veces nos sorprendió la aurora escuchando tu palabra luminosa, que en esta hora, en que somos testigos de tu tránsito a la inmortalidad, viene a nuestra mente el verso de Miguel Hernández que te nombra:

"a las aladas almas de las rosas

del almendro de nata te requiero,

que tenemos que hablar de muchas cosas,

compañero del alma, compañero"



La República Bolivariana de Venezuela decreta tres días de duelo nacional para honrar la memoria y el legado eterno del Comandante Fidel Castro.

Con Bolívar, Martí, Chávez y Fidel Venceremos!!!

Hasta la Victoria Siempre!!!



IV. Otros

Finalmente, pese a no formar parte de la región latinoamericana, remitimos al texto circulado por otro Estado hispanoparlante con el que Cuba ha mantenido relaciones muy estrechas, España, cuyo comunicado oficial se lee de la siguiente manera:

COMUNICADO 335 Condolencias a Cuba

El Gobierno español desea expresar al gobierno y a las autoridades cubanas su más sincero pésame por el fallecimiento del ex presidente Fidel Castro. Desaparece una figura de gran calado histórico, que marcó un punto de inflexión en el devenir del país y que tuvo gran influencia en toda la región.

El ex presidente Castro mantuvo siempre estrechos vínculos con España como hijo de españoles y estuvo muy apegado a sus lazos de sangre y cultura. Por ello España se une especialmente al pesar del Gobierno y autoridades cubanas. En estos momentos de duelo, el Gobierno de España expresa su voluntad de continuar trabajando intensamente en el fortalecimiento de los vínculos bilaterales y de las relaciones de profunda amistad que unen a nuestros dos pueblos.




Para este 29 de noviembre, estuvieron presentes en La Habana, por parte de América Latina, los Jefes de Estado de Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, México, Nicaragua, Panamá y Venezuela (ver nota de TeleSur y nota de TribunaNoticias), así como de República Dominicana (ver nota de prensa). Por su parte, el rey Juan Carlos I de España asistió en representación de su hijo el rey Felipe VI, así como el Primer Ministro de Grecia, Alexis Tsipras. Con relación a Costa Rica, la representación oficial a los homenajes celebrados en La Habana recayó en su Vice Canciller (ver nota de prensa).