Syria: the dirty role of UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon


Five thousand citizens evacuated from Workers’ city of Adra

Dec 29, 2013

Damascus, (SANA) – More than 5 thousand citizens in the residential worker city of Adra were evacuated on Sunday by the help of the Syrian Arab army, Minister of Social Affairs Kinda al-Shammat said.

“The citizens who have been evacuated are now in a safe haven as the ministry formed a relief operations’ room with the cooperation of Damascus countryside governorate to offer them the basic relief aid,” the Minister said in a statement to SANA.

She affirmed that any international organization has never contacted the Ministry regarding the humanitarian file in Adra.

Armed terrorist groups, linked to Jabhat al-Nusra, the so-called Liwa al-Islam and the Islamic Front infiltrated into the workers’ city of Adra on December 11, perpetrating a number of massacres there against the families, burning the houses of state employees, slaughtering a number of them and mutilating their bodies.


Read more at:


syria.citizens evacuated1

“They had lists of government employees on them.” “This means they had planned for it beforehand and knew who works in the governmental agencies. They went to the addresses they had on their list, forced the people out and subjected them to the so-called “Sharia trials.” I think that’s what they call it. They sentenced them to death by beheading.”

“There was slaughter everywhere.” “The eldest was only 20 years old; he was slaughtered. They were all children. I saw them with my own eyes. They killed fourteen people with a machete. I don’t know if these people were Alawites. I don’t know why they were slaughtered. They grabbed them by their heads and slaughtered them like sheep.”

“Civilians told us that the workers of an Adra bakery were all executed and burned during the first hours of the attack. Whole families were massacred. We do not have an exact estimation of the number because we are unable to get into the town, but the number is high,” Kinda Shimat, Syria’s Social Affairs Minister, told RT.

“They killed everyone at the Adra Ummalia police station,” another fugitive from the town told RT. “And they killed everyone at the Adra Ummalia hospital where my sister works. She stayed alive only because she didn’t show up for work that day. There are about 200 people at the police station. They are civilians. The militants are hiding among them, using them as a shield to prevent the Army from bombing the police.”

July 17, 2012 – USA and Al Qaeda: Holy Alliance:…

June 25, 2013 – Saudi Arabia: ‘Syrian rebels must be armed’…

Oct 18, 2013 – ‘After Saudi Rejects UNSC Seat, Ban Ki-moon Praises Them’


About kruitvat

I am working for the Belgian human rights association 'Werkgroep Morkhoven' which revealed the Zandvoort childporn case (88.539 victims). The case was covered up by the authorities. During the past years I have been really shocked by the way the rich countries of the western empire want to rule the world. One of my blogs: «Latest News Syria» (WordPress)/ Je travaille pour le 'Werkgroep Morkhoven', un groupe d'action qui a révélé le réseau pornographique d'enfants 'Zandvoort' (88.539 victims). Cette affaire a été couverte par les autorités. Au cours des dernières années, j'ai été vraiment choqué par la façon dont l'Occident et les pays riches veulent gouverner le monde. Un de mes blogs: «Latest News Syria» (WordPress)/ Ik werk voor de Werkgroep Morkhoven die destijds de kinderpornozaak Zandvoort onthulde (88.539 slachtoffers). Deze zaak werd door de overheid op een misdadige manier toegedekt. Gedurende de voorbije jaren was ik werkelijke geschokt door de manier waarop het rijke westen de wereld wil overheersen. Bezoek onze blog «Latest News Syria» (WordPress) ------- Photo: victims of the NATO-bombings on the Chinese embassy in Yougoslavia
This entry was posted in Geen categorie and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Syria: the dirty role of UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon

  1. kruitvat says:

    December 24, 2013 – ‘US, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Israel oppose Iran’s participation in Geneva-2 for ideological reasons’

    Less than a month is left before the international conference on the Syrian settlement Geneva-2. But the entry list has not yet been determined. The opposition can’t decide whether to send its representatives to Switzerland and if so, then who will they be? Meanwhile, Russia and the United States cannot come to an agreement about the participation of Iran. The date and venue for the international conference on Syria have been agreed on. The meeting should begin on January 22 in the Swiss city of Montreux, 60 km from Geneva.
    Damascus will be represented by a delegation headed by Minister of Foreign Affairs Walid Muallem. The members of the Syrian opposition delegation are unknown. Moreover, it is still not decided whether the opposition is going to participate in the conference at all. It was clearly told that any preliminary conditions, including the presidency of Bashar al-Assad, were unacceptable. At the same time, its presence at the negotiating table is highly desirable, Director of the Institute of Strategic Planning and Forecasting Alexander Gusev notes.
    “Over the last six months, the Syrian opposition at one moment has consented (to come), then refused, and now its participation in the Geneva-2 conference is doubtful. The political will of such countries as the US and France is needed for the representatives of the Syrian opposition to attend this conference. The fact is that it is impossible to adjust the political process in Syria without their participation,” he said.
    Russia considers Iran’s participation in the conference on Syria also necessary. However, Tehran’s presence at the conference is questionable so far, head of the Russian Foreign Ministry Sergey Lavrov says.
    “The Iranians told us that if they receive an invitation to participate in the Geneva conference without preconditions, like all the others, they will accept it. We are receiving signals that Iran may have a positive impact on the settlement process. Almost everybody is talking about it in private conversations. Some even began to speak out publicly in favor of not depriving the conference of such an important participant as Iran. In particular, it was stated by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. Those, who oppose the Iranian participation, do not do it for the good of the cause, but for ideological reasons,” he said.
    The US, as well as Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Israel are the main opponents of Iran’s participation in the Geneva-2 conference. Each of these countries has its own reasons to protect the Syrian settlement from Iran’s interference or at least seriously limit Tehran’s activities, General Director of the Center for Strategic Estimates and Forecasts Sergey Grinyaev notes.
    “Russia’s position is dictated by the fact that Iran de facto is a participant of the events in Syria. It’s not a secret that some armed units of the Islamic Republic of Iran directly took part in hostilities. This is quite understandable. The thing is that the Iranian leadership viewed the conflict in Syria as a harbinger of possible escalation of the situation regarding Iran itself. Moreover, in recent years, Iran has turned into a full-fledged regional player possessing not only powerful armed forces, but also strong enough political power capable of formulating and solving not only regional but also some global issues. That is why Iran’s full-fledged participation in the Geneva-2 conference is quite justified. But the same situation is contrary to the position of the US. The US doesn’t want to increase the number of participants of the conference by way of including regional representatives, especially such an influential player as today’s Iran,” he said.
    At present, delegations from 26 countries have agreed to participate in the Geneva-2 conference. They are to put an end to the ethnic strife in Syria and without delay stop the bloodshed on the basis of the Geneva Communiqué of June 30, 2012. The purpose is the more elusive as there are numerous radical groups in the country, for whom the peace process is unprofitable.
    Natalia Kovalenko

  2. kruitvat says:

    World War 3, West Asian Front: UN declares War Crime in Syria! Demanding international action! Focused on ending the general insurgency fueled war, rather than chemical weapons!

    by Aaron Hutchins|

    September 17, 2013

    “….the use of chemical weapons in Syria is only the tip of the iceberg. The suffering in Syria must end. Next week, as world leaders gather here, I will make a strong appeal to member states for action now…..we also must look at broader issues, not only chemical weapons….”-Ban Ki-moon, UN Secretary General

    UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, stated that chemical weapons use in Syria is a war crime. He also condemns conventional weapons use in the war in Syria.

    He stated that the UN Security Council and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons will be holding meetings. Ki-moon is asking for a UN resolution. He stated it will take the co-operation of “wide range of [UN] members”.

    Ban Ki-moon’s speech opening the 68th General Assembly focused more on the overall war in Syria, than on the use of chemical weapons, suggesting that the United Nations is gearing up to support military action against Syria.

    Ki-moon implied military action was needed to stop the use of chemical weapons, despite the fact his speech focused on other issues caused by the U.S. backed insurgency. He did not say who is using chemical weapons.

    – See more at:

  3. kruitvat says:

    Ban Ki-Moon On Possible Use Of Force In Syria

    UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Tuesday that the international community “must consider the impact of any punitive measure” against the Syrian regime of President Bashar Assad’s for its alleged use of chemical weapons. (Sept. 3, 2013)

  4. kruitvat says:

    Kofi Annan, Ban Ki-moon call for action on Syria
    JULY 19, 2012

    UPDATE: UN chief Ban Ki-moon and international envoy Kofi Annan have called on the UN Security Council to take strong action when it meets on the Syria conflict.

    The 15-nation council was due to vote today on a western-backed resolution calling for sanctions against Syria.

    Russia and China were expected to veto the resolution, despite mounting global concern over Syria after a Damascus bomb attack in which three close associates of President Bashar al-Assad were killed.

    Ban said there was an “extreme urgency” for action to make government and opposition forces halt the violence.

    Annan, the UN-Arab League envoy, said the council must take “decisive” action on the conflict after he persuaded the major powers to postpone the vote, which was originally set for Wednesday.

    “The deteriorating situation in Syria underscores the extreme urgency for all sides to stop armed violence in all its forms, implement the six-point plan and move swiftly towards a political dialogue,” Ban said in a statement.

    Ban “strongly condemns” the Damascus bomb attack in which Defence Minister General Daoud Rajha and two other top members of Assad’s entourage were killed, said the statement.

    He expressed concern about the use of “heavy weapons by Syrian security forces” and urged the Security Council “to shoulder its responsibility and take collective and effective action on the basis of UN Charter obligations and in view of the seriousness of the situation.”

    Annan intervened just ahead of a scheduled vote on the western resolution on Wednesday to get it delayed. But with no new diplomatic proposals emerging, a new vote was called for today.

    The UN-Arab League envoy “urged members of the Security Council to unite and take concerted and strong action that would help stem the bloodshed in Syria and build momentum for a political transition,” said his spokesman Ahmad Fawzi.

  5. kruitvat says:

    U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon: ‘I thank the Security Council Members’ Prompt Action’ On Syria

    Aug 23rd, 2013

  6. kruitvat says:

    LIBYA: U.N. Chief’s Ambivalent Role in the No-Fly Zone

    UNITED NATIONS, Mar 23 2011 (IPS) – When the U.N. Security Council adopted a wide-ranging resolution last week recommending humanitarian and military action inside Libya, both U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa were assigned key roles in “coordinating” the implementation of the mandate.

    The eight-page resolution calls on member states to “immediately” inform both Ban and Moussa of measures taken in enforcing the “no-fly zone” over Libya and also to “coordinate closely” on measures taken to implement the ban on flights, including “to supply a concept of operations”.
    “This is probably the first time the head of the U.N. organisation is participating in the planning of military operations,” said Chakravarthi Raghavan, a longstanding journalist who has covered the United Nations both in New York and Geneva since the 1960s.

    “I read through the resolution carefully,” he told IPS, and “while various nations acting under the mandate to enforce a no-fly zone and protect civilians are asked to report their actions to the secretary-general, there are (also) paras about ‘cooperating’ with secretary-general.”

    But there is nothing in the resolution asking him to coordinate or plan the military operation, said Raghavan, a former editor of the South-North Development Monitor in Geneva.

    He said “it is appalling the secretary-general – possibly electioneering for a second term – should have participated in the Paris meeting to plan the military operations.”

    The logistics of the no-fly zone were finalised in Paris last week at a meeting of heads of state and foreign ministers, mostly from the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), along with Ban and Moussa.
    The relevant operative paragraphs in the resolution have also given rise to political ambiguity – on the real role of the U.N. secretary-general in the no-fly zone operations.

    “It remains to be seen whether Ban Ki-moon will actually function as General Ban, with any influence over real-time military decision-making,” said Phyllis Bennis, director of the New Internationalism Project at the Washington-based Institute for Policy Studies.

    She said the language of the resolution calls for close coordination by the governments participating in military action in Libya, with the secretary general.

    “But it remains quite unclear, both from the actual language of the resolution and from statements of the governments carrying out the military actions in Libya, what, if any, the real role of the secretary-general is to be,” she told IPS.

    Beyond the calls for governments to “coordinate with each other and the secretary-general” on their military actions, the only specific role assigned to him is to report to the Security Council what implementation is underway, said Bennis, author of “Calling the Shots: How Washington Dominates Today’s U.N.”.

    Although Ban Ki-moon participated in the Paris meeting that aimed at coordinating military action, she said, there was no indication following that meeting the U.N. chief was actually playing a substantive role in military decision- making.

    It may be that his primary role will be in that “report- back” position, where he will relay to the Security Council – which of course includes five members who have expressed varying degrees of opposition to the U.N.-approved military action in Libya – what the military enforcers are doing, Bennis added.

    Given the concern particularly of the Barack Obama administration to insure U.N. backing for the military intervention in Libya, it may be that ensuring the presence of the secretary-general in Paris is primarily a political gesture aimed at reminding the world that this U.S.-French- British attack – with the requisite minimal involvement of other Europeans and, so far in theory, Qatar – does indeed have the U.N.’s imprimatur, she said.

    Responding to questions about Ban’s role in coordinating the enforcement of the no-fly zone, U.N. spokesperson Martin Nesirky told reporters Monday the first step the secretary- general undertook was to take part in the high-level meeting in Paris.

    “And that was part of the follow-up to the Security Council resolution,” he said.

    “And I am sure when he briefs the Council on his return from his trip, as he is also expected to do under the terms of the Security Council resolution, there will be more details about precisely how this is being coordinated,” said Nesirky.

    Pressed further whether the secretary-general was told in advance of the air strikes on Libya, Nesirky said: “As you know, countries are duty-bound under the terms of the resolution to notify what measures they are taking. And those notifications are being received and transmitted to the Council as they are received.”

    The high-level meeting in Paris, he said, “strikes me as a fairly clear example of coordinating”.

    “And further details of what other mechanisms are in place, I am sure, will be becoming clear as the days pass, not least when he briefs the Security Council,” Nesirky added.

    Bennis told IPS that given the legacy of illegal unilateral no-fly zones, such as that established by the U.S. and UK in Iraq in 1991, which resulted in the deaths of over 700 civilians – and 144 of them documented by the U.N. in 1999 alone – it is not surprising that keeping the face of the United Nations front and centre remains a high priority for the Western countries attacking Libya.

    However, Ban’s follow-up statements calling for “an immediate end to violence by all parties, in accordance with Security Council resolutions 1970 and 1973, and for the responsibility to protect civilians” may represent a potentially important move to reassert the limitations of the U.N. resolution.

    Or at least to remind the Western powers of those limitations, she said, pointing out that while the resolution allows the virtually unlimited use of “all necessary measures”, it does restrict those measures to the goal of protecting civilians, not for the purpose of supporting or encouraging or enabling the opposition’s own military efforts.

    So the statement of the secretary-general could be seen as distancing his office from the stated regime change goals of the Western powers – goals that clearly violate the terms of the Security Council resolution, but which are just as clearly central to the operative policies of Washington, Paris and London, Bennis declared.

  7. kruitvat says:

    Syria files complaint with U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon

    The News – Latest News

    Syria has filed a complaint with U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon protesting Israel’s chopping down of trees in the occupied Golan Heights.

    The felling of cherry trees is “a flagrant violation of international law and humanitarian law,” said Syrian officials.

    The article says the cutting of trees aims to put pressure on Syrian villagers in order to force them to leave their land.

    They called the United Nations to pressure Israel to stop “these illegitimate and inhuman practices.”

    Israel has been occupying the strategic Golan Heights since the 1967 Mideast war and Syria been demanding a full Israeli withdrawal from the plateau.

    Peace talks between Israel and Syria have been stalled since 2000.

  8. kruitvat says:

    Mar 18, 2011 – Beyond Mandate: The UNSC Resolution on No-Fly-Zone against Libya

    The No-fly-zone resolution of the UN Security Council on March 18 is a most trying time for people who can see the total moral and political collapse of the UN as a world organisation expressing universalism. This resolution is slap on the face of peace, security, dignity and freedom of the Libyan people and the African Union who as African community opposed such moves against Libya. This resolution contradicts the purpose of the UN Charter itself which protects the sovereign rights of member-countries to maintain law and order within their borders. The resolution is condemnable as it also defies the objectives of the Non-Aligned Movement. The UNSC is acting as a club of a few European states, the Arab League and GCC which have shown their slavish submission to the US which is in the habit of chasing and attacking weak countries.

    I condemn all those who either voted for this resolution or maintained abstention. This is a painful moment after Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine. In these cases, the UN and its key players have shown their true colours, dualism and hypocrisy in taking any military action against Israel which has been murdering Palestinians and playing with their dignity and human rights. It is a shameful moment for them to have allowed the passage of a dangerous and illegitimate resolution.

    Coming to the dangerous aspects of this resolution, I am perturbed over phrases and wordings deliberately crafted by the US and Zionists: ‘to take all necessary measures to protect civilians and civilian places’. This is not simply a resolution for a no-fly zone but a total approval of naked aggression against the Libyan people under Chapter VII of the UN Charter to get full freedom to bomb Libya by all means without any conditions.

    It is an all out war against Libya. The “No-fly-zone” is basically meant for preventing a country’s planes to use its own sovereign airspace. This resolution has been approved under the name of “no-fly-zone” but its nature is much more dangerous. The role of the Arab League and the GCC shows the poverty of minds of rulers who are most corrupt and subservient to foreign powers. Their policies are not free and their behaviour is far from that independent nations. This kind of resolution should have been passed against Israel long ago in order to protect the Palestinians from the the daily crimes of Israel which is supported and encouraged by the US.

    In its weekly report (10-16 March 2011), the PCHR records the death of two Palestinians by an IOF air strike in the Gaza Strip. Two Palestinian workers were wounded in the same attack. Three buildings on the targeted site were destroyed. Illegal Israeli settlers escalated attacks on Palestinian civilians and their properties in the West Bank. PCHR documented 40 recent attacks by Israeli settlers in the West Bank. The settlers burnt four cars and a tractor, and damaged seven vehicles. A number of Palestinian civilians suffered from tear gas inhalation fired by IOF soldiers who escorted Israeli settlers. IOF uprooted 400 olives trees in Beit Dajan village, east of Nablus. IOF continued to target Palestinian workers, farmers and fishermen in border areas in the Gaza Strip.

    IOF continues to use force against peaceful protests in the West Bank. IOF arrested two international human rights defenders. IOF conducted 47 incursions into Palestinian communities in the West Bank. IOF arrested 66 Palestinian civilians, including six children. Fifty two detainees are from ‘Awarta village, southeast of Nablus. Israel has continued to impose a total siege on the OPT and has isolated the Gaza Strip from the outside world. Israel has continuously closed all border crossings to the Gaza Strip for over three years.

    The illegal Israeli-imposed closure of the Gaza Strip, which has steadily tightened since June 2007, has had a disastrous impact on the humanitarian and economic situation in the Gaza Strip. IOF have continued to impose severe restrictions on the movement of Palestinian civilians throughout the West Bank, including occupied East Jerusalem. Thousands of Palestinian civilians from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip continue to be denied access to Jerusalem. IOF has established checkpoints in and around Jerusalem severely restricting Palestinian access to the city. Civilians are frequently prevented from praying at al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem. There are approximately 585 permanent roadblocks, and manned and unmanned checkpoints across the West Bank.

    When complete, the illegal Annexation Wall will stretch over 724 kms around the West Bank further isolating the entire Palestinian population. Stretches of 350 kms of the Wall have already been constructed. Approximately 99% of the Wall has been constructed inside the West Bank itself, further confiscating Palestinian land. At least 65% of the main roads that lead to 18 Palestinian communities in the West Bank are closed or fully controlled by IOF. There are approximately 500 kms of restricted roads across the West Bank. In addition, approximately one third of the West Bank, including occupied East Jerusalem, is inaccessible to Palestinians without a permit issued by the IOF. These permits are extremely difficult to obtain.

    Certainly the UNSC resolution against Libya is not for democracy or freedom of people but for destroying it as they destroyed Iraq earlier. It will not bring freedom as we can see in Baghdad, Basra, Kirkuk and Erbil where Americans are secure but not the Iraqis. Certainly it will not uphold the principle of the UN in this case as it is selective, prejudicial, unfair and obsessive imposition of the Western mindset aided and abetted by the slavish mindset of Arab rulers. It will be a precedent for a long series of violations of the international law. The role of Ban-ki-Moon is like an American bureaucrat. Today, the whole UN edifice and its chorus for nations’ freedom, unity and dignity got dissolved in the ocean of its own blunderous slavishness. Today, I have lost total faith in the UN and will not entertain any expectation from it until and unless its nature and actions change in the interests of the Mankind.

    By Arshi Khan

    Arshi Khan is Associate Professor at Department of Political Science, Aligarh Muslim University, India and can be reached at cfsarshi[@]yahoo[.]co[.]in

  9. kruitvat says:

    Dec 14, 2011 – U.N. chief defends NATO from critics of Libya war

    (Reuters) – U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Wednesday defended NATO against criticism from Russia, China and other countries, which accuse the alliance of overstepping its U.N. mandate to protect civilians in Libya.

    It was an unusual move by the cautious head of the United Nations, who will complete his first five-year term at the end of the month and begin his second term in January. Ban has rarely taken public positions that pit him with some permanent members of the 15-nation Security Council against others.

    “Security Council resolution 1973, I believe, was strictly enforced within the limit, within the mandate,” Ban told reporters in New York. “This military operation done by the NATO forces was strictly within (resolution) 1973.”

    “I believe this is what we have seen, and there should be no misunderstanding on that,” he said.

    Resolution 1973, adopted in March 2011, authorized U.N. member states to impose a no-fly zone over Libya and take “all necessary measures” to protect civilians threatened by the government’s crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators inspired by “Arab Spring” uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt.

    Russia, China, India, Brazil and South Africa — the so-called BRICS nations — have repeatedly accused NATO of using the mandate to protect civilians as a cover to pursue regime change by aiding rebel forces who ousted and eventually killed Libya’s long-time leader Muammar Gaddafi.

    The United States, Britain, France and other NATO members have defended NATO, which says it adhered strictly to its Security Council mandate during its 8-month military operation, in which Britain and France launched repeated air strikes against Gaddafi’s forces.

    The United States was initially at the forefront of NATO’s Libya operation alongside France and Britain, but later took a lower-profile role focusing on activities such as real-time intelligence gathering and surveillance.


    Ban said none of the Arab leaders ousted during the Arab Spring uprisings were removed with outside help.

    “These changes of regime were done by the people, not by the intervention of any foreign forces, including the United Nations,” Ban said.

    In addition to Gaddafi, the long-serving presidents of Tunisia and Egypt were forced out, paving the way for elections that Western nations hope will install democratic governments. Yemen’s president was also forced to cede power to his deputy.

    Ban said he was pleased that the concept of taking action to protect civilians — often referred to as the “responsibility to protect” or R2P — appeared to be gaining momentum.

    But he reiterated that some kind of concerted international action was needed on Syria, where the United Nations says more than 5,000 civilians have been killed in a government crackdown on pro-democracy protesters this year.

    “This cannot go on,” he said. “In the name of humanity, it is time for the international community to act.”

    Last month, Russia and China vetoed a European-drafted Security Council resolution that would have condemned the Syrian clampdown and threatened President Bashar al-Assad’s government with possible sanctions.

  10. kruitvat says:

    February 2, 2012 – NATO Dirty Games At United Nations To Destroy Syria

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s