As diplomats battled to reach an agreement with Russia, which had traded jabs with the US over the renewal of the aid operation, a UN Security Council (UNSC) mandate for relief aid to nearly 4 million people in Syria through Turkey expired on Sunday (July 9). In&nbsp;conversation with Canada’s CBC television, Martin Griffiths, UN aid chief, said that "people will die" if this operation cannot be continued. The 15-member council had to pass a fresh resolution in January to extend it for another six months, but Russia on Friday (July 7) vetoed a one year extension and then failed in its own attempt to secure a six-month renewal, reported by Reuters.

However, as per the US, France and Britain, a six-month extension is insufficient for aid groups to make a plan and carry it further.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/syria-first-country-other-than-russia-to-recognise-ukraine-separatist-republics-of-donetsk-and-lugansk-493080">Syria first country other than Russia to recognise Ukraine separatist republics of Donetsk and Lugansk</a>

Russia, on the other hand, claims that the UN aid mission breaches Syria’s territorial integrity and sovereignty. There are concerns amongst the opposition that more help should be distributed domestically and that this will lead to being under the government’s control.

Watch |&nbsp;Iran seeks to resolve Syria-Turkiye tension

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/iran-seeks-to-resolve-syria-turkiye-tension-494066/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Linda Thomas-Greenfield, US ambassador to the United Nations, spoke to the groups who informed her that without the UN’s effort, nearly 70 per cent of the world’s food needs would not be met. Linda tweeted, saying attempts are being made to reach a deal with the UNSC.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Today, I spoke with humanitarian NGOs working to deliver cross-border aid inside Idlib. They told me about the millions of Syrians who will not eat if the <a href="https://twitter.com/UN?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@UN</a> cross-border mechanism is not renewed. The UNSC decision will be a choice between life and death. All eyes are on NY.
— Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield (@USAmbUN) <a href="https://twitter.com/USAmbUN/status/1546200624219439111?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 10, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

In response to Linda’s tweet, Russia’s Deputy UN ambassador Dmitry Polyanskiy tweeted saying that Russia only wants to improve the UN operation’s effectiveness and transparency.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/what-is-behind-turkeys-syria-incursion-threats-485142">What is behind Turkey’s Syria incursion threats?</a>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
There’s no need to fight and you know it perfectly well! Both drafts foresaw 6+6 extension of <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/CBM?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#CBM</a>.Implying that Russia tried to kill CBM is going against the truth:we just insist on making humanitarian assistance to <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Syria?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Syria</a> more efficient and transparent. Are you with us on that? <a href="https://t.co/2FklqXoLoX">https://t.co/2FklqXoLoX</a>
— Dmitry Polyanskiy (@Dpol_un) <a href="https://twitter.com/Dpol_un/status/1546221009119895554?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 10, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The council’s decision on the aid operation authorisation has always been divisive, but this year’s vote coincides with the intensified hostilities between due to Russian invasion.

(With inputs from agencies)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

As diplomats battled to reach an agreement with Russia, which had traded jabs with the US over the renewal of the aid operation, a UN Security Council (UNSC) mandate for relief aid to nearly 4 million people in Syria through Turkey expired on Sunday (July 9).

As diplomats battled to reach an agreement with Russia, which had traded jabs with the US over the renewal of the aid operation, a UN Security Council (UNSC) mandate for relief aid to nearly 4 million people in Syria through Turkey expired on Sunday (July 9). In conversation with Canada’s CBC television, Martin Griffiths, UN aid chief, said that "people will die" if this operation cannot be continued. The 15-member council had to pass a fresh resolution in January to extend it for another six months, but Russia on Friday (July 7) vetoed a one year extension and then failed in its own attempt to secure a six-month renewal, reported by Reuters. However, as per the US, France and Britain, a six-month extension is insufficient for aid groups to make a plan and carry it further. Also read | Syria first country other than Russia to recognise Ukraine separatist republics of Donetsk and Lugansk Russia, on the other hand, claims that the UN aid mission breaches Syria’s territorial integrity and sovereignty. There are concerns amongst the opposition that more help should be distributed domestically and that this will lead to being under the government’s control. Watch | Iran seeks to resolve Syria-Turkiye tension Linda Thomas-Greenfield, US ambassador to the United Nations, spoke to the groups who informed her that without the UN’s effort, nearly 70 per cent of the world’s food needs would not be met. Linda tweeted, saying attempts are being made to reach a deal with the UNSC. Today, I spoke with humanitarian NGOs working to deliver cross-border aid inside Idlib. They told me about the millions of Syrians who will not eat if the @UN cross-border mechanism is not renewed. The UNSC decision will be a choice between life and death. All eyes are on NY. — Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield (@USAmbUN) July 10, 2022 × In response to Linda’s tweet, Russia’s Deputy UN ambassador Dmitry Polyanskiy tweeted saying that Russia only wants to improve the UN operation’s effectiveness and transparency. Also read | What is behind Turkey’s Syria incursion threats? There’s no need to fight and you know it perfectly well! Both drafts foresaw 6+6 extension of #CBM.Implying that Russia tried to kill CBM is going against the truth:we just insist on making humanitarian assistance to #Syria more efficient and transparent. Are you with us on that? https://t.co/2FklqXoLoX — Dmitry Polyanskiy (@Dpol_un) July 10, 2022 × The council’s decision on the aid operation authorisation has always been divisive, but this year’s vote coincides with the intensified hostilities between due to Russian invasion. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

UNSC fails to reach aid deal for nearly 4 million people in Syria as mandate expires

India has once again stepped up to help a country in need. This time, India is gifting 2,000 tonnes of rice to Syria where people have been starving due to economic collapse and constant violence.

The war-torn country has been struggling to meet ends meet with the majority of the population falling below the poverty line.&nbsp;

In order to help the ailing country, India is delivering 2,000 tonnes of rice as a response to the request for emergency humanitarian assistance from the Syrian government, the external affairs ministry said.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Govt. of India’s humanitarian assistance of 2000 MT rice as Gift for People &amp; Govt of Syria arrives in Latakia. Amb Hifzur Rahman presents the gift to Syrian Minister of Local Admin, Head of Supreme Relief Com. Eng Makhlouf<a href="https://twitter.com/DrSJaishankar?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@DrSJaishankar</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/MEAIndia?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@MEAIndia</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/SecySanjay?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SecySanjay</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/IndianDiplomacy?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@IndianDiplomacy</a> <a href="https://t.co/ivoUnjSXsN">pic.twitter.com/ivoUnjSXsN</a>
— India in Damascus (@eoidamascus) <a href="https://twitter.com/eoidamascus/status/1359898181513981953?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 11, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The Indian ambassador Hifzur Rahman handed over the first 1,000 tonnes of rice to Hussain Makhlouf, Syria’s minister of local administration and head of the Supreme Relief Committee on Friday at Latakia port. Next 1,000 tonnes of rice will be delivered to Syria by February 18.

"India and Syria have historically enjoyed close and friendly relations. The government of India has always stood in solidarity with the people of Syria, and our bilateral engagement has continued apace even during the years of internal conflict there through a number of development and capacity building projects," the external affairs ministry said.

Last year in July, the Indian government had gifted nearly 10 tonnes of medicines to Syria to assist them through the coronavirus pandemic, which had stopped several aides to the war-torn country.

In addition to this, a camp was also set up in January 2020, called 'Jaipur foot', for artificial limbs. Organised by the Indian external affairs ministry in partnership with Bhagwan Mahaveer Viklang Sahayata Samiti, this camp, organised in Damascus, benefited nearly 500 Syrian nationals.

India has once again stepped up to help a country in need. This time, India is gifting 2,000 tonnes of rice to Syria where people have been starving due to economic collapse and constant violence.

India has once again stepped up to help a country in need. This time, India is gifting 2,000 tonnes of rice to Syria where people have been starving due to economic collapse and constant violence. The war-torn country has been struggling to meet ends meet with the majority of the population falling below the poverty line. In order to help the ailing country, India is delivering 2,000 tonnes of rice as a response to the request for emergency humanitarian assistance from the Syrian government, the external affairs ministry said. Govt. of India’s humanitarian assistance of 2000 MT rice as Gift for People & Govt of Syria arrives in Latakia. Amb Hifzur Rahman presents the gift to Syrian Minister of Local Admin, Head of Supreme Relief Com. Eng Makhlouf@DrSJaishankar @MEAIndia @SecySanjay @IndianDiplomacy pic.twitter.com/ivoUnjSXsN — India in Damascus (@eoidamascus) February 11, 2021 × The Indian ambassador Hifzur Rahman handed over the first 1,000 tonnes of rice to Hussain Makhlouf, Syria’s minister of local administration and head of the Supreme Relief Committee on Friday at Latakia port. Next 1,000 tonnes of rice will be delivered to Syria by February 18. "India and Syria have historically enjoyed close and friendly relations. The government of India has always stood in solidarity with the people of Syria, and our bilateral engagement has continued apace even during the years of internal conflict there through a number of development and capacity building projects," the external affairs ministry said. Last year in July, the Indian government had gifted nearly 10 tonnes of medicines to Syria to assist them through the coronavirus pandemic, which had stopped several aides to the war-torn country. In addition to this, a camp was also set up in January 2020, called 'Jaipur foot', for artificial limbs. Organised by the Indian external affairs ministry in partnership with Bhagwan Mahaveer Viklang Sahayata Samiti, this camp, organised in Damascus, benefited nearly 500 Syrian nationals.

India gifts 2,000 tonnes of rice to Syria as 'humanitarian assistance'

The UN Security Council on Saturday passed a resolution to restart cross-border humanitarian aid to Syria, but only after caving to Russian pressure to close one of two access points into the war-torn country.

Following a week of division and seven ballots, the Council passed a proposal submitted by Germany and Belgium allowing the use of the Bab al-Hawa crossing point for one year.

The measure was approved by 12 of 15 members, with Russia, China and the Dominican Republic abstaining, diplomats said.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/russia-china-veto-syria-aid-via-turkey-for-second-time-this-week-312460">Also read:&nbsp;Russia, China veto Syria aid via Turkey for second time this week</a>

Authorization for the continued transport of aid to Syria, a system in place since 2014, expired Friday night after Moscow and Beijing used their veto power and the Council then rejected a counterproposal from Russia.

With the approval of the German-Belgian proposal on Saturday, the Bab al-Hawa crossing point on Syria's northwestern border with Turkey will be maintained for a year, until July 10, 2021.

This will allow badly needed humanitarian aid to continue flowing to several million Syrians living in the insurgent region of Idlib, which the Syrian regime does not control.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/russia-china-veto-un-extension-of-aid-deliveries-to-syria-from-turkey-311484">Also read: Russia, China veto UN extension of aid deliveries to Syria from Turkey</a>

For weeks, Russia, Syria's most important ally, has been demanding an end to the use of the Bab al-Salam border crossing, which leads to the Aleppo region in northern Syria.&nbsp;

European countries and the US had wanted to maintain both crossing points.

"Russia controls this process," said Richard Gowan of the International Crisis Group think tank.&nbsp;

"The drama and vetoes of the last week were a distraction as ultimately Russia was always going to force a settlement on roughly the terms we see today," he told AFP.

The outcome of Saturday's vote is a notable failure for the United States, whose ambassador had called the maintenance of two border crossings a "red line."

UN authorization allows the international body to distribute aid to displaced Syrians without Damascus's permission.

But Russia and China argue that the authorization violates Syria's sovereignty, and that aid can increasingly be channeled through Syrian authorities.

Lifesaving assistance 
Western member states reject Russia's arguments, saying there is no credible alternative to the cross-border system and that Syrian bureaucracy and politics prevent an effective flow of aid in areas not controlled by the Syrian regime.

Susannah Sirkin, of Physicians for Human Rights, called the UN system "the most viable channel to deliver aid to millions of Syrians in need."

"Without it, civilians who rely on lifesaving assistance will be at the mercy of the Syrian government," which could block aid deliveries to areas under opposition control, she said.

The closure of the Bab al-Salam crossing was also a setback for UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who called in June for a one-year extension of the aid to include the two access points.

In January, Moscow succeeded in having the crossing points reduced from four to two and in limiting the authorization to six months instead of a year.

This week Russia and China exercised their veto rights as permanent members twice -- on Tuesday and Friday -- even as NGOs and Western countries accused them of politicizing a humanitarian issue.

Friday's vetoes by Moscow and Beijing marked the 16th for Russia and 10th for China on texts linked to Syria since the war began in 2011.

The UN Security Council on Saturday passed a resolution to restart cross-border humanitarian aid to Syria, but only after caving to Russian pressure to close one of two access points into the war-torn country.

The UN Security Council on Saturday passed a resolution to restart cross-border humanitarian aid to Syria, but only after caving to Russian pressure to close one of two access points into the war-torn country. Following a week of division and seven ballots, the Council passed a proposal submitted by Germany and Belgium allowing the use of the Bab al-Hawa crossing point for one year. The measure was approved by 12 of 15 members, with Russia, China and the Dominican Republic abstaining, diplomats said. Also read: Russia, China veto Syria aid via Turkey for second time this week Authorization for the continued transport of aid to Syria, a system in place since 2014, expired Friday night after Moscow and Beijing used their veto power and the Council then rejected a counterproposal from Russia. With the approval of the German-Belgian proposal on Saturday, the Bab al-Hawa crossing point on Syria's northwestern border with Turkey will be maintained for a year, until July 10, 2021. This will allow badly needed humanitarian aid to continue flowing to several million Syrians living in the insurgent region of Idlib, which the Syrian regime does not control. Also read: Russia, China veto UN extension of aid deliveries to Syria from Turkey For weeks, Russia, Syria's most important ally, has been demanding an end to the use of the Bab al-Salam border crossing, which leads to the Aleppo region in northern Syria. European countries and the US had wanted to maintain both crossing points. "Russia controls this process," said Richard Gowan of the International Crisis Group think tank. "The drama and vetoes of the last week were a distraction as ultimately Russia was always going to force a settlement on roughly the terms we see today," he told AFP. The outcome of Saturday's vote is a notable failure for the United States, whose ambassador had called the maintenance of two border crossings a "red line." UN authorization allows the international body to distribute aid to displaced Syrians without Damascus's permission. But Russia and China argue that the authorization violates Syria's sovereignty, and that aid can increasingly be channeled through Syrian authorities. Lifesaving assistance Western member states reject Russia's arguments, saying there is no credible alternative to the cross-border system and that Syrian bureaucracy and politics prevent an effective flow of aid in areas not controlled by the Syrian regime. Susannah Sirkin, of Physicians for Human Rights, called the UN system "the most viable channel to deliver aid to millions of Syrians in need." "Without it, civilians who rely on lifesaving assistance will be at the mercy of the Syrian government," which could block aid deliveries to areas under opposition control, she said. The closure of the Bab al-Salam crossing was also a setback for UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who called in June for a one-year extension of the aid to include the two access points. In January, Moscow succeeded in having the crossing points reduced from four to two and in limiting the authorization to six months instead of a year. This week Russia and China exercised their veto rights as permanent members twice -- on Tuesday and Friday -- even as NGOs and Western countries accused them of politicizing a humanitarian issue. Friday's vetoes by Moscow and Beijing marked the 16th for Russia and 10th for China on texts linked to Syria since the war began in 2011.

UN restarts cross-border aid to Syria but shuts access point

What can be done when a state acts against its citizens? Or, put slightly differently, do people of and within a given state have recourse to redressal when their state turns against them? &nbsp;No is the sad answer. The questions posed here are not academic. These are the real world, hardnosed questions and issues which are panning out all too poignantly in a country which has become emblematic of peoples’ epic helplessness and the international community’s stoic but hypocritical inaction. The reference is to Syria and its peoples who have been trapped in the crosshairs of a vicious conflict that now has morphed into a veritable battlefield for the panning out of competing geopolitical interests.

The victims, with no clear end game in sight, have been the people of Syria, killed, injured or displaced by the vortex of this deadly conflict. The so called international community not just watches as a mute spectator but, in reality, the Syrian conflict or even war, has provided its major states opportunity to expand their respective interests. Needless to say, this politics of opportunism goes against the high minded and lofty-sounding principles that the so called international community professes and, at times, loudly proclaims. &nbsp;All this raises a bevvy of questions: what explains the impunity of states when they act against their people? Why is the international community “helpless” in cases like these? What explains the dissonance between the international community’s proclamations and its (in)action? &nbsp;Last but not the least, do then people have to be at the sufferance of a state that goes against them? And, with reference to the “case” in contention, will the people of Syria ever have a respite from war, misery and depredation?

The thrust of the answer lies in the summum bonum of international politics and system: the state and its concomitant, sovereignty. The fundamental unit of the international system is the state and sovereignty is the bedrock of the state. This system and its corollaries, accruing from the Treaty of Westphalia has till now held its ground, so to speak. While there are some salubrious aspects to it but, it would appear, that the main failing of the Westphalian system is its privileging of the state over people. State sovereignty then acts as a shield for the state under which a given state can do anything, without accountability to anyone. (This happens because the international system and international relations are anarchic. That is, there is no higher authority in the system to which states can take recourse to). States then are free to do anything within their sovereign jurisdictions and frontiers.

&nbsp;The tragic Syrian saga corresponds to sovereignty as a shield, under which a regime has not only gone against its people but murdered, gassed and displaced them.&nbsp;

The question that may be posed here is that is not international law a binding constraint on states? The answer again is no. International law is merely a normative corpus of laws that hardly goes against a state. And, states merely or largely pay lip service to it. International law is also handicapped by the absence of an appellate authority where people can take their case(s) to. The International Criminal Court of Justice exists but yet again sovereignty is a major constraint here along with the reluctance or even obstructionism by major states. The recent threats against and bullying toward the ICJ by United States national security advisor, John Bolton, illustrate the point.

States’ sovereignty and prerogatives thereof win over the safety and security of the people. Obiter dictum, public opinion as a rallying force against states’ atrocities against their people is a pious and a vain wish. Unless and until a given state's interests (howsoever defined) are not affected, it will not act. The state system then, despite proclamations to the contrary, is slanted and configured against people. &nbsp;As a corollary, the so called international community is a fiction maintained perhaps for rhetorical purposes.

Against this backdrop, and with reference to Syria, its people are doomed to suffer and their collective fate is uncertain. But, this assertion must be qualified. Syria and its peoples are doomed to be trapped in the vortex of war and depredation, till a power state decides to act for them.

The reference here is not to the so called Responsibility to Protect (R2P), another vain construct that flounders on the rocks of reality but humanitarian intervention, of a military nature. But, humanitarian intervention, appears to be an oxymoron, for states hardly ever act out of altruism. They act when their interests are at stake. However, there has been an odd case of humanitarian intervention or so in the recent past. If this is the case, why has not this happened in the case of Syria? The reason might be civilizational or cultural. 
 
Syrians, by and large, are Muslims so the world powers might not be amenable to intervene military in the conflict. &nbsp;However, the overwhelming reason appears to be there are no stakes for Great powers to intervene except as players to advance their interests. To put a semantic twist to it, Great Powers might also be an oxymoronic phrase. 
 
There might be powerful powers, if this phrase makes sense but no great powers for greatness&nbsp;is not something that accrues from the metrics of power but sheer and pure humanity which is conspicuously missing from any so called Great power. &nbsp;Greatness is earned by what an individual, persons, groups or even states can do for their fellow humans even if they are “different”. There, alas, is no such great power, in the world, that can offer respite and succour to the blighted people of Syria. They will suffer till perhaps Providence intervenes!

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

What can be done when a state acts against its citizens? Or, put slightly differently, do people of and within a given state have recourse to redressal when their state turns against them?

What can be done when a state acts against its citizens? Or, put slightly differently, do people of and within a given state have recourse to redressal when their state turns against them? No is the sad answer. The questions posed here are not academic. These are the real world, hardnosed questions and issues which are panning out all too poignantly in a country which has become emblematic of peoples’ epic helplessness and the international community’s stoic but hypocritical inaction. The reference is to Syria and its peoples who have been trapped in the crosshairs of a vicious conflict that now has morphed into a veritable battlefield for the panning out of competing geopolitical interests. The victims, with no clear end game in sight, have been the people of Syria, killed, injured or displaced by the vortex of this deadly conflict. The so called international community not just watches as a mute spectator but, in reality, the Syrian conflict or even war, has provided its major states opportunity to expand their respective interests. Needless to say, this politics of opportunism goes against the high minded and lofty-sounding principles that the so called international community professes and, at times, loudly proclaims. All this raises a bevvy of questions: what explains the impunity of states when they act against their people? Why is the international community “helpless” in cases like these? What explains the dissonance between the international community’s proclamations and its (in)action? Last but not the least, do then people have to be at the sufferance of a state that goes against them? And, with reference to the “case” in contention, will the people of Syria ever have a respite from war, misery and depredation? The thrust of the answer lies in the summum bonum of international politics and system: the state and its concomitant, sovereignty. The fundamental unit of the international system is the state and sovereignty is the bedrock of the state. This system and its corollaries, accruing from the Treaty of Westphalia has till now held its ground, so to speak. While there are some salubrious aspects to it but, it would appear, that the main failing of the Westphalian system is its privileging of the state over people. State sovereignty then acts as a shield for the state under which a given state can do anything, without accountability to anyone. (This happens because the international system and international relations are anarchic. That is, there is no higher authority in the system to which states can take recourse to). States then are free to do anything within their sovereign jurisdictions and frontiers. The tragic Syrian saga corresponds to sovereignty as a shield, under which a regime has not only gone against its people but murdered, gassed and displaced them. The question that may be posed here is that is not international law a binding constraint on states? The answer again is no. International law is merely a normative corpus of laws that hardly goes against a state. And, states merely or largely pay lip service to it. International law is also handicapped by the absence of an appellate authority where people can take their case(s) to. The International Criminal Court of Justice exists but yet again sovereignty is a major constraint here along with the reluctance or even obstructionism by major states. The recent threats against and bullying toward the ICJ by United States national security advisor, John Bolton, illustrate the point. States’ sovereignty and prerogatives thereof win over the safety and security of the people. Obiter dictum, public opinion as a rallying force against states’ atrocities against their people is a pious and a vain wish. Unless and until a given state's interests (howsoever defined) are not affected, it will not act. The state system then, despite proclamations to the contrary, is slanted and configured against people. As a corollary, the so called international community is a fiction maintained perhaps for rhetorical purposes. Against this backdrop, and with reference to Syria, its people are doomed to suffer and their collective fate is uncertain. But, this assertion must be qualified. Syria and its peoples are doomed to be trapped in the vortex of war and depredation, till a power state decides to act for them. The reference here is not to the so called Responsibility to Protect (R2P), another vain construct that flounders on the rocks of reality but humanitarian intervention, of a military nature. But, humanitarian intervention, appears to be an oxymoron, for states hardly ever act out of altruism. They act when their interests are at stake. However, there has been an odd case of humanitarian intervention or so in the recent past. If this is the case, why has not this happened in the case of Syria? The reason might be civilizational or cultural. Syrians, by and large, are Muslims so the world powers might not be amenable to intervene military in the conflict. However, the overwhelming reason appears to be there are no stakes for Great powers to intervene except as players to advance their interests. To put a semantic twist to it, Great Powers might also be an oxymoronic phrase. There might be powerful powers, if this phrase makes sense but no great powers for greatness is not something that accrues from the metrics of power but sheer and pure humanity which is conspicuously missing from any so called Great power. Greatness is earned by what an individual, persons, groups or even states can do for their fellow humans even if they are “different”. There, alas, is no such great power, in the world, that can offer respite and succour to the blighted people of Syria. They will suffer till perhaps Providence intervenes! (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The international community has failed Syria

More than 70 aid groups in Syria have reportedly withdrawn from the United Nation&#39;s (UN) information sharing programme, accusing the world body of being &ldquo;significantly and substantially&rdquo; influenced in its distribution of aid by President Bashar al-Assad&#39;s regime.&nbsp; 
 
In a letter to the UN, about 70 humanitarian groups have announced their withdrawal from &quot;Whole of Syria (WoS)&nbsp;information-sharing mechanism&quot;, the Guardian reported today.&nbsp; 
 
The letter stated that the groups, which comprise Syria&#39;s most renowned aid organisations, could no longer put up with the &ldquo;manipulation of humanitarian relief efforts by the political interests of the Syrian government that deprive&nbsp;other Syrians in besieged areas from the services of those programmes&rdquo;. 
 
According to Al Jazeera, aid groups accused the UN of being complacent in Syrian government&#39;s interference in the delivery of humanitarian assistance.&nbsp; 
 
In the open letter, the Guardian further elaborates, the non-governmental organisations told&nbsp;the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA): &nbsp;&ldquo;The Whole of Syria information-sharing mechanism was created in order to prevent gaps in the response by including all humanitarian actors providing cross-border relief. Yet, UN agencies based in Damascus and their main partner, Syrian Arab Red Crescent (Sarc)&nbsp;have been making the final decisions, shaped by the political influence of the Syrian government.&quot;&nbsp; 
 
UN is also accused of being a &#39;&#39;political player&#39;&#39; in marginalising humanitarian workers and blocking aid to the rebel-held areas. 
 
The signatories have called for a transparent investigation into the &quot;political impact that the Syrian government has on humanitarian actors&quot;. 
 
The UN secretary-general&#39;s spokesman, however, said that the world body&#39;s operations in Syria were transparent.&nbsp; 
 
&quot;Everything is listed. We always welcome any scrutiny to our humanitarian work in Syria. Our focus is and will continue to be to deliver as much aid as possible to the Syrian people,&quot; he said. 
 
(WION) 
&nbsp;

In a letter to the UN, the aid groups said that they can no longer tolerate the 'manipulation of relief efforts by the Syrian government'

More than 70 aid groups in Syria have reportedly withdrawn from the United Nation's (UN) information sharing programme, accusing the world body of being “significantly and substantially” influenced in its distribution of aid by President Bashar al-Assad's regime. In a letter to the UN, about 70 humanitarian groups have announced their withdrawal from "Whole of Syria (WoS) information-sharing mechanism", the Guardian reported today. The letter stated that the groups, which comprise Syria's most renowned aid organisations, could no longer put up with the “manipulation of humanitarian relief efforts by the political interests of the Syrian government that deprive other Syrians in besieged areas from the services of those programmes”. According to Al Jazeera, aid groups accused the UN of being complacent in Syrian government's interference in the delivery of humanitarian assistance. In the open letter, the Guardian further elaborates, the non-governmental organisations told the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA): “The Whole of Syria information-sharing mechanism was created in order to prevent gaps in the response by including all humanitarian actors providing cross-border relief. Yet, UN agencies based in Damascus and their main partner, Syrian Arab Red Crescent (Sarc) have been making the final decisions, shaped by the political influence of the Syrian government." UN is also accused of being a ''political player'' in marginalising humanitarian workers and blocking aid to the rebel-held areas. The signatories have called for a transparent investigation into the "political impact that the Syrian government has on humanitarian actors". The UN secretary-general's spokesman, however, said that the world body's operations in Syria were transparent. "Everything is listed. We always welcome any scrutiny to our humanitarian work in Syria. Our focus is and will continue to be to deliver as much aid as possible to the Syrian people," he said. (WION)

Syria's aid groups withdraw cooperation from UN, say efforts 'influenced' by Assad government: Reports

syria-aid-groups

Syria Aid Groups, News on Syria Aid Groups, stories on Syria Aid Groups, articles on Syria Aid Groups, Syria Aid Groups stories at Wion, Syria Aid Groups news, Syria Aid Groups latest news

syria aid-groups

UNSC fails to reach aid deal for nearly 4 million people in Syria as mandate expires

India gifts 2,000 tonnes of rice to Syria as 'humanitarian assistance'

UN restarts cross-border aid to Syria but shuts access point

The international community has failed Syria

Syria's aid groups withdraw cooperation from UN, say efforts 'influenced' by Assad government: Reports