Russia, China unlikely to agree to UN chapter 7 resolution

ANALYSIS:Some opposition groups could use Tremseh to put pressure on UN for resolution that includes military sanction

THE REPORT of a slaughter at Tremseh has heightened tensions between western powers demanding tough UN Security Council action against the Syrian government and Russia and China, which support a more measured approach, particularly since there are conflicting claims over what happened in the village and the identity of the victims.

UN monitors deployed in the nearby city of Hama may be able to determine the facts before the council finalises the draft text of a resolution. But the monitors will have to gain access to Tremseh quickly, before either of the sides destroys evidence that could reveal the truth.

If, as some opposition sources claim, the majority of victims are civilian residents of the village, slain by Syrian army shelling and by pro-government militiamen on a killing spree, the hardliners could achieve their demand for the tightening of sanctions on the regime if it does not abide by its commitments to the plan proposed by UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan.

It is unlikely that Russia and China, which wield vetoes, will agree to place any resolution under the UN charter’s chapter seven, defining the conflict as a threat to international peace and security and invoking mandatory sanctions.

However, if the majority of the dead are rebel fighters slain in battle – as claimed by the state media and other opposition activists – Russia and China could press the council to adopt a more moderate line and to accept the draft circulated by Moscow, which calls for the extension of the UN monitoring mission’s mandate.

Several veteran observers have warned that certain opposition groups could be using the Tremseh incident to put pressure on the council to insist not only on a chapter seven resolution but include the threat of military as well as non-military sanctions.

These groups would also like to see Annan fired, the UN monitoring mission disbanded, and the council authorise the arming of rebels. Their demands are unlikely to be realised since western powers are unwilling to commit air or ground forces, regarded as the only way to defeat the regime’s superior and still largely loyal armed forces.

This leaves the Annan plan the only option and the UN mission the only means of effecting change on the ground. During a press briefing yesterday, mission chief Gen Robert Mood said that, in some localities, his team had facilitated dialogue between the sides in an effort to “build confidence and stop the negative spiral of violence”. He cited progress in Deir al-Zor, the oil hub in the east, where his mission has observed “a significant reduction of violence and growing confidence in a possible step-by-step approach”.

He urged the council to unite on a plan that “meets the aspirations of the Syrian people – and is accepted by the parties. Government and opposition must be willing to make concessions and sit down at the negotiating table. If this happens . . . the mission can contribute to improving the situation on the ground and facilitate further dialogue.”