Blinken, Guterres Discuss Expanding Aid to Syria

A camp for earthquake survivors in Jindires, northern Syria (Reuters)
A camp for earthquake survivors in Jindires, northern Syria (Reuters)
TT
20

Blinken, Guterres Discuss Expanding Aid to Syria

A camp for earthquake survivors in Jindires, northern Syria (Reuters)
A camp for earthquake survivors in Jindires, northern Syria (Reuters)

Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke Tuesday with United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on the urgent need to facilitate humanitarian access in Syria so the UN and humanitarian actors can deliver life-saving assistance to those affected by the February 6 earthquakes.

Secretary Blinken underscored the need for the Assad regime to meet its commitment to open the Bab Al-Salam and Al-Rai border crossings for humanitarian purposes, including through a Security Council authorization, if necessary, according to US State Department spokesman Ned Price.

The Secretary noted that an expanded resolution would give the UN and humanitarian actors the flexibility they need to more effectively deliver aid to people in need in Syria.

“Important conversation with UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres on expanding UN access to earthquake victims in Türkiye and Syria. In addition to providing aid through USAID and State PRM, we offer our full support to UN-led efforts to surge humanitarian aid,” Blinken tweeted.

For her part, the US Representative to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield welcomed the UN diplomacy, hinting at the arrangement between the UN and Assad to use the Bab Al-Salam and Al-Rai crossings.

She said the UN welcomes the news that some UN aid moved through the Bab Al-Salam and Al-Rai crossings, and that they look forward to receiving more from the UN about how this arrangement is playing out on the ground.

“We have made that call when it comes to the regime. We have made that call when it comes to opponents of the regime. Everyone should put aside their agendas and affiliations in service of one pursuit and one pursuit only, and that’s addressing the humanitarian emergency, the humanitarian nightmare that’s unfolding in parts of northwest Syria,” Price said.

He noted that the US “responded immediately in the aftermath of these earthquakes.”

“We deployed the Disaster Assistance Response Teams within hours. We announced last week that we’re providing an additional $85 million above and beyond our initial response. We deployed the urban search and rescue teams with nearly 200 members, 12 dogs, 170,000 pounds of specialized equipment.”

“The international community also has a collective moral obligation to do all it can,” he stressed.

Blinken further added that it is possible to use the military bases in Syria for aid.



How Did Iraq Survive ‘Existential Threat More Dangerous than ISIS’?

Iraqi sheikhs participate in a solidarity demonstration with Iran on a road leading to the Green Zone, where the US Embassy is located in Baghdad (AP). 
Iraqi sheikhs participate in a solidarity demonstration with Iran on a road leading to the Green Zone, where the US Embassy is located in Baghdad (AP). 
TT
20

How Did Iraq Survive ‘Existential Threat More Dangerous than ISIS’?

Iraqi sheikhs participate in a solidarity demonstration with Iran on a road leading to the Green Zone, where the US Embassy is located in Baghdad (AP). 
Iraqi sheikhs participate in a solidarity demonstration with Iran on a road leading to the Green Zone, where the US Embassy is located in Baghdad (AP). 

Diplomatic sources in Baghdad revealed to Asharq Al-Awsat that Iraqi authorities were deeply concerned about sliding into the Israeli-Iranian war, which they considered “an existential threat to Iraq even more dangerous than that posed by ISIS when it overran a third of the country’s territory.”

The sources explained that “ISIS was a foreign body that inevitably had to be expelled by the Iraqi entity, especially given the international and regional support Baghdad enjoyed in confronting it... but the war (with Israel) threatened Iraq’s unity.”

They described this “existential threat” as follows:

-When the war broke out, Baghdad received messages from Israel, conveyed via Azerbaijan and other channels, stating that Israel would carry out “harsh and painful” strikes in response to any attacks launched against it from Iraqi territory. The messages held the Iraqi authorities responsible for any such attacks originating from their soil.

-Washington shifted from the language of prior advice to direct warnings, highlighting the grave consequences that could result from any attacks carried out by Iran-aligned factions.

-Iraqi authorities feared what they described as a “disaster scenario”: that Iraqi factions would launch attacks on Israel, prompting Israel to retaliate with a wave of assassinations similar to those it conducted against Hezbollah leaders in Lebanon or Iranian generals and scientists at the start of the war.

-The sources noted that delivering painful blows to these factions would inevitably inflame the Shiite street, potentially pushing the religious authority to take a strong stance. At that point, the crisis could take on the character of a Shiite confrontation with Israel.

-This scenario raised fears that other Iraqi components would then blame the Shiite component for dragging Iraq into a war that could have been avoided. In such circumstances, the divergence in choices between the Shiite and Sunni communities could resurface, reviving the threat to Iraq’s unity.

-Another risk was the possibility that the Kurds would declare that the Iraqi government was acting as if it only represented one component, and that the country was exhausted by wars, prompting the Kurdish region to prefer distancing itself from Baghdad to avoid being drawn into unwanted conflicts.

-Mohammed Shia Al Sudani’s government acted with a mix of firmness and prudence. It informed the factions it would not tolerate any attempt to drag the country into a conflict threatening its unity, while on the other hand keeping its channels open with regional and international powers, especially the US.

-Iraqi authorities also benefited from the position of Iranian authorities, who did not encourage the factions to engage in the war but instead urged them to remain calm. Some observers believed that Iran did not want to risk its relations with Iraq after losing Syria.

-Another significant factor was the factions’ realization that the war exceeded their capabilities, especially in light of what Hezbollah faced in Lebanon and the Israeli penetrations inside Iran itself, which demonstrated that Israel possessed precise intelligence on hostile organizations and was able to reach its targets thanks to its technological superiority and these infiltrations.

-The sources indicated that despite all the pressure and efforts, “rogue groups” tried to prepare three attacks, but the authorities succeeded in thwarting them before they were carried out.

The sources estimated that Iran suffered a deep wound because Israel moved the battle onto Iranian soil and encouraged the US to target its nuclear facilities. They did not rule out another round of fighting “if Iran does not make the necessary concessions on the nuclear issue.”