logo
Britain's influence spreads through new Syria

Britain's influence spreads through new Syria

The National19-02-2025

The UK is wielding considerable influence in post-Assad Syria, through a combination of political connections, charity operations and a well-networked returning diaspora, The National can reveal. Britain's relations with the Syrian administration are understood to be good despite no ministerial visit. British-Syrians in Damascus hope it will lead to the lifting of sanctions to allow rebuilding and investment to begin after 14 years of war. Sources have disclosed to The National that the UK's National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell recently held a low-key meeting with the new administration, boosting suggestions that he will play a leading role in relations. Unlike ministers from Germany and France, the UK's Foreign Secretary David Lammy has yet to visit Damascus since the toppling of dictator Bashar Al Assad. France also hosted an international conference on Syria in December. There has been disappointment from the British-Syrian community about the UK's "low profile" on the issue. But the UK's long-standing support for the opposition in Syria, and envoy Ann Snow's recent engagement with the new administration, has placed UK relations on par with Germany and France, a former diplomat for the traditional Syrian opposition told The National. "The UK supported change since 2011 and they supported the opposition in many ways. The relationship and contact is there, and there is mutual understanding,' said Walid Saffour, who was exiled to the UK more than 40 years ago and represented the Syrian National Coalition in the UK in 2012, but is not involved in the new Syrian administration. Meanwhile, a new generation of British-Syrians are advising the new administration, although this is not connected to any UK government initiative. Syrians from civil society, political and legal support groups established by diaspora communities in the past 14 years are helping to shape the course of policy. Their expertise covers law, governance and preservation of civil freedom. The sharp increase in the number of well-attended conferences and workshops taking place in Syria since December indicates that those inside the country are hungry for political participation, paths to justice for victims of past crimes, and knowledge about how their country can be reshaped after more than five decades of one-family rule. Some Syrians who have returned are directly participating in the government. Among them is Razan Saffour, Mr Saffour's daughter, who became a prominent voice of the opposition during the civil war. She travelled with Syria's interim leader Ahmad Al Shara during his first official state visit to Saudi Arabia and sat in on the meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. She also accompanied Foreign Affairs Minister Asaad Al Shibani to the Munich Security Conference last week. Ms Saffour was born and raised in London, where she studied at the School of Oriental and African Studies. She travelled to Damascus for the first time in January with her father, and his partially destroyed childhood home in Homs was one of their first stops. Oxford-educated barrister Ibrahim Al Olabi was appointed as an adviser for human rights to the new administration. Mr Al Olabi practises at law firm Guernica 37 and is the founder of the UK-based NGO Syrian Legal Development Programme. He is widely regarded as being concerned with achieving justice for Syrians, having worked for years advising European governments and police forces on crimes related to Syria. He was part of the legal team advising The Netherlands on actions to bring the former Syrian regime to account for crimes involving torture. Mr Powell, who served as chief of staff during Tony Blair's premiership, was appointed to the role of National Security Adviser by the new Labour government in November, just weeks before the toppling of Mr Al Assad. His knowledge of Syria pre-dates the civil war. His brother, Lord Charles Powell, is a trustee of the Said Foundation, set up by British-Syrian businessman and philanthropist Wafic Said. Mr Said met Mr Al Shara in mid-January at the presidential palace in Damascus. This personal connection and the work done by the Said Foundation has given Mr Powell a long-standing and extensive knowledge of the country and the issues it faces, according to those who know him. Two sources confirmed a recent meeting between Mr Powell and Syria's new administration and it is thought he had established back-channel contact with Hayat Tahrir Al Sham before it took power via Inter Mediate, the negotiation and diplomacy charity he co-founded with Martin Griffiths, the founder and former director of the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue in Geneva. In 2021 it was claimed that Mr Powell had even met Mr Al Shara, although that was denied by the Syrian group. Mr Powell – who was the chief negotiator in Northern Ireland peace talks that led to the Good Friday agreement – is an advocate of engagement with terrorist groups and has said that the lessons from the Troubles can be applied to other conflicts. Britain's Foreign Office has for several years used paid contractors to help displaced Syrians return home, address community tension between Arabs and Kurds and report back to London on the situation in north-east Syria. Aims of UK-funded projects also included challenging Russian narratives and 'amplifying truth and the views of moderate Syrians', according to government documents. Taking the appropriate tone with the new regime will be key, according to former British Army officer Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, who has written extensively on Syria and has been in the country this month. He acknowledged the new government in Damascus 'does not need us to tell them what to do', but instead requires 'advice and resources' to ensure they can achieve their plans. Writing in The National, Mr de Bretton-Gordon said: 'It was ostensibly the British Syrian diaspora from the Syrian British Medical Society (SBMS) and Union of Syrian Medical Charities (UOSSM) who kept the medical facilities in Idlib running, giving the residents some hope and the will to carry on.' He visited the new Health Ministry and said it would like to replicate what SBMS did across the whole of Syria. 'Also, in the same vein they have asked the White Helmets, the civil emergency teams … to run the emergency services now country-wide,' he said. 'The revolution which toppled the old guard in Damascus grew out of north west Syria, and the interim President … appears to be a viable leader. The Syrians I know, some very close to the new team, tell me they are the real deal. 'Britain is uniquely placed through the British-Syrian diaspora to make a real difference, and opening the British Embassy in Damascus cannot happen soon enough.' British-Syrians hope developments will lead swiftly to a lifting of sanctions. Ghaith Armanazi, a British-Syrian diplomat and former ambassador to the Arab League in London, said members of the community had met with City firms keen on investing in Syria. 'An idea is being developed at the moment with members of the Syrian community promoting the idea of an international conference that would look into bringing investment into Syria,' Mr Armanazi told The National. "All areas of Syria need help: education, finance, energy and tourism. These areas are ripe for development and recovery from all these years of conflict." He also suggested that the UK could open offshoots of its schools and universities in Syria. 'One of the messages the new administration is projecting is how open they are and different from the socialist model of the [Assad regime],' Mr Armanazi said. The UK will debate easing restrictions applying to energy, transport and finance sectors, Foreign Office Minister Stephen Doughty said last week. But more radical measures were needed, said Mr Saffour. 'In the long term we have to lift sanctions altogether otherwise the situation in Syria will stay as it is. Refugees will not be able to go back. It is a country without services,' he said. The diaspora's input may also ensure that the desires and demands of a broad range of Syrian views are represented in building new institutions, policy planning, and the writing of a new constitution, potentially tempering the positions of more hardline, conservative officials who have joined Ahmad Al Shara's new administration in Damascus from HTS's former Syrian Salvation Government in Idlib. At the end of last month, 48 Syrian civil society organisations who had worked in opposition-held areas of the country and abroad held a meeting attended by Judge Khitam Haddad, caretaker deputy minister of Justice for Legal Affairs and Studies, at Damascus's Cham Palace hotel. The meeting proposed specific and urgent recommendations to the new authorities on initiating legal accountability and transitional justice processes, which, the groups said, were 'essential to prevent the country descending into civil conflict".

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

EU, Britain reach post-Brexit deal on Gibraltar Border
EU, Britain reach post-Brexit deal on Gibraltar Border

Al Etihad

time31 minutes ago

  • Al Etihad

EU, Britain reach post-Brexit deal on Gibraltar Border

12 June 2025 00:14 BRUSSELS (WAM)The European Union (EU) and Britain have agreed on the status of the overseas territory of Gibraltar, facilitating border crossings and resolving years of political territory has had its border arrangements with Spain as a significant point of contention since the United Kingdom's decision to withdraw from the EU in Wednesday's agreement, arrivals at Gibraltar Airport will present their passports to both Gibraltarian and Spanish border British Foreign Office stated that this system mirrors the model used by French police at London's St. Pancras station, the terminus for the Eurostar service connecting Britain with mainland Europe. "We have reached an agreement which protects British sovereignty, supports Gibraltar's economy and allows businesses to plan for the long-term once again," British Foreign Minister David Lammy said.

Could David Cameron be prosecuted for threatening the ICC?
Could David Cameron be prosecuted for threatening the ICC?

Middle East Eye

time3 hours ago

  • Middle East Eye

Could David Cameron be prosecuted for threatening the ICC?

David Cameron, the former British foreign secretary, may be liable for prosecution under international law and within the UK for his attempts to obstruct the work of the International Criminal Court (ICC), experts have said. Middle East Eye revealed on Monday that Cameron privately threatened Karim Khan, the British chief prosecutor at the ICC, in April 2024 to defund and withdraw from the ICC if it issued arrest warrants for Israeli leaders. "A threat against the ICC, direct or indirect, is an obstruction of justice," Francesca Albanese, the UN's special rapporteur on Palestine, told MEE's live show on Tuesday. "It's incredibly serious that someone in a position of power might have had the audacity to do that." And Professor Sergey Vasiliev of the Open University of the Netherlands reacted: "If the reports are confirmed, David Cameron did cross the legal line when he threatened the Prosector with all kinds of consequences for applying for the warrants. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters "This is a serious matter that shows Cameron's utter lack of respect for the ICC's judicial and prosecutorial independence." What did David Cameron do? Cameron, then foreign secretary in Rishi Sunak's Conservative government, made the threat on 23 April 2024 during a heated phone call with Khan. Cameron told Khan that the UK would "defund the court and withdraw from the Rome Statute" if the ICC issued warrants for Israeli leaders. At the time, Khan and his team of lawyers were preparing arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his then-defence minister, Yoav Gallant, as well as for Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Ismail Haniyeh and Mohammed Deif. Khan's office applied for warrants on 20 May, less than a month after the phone call. 'Per the reported dialogue, David Cameron clearly seeks to pressure the ICC Prosecutor's decision regarding whether to pursue warrants for Israeli officials' - Professor Tom Dannenbaum Six months later, on 21 November, the warrants were approved by a panel of judges, officially charging Netanyahu and Gallant with war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Gaza since October 2023. MEE revealed details of the call based on information from several sources, including former staff in Khan's office familiar with the conversation and who have seen the minutes of the meeting. Cameron, a former British prime minister who was appointed foreign secretary by Sunak in November 2023, told Khan that applying for warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant would be "like dropping a hydrogen bomb". He said Khan was "on the brink of making a huge mistake" and that "the world is not ready for this". The report has drawn condemnation from British MPs who called for an investigation into Cameron's actions. Cameron has not responded to multiple requests for comment. Approached by MEE for a response to the exchange with Cameron, Khan said on Monday: "I have no comment to make at this time." What's the background to David Cameron's demands? The Conservative government was accused last year of being behind the delay in the ICC's issuance of arrest warrants against Israeli and Hamas officials, after filing a request with the pre-trial chamber to challenge the court's jurisdiction on Israeli nationals. The request prompted dozens of submissions from other states, but was later dropped by the Labour government, which came to power in July 2024. The revelations about Cameron came after the administration of US President Donald Trump said last week that it would sanction four ICC judges for investigations into the US and its ally Israel. In February, Khan was the first ICC official to be the target of US sanctions, carried out under an executive order issued shortly after Trump took office. The revelations also follow Khan's decision to take a leave of absence pending a UN-led investigation into alleged sexual misconduct, an accusation denied by his lawyers. What are the legal risks for Cameron? The ICC, established by the Rome Statute in 2002, is the only permanent international court that prosecutes individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. It has 125 signatories, including the UK and all EU countries, though Hungary has officially begun the withdrawal process. Leading international law experts have told Middle East Eye that Cameron's behaviour is an attack on judicial independence, and is prohibited under the Rome Statute and British law as an obstruction of justice. Professor Tom Dannenbaum of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy said that, in general, the UK is entitled to withdraw from the ICC, and, upon exit, would then cease its financial contribution. Exclusive: David Cameron threatened to withdraw UK from ICC over Israel war crimes probe Read More » Additionally, as a state party to the Rome Statute, the UK can advocate budget cuts within the Assembly of States Parties, the court's governing body, without having to pull out. But, he said, the issue here arises before any such withdrawal or defunding. "The problem here is David Cameron's reported threat to condition possible UK action or inaction in those respects on the decisions of the ICC Prosecutor regarding whom to investigate and prosecute," said Dannenbaum. "That threat is deeply concerning. The rule of law depends on prosecutors' insulation from political pressure in their identification of individuals for investigation and prosecution,. That is true at the ICC just as it is in domestic systems of criminal justice." Under what law could Cameron be charged? The four experts MEE spoke to said the ICC could charge Cameron, given the nature of the phone call with Khan, based on Article 70 of the Rome Statute, which prohibits offences against the administration of justice. These include "impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties; and retaliating against an official of the Court on account of duties performed by that or another official." Dannenbaum argued that Cameron's threat to withdraw the UK from the ICC and defund the court may amount to "corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of … persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties". Although this particular provision has never been litigated before the ICC, Dannenbaum said, the relevant offence of "corruptly influencing a witness" has. "That case law indicates that 'corruptly influencing' includes 'pressuring' the protected person in a way 'capable of influencing the nature' of their contribution and thereby 'compromising' it, with the term 'corruptly' signifying the aim of 'contaminating' the person's contribution," Dannenbaum explained. "Per the reported dialogue, David Cameron clearly seeks to pressure the ICC Prosecutor's decision regarding whether to pursue warrants for Israeli officials. It is possible that this pressure would be understood to have been designed to 'contaminate' the Prosecutor's decision, although that concept may be less clear here than it is in the context of witness testimony. "Considerations regarding state withdrawal and budget cuts are plausibly 'capable' of influencing such decisions, albeit that the Prosecutor appears to have resisted the pressure in the case at hand." Given the above points, Dannenbaum concluded that Cameron's conduct may be consistent with the prohibited offences against the administration of justice listed under Article 70. The court has jurisdiction over Article 70 offences, irrespective of the nationality or location of the accused. What penalty could Cameron face? If successfully charged, Cameron is likely to face an arrest warrant by the court and, if convicted, could be sentenced to up to five years of imprisonment in The Hague or a fine. However, given the vulnerability of the ICC, with Trump's sanctions and Khan's leave of absence, Vasiliev suggested that Cameron's prosecution in The Hague would be "rather unlikely. "The ICC could in principle open the investigation into these allegations under Article 70 or request the UK to do so (or the UK could do so on its own). Whether this will in fact be done, is a big question." Could Cameron be prosecuted in the UK? Toby Cadman, a British barrister and international law expert, said that if the allegations are substantiated by clear evidence, then Cameron could be investigated at an international and domestic level "provided there's political will". Francesca Albanese: David Cameron could be criminally liable for threatening ICC Read More » In the UK, an investigation could be opened for the common law offence of obstruction or perverting the course of justice or the common law offence of misconduct in public offence, he said. An investigation in the UK can be carried out in accordance with Section 54 of the ICC Act 2001, which is based on Article 70 of the Rome Statute. The attorney general's consent would be required for any prosecution to go ahead. "It is quite clear that the allegation is serious and if the UK is committed to maintaining a system based on the rule of law with full respect for the state's international treaty obligations it should open an investigation and if the evidence supports it, bring charges," Cadman told MEE. Could Cameron be prosecuted outside the UK? But Vasiliev suggested that Cameron's prosecution before the courts of other states would be precluded by his functional immunity - the protection granted to senior officials if an alleged offence was committed during their official duties. "Cameron has a functional immunity for that act as he uttered those threats in the exercise of his official functions, and there is no exception to such immunity applicable in foreign courts for offences against the integrity of judicial system," Vasiliev argued. "The prosecution authorities of other states parties therefore will not eagerly pursue such a case."

Francesca Albanese: David Cameron could be criminally liable for threatening ICC
Francesca Albanese: David Cameron could be criminally liable for threatening ICC

Middle East Eye

time8 hours ago

  • Middle East Eye

Francesca Albanese: David Cameron could be criminally liable for threatening ICC

On Monday, Middle East Eye revealed that former British Foreign Secretary David Cameron privately threatened to defund and withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC) if it issued arrest warrants for Israeli leaders. Cameron, then foreign secretary in Rishi Sunak's Conservative government, made the threat in April 2024 in a heated phone call with Karim Khan, the British chief prosecutor of the court. Since then, 10 British MPs have commented on the revelation. Some have called for a parliamentary investigation, while others have urged the Labour government to distance itself from Cameron's actions. On Tuesday afternoon, Humza Yousaf, who was Scotland's first minister when Cameron made the threat, said that it was "shameful that Lord Cameron allegedly threatened the ICC for having the audacity to do their job". Now, legal experts say there is a serious risk that Cameron, who sits as a Tory peer in the House of Lords, could be criminally liable. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Francesca Albanese, the prominent legal scholar and UN special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories, weighed in on Tuesday evening in an exclusive interview with MEE. Albanese, an expert in international law, was careful to note that she is not conversant with all the details of the Cameron story. She caveated her comments by saying, "if this occurred and there is evidence". The UN rapporteur explained that if Cameron acted as MEE's sources said he did, the former foreign secretary and prime minister has committed a "criminal offence under the Rome Statute". The Rome Statute criminalises those who attempt to prevent war crimes from being prosecuted. Article 70 awards the ICC jurisdiction over those responsible for "impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties". According to MEE's sources in The Hague, Cameron told the ICC prosecutor that if the ICC issued warrants for Israeli leaders, the UK would "defund the court and withdraw from the Rome Statute". Cameron did not respond to multiple requests for comment. 'The court can take action' "A threat against the ICC, direct or indirect, is an obstruction of justice," Albanese told MEE. "It's an action aimed at preventing the court from carrying out an investigation. So it's a violation of the principle of judicial independence. "It's incredibly serious that someone in a position of power might have had the audacity to do that." Exclusive: David Cameron threatened to withdraw UK from ICC over Israel war crimes probe Read More » Albanese pointed out that "any form of intimidation, retaliation, or interference with court officials is an offence in itself". Significantly, she said that the "court can take action against a person who misbehaves or obstructs proceedings." Cameron could also face potential repercussions under British domestic law. Section 54 (1) of the International Criminal Court Act 2001 notes: "A person intentionally committing any of the acts mentioned in article 70.1 (offences against the administration of justice in relation to the ICC) may be dealt with as for the corresponding domestic offence committed in relation to a superior court in England and Wales." Albanese said that if Cameron was still in politics, "there would be condemnations from other states, probably diplomatic or retaliatory measures. "Now, I don't know the UK system enough, but in normal systems, had he still been in office, there could have been an investigation, legal challenges by civil society - surely something that will happen. "And again, I don't know. One needs to see the UK legislation, but surely there could be something that is along these general principles." 'Cameron must be investigated' In the call on 23 April, Cameron told Khan that applying for warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant would be "like dropping a hydrogen bomb". He said Khan was "on the brink of making a huge mistake" and that "the world is not ready for this". According to MEE's sources, the foreign secretary spoke aggressively and repeatedly shouted over Khan, who had to ask to be able to complete his points. 'Any form of intimidation, retaliation, or interference with court officials is an offence' - Francesca Albanese Labour MP Naz Shah called the news "shocking" and said she would be "raising this matter directly" with the Foreign Office. Labour MP Zarah Sultana said on social media platform X that "David Cameron - and every UK minister complicit in arming and enabling Israel's genocide in Gaza - must be investigated for war crimes." Independent MP Ayoub Khan told MEE: "I urge the relevant parliamentary standards committees to investigate this matter with the seriousness it deserves." Emily Thornberry, a senior Labour MP and the chair of parliament's foreign affairs select committee, said: "I've always believed that when making difficult decisions, international law must always be our guide." Approached by MEE for a response to the exchange with Cameron, Khan said on Monday: "I have no comment to make at this time."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store