GHANA’S EXPORTS TO DECLINE, If Genetically Modified Foods Are Introduced

Gideon Quarcoo CEO of GEPA

The Ghana Export Promotion Authority (GEPA) says the introduction of Genetically Modified crops into the country could hurt its efforts to boost non-traditional exports into the European Union and the other developed countries.

“In view of the overwhelming evidence of the EU and Western World’s attitude to GM foods it would be detrimental for Ghana to introduce the organism into its crops as all products stand the risk of being rejected and thereby reducing the percentage of exports to the region,” GEPA said in a statement signed by Mr Gideon Quarcoo, Acting Chief Executive Officer.

In 2012, 44.55% of Ghana’s non-traditional products was exported to the European Union and other Developed countries and GEPA hopes to increase this percentage in order to achieve the US$5 billion target set by the government for 2017.

The statement said the potential economic harm would be incalculable if Ghana were to be labelled a GM haven exporting GM crops to the world.

Serving the nation through the development and promotion of Ghana’s non-traditional exports (NTEs), that is Agriculture, Processed and Semi-Processed, Handicrafts and Services, the Ghana Export Promotion Authority (GEPA) has worked assiduously to increase NTE earnings from US$1.164 billion in 2007 to US$2.364 billion in 2012.

Lately, there has been talk about adopting genetically modified organisms into crops produced in Ghana. GM foods or GMOs (genetically-modified organisms) is most commonly used to refer to crop plants created for human or animal consumption using the latest molecular biology techniques.

It is believed that adapting genetically modified organisms into various crops would increase pest resistance and decrease crop losses to ensure adequate food supply to the ever growing world population.

However, this assertion has been disputed by environmentalists, public interest groups, professional associations and religious organizations that have raised concerns about GM foods and criticized the proponents for pursuing profit without concern for potential hazards.

The statement said although governments have not been fully responsive to the mounting evidence of harm from GMOs, consumers is reacting in greater numbers.

The impact can be significant and world-changing. In Europe, after the media publicized significant health risks of GMOs in early 1999, a tipping point of consumer rejection forced the food companies to commit to remove GM ingredients from that continent.

Now consumer rejection in the U.S. appears to be setting the stage for the removal of GMOs in that country as well. Consumer concern over GMO health risks has driven unprecedented demand for non-GMO products.

In 2012 sales of non-GMO labeled products in the United States increased more than any other health and wellness category, according to 2012 Nielsen Health and Wellness Claims Performance Report.

An executive at the national food store chain Whole Foods said that when a product becomes verified as non-GMO, sales increase by 15-30 percent. GNA

 

Editorial

Even The British

On the front page of this issue is a story about how some British citizen are upset about the deployment of about 10,000 US soldiers on military bases in the UK.

Even the British want their freedom and are beginning to reject US military bases as impositions.

The point here is that foreign military bases are an affront to any and every people’s dignity.

Over the years, The Insight has been consistent in its opposition to the establishment of US military bases in Africa.

We express our full solidarity with all the progressive forces in the United Kingdom opposed to the presence of US troops on their soil.

 The Insight calls on all Africa leaders to emulate the shining example of these gallant citizens of the United Kingdom and oppose the establishment of foreign military bases on the continent.

Cuban President Raul Castro

We have never ceded to aggression, coercion or threats
Speech by Army General Raúl Castro Ruz, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Cuba and President of the Councils of State and Ministers, in commemoration of the 55 anniversary of the triumph of the Revolution, Santiago de Cuba’s Manuel Carlos Cespedes Park, January 1, 2014, Year 56 of the Revolution (Council of State transcription)

Men and women of Santiago de Cuba;
The people of Cuba’s eastern provinces;
Combatants of the Rebel Army, the underground struggle and all combat actions in defense of the Revolution over these 55 years; 

Compatriots:

Not even the greatest dreamer among those of us who accompanied Fidel in an event like this one, January 1, 1959, could imagine that we would be here today.

Nothing has been easy along this long and perilous journey. This has been possible in the first place, thanks to the immense capacity for resistance and struggle of several generations of the noble and heroic Cuban people, true protagonist of this, their Revolution, which is the triumph of the same ideals defended by the mambises in 1868, who, led by Cespedes, began the war of independence from Spanish rule; by Maceo and Gomez, with whom José Martí in 1895 reinitiated the heroic struggle, truncated by the 1898 U.S. intervention which prevented the Liberation Army’s entry into Santiago de Cuba.

It is also the struggle undertaken against the bourgeois, neocolonial republic by Baliño, Mella, Rubén Martínez Villena, Guiteras and Jesus Menendez, just to mention a few.

This was the aspiration which motivated the Centennial Generation, under the command of Fidel, to storm the Moncada garrison in this city, and the Carlos Manuel de Céspedes in Bayamo, to overcome failure, withstand the rigors of prison, embark on the Granma yacht expedition, endure the Alegria de Pio setback and continue to the Sierra Maestra to begin the guerrilla struggle of the nascent Rebel Army, whose commander in chief, with his personal example of courage under fire, tenacity and unwavering faith in victory, his commitment to unity and undisputed leadership, was able to unify all revolutionary forces and lead them to the definitive victory .

Exactly 60 years after the U.S. intervention undermined the insurgents’ victory, this time, the mambises were indeed able to enter the city of Santiago de Cuba.

Today we render well-deserved tribute to those who gave their lives in the mountains, fields and cities, combatants of the Rebel Army and underground fighters, those who fell after the victory in many other honorable missions, who devoted their youth and energy to building socialism, guided by Marti’s assertion that all the world’s glory fits within a kernel of corn and that there is no greater satisfaction or reward than fulfilling one's duty.

We cannot fail to mention the decisive contribution of Cuban women during the revolutionary process, as worthy successors to the example of Mariana Grajales, mother of the Maceo’s, both in the guerrilla and particularly in the underground struggle, subjected to brutal persecution by the dictatorship’s minions. On the occasion of this 55th anniversary, Cuban television has been broadcasting the historic Clandestinas series as a fitting tribute to those brave young women who risked their lives many times. Some of them are present here, to our joy. (Applause).

In this very location, January 1, 1959 amid the popular jubilation which reigned throughout the entire country, Fidel presciently warned, I quote, "The Revolution begins now, the Revolution will not be an easy task, the Revolution will be a difficult undertaking and wrought with danger."

From very early on, countless destabilization plans were launched, beginning with the refuge provided by the United States to criminals and torturers of the Batista regime and all sorts of embezzlers who appropriated the nation’s treasury.

The triumphant Revolution was forced to face the promotion and organization of state terrorism via sabotage and armed banditry, which on two occasions was operating in the six provinces which the country had at the time; the exclusion of Cuba from the OAS and the breakdown of diplomatic relations with all Latin American countries, with the honorable exception of Mexico; the Bay of Pigs invasion; the economic, commercial and financial blockade; the corporate media campaign to defame the revolutionary process and its leaders, especially Fidel, who was the target of more than 600 assassination attempts; the October Missile Crisis in 1962; hijackings and attacks on ships and civil aircraft; the killing of teachers and literacy workers, campesinos, students and diplomats which has thus far left a total of 3,478 dead and 2,099 disabled.

It has been 55 years of constant struggle against the designs of 11 U.S. administrations, which with more or less hostility, have never relinquished the goal of changing the economic and social system created by the Revolution, eliminating its example and restoring imperial domination over our homeland.

The Cuban Revolution put an end to several myths, among them the one which asserted that it was not possible to build socialism on a small island 90 miles from the United States. A Revolution which was not the result of an international confrontation or which had massive support from abroad. A Revolution which did not limit itself to the replacement of one government for another, but in less than 24 hours dissolved the repressive machinery of the dictatorial regime and laid the foundations of a new society.

A Revolution which built an army as the people in uniform, and to defend itself, developed its own military doctrine.

A Revolution which is celebrating 55 years of work by and for the people who it made the owners of the land and industry - first becoming literate and training teachers and professors; building general and special schools for all children, universities, art and sports schools, constructing clinics and hospitals; preparing doctors for Cuba and the world. A Revolution that has allowed us to achieve levels of education and health care which are today recognized internationally.

A Revolution which laid the foundation for democratizing the creation and diffusion of, and access to culture.

In short, a Revolution that has become a reality and will continue to pursue the desires of José Marti codified in the Constitution which states, I quote, "I want the first law of our Republic to be the commitment of Cubans to full human dignity."

In discussing these issues, I recall the words of Fidel’s July 26, 2003, during the event commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Moncada, when he said, "To educate people in truth, with words and with irrefutable facts, has been perhaps the fundamental factor in the great feat which has been accomplished."

How else is it possible to describe the colossal capacity for resilience and self-confidence offered to the world by our people, who were able to stoically endure the grueling special period to which we were subjected as a consequence of the disappearance of the Soviet Union and the socialist camp, amid the wave of uncertainty and demoralization that these dramatic events generated in good part of humanity’s progressive forces.

The image of Cuba - famous in the Americas before the Revolution as a paradise for gambling and prostitution, a mafia refuge, and the preferred destination for their tainted investments, facilitated by the widespread administrative corruption of the dictatorship - was transformed by the revolutionary process into a symbol of dignity, independence, humanism and intransigence in defense of principles.

Following the maxim of Martí, the Cuban Revolution has never asked on what side a more comfortable life is to be found, but on which side duty lies. We have been coherent and consistent with Marti’s ethics. Over 55 years, we have received the noble and generous solidarity of many sister peoples, in the first place from the Soviet Union while it existed and especially in the first difficult years, while we offered our solidarity and support in different regions of the planet, through both glorious internationalist combat missions and programs of medical, educational, and sports cooperation, among others, making a reality of the legacy that " Homeland is Humanity."

We have never ceded to aggression, coercion or threats. The Revolution’s foreign policy has always been a powerful weapon in the defense of national independence, self-determination and sovereignty, in favor of world peace, development, social justice and solidarity with the peoples of the Third World.

The planet we inhabit has changed a great deal since January 1, 1959. This small island, which U.S. governments have sought to isolate within the regional environment with brutal pressure, holds the Pro Tempore Presidency of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) and is preparing to host its summit meeting in Havana later this month, inspired by the ideal of forging new unity within diversity in Our America.

We have not forgotten the unique historical coincidence that on a day like today, the 1^st of January, 210 years ago, the first revolution in the Latin American and Caribbean region triumphed. It was also the first and only victory of a revolutionary movement led by Black slaves who fought against this shameful system, and at the same time, for national independence.

The effects of those dramatic events had repercussions in Cuba; Haitian blood, in fact, runs through the veins of more than a few Cuban easterners.

Both nations have had to pay a high price for daring to confront the reigning empires.

In addressing this subject I wish to reiterate to the sister people of Haiti, and its government, that Cubans will never abandon you and that you can always count on our modest collaboration. (Applause)

Compañeras and compañeros:

I will take advantage of this opportunity to devote a few words to the progress of two important projects of interest in Santiago de Cuba.

At a cost of more than $200 million, reconstruction has been completed on the aqueduct in the country’s second largest city, where a quarter million people received water every 7 to 9 days. Another 76,500 had a cycle of over 15 days and more than 16,000 were not even reached by the aqueduct, which led to the need for some 200 trips daily by tank trucks to supply them, and a high level of fuel consumption.

For almost all of you today, the situation described belongs to the past, since 29 of the existing 32 hydrometric areas are supplied daily, with three supplied on alternate days and work is underway on calibration of the distribution system to achieve the goal established. Additionally rehabilitated were three water treatment plants and 22 pump stations.

As part of this program, the construction of sewer and storm drainage, specifically in the San Pedrito neighborhood, was also initiated and will be extended to the rest of the city in 2014.
The [city’s] water and waste water company has been provided the equipment required to ensure the sustainability of their services. It is now up to you to make rational use of the water.

As is known, this city suffered the fury of Hurricane Sandy’s winds on the morning of October 25, 2012, which also affected, although to a lesser extent, the provinces of Holguín and Guantánamo. The loss of 11 lives and the devastating images of destroyed homes, infrastructure and vital installations which we endured in the first days after the event, evidenced, along with national and international solidarity, first from our Venezuelan brothers and sisters (applause), the ability of Santiago’s people to overcome any obstacle.

After a year and two months of intense work, a solution has been found to 50% of the 171,380 damaged dwellings, and additionally 97% of public health care facilities affected have been re-established, 88% of educational facilities, plus 82% of sports and cultural installations, as well as 100% in the food processing industry.

Despite the fact that the provincial goal for new homes was not met, the 331 planned in the San Pedrito neighborhood, historically one of the most humble, were completed, and work continues in other areas of the city.

We in the central government will continue to systematically supervise this work until it is fully completed.

To achieve the building of an ever more beautiful, hygienic, orderly and disciplined city, fitting for its status as the Heroic City, the cradle of the Revolution, as I said on July 26, last year, when the 60th anniversary of the Moncada was commemorated, it is now up to authorities, in the first place, with the support of citizens, to strengthen respect, I repeat, reinforce respect, for the role to be played by Physical Planning, which will contribute to the strict enforcement of the city’s new Land Use Plan, which will be approved this year by the Provincial Assembly of People's Power.

I think that if we all do our duty, we will continue to ensure that "Santiago is still Santiago."(Shouts of "Santiago") Exactly. (Applause) If we would like to help translate that, it means you can build, but not wherever it might occur to anyone. Or we will never have the city we described on July 26^th, today: beautiful, hygienic, orderly and disciplined. Do you agree? (Shouts of "Yes" and applause)

This is all I intended to say about the two programs.

Next I will discuss an issue, in regards to which we still have a long way to go. I am referring to the challenge imposed on us by the continuous campaign of political and ideological subversion, conceived in and directed by the centers of global power to re-colonize the minds of the people and deny their aspirations to construct build a better world.

In his brilliant definition of revolution formulated May 1, 2000, in Havana’s Plaza de la Revolución, Fidel expressed, among other ideas, the following:

"Revolution is challenging powerful dominant forces within and beyond the social and national environment."

"It is defending values which are believed at the cost of any sacrifice… It is the profound conviction that there is no force on earth capable of crushing the power of the truth or ideas."

In our case, as in many regions of the world, attempts to subtly introduce platforms of neoliberal thought and the restoration neocolonial capitalism, directed against the very essence of the socialist revolution based on a deliberate manipulation of history and the current situation of general crisis of the capitalist system, to the detriment of the values, identity and national culture, favoring individualism, selfishness and commercial interest over morality.

In short, they deceitfully strive to sell to youth the alleged advantages of rejecting social ideologies and consciousness, as if these precepts did not fully represent the interests of the ruling class in the capitalist world. With this, they attempt to create a rupture between the historical leadership of the Revolution and younger generations and promote uncertainty and pessimism about the future, all with the clear goal of dismantling socialism in Cuba from within.

In current circumstances, the challenge becomes greater but we are confident that with the participation of the forces available to the Revolution, we will be victorious in this decisive battle, meeting the social objectives approved by First National Conference of the Party two years ago, an arena in which insufficient progress has been made.

There is much more work to be done. For this we can count on the combativity and patriotic commitment of the great number of intellectuals, artists, revolutionary professors and teachers, as well as the strength of our social research centers , universities and a student body, whose potential is not, as of yet, fully utilized.

Efforts to disseminate ideas that deny the vitality of Marxist, Leninist and Martí’s concepts should be challenged with a creative theoretical conceptualization of the socialism possible under the existing conditions in Cuba, as the only alternative of equality and justice for all.

Younger generations of leaders who are assuming major responsibilities in the direction of the nation, in a gradual and orderly fashion, can never forget that this is the Socialist Revolution of the humble, by the humble and for the humble, (applause and cheers), the essential premise and effective antidote to avoid falling under the spell of the siren songs of the enemy, who will not renounce the goal of distancing them from our people, in order to undermine their unity with the Communist Party, the only legitimate heir to the legacy and authority of the Commandante en Jefe of the Cuban Revolution, Fidel Castro Ruz. (Applause and shouts of "Viva!")

In this context, it is worth recalling the continuing importance of constantly perfecting the principle of direct consultation with the population about decisions vital to the development of society, as was demonstrated during the process prior to the approval of the new Labor Code by our National Assembly, and as was done previously with the proposed Economic and Social Policy Guidelines, which, after a broad, democratic popular examination, were approved by the 6th Party Congress and later ratified by our Parliament, to which a progress report on implementation is made twice a year and a similar procedure is followed within the central leadership of the government and the Party .

This method will ensure that the program of the Revolution is updated every five years, so that it always reflects the true interests of the people in regards to fundamental issues of society, and any errors are corrected in a timely fashion. This way, the continuous improvement and development of our socialist democracy will be assured.

Closely linked to these concepts of strategic scope, truly strategic for the present and the future of the country, is the phrase spoken by Fidel here, almost at this same time, from this balcony exactly 55 years ago today, with which, given its timeless relevance, I wish to conclude my comments, I quote, "The Revolution has triumphed without any commitments to absolutely anyone, beyond the people, who are solely responsible for all of its victories." (Applause)

Fifty-five years later, in the very same place, we can repeat with pride, "The Revolution continues to be the same, without commitments to absolutely anyone, only to the people!"

Thank you very much.

(Shouts of: "¡Viva la Revolución, Vivan Fidel y Raúl!" and ovation)

Britons Fight For Independence From USA

It's almost never discussed in the political mainstream. But thousands of foreign troops have now been stationed in Britain for more than 70 years. There's been nothing like it since the Norman invasion. With the 15-month Dutch occupation of London in 1688-9 a distant competitor, there has been no precedent since 1066 for the presence of American forces in a string of military bases for the better part of a century.

They arrived in 1942 to fight Nazi Germany. But they didn't head home in 1945; instead, they stayed on for the 40-odd years of the cold war, supposedly to repel invasion from the Soviet Union. Nor did they leave when the cold war ended and the Soviet Union collapsed, but were invited to remain as the pivot of the anti-Soviet Nato alliance.

A generation later, there are still nearly 10,000 US military personnel stationed in Britain, based in dozens of secretive facilities. Most of them are in half a dozen major military bases – misleadingly named RAF this or that, but effectively under full American control: Lakenheath, Croughton, Mildenhall and Molesworth among others – along with the National Security Agency and missile defence bases such as Menwith Hill in Yorkshire.

British troops are now finally being pulled out of Germany. There is not the slightest suggestion, however, that US forces will be withdrawn from Britain in the forseeable future. But what are they doing here? Who are they supposed to be defending us from?

A clue as to what's at stake was given last week by Robert Gates, a former US defence secretary, when he warned that cuts in Britain's defence spending – still the fourth largest in the world – threatened its "full spectrum" military "partnership" with the US.

He's not the first American official to play on the neuroses of the British security elite, for whom the preservation of a lopsided "special relationship" with the US is the acme of their aspirations for the country. The London establishment's fear of US rejection reached fever pitch last year when parliament finally represented public opinion over military action and rejected what would have been a catastrophic attack on Syria.

Elite anxiety over risking American displeasure or neglect is matched by a growing fear that the British public will no longer tolerate the endless US wars it has dragged them into over the past 15 years. General Sir Nick Houghton, the chief of the defence staff, last month declared that the nation had become "sceptical about the ability to use force in a beneficial way", and must not lose its "courageous instinct". He was echoed by the Commons defence committee, which claimed that "one of the greatest strategic threats to defence" is the public's "lack of understanding of the utility of military force".

No wonder the government has been clamping down on protest rights at bases such as Menwith Hill, a key link in the US missile defence and drone programmes. And it's hardly a surprise that the British public – as in the US itself and other Nato states – has hardened against continued western warmaking, given its record of bloody failure.

Since the post-cold war world gave way to the war on terror, after all, Britain has joined the US in one war of aggression after another – in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya – with disastrous results. Military operations have been punctuated by campaigns of kidnapping, torture and murderous drone attacks. Nato has morphed from a self-declared defensive alliance into a latter-day colonial expeditionary force, under the cover of increasingly discredited humanitarian rhetoric.

Of course, Britain is very far from unique in hosting US bases. It is part of a global archipelago of American military garrisons, now present in a majority of the world's states: a modern-day empire by any other name. But along with France, Britain is the only US ally still able to "project force" globally and has long played the role of unsinkable aircraft carrier: a US forward base, from which military operations are routinely launched across the globe.

But whose interests are actually served by such a role? No doubt arms contractors are delighted, but it's hard to argue that it benefits the British people – let alone those on the receiving end of the US and British military. Politicians and securocrats claim it gives them influence over US policy, but they struggle to produce the evidence on the rare occasions they're asked to explain how. "The foreign policy elite still have a strong idea," as the Chatham House analyst James de Waal puts it, that intervention based on "values" is an "innate part of what the UK is all about". In fact, what successive governments have done is mortgaged Britain's security and independence to a foreign power – and placed its armed forces, territory and weaponry at the disposal of a system of global domination and privilege, now clearly past its peak.

As was made clear by ministers more than a decade ago, there are now no circumstances in which British governments envisage the use of military force, except in harness with the US. Even Britain's own colonial-era overseas bases, such as Diego Garcia, have long been handed over to the US military, while its inhabitants were expelled. Britain's fake patriots who bleat about the power of the European Commission are more than happy to subordinate the country's foreign policy to the Pentagon and allow its forces permanent bases on British soil.

From the American point of view, its network of intelligence and military bases in Britain may help keep the country tied to the US global network. There's no doubt that would be difficult to disentangle, and there is no shortage of pressure points to discourage even a modest disengagement. The idea of a British Rafael Correa – the Ecuadorean president who closed the US Manta airbase in 2007, saying he'd reconsider the situation if the Americans let Ecuador open a base in Miami – is still political science fiction.

But the withdrawal of British troops from Germany and this year's planned renewal of the US-British defence agreement offer a chance to have a real debate on the US military relationship – and demand some transparency and accountability in the process. There is no case for maintaining foreign military bases to defend the country against a non-existent enemy. They should be closed. Instead of a craven "partnership" with a still powerful, but declining empire, Britain could start to have an independent relationship with the rest of the world.

First published by The Guardian on Thursday, January 23, 2014

Syrian conversations: How little the west knows about Syria

Syrian President Bashar Al Assad

By Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey

As we tune in to a hypothetical conversation between the average member of the public reading or watching the average western media outlet, and someone who knows the truth about Syria, how many of the readers of this piece will identify with the former and ask why their newspapers have misinformed them all this time?

So, you say you know enough about Syria to form an informed opinion?

Yes, I think I have seen enough on television and read enough in the newspapers. I have seen and read enough to know that Syria is ruled by a bloodthirsty dictator who has used chemical weapons against his own people, who have taken up arms to get rid of him. That's what the entire conflict is about.

So, evidently your newspapers and TV channels have been wasting public funds if that is what they have taught you.

How do you mean?

I mean you could not be more wrong... you are so wrong in fact it is hard to know where to begin. For a start, President al-Assad is a doctor of medicine. Doctors don't go around gassing people. Secondly, you will find that the gassing events were in fact staged by the "opposition" and if you bothered to read the factsheets coming out of Syria you will see there is not a shred of evidence linking the Government to chemical weapons while there is evidence directly linking the "opposition" to incriminate the Government.

The Syrian Government forces have been protecting the Syrian population against a foreign-backed scourge, which is split into dozens of factions, some with links to al-Qaeda, many of them extremist Islamist factions which want to see Syria ruled by Sharia law.

Syria is one of the few countries in the region with a secular constitution. Extremist Islamist movements are not tolerated, al-Qaeda is not tolerated, terrorists are not tolerated. The Alawid orientation which President al-Assad follows is tolerant, women have full rights in Syria, they do not have to use the veil or the burqah, Sharia law is deemed unconstitutional.

Religious tolerance is synonymous with Syrian society, which accepted refugees from Iraq irrespective of religious orientation. Ten per cent of the population is Christian - communities targeted by the "opposition" terrorists, many nuns have been raped and decapitated, or worse. This why the population in general would vote for Bashar al-Assad tomorrow in a free and fair democratic election and this is why those who oppose him are not prepared even for that hypothesis to be on the negotiation table.

And why not? Because the Syrian state has one hundred percent ownership of the country's mineral resources, will not open them up to foreign control, because Syria has reserves of 2.5 billion barrels of oil, because Syria is one of the few countries that does not owe a cent to the International Monetary Fund.

Before Saudi Arabia and Qatar started fighting the proxy war of the FUKUS Axis (France-UK-US) by arming and training groups of criminals, rapists, torturers, arsonists, murderers, looters, thieves, cutthroats, child molesters and cannibals, Syria was a peaceful country without any internal problems.

Why have you suddenly gone quiet?

The good, the bad, and the ugly in Syria talks

Terrorists operating in syria

By Dr Ismail Salami

A five-minute audio message by al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri went viral on the internet in which he enjoins the rebels in Syria to end their infighting and focus their energies on battling against President Bashar al-Assad's forces.

A veritable testimony to the fact that the militants fighting against Bashar al-Assad are affiliated to the terrorist al-Qaeda and as a result, they are stripped of any cloak of legitimacy, it further reinforces the notion that there is more than meets the eye in Syria.

Interestingly, the warring factions decided to patch up their differences and sit down at the negotiating table once they heard their leader’s bezels of wisdom. 

The negotiations started on Wednesday in an ambience charged with vitriol and spite. While Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem was trying to clarify the real situation in Syria and give a “Syrian version of facts,” UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon interrupted him and tried to deny him the chance to continue with his speech. 

The western media say that he had exceeded his time and that he should not have clashed with the UN head but the fact is that they had gathered together to resolve a Syrian crisis which has been largely engineered by the West and the al-Qaeda elements. In other words, they were there to resolve a West-fomented crisis and the Syrian foreign minister was utterly entitled to finish his speech.

Here's the exchange:

Ban: Can you just wrap up please.

Moallem: I came here after 12 hours in the airplane. I have few more minutes to end my speech. This is Syria.

Ban: How much do you have left now?

Moallem: I think 5-10 minutes.

Ban: No, no. I will give you another opportunity to speak.

Moallem: No, I cannot divide my speech. I must continue ... I will do my best to be fast.
Ban: Can you just wrap up in one or two minutes?

Moallem: No, I can't promise you, I must finish my speech. ... You live in New York, I live in Syria. I have the right to give the Syrian version here in this forum. After three years of suffering, this is my right.

Ban: We have to have some constructive and harmonious dialogue, please refrain from inflammatory rhetoric.
Moallem: It is constructive, I promise you, let me finish.

Ban: Within 2-3 minutes please. I will give you another opportunity.

Moallem: You spoke for 25 minutes, at least I need to speak 30 minutes.

The talks do not seem to yield any fruits as there is a substantial gap between what the government of Bashar al-Assad demands and what the Syrian National Coalition (SNC) and its Western allies want. The opposition group insists that President Bashar al-Assad must relinquish power and that a transitional government be formed in Syria. 

On the other hand, Damascus says that Assad will leave office only if he is voted out of office. That is, free elections will be held in the country and people will determine their own fate. Damascus also says the coalition does not represent the Syrian opposition. 

As Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem told the audience in Montreux, Switzerland, “No one in the world has the right to confer or withdraw the legitimacy of a president, a constitution or a law, except for the Syrians themselves.”

However, the idea of Assad staying in power was tossed away when Syrian opposition leader Ahmad al-Jarba said the “rebels will never accept a negotiated settlement that keeps Assad in power", and he suggested that "further talks are pointless if the regime rejects the premise of a transition government.” 

In a threatening voice he said, “Time is like a sword.  And for the Syrian people, time is now blood.” The simile ‘time is like a sword’ is sort of awkward and absurd. But once we think of the crimes committed on a daily basis by the a-Qaeda elements in Syria, the simile becomes grotesquely impregnated. 

To make matters worse, the SNC sources said on Friday they will not hold direct talks with the Syrian delegation headed by Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem unless Damascus endorses the Geneva I communiqué, which was signed in 2012 and calls for a transitional government.

These are indeed strange times. A country is brazenly invaded and the invaders and those who support the invasion seek to determine the fate of the nation.

Crisis is crippling the country and a solution should be carved out to best serve the interests of the Syrian people. One reasonable solution was brought up by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani at the World Economic Forum in Davos when he called for a new election in Syria, saying Iran would respect the results.

"The best solution is to organize a free and fair election in Syria. And once the ballots are cast, we should all accept the outcome. Decision-making is for the Syrian people to do and they are the ones who should determine their own future, and in doing so, the first condition is that bloodshed be stopped and certain countries give up supporting terrorism,” the Iranian president added.

To put it succinctly, the only workable roadmap for Syria to exit crisis is to be engineered in evicting the al-Qaeda militants generously funded by Saudi Arabia and Qatar and in holding democratic national elections.