Language:

See all Disinfo Cases - Detail

Disinfo: Sanctions on Syria are illegal

Summary

Sanctions against Syria – whether from European countries or the United States – are illegal.

Disproof

In 2005, by UNSC Resolution 1636, the UN Security Council imposed travel bans and asset freezes on people suspected of being involved in the 14 February 2005 terrorist bombing in Beirut, Lebanon, in which Syria was implicated by a UN report.

The EU implemented those measures by adopting Council Common Position 2005/888/CFSP and Council Regulation (EC) No 305/2006.

More sanctions were imposed in response to the Syrian government’s support of international terrorism and violations against democratic and human rights in the country after the war began in 2011, and have been strengthened several times due to escalating violence in the region.

On 27 May 2013, the Council of the EU adopted conclusions in which it condemned the violence and the continued widespread and systematic gross violations of human rights in Syria, the massacres committed by the Syrian armed forces and its militias, all instances of hostage-taking of peacekeepers, and the atrocities committed by the Syrian regime. It expressed concern for military operations conducted by the regime and its supporters, as well as the rise of religiously or ethnically motivated violence. In view of the seriousness of the situation, on 31 May 2013, the Council of the EU adopted restrictive measures against Syria in numerous fields.

The latest extension of the EU sanctions regime against Syria was adopted in May 2019 for one year. EU sanctions are targeted at the Syrian regime and its policies. The sanctions include an oil embargo, restrictions on certain investments, a freeze of the assets of the Syrian central bank held in the EU, export restrictions on equipment and technology that might be used for internal repression as well as on equipment and technology for the monitoring or interception of internet or telephone communications.

 

 

 

Go to search

publication/media

Sputnik Arabic (Archived)
elnashra.com (Archived)
alqraralaraby.com (Archived)
ar.farsnews.com (Archived)
almanar.com.lb (Archived)
  • Reported in: Issue 177
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 11/12/2019
  • Language/target audience: Arabic
  • Country: US, Syria
  • Keywords: European Union, Syrian War, Sanctions

Disclaimer

Cases in the EUvsDisinfo database focus on messages in the international information space that are identified as providing a partial, distorted, or false depiction of reality and spread key pro-Kremlin messages. This does not necessarily imply, however, that a given outlet is linked to the Kremlin or editorially pro-Kremlin, or that it has intentionally sought to disinform. EUvsDisinfo publications do not represent an official EU position, as the information and opinions expressed are based on media reporting and analysis of the East Stratcom Task Force.

see more

The WADA expert group was geopolitically biased against Russia

If we have a closer look at the laboratory expert group, it consist of the following members; Terence Wan (Chair) Hong Kong, Arieh Cohen from Denmark, Bruno Garrido from Brazil, Catrin Goebel from Australia, Andrea Gotzmann from Germany, Tiia Kuuranne from Finland, Bruno le Bizec from France, Jenny Schulze from Sweden, Lorraine Turner from the UK and Peter van Eenoo from Belgium. The geopolitics are not favorable for Russia. The team manically consists of members of the pro-Western bloc, so it’s no wonder that this team voted all in favor of putting a four-year ban on Russia.

December 11, 2019
Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin narrative claiming that any criticism of Russia voiced by any non-Russian entity, be it an NGO, a government, or a media outlet, is a symptom of pathological Russophobia afflicting all such institutions.

In the course of the World Anti-Doping Code (WADA) investigation into the alleged state-sponsored doping operation, Russia has received the same treatment as any other country probed for doping violations. See here and here for comprehensive debunking by Polygraph.info.

South Ossetia was subjected to armed Georgian aggression

In August 2009, South Ossetia was subjected to armed Georgian aggression, which forced Russia to intervene and expel the Georgian army and to deploy forces on the border between the two sides to keep the peace.

December 11, 2019
Disproof

A recurring pro-Kremlin narrative trying to deny any role for Russia in the Russo-Georgian 2008 war, and presenting it instead as a conflict between South Ossetia and Georgia. South Ossetia and Abkhazia did not claim independence from Georgia but were occupied by Russia.

Currently, Russia occupies 20% of Georgia's territory, about 11 years after the Russo-Georgian War, and continues to breach its international obligations by consolidating its control in Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

NATO represents a threat to Russian security

NATO was formed to confront the Soviet Union. There is now neither the Soviet Union nor the Warsaw Treaty, that is, the military alliance established in response to the creation of NATO. However, NATO is still present and even expanding. At the moment of its formation, the Alliance included 12 countries, but the number of members now is 29, while the total military spending of the alliance exceeds 70% of global military spending. Today we must start from the fact that NATO expansion and infrastructure development near the Russian border represent one of the potential threats to our country’s security.

 

December 11, 2019
Disproof

A recurring pro-Kremlin narrative on Western attempts to encircle Russia and portraying military exercises as security threats.

The claim that NATO is encircling Russia is one of the myths about NATO. Russia's land border is just over 20,000 kilometres long. Of that, less than one-sixteenth (1,215 kilometres), is shared with NATO members. Russia has land borders with 14 countries. Only five of them are NATO members. Outside NATO territory, the Alliance only has a military presence in two places: Kosovo and Afghanistan.