Report of the
Secretary-General to the Security Council on the implementation of resolution
2043 (2012) and UNSMIS end of mandate
I- Introduction
1. On 21 April, the
Security Council adopted resolution 2043 (2012), which established the United
Nations Supervision Mission in Syria (UNSMIS) for an initial period of 90 days
with a mandate to monitor the cessation of armed violence in all its forms by
all parties, and to monitor and support the full implementation of the
six-point plan endorsed in Security Council resolution 2042 (2012). The present
report provides a comprehensive account of
the implementation of resolution 2043 (2012), including the six-point plan.
2. The crisis in the Syrian
Arab Republic is the consequence of a combination of factors, including a State that has failed to respond to the
legitimate political, economic and social demands of its people and its
position in a complex region. The response of the security apparatus to
what started as peaceful demonstrations led to armed clashes. In
recent months, the crisis has become increasingly violent and militarized.
The State’s campaign of violently suppressing dissent, which from the outset
employed excessive and lethal force against peaceful demonstrators, was
followed by defections and the formation of anti-Government armed
groups.
3. In parallel, the
President of the Syrian Arab Republic announced a series of actions in pursuit of a programme aimed at political and
governance reforms. A popular referendum endorsing a new national
constitution was held on 26 February, followed by parliamentary elections
on 7 May and the appointment of a new Government on 23 June. These initiatives,
which were taken unilaterally and took place amidst continuing violence
throughout the country, failed to meet the demands of the opposition.
4. The political opposition
has been formed in country and in exile. The Syrian National Council, comprising a diverse set of members, is
recognized by many as a legitimate representative of the Syrian people.
However, other opposition groups exist inside and outside the country
which cannot be ignored. The Syrian National Council has rejected any
political dialogue with the Government under present conditions. Many among
anti- Government armed groups, comprising army defectors and an increasing
number of armed civilians, identify themselves as the Free Syrian Army
(FSA) - whose leadership resides abroad - but operate relatively
independently on the ground. Most FSA groups initially adopted a defensive
posture, but then turned to offensive operations against Government
forces, facilities, and against critical national infrastructure. Over the
past period, the situation became more complex and deadly with a series of
bombings -- some of which are indicative of the presence of a third actor.
5. With the upturn in
violence, and at the request of the General Assembly, as contained in its
resolution 66/253 of 16 February, the Secretary-General of the League of Arab
States and I jointly named former Secretary-General of the United Nations, Kofi
Annan, as Joint Special Envoy of the United Nations and the League of Arab
States for Syria on 23 February.
6. On 10 March 2012, Joint
Special Envoy Annan presented the Syrian President with a sixpoint proposal,
which called for a commitment to a political process and a cessation of armed violence in all its forms by all parties, with
the Government to immediately end the use of heavy weapons in population
centres, and to begin pullback of military concentrations in and around
those centres. The plan also includes a range of other steps by the Syrian
Government to alleviate the crisis, including humanitarian access, access
to and release of detainees, access and freedom of movement for
journalists, and freedom of association and the right to demonstrate
peacefully.
7. On 25 March, the
Government of the Syrian Arab Republic conveyed its commitment to the six-point
proposal, confirmed by the Joint Special Envoy on 27 March. The Joint Special
Envoy also sought similar commitments from the opposition. Despite intense
levels of violence in late March and early April, for the first time in over
one year, a cessation of violence was declared and went into effect across
Syria on 12 April. Based on the commitments of the parties and the reduction in
hostilities by both sides, I proposed the establishment of UNSMIS in my letter
to the President of the Security Council of 19 April (S/2012/238).
8. The arrival of an
advance team followed by the United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria (UNSMIS) on 16 April took place during a marked
reduction in violence across the country. However, by the third week of May, a
return to unrestrained hostilities was seen to the extent that by 15 June
UNSMIS decided to temporarily suspend activities. The Government and the
opposition were informed that, absent respect for the cessation of violence,
UNSMIS would not be able to resume normal operations.
II- Implementation of the
Six Point Plan and UNSMIS activities in support of the Plan
9. As the Joint Special
Envoy told the General Assembly and the Security Council on 7 June, the six-point plan has not been implemented. As
described below, and in spite of the best efforts of UNSMIS to support the
parties in the effort to de-escalate the crisis, there is not a cessation of
violence, and the basic human rights whose protection is at the core of
the Plan continue to be violated. People continue to be arbitrarily detained,
hundreds of thousands of people in need of emergency assistance cannot be
reached by aid agencies, and there is no freedom of assembly. During the
reporting period, these conditions did not create a political space that would
allow for meaningful political dialogue.
A. Cessation of violence
10. From 16 April until
early May, hostilities were characterised by low intensity fighting and a general reduction in violence. The cessation of
violence established under the six point plan and UNSMIS presence seemed
to have a dampening effect in the areas where observers were deployed.
Syrian forces began but did not complete withdrawal of heavy weapons and
troops from population centres; otherwise, both sides responded to UNSMIS
initial notifications of violations. The military observers and civilian
personnel were also active in defusing tensions between the sides.
Nonetheless, UNSMIS noted operations by the Syrian Arab Armed Forces
against the opposition, including occasional shelling, and opposition
attacks against Government convoys, checkpoints, and police stations.
UNSMIS observers also reported hearing small arms fire and explosions
daily, in all their locations. During this period, UNSMIS observers
enjoyed relatively unimpeded access to sites of interest, and were not subject
to targeted incidents themselves.
11. An increase in the
number, size, and sophistication of bombings marked a significant deterioration in the situation on the ground. Two
suicide bomb attacks, of at least 1,000 kilograms of explosives each,
targeted Government facilities in Damascus on 10 May. The following day in
Aleppo, one bomb exploded in a market area, and security forces detained a
truck carrying a 1,500 kilogram explosive device before it was able
to detonate. While the bombings primarily targeted Government security
installations, critical infrastructure was also attacked. The nature,
scale, and techniques used in these attacks suggest a link to
well-organized terrorist groups. During the same period, UNSMIS observed
intermittent fighting between Government and opposition forces, increasing
tension in cities, and an increase in the number of heavy weapons,
including tanks, deployed by Government forces in or near population
centres. UNSMIS also received reports of attacks by armed opposition
groups against Government forces, installations,
and check points. The Mission was impacted directly and indirectly,
as patrols came under fire in Al-Qusayr, Deir-Ez-Zor, and in Khan
Sheikhoun, with the latter incident also involving an improvised explosive
device (IED), incapacitating its patrol vehicles.
12. From late May,
conditions deteriorated with the rise of coordinated Government forces’ assaults as part of an offensive on population
centres, using both infantry and heavy weapons, in the apparent campaign
to clear territories of opposition and armed opposition groups. The
operations focused on Homs and the surrounding areas (Ar Rastan,
Talbissa, and Al-Qusayr), the area around Al-Houla, Ariha, Kafr Zita, and
Mourek (between Hama and Idlib), and villages northwest and south of
Aleppo. Armed clashes between opposition and Government forces in
population centres, and the Syrian Arab Armed Forces use of tanks and artillery, caused heavy civilian casualties. In
tandem, both sides imposed increasing impediments on UNSMIS’ visits to
scenes of fighting in population centres, including by direct fire and
targeted bomb attacks on or close to UNSMIS patrols.
13. On 25 May, the town of
Al-Houla, Homs Governorate, was subjected to an attack initially by shelling. The following day, UNSMIS
observers saw a total of 100 bodies, including 41 children and nine women
in several locations, including three mosques and a house. Some of the
bodies bore wounds which appeared to be consistent with heavy artillery
fire; others appeared to have received gunshot wounds or suffered serious
head injuries. In one house, UNSMIS observers saw the bodies of eight
people, including six children and one woman, the latter with a gunshot wound
to the head. UNSMIS personnel identified both recent and potentially older
impact marks on village buildings from direct and indirect artillery,
mortar and tank fire, along with pieces of shrapnel from these shells,
including 23mm ZU-23 anti-aircraft cannons and rounds from a
122mm howitzer. On 27 May, the Security Council issued a press statement
condemning the killings in the strongest possible terms. In addition, the
international Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic conducted
a special inquiry on the events in Al- Houla, and reported its findings in
an oral update issued on 26 June (A/HRC/20/CRP.1).
14. As the Government
offensive continued, UNSMIS observed a pattern in the assaults. Intermittent
artillery shelling and mortar fire was followed by limited deployments of mechanized
infantry and tanks into town centres, followed by arrests or detention of suspected
opposition supporters. The offensive was accompanied by a rise in planned and
coordinated attacks by armed opposition groups against Government security
forces.
UNSMIS marked an increase
in tempo and a shift in tactics of armed opposition operations, also targeting
Government and civilian infrastructure using small arms, IEDs, and
rocket-propelled grenades.
15. From 8 June, coinciding
with the Free Syrian Army’s withdrawal of commitment to the six-point plan,
citing lack of progress in its implementation, UNSMIS noted the intensification
of armed conflict. The armed opposition and at least some elements of the
political opposition, as well as the Government had, it appeared, determined to
pursue a military strategy. In this context, UNSMIS first observed the use of
helicopter gunships and unmanned aerial vehicles by Government forces, as part
of combined air, armour, rtillery, and infantry operations against opposition
strongholds in several urban centres. The opposition escalated and intensified its attacks on Government
checkpoints and positions in proximity to opposition locations, bombing of
critical infrastructure, and assassinations of Government officials and senior
officers.
16. As of 15 June, UNSMIS
judged that the parties’ lack of compliance with six-point plan commitments and
the cumulation of obstacles to mandate implementation functions -- due to the
level of violence, monitoring access restrictions, and direct targeting --
rendered operational activities unworkable. The Mission therefore suspended its
normal activities. Subsequent UNSMIS observation of the ongoing hostilities
reflect military observers’ limited vantage from Team Site locations.
Conditions have not been conducive since that date to resume normal UNSMIS
functions, but are reviewed on a daily basis; interaction with relevant local
actors is conducted as allowed by the security environment. Within those
criteria, the Mission has instituted, as of 26 June, visits to medical and
educational facilities in conflict-affected areas, to monitor their status and
civilian access.
17. Since 16 April, the
Government of Syria has addressed 57 letters to the President of the Security
Council and me, transmitting allegations of violations of the cessation of
violence by armed opposition groups. These letters contain detailed lists of
several thousand incidents and victims, the nature of attacks and the alleged
perpetrators, and of Government properties targeted. In parallel, Syrian
opposition groups and local and international human rights organizations
continue to provide the Office of the Joint Special Envoy for Syria with
detailed and documented reports of allegations of violations of the cessation
of violence by the Government and Government-backed militias, as well as human
rights violations allegedly carried out by the Government. They include names of
thousands of victims of violence and human rights abuses.
B. Humanitarian assistance
18. Due to the intensified
fighting, the humanitarian situation continued to deteriorate.
Humanitarian organizations estimate that there are now up to 1.5
million people in need of humanitarian assistance inside Syria. As of 28 June,
the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) reported over 96,000
assisted refugees in Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey, representing almost a
threefold increase since April.
19. Civilians inside Syria
continue to bear the brunt of the armed conflict. The number of casualties and
people injured is rising rapidly, as well as the number of people displaced internally
and outside the country. While the United Nations is unable to verify the number
of casualties, the Government of Syria has reported more than 7,000 Syrian citizens
killed, including military personnel, while non-Governmental organizations report
figures ranging from 13,000 to 17,000 killed since the outset of the crisis.
Residents in the cities
most affected by the fighting suffer from water and food shortages and are
often unable to access medical care. There are also reports that schools have
been regularly raided, used as military bases and detention centres. Hospitals
and health facilities have been raided and shelled too.
20. United Nations agencies
managed to reach significantly more people in June than during previous months.
In coordination with the Syrian Arab Red Crescent (SARC), the World Food
Program (WFP) managed to distribute assistance up to 500,000 people in June.
Non-food items have been provided to 80,000 people in that same period. A
significant response is also on-going in the health sector. However, these
efforts remain insufficient to meet the growing needs.
21. The escalation of
violence since mid-May has had a negative impact on the delivery of essential
services and assistance to civilians. Efforts to address humanitarian needs were
hampered by continued violence and fighting which prevented access to the areas
most affected, such as Homs and Deir Ez Zor, and delayed the establishment of
United Nations field presences. Cumbersome conditions and processes for
partnering with local and international non-governmental organizations (NGOs),
and difficulties to import much needed equipment constitute additional
impediments to a more effective humanitarian response.
22. Daily shelling of Homs
has continued since 25 May. The evacuation of civilians has not yet been
possible, as armed opposition groups have not yet agreed to observe the necessary
humanitarian pause, despite UNSMIS facilitation. Access to medical assistance
is restricted by ongoing fighting, and by the Syrian authorities’ closure of or
reinforced presence in and around medical centres. As of 16 June, one hospital
in Homs city was operational, but partially occupied by SAAF soldiers.
According to local citizens, fear of detention is a barrier to seeking medical
care.
23. In the Deir Ez-Zor
Governorate, SARC has not been able to access several areas of Deir Ez-Zor city
due to security conditions since 26 June. A hospital in an opposition controlled
area has been closed since 15 June. UNSMIS negotiations with the Governor have
not yet succeeded in its re-opening.
C. Detention
24. Thousands of Syrians
continue to be detained in a network of Government-run facilities of different
kinds. This reportedly includes not only persons engaged in armed fighting, but
human rights defenders and activists, as well as vulnerable persons. Among
those arrested are figures known for advocating non-violence.
25. Under the six-point
plan, the Government of Syria has an obligation to provide full access to all
persons arbitrarily detained, and to intensify the pace and scale of their release.
Progress in this area has not been significant in the broader context of the
status and circumstances of thousands of detainees across the country, which
remains unclear.
There continue to be
worrying reports of significant abuses (including torture under detention) and
wide-scale arrests and detentions.
26. UNSMIS observed the
release of 183 detainees in Damascus and Dera’a on 31 May, and the release of
285 detainees in Damascus, Dera’a, Hama, Idlib and Deir Ez-Zor on 14 June. On
both dates, Government announcements indicated that 500 detainees had been released
countrywide. UNSMIS requested lists and details of the total 1,000 detainees announced
as released, but those were not provided. Ten released detainees claimed, during
UNSMIS interviews, that they had been arbitrarily detained and held incommunicado
for periods between 20 and 45 days by either military or police intelligence
members, for alleged participation in demonstrations or as members of armed groups.
27. UNSMIS received
unconfirmed information throughout the period regarding arbitrary and
incommunicado detention of hundreds of persons, including children, women and political
activists. As of 25 June, UNSMIS had received and cross-checked information on
2,185 detainees and 97 places of detention countrywide. The Mission has, to
date, obtained access on one occasion to a detention centre in Dera’a.
28. UNSMIS submitted a
written request to the Government for information, access and release of 102
arbitrarily detained persons in vulnerable categories on 11 June. On 15 June,
the Mission submitted a written request for access to detention facilities in Damascus,
Aleppo and Hama. On 21 June, UNSMIS met with the Deputy Minister for Foreign
Affairs and the Chief Legal Adviser to the President concerning these requests.
The mission has yet to
receive a response. The authorities have also not yet responded to the
Mission’s proposal, submitted at the end of May, to establish a national
working group on arbitrary detention.
29. UNSMIS also received
reports from members of the public as well as of the Government of persons
deprived of liberty by armed opposition groups. In most cases, these groups
denied to UNSMIS that they had any persons in their custody. In several cases,
opposition contacts confirmed to UNSMIS that such persons were in their
custody.
UNSMIS received reports
from pro-Government individuals of demands for payment or ammunition in
exchange for release of abductees held by armed opposition groups.
Though not able to verify the claim, one reliable source informed
UNSMIS that persons deprived of liberty by armed groups are frequently
subjected to a quick “trial”, followed by arbitrary executions.
D. Freedom of Movement of
Journalists
30. UNSMIS was not able to
monitor and report systematically on compliance with the sixpoint plan
provision regarding journalists’ freedom of movement, relying primarily on information
reported through regular contact with media representatives in Syria.
31. The Syrian authorities
accelerated the issuance of entry-visas to journalists after 25 March. The
Joint Special Envoy periodically received letters from the Deputy-Prime
Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates of Syria informing of
the number of international journalists and media organizations, including from
other Arab countries, who had been given entry visas. The last such letter was
received on 14 June 2012 and covers the period from 25 March till 13 June,
stating that “207 foreign and Arab media outlets” had been given visas.
32. UNSMIS continued to
receive reports from several international media outlets that visas had not
been issued to their journalists for several months. Press identity cards, one means
of safeguarding press security and facilitating access through checkpoints,
were not issued. Journalists traveling outside of Damascus often accompanied
UNSMIS patrols.
33. UNSMIS received
in-person reports from Syrian journalists who said that they had been detained
by Government forces, or physically attacked by anti-Government crowds.
UNSMIS was also informed
that journalists attached to official Syrian media channels do not venture into
opposition-controlled areas out of concern for their safety. In addition, foreign
journalists working in Syria have reported to UNSMIS harassment by
antigovernment crowds.
34. In a letter dated 27
June, the Deputy-Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates
informed the Joint Special Envoy that “armed terrorist groups” had attacked the
headquarters of the Syrian news channel Al-Ikhbariya in Damascus, destroying
the station and killing three journalists and four security guards. Al-Nusra
front, a terrorist group, claimed responsibility for the attack on its website
on 2 July.
E. Respect for freedom of
assembly and peaceful protest
35. Under the six-point
plan, the Syrian Government committed to respect the freedom of association and
the right to demonstrate peacefully as legally guaranteed. As noted in my letter
of 25 May (S/2012/363), the broad context of intimidation and human rights violations
did not constitute an environment in which citizens can express their opinions and
demonstrate freely.
36. In spite of the risks
of violence, public demonstrations have been a key feature of opposition
activity prior to and throughout the deployment of UNSMIS. Both Government and
opposition sources reported that protests continued to take place throughout
the country, albeit on a smaller scale and for shorter periods than had been reported
during the early stages of the uprising. Marches and other forms of demonstrations
have been occurring in a range of major urban centres, as well as in smaller
villages and towns, including in some instances in response to the arrival of UNSMIS
personnel. Aleppo University remained the focus for most large student-led demonstrations.
Pro-Government demonstrations also took place in a range of locations, including
in response to major incidents such as the suicide bombings in Damascus on 10 May
and the elections of 7 May.
37. Due to the often
unplanned nature of such demonstrations, particularly in opposition areas, and
the risks to UNSMIS personnel moving in proximity to what are often uncontrolled
groups of protesters, UNSMIS was not in a position to systematically monitor
and report on such events. As such, observation of compliance with the
six-point plan provisions relating to freedom of assembly and peaceful protest
relied primarily on reports from all sides and on-site verification where
possible.
38. UNSMIS received
numerous reports of Government and security actors using excessive force,
including live ammunition and lethal force, to disperse peaceful demonstrations
in different parts of the country. A number of local Government officials
claimed to UNSMIS that they ask police to arrest anti-Government demonstrators.
Pro-Government demonstrations which UNSMIS observed on an ad hoc basis did not
appear to be subject to comparable restrictions.
39. UNSMIS personnel and
vehicles also suffered a number of violent incidents when in the vicinity of
demonstrations by supporters of both sides. These ranged from painting of slogans
and graffiti on patrol vehicles to significant physical damage to vehicles
caused by rocks, bullets and other projectiles. Prior to the suspension of
patrolling on 15 June, such incidents made it increasingly difficult to
actively monitor compliance with point six of the six-point plan.
III. Political track
40. Since his appointment,
the Joint Special Envoy and his Deputies developed and maintained regular
contacts with the Government of Syria and a wide range of leaders and members
of the Syrian opposition, in order to identify common ground for engagement
towards a political solution of the crisis. The work of UNSMIS has been crucial
to establish facts and provide an objective basis for international assessments
and policies, which has been critical in the efforts of the Joint Special Envoy
to achieve international consensus regarding the nature of the crisis and the
requirements of a solution. UNSMIS has also been in a position to engage the
parties on the ground in support of the Joint Special Envoy’s efforts.
41. During consultations
carried out by the Office of the Joint Special Envoy over the past months, it
became evident that many Syrians are of the view that no meaningful political
process can be initiated so long as military operations continue, and thousands
of people remain in detention and at risk of further abuse, torture, or summary
executions. At the same time, a sustained cessation of violence and progress on
the implementation of the provisions of the other five points of the six-point
plan cannot be achieved without a credible political perspective. It also
became clear, as the six-point plan was not being implemented, that more joint
and sustained pressure was needed on the parties, including consequences for
non-compliance, and that a clearer path needed to be charted to effectively
support a Syrian-led political transition. The Joint Special Envoy briefed the General
Assembly and the Security Council to this effect on 7 June 2012.
42. In this context, the
Joint Special Envoy and the team worked intensively to convene a group of
organizations and countries who have influence with the parties in Syria to
agree on a set of additional actions to address the crisis. To this end, on 30
June 2012, the Secretaries-General of the United Nations and the League of Arab
States, the Foreign Ministers of China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United
States, Turkey, Iraq (Chair of the Summit of the League of Arab States), Kuwait
(Chair of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the League of Arab States) and
Qatar (Chair of the Arab Follow-up Committee on Syria of the League of Arab
States), and the European Union High Representative for Foreign and Security
Policy met at the United Nations Office at Geneva as the Action Group for
Syria, chaired by the Joint Special Envoy of the United Nations and the League
of Arab States for Syria.
43. The Action Group
communiqué called on all parties to re-commit to a sustained cessation of armed
violence and implementation of the six-point plan immediately and without
waiting for the actions of others, and to cooperate with UNSMIS in this regard.
The Action Group also called for the Government to provide access to and
release detainees, allow journalists to enter and move freely, and respect the
right to demonstrate peacefully. The Action Group stressed that full
humanitarian access must be ensured.
44. The Action Group agreed
on “Principles and Guidelines on a Syrian-led transition”.
These stressed that it is
for the people of Syria to come to a political solution, but that time is
running out and rapid steps are needed to reach agreement for a transition. The
Action Group stressed that the bloodshed must end, and the parties must be
prepared to put forward effective interlocutors to work with the Joint Special
Envoy towards a Syrian-led settlement. The Action Group agreed that any
political settlement should deliver to the people of Syria a perspective for
the future that can be shared by all in Syria; that clear, irreversible steps
in the transition are needed according to a fixed time frame; and that a
transition must take place in a climate of safety for all, stability and calm.
Among other elements, the Action Group agreed that the transition should
include a transitional governing body which can establish a neutral environment
in which the transition can take place, and which would exercise full executive
powers. The transitional governing body could include members of the present
government and the opposition and other groups, and should be formed on the
basis of mutual consent.
45. While reaffirming that
it is for the Syrian people to determine the future of the country, the Action
Group stressed the need for a National Dialogue process that must not only be
inclusive but must also be meaningful and see all its key outcomes implemented.
The Action Group foresaw that the constitutional order and legal system could
be reviewed, subject to popular approval, and that once the new constitutional
order is established, free and fair multi-party elections will need to be
conducted. The Action Group underscored that women must be fully represented in
all aspects of the transition.
46. The Action Group
members have committed to each other and the Joint Special Envoy that they will
apply joint and sustained pressure on the parties in Syria to implement the
terms of the communiqué, and that they are opposed to any further
militarization of the conflict. The Joint Special Envoy will keep the United
Nations and the League of Arab States fully informed. Further Action Group
meetings may be convened to review concrete progress made and to determine what
further steps and actions are needed from the Action Group to address the
crisis.
47. The Joint Special Envoy
and his team will continue to engage the parties as well as other relevant
actors, with the immediate goals of bringing about an end to the violence, and
laying the ground for a Syrian-led and Syrian-owned negotiation regarding the
shape of a transitional governing body and a broader transition, as outlined by
the Action Group.
48. Deputy Joint Special
Envoy Al-Kidwa traveled to Cairo for a meeting of the opposition under the
auspices of the League of Arab States on 2 July, where efforts were underway at
the time of writing to make progress in organizational and political terms.
IV. UNSMIS deployment and
operations
49. Immediately following
the 12 April adoption of resolution 2042, a DPKO/DFS advance team initiated
discussions with the Government and opposition groups in Syria on a possible
peacekeeping presence. On 21 April 2012, the Security Council authorised the
establishment of UNSMIS under resolution 2043 (2012). Major General Mood
(Norway), Chief Military Observer and Head of Mission, took command of UNSMIS
on 29 April 2012.
50. With a record rapid
deployment, UNSMIS was fully operational on 30 May. As of 30
June, UNSMIS had 278 military observers in its Damascus headquarters,
and eight team sites in Aleppo, Damascus, Deir-Ez-Zor, Hama, Homs, Idlib,
Dera’a, and Tartus; 121 civilian staff addressing political and civil affairs
and human rights matters, administration and support at Mission Headquarters,
with mixed military-civilian teams in five of the sites. Induction training inclusive of human rights
issues, and on counter improvised explosive device skills, trauma first aid,
social and cultural awareness, along with Mission specific communication,
observation and reporting skills were provided to all incoming personnel.
51. The establishment of
UNSMIS was facilitated by the substantial cooperation of the
Government of Syria, including in the provision of security in and
around UNSMIS locations. The Mission has
encountered subsequent difficulties in relation to the importing of necessary
communications equipment, issuance of visas, and the conclusion
of the Status of Mission Agreement (SOMA) between the United
Nations and the Government of Syria, as required under resolution 2043 (2012). The
SOMA remains under negotiation.
52. UNSMIS operations have
focused in and around population centres, in relation to both military
monitoring and civilian interactions. To consolidate the cessation of violence,
saturated patrolling was conducted in those areas, and visits to conflict-prone
and incident-specific areas for fact-finding and tension-defusing purposes. A
system of transparent violation reporting was put in place with, initially,
positive reactions and subsequent rectification by the sides, though neither
responded to written UNSMIS requests for follow-up and verification.
53. As civilian staff
deployed, mixed teams expanded interactions and sought every
opportunity to engage with the local population in Government and
opposition areas, building a network of
community contacts as well as of national officials. Liaison and
engagement at the local level were important instruments towards
building stability where signs of cooperation
encouraged it. The pilot engagement project in Homs sought to mediate technical issues between the sides for restoration of
critical services, and as a step in confidence-building for conflict reduction.
54. The United Nations Mine
Action Service deployed Counter Improvised Explosive Devices specialists to UNSMIS, who provided induction and Team
Site-level training to the military observers. The specialists also conducted blast
assessments of IEDs, investigation of damage to
UNSMIS vehicles by small arms as well as machine gun fire, and accompanied UNSMIS Observers on post-incident fact-gathering
patrols to determine the nature,
direction and variety of weapons used during alleged attacks on
population centres.
55. UNSMIS monitoring and
reporting activities were hampered by several factors. Access to incident
locations or conflict was, on multiple occasions, delayed due to security
concerns, Government warnings, or by opposition actors and by groups of
civilians. In addition, civilians in opposition-held areas claimed retaliation
by Government forces following UNSMIS visits, were critical of the lack of
protection from the Mission, and became hostile towards the observers on
several occasions. As civilian living conditions deteriorated, popular
expectations grew that the presence of United Nations military observers would
achieve a cessation of violence, and provide protection to civilians in its
absence. UNSMIS was active in taking advantage of public information
opportunities to emphasize its continued commitment to the Syrian people,
explain its limited role and contain expectations.
56. Risks to the observers
mounted in tandem with the hostilities. During the week of 11 June alone,
UNSMIS observers were targeted either by close fire or hostile crowds at least
ten times. Indirect fire incidents in the vicinity of observers or Team Sites
mounted over the reporting period, as well as several incidents of weapons fire
directly impacting Team Sites. Incidents of damage to UNSMIS vehicles also
increased, with nine vehicles damaged or struck by small arms fire during the
week mentioned. The increase in violence also undermined UNSMIS ability to
engage with local communities amid repercussions from civilian expectations of
a Mission protection role. Parallel expectations by Government supporters held
that the Mission should expose the assaults against their own. The frequency
and gravity of encounters with hostile crowds increased, as illustrated by the
12 June incident outside Al-Haffah, where UNSMIS vehicles were blocked and
damaged by a crowd, then fired upon by unknown persons, during attempts by
observers to reach the town.
57. As described in
paragraphs 8 and 16, UNSMIS observers have remained in their locations and had
limited engagement since 15 June, apart from case-by-case humanitarian-related
monitoring visits to medical and educational facilities since 26 June. On the
basis of further review by UNSMIS, the Mission decided to consolidate UNSMIS
team sites into four regional locations, in Aleppo, Deir Ez-Zor, Homs and Rif
Damascus, maintaining a geographical presence across Syria and strengthening
joint military-civilian fact-finding endeavors, as of the first week of July.
In tandem, the number of military observers will be temporarily reduced.
V. Options for the future
of UNSMIS
58. I have described the
rapid deployment of the Mission and the gains which were seen in the immediate
aftermath. The subsequent upsurge in incitement and armed violence by the
parties has now reached, and in some places exceeded, the levels seen prior to
the initial cessation of violence. Should the Government and armed opposition
groups decide to continue to pursue a military response to the current
conflict, the effectiveness of UNSMIS would need to be reviewed. At the time of
writing, there was little evidence pointing to an imminent change in these
positions, pending the anticipated impact of the 30 June JSE-convened Action Group decisions.
59. The Council’s decision
to deploy a peacekeeping monitoring mission in Syria was taken on the basis of
certain assumptions, foremost among them that the parties involved in the
conflict would uphold their commitments to a cessation of violence in all its
forms. The continuation of violence has altered the premise on which UNSMIS was
established, such that unless these commitments are urgently re-affirmed and
acted upon, a re-calibration of effort in response to the situation on the
ground would be appropriate. A range of options have been explored, as outlined
below, with the potential advantages and disadvantages of each in strengthening
the Mission’s engagement in conditions other than those originally anticipated
for the exercise of its mandated functions in support of the six-point plan.
60. The options presented
address the withdrawal of UNSMIS; the expansion of military observation
capacity or the addition of an armed protection element; maintaining the
current size and posture; and a shift to civilian functions and redeployment to
Damascus, with or without additional field presences. These proposals are
neither exhaustive nor fully reflective of evolving conditions on the ground,
nor account for operational and political developments subsequent to the
submission of this report.
61. Should the political
and security conditions render mandated Mission functions and fruitful
interaction with all parties untenable, the withdrawal of UNSMIS may need to be
considered. Withdrawal would eliminate risks to military observers and civilian
staff. It would also point to the parties’ responsibilities to end hostilities,
and underscore that the pursuit of military strategies is not a viable
solution. This decision, however, would signal a loss of confidence in an early
return to a sustainable cessation of violence and remove the sole source of independent
monitoring of the six-point plan implementation on the ground. It would likely
precipitate a further blow to efforts to stabilize the situation on the ground,
and render the prospect of a negotiated Syrian-led transition, as laid out by the
Action Group, more difficult, jeopardizing the unity built around this way
forward.
Furthermore, without the
Mission in place, the Syrian people would have no local mechanism through which
to engage in dialogue towards a durable settlement.
62. Alternatively, the
potential to bolster UNSMIS could be considered. Expanding the number of
military observers would increase the scope and scale of observation capacity.
A commensurate augmentation
of civilian staff to support the larger presence and the mixed
military-civilian functions would also be necessary, increasing the size of the
Mission footprint throughout the country.
63. This measure should be
considered relative to the Mission’s ability to conduct observation tasks,
fact-finding on incidents, and reporting on compliance with the sixpoint plan,
which depends on a permissive environment that, at the moment, does not exist.
This implies a return to a cessation of violence and significant improvement in
the current factors limiting mandate implementation. Expansion also treats the
strategic and political challenges facing the Mission with a quantitative
rather than qualitative remedy.
The risk of exposure would
increase in tandem with expansion, as well as unrealistic expectations of
UNSMIS protective and intervention capabilities across constituencies.
In the current context,
these expectations are already pronounced and, going unmet, have led to
aggression and direct attacks against the Mission. Expansion of UNSMIS in this way
risks an unacceptably high security exposure without commensurate benefit.
64. A second option for
bolstering the Mission would entail deployment of a necessarily sizeable armed
force-protection element as a security guarantor for the work of the unarmed
observers and civilian staff. This would enable the Mission to maintain team sites
in the field and close contact with local communities, in addition to
augmenting national security provision. An armed protection component would
also require host country consent and troop contributors willing to perform
that role. Neither of these preconditions appears likely. Moreover, a
deployment of armed peacekeepers would immediately raise expectations of
civilian protection within the context of ongoing and intensive violence.
65. Maintaining the Mission
in its current size and configuration presents another option.
This would enable efforts
on all aspects of the six-point plan to continue, and strengthening of
relationships and patterns of local-level engagement already established.
It would also convey the
determination to restore a cessation of violence. Current assessments, however,
suggest that prospects for the latter remain uncertain. UNSMIS would remain
configured for tasks it cannot implement. In this case, the risk exposure would
not diminish, nor would expectations to deliver a peaceful resolution.
Opportunities to strengthen
UNSMIS support for the non-military aspects of the six-point plan would remain
limited, cementing the status quo in place.
66. The individual merits
of each of the proposals mentioned above appear to be outweighed by the
potential negative implications and disincentives foreseen if armed
confrontation continues at the current level. In this light, a shift in Mission
structure and focus could be envisioned.
67. Drawing on the
Mission’s experience to date and in the context of large-scale violence on the
ground, options which strengthen support for dialogue with and between the
parties, and enhance attention to the political track and rights issues across
the six point plan’s components could be considered. In conjunction, UNSMIS
could retain a military observer capability to conduct effective verification
and fact-finding tasks, though with a limited scope for action if current
conditions persist. Within the authorized strength of 300, the observer
capacity could be adjusted substantially should conditions permit – or
otherwise – the extension of the Mission’s reach.
68. This UNSMIS presence
would focus on activities within the mandate that can be achieved under current
circumstances, and that would be useful in building support for the Joint
Special Envoy’s efforts. Capacities for “good offices” would be strengthened to
seize opportunities to foster dialogue, to broker local-level agreements to
calm tensions and promote ceasefires between the sides, and to deepen
engagement where possible, as steps toward confidence-building and stability
where signals from the sides encourage such measures.
69. If UNSMIS were
re-oriented in this manner, the Mission would redeploy from the field to the
capital to minimize risks, retaining core civilian and military observer
capacities to focus on the spectrum of initiatives feeding into the political
process. From a central hub in Damascus, the civilian component would continue
liaison and dialogue with opposition and Government representatives in the
provinces as security conditions allow. This model would maintain a United
Nations presence in situ dedicated to the promotion of the six-point plan with
all parties. It would expand direct engagement with the Syrian authorities and
opposition groups and report on progress towards the plan’s objectives.
This presence would cover
the range of issues, involve the scope of interlocutors, and be positioned to
scale up quickly to capture or expand on gains in the process.
70. Under this option,
adequate civilian capacities would be devoted to maintaining the network of
liaison relationships at the national and local levels, seeking forward steps
on the six-point plan through intensive facilitation of political dialogue,
inclusion of local actors in the broader fora, and building confidence in the
process. Continued efforts on detention and rights issues would complement and
benefit from the Mission’s primary political engagement functions. A reduced
military observer component would support these civilian-led activities with
military liaison and, as it does now, conduct visits to incident sites to
conduct fact-finding and verification tasks. This structure could be expanded
to include selected field offices, local conditions and security permitting,
which would function within the same operational framework, enabling broader
geographic coverage and reach to pivotal areas outside the capital.
71. Retaining the core
structural elements of the Mission would allow UNSMIS to build up and expand
its activities as improvements occur, and strengthen those capacities which
prove to benefit the six-point plan and the political track. A consolidated
presence, reoriented to maximize UNSMIS capacities to facilitate political
dialogue and diminish exposure to mandate implementation impediments, appears
preferable in current conditions, and reflects an equally responsive structural
and operational flexibility as conditions change. This model strengthens the
conciliation approach and building support for the six-point plan, but is not
without drawbacks. At a minimum, it implies that establishment of a sustained
cessation of violence is not an immediate prospect, and limits observation and
reporting capacity concerning violations of a reputed cessation of violence
accordingly. Popular opinion may misinterpret intensified advocacy at the central
level as privileging Government prerogatives, while reducing access to
opposition groups outside the capital. Nonetheless, the risks associated with
this approach may be more acceptable in comparison to the benefits of enhanced
engagement and the uncertainty of alternatives.
VI. Observations
72. The conflict in Syria
is characterized by a deep political crisis, driven by frustrated popular
aspirations for political reform, the brutal and disproportionate crackdown of
the Government on the opposition and persistent disregard for the human rights
of the Syrian people. Those issues, at the heart of the crisis since its
outset, must be addressed for any viable solution to be found.
73. I am deeply troubled by
the dangerous trajectory of the conflict and the destructive dynamics at play
on the ground. The peaceful popular uprising that started sixteen months ago
has transformed into a violent confrontation between the Government and armed
opposition groups. The use of heavy weapons, including indiscriminate shelling
by tanks and from helicopters, in civilian population areas, has intensified.
Attacks by the opposition against government forces, officials and critical
infrastructure have also multiplied. Syria is now engulfed by violence and at
risk of becoming a theater for fullblown civil war, with grave implications for
the people of Syria and for people in the region.
74. I am alarmed at the
escalating numbers of people killed and injured, while many civilians remain
trapped in areas of ongoing conflict with decreasing access to vital
livelihoods and medical services. I condemn armed violence in all its forms,
and call for it to stop immediately, in accordance with the six-point plan and
resolutions 2042 (2012) and 2043 (2012). I also remind all parties that
indiscriminate, disproportionate and targeted attacks on civilians and civilian
infrastructure are violations of international humanitarian law which must
cease.
75. The human rights
situation has continued to deteriorate, with extensive human rights violations,
including unlawful killings, wide-scale arbitrary arrests and detentions,
torture and other forms of ill treatment, sexual violence and abuse of
children. I condemn these violations in the strongest possible terms. They must
be fully and independently investigated, and accountability of the perpetrators
must be ensured.
76. The six-point plan
initially provided a mechanism to assist parties in de-escalating the conflict.
Regrettably, it has not been implemented in any meaningful way. The failure of all
parties to seize this opportunity has deepened divisions in the country and
seen violence intensify. As of now, the Government of Syria and the armed
opposition both appear to have chosen to pursue a military response to the
current conflict, narrowing the space for comprehensive dialogue between the
parties on what the future of their country should look like and how it can be
achieved.
77. The Action Group
meeting on 30 June marked a new stage in the effort to build international
unity, ensure joint and sustained pressure on the parties to implement the six-point
plan, and, most importantly, agree on principles and guidelines for a Syrian-led
transition. The parties on the one hand and the international community on the
other must realize that its promise must be quickly and visibly realized,
through a genuine readiness to recommit to the six-point plan and restore a
cessation of violence, and embark on a negotiated transition.
78. The Joint Special Envoy
intends to visit the region shortly, including visiting important countries who
were not at the Action Group meeting, and Syria. Initial statements from both
the Government and opposition regarding the Action Group outcome showed that
considerable efforts will be required for the parties to move forward in
earnest. I expect the parties to cooperate fully with the Joint Special Envoy.
I urge them to embrace the path the Action Group has charted and take ownership
of the effort to negotiate and agree on a transition to a better future for
Syria. I would strongly appeal to members of the Action Group and other
influential States to bring their individual and combined weight to bear. I
take note that the Permanent Members of the Security Council who were at the
Action Group meeting pledged to continue to support the effort, and, in this
regard, I stress the Council’s responsibilities to ensure that its resolutions
are implemented. Should the Council’s resolutions continue to be flouted by the
parties, I would call on Council members to exercise their common
responsibilities by taking necessary collective action.
79. UNSMIS can play a
valuable role in supporting political dialogue and local confidence building,
in establishing facts on the ground, and reporting clearly and objectively to
the international community. Should the violence persist or openings for
internal political dialogue develop, I have put forward options for UNSMIS
re-orientation in this context.
These are based on an
assessment of the situation in Syria when this report was prepared, pending
anticipated political and operational developments attending domestic Syrian processes
pursuant to the 30 June Action Group communiqué.
80. A presence which shifts
the primary focus to engagement recognizes that without a platform for and
confidence in a political process, there is little more UNSMIS can do to urge
the parties towards a cessation of violence. In the context of possible
collective action by the Council both sides may commit to fulfilling their
obligations under the Joint Special Envoy’s six-point plan, beginning with an
immediate and unconditional halt to armed hostilities. I would therefore
encourage the Council to keep this prospect alive by maintaining a Mission
presence capable of adapting to the opportunities that may arise should the parties
accept a political solution. Focused on political engagement with all interlocutors,
this Mission could sustain monitoring of and support for implementation of the
six-point plan, including the cessation of armed violence when feasible, and
respond flexibly to positive changes on the ground as they occur.
81. It is essential that
the parties step back from the ever deepening confrontation in which they are
engaged, recommit to the six-point plan, implement their commitments, and work
in good faith with the Joint Special Envoy on the path outlined by the Action Group.
With the lack of trust that currently exists between the parties, such an
approach can only be effective if supported by a cohesive and committed
international community who actively supports and facilitate a meaningful
political process. The Action Group embodies an important effort in this
regard. It is now the responsibility of the Security Council to provide the
necessary support and ensure sustained, united and effective pressure on all
concerned to obtain compliance with its decisions and create conditions for the
success of a political solution as envisaged by the Action Group.
82. The conflict in Syria
is among Syrians, and they must ultimately solve it. The people of Syria need
to identify and lead the way towards implementation of a vision for a new and
balanced political dispensation which addresses their legitimate aspirations as
well as the serious consequences of the conflict.
83. Continued oppression
will not diminish the legitimate demands of many Syrians for reform and
political change. However unclear the outcome is at this point, the people of Syria
have put their country on a path of irreversible change, and we have a
responsibility to assist them in implementing change in a peaceful way.
84. In this regard, I
reiterate that encouragement to any party in Syria to pursue its objectives
through the use of violence and military means is inconsistent with the letter
and spirit of resolutions 2042 and 2043, and the six point plan. Those who may
contemplate supporting any side with weapons, military training or other
military assistance, must reconsider such options and act to halt armed
violence in all its forms by all sides and prevent further repression of the
population.
85. The role of the Action
Group on Syria in supporting the path towards a Syrian-led transition to a democratic and pluralistic Syria is
critical. I call on Members of the Security Council and all States with
influence to live up to their responsibilities and spare no effort in
working together towards the peaceful and comprehensive settlement of
the crisis in accordance with the six-point plan, resolutions 2042 and
2043, and the Action Group communiqué of 30 June 2012 annexed to this
report.
86. In conclusion, I wish
to express my appreciation to all countries contributing troops and equipment
to UNSMIS. I also commend the efforts of the Joint Special Envoy and the Head
of Mission of UNSMIS, and I am deeply grateful to the brave military and
civilian personnel of UNSMIS, and of the staff of the Office of the Joint
Special Envoy, for their dedication and hard work under very challenging
conditions.
Follow me on Twitter @NabilAbiSaab
Nice Blog Post !
ReplyDelete