Foreign Military Intervention in Syria

During the small hours of the morning of August 21st, 2013, an alleged gas attack took place in a district of Damascus killing scores of innocent civilian people. It has been reported that most of the victims are children, and that the attack was perpetrated by the Syrian armed forces.

Some days ago I wrote a piece shedding doubt on the mainstream narrative of these events, highlighting particular evidence that seemed to show that the chemical attack, although it indeed took place, was likely committed by the opposition forces in an attempt to blame the attack on Assad. Since I have posted that article, I have already been called an Assad sympathizer and accused of spreading pro-Assad propaganda.

In a situation that is so emotionally intense for those involved or with a personal interest at stake, be it the life of a loved one in Syria or religious belief, it is natural to revert to a dual thinking and polarize the conflict between two base camps: in this case those who support Assad, and those who support the Rebels - and if you believe the issue is more complex than this dichotomy are not on either side of this spectrum, or are asking questions which are uncomfortable to either stance, you are immediately labelled an agent of the opposing group. If you question the mainstream media reports of chemical attacks by Assad you will be accused by the supporters of the Rebels of being an apologist for the thousands of victims killed by the Syrian security forces; if you question Assad's conduct and its killing of thousands of civilians by the Syrian army, you get accused by his supporters of being an apologist for Islamist proxy opposition groups supported and armed by a cocktail of foreign powers including France, Germany, Turkey, United Kingdom, U.S.A. and a number of Gulf states and who are bound to serve their interests if they get to power.

At the same time, many in leftist circles have heard the arguments from their comrades and peers in why they would support Assad irregardless of the crimes he has committed. This irrational discourse is based on Assad's secular track record which makes him more palatable to western leftist circles, as well as his professed (although largely unsubstantiated) resistance against Western imperialism and U.S. hegemony. These people forget that Assad has, for years, been instrumental for Washington's and Israel's policies in the region, achieving a relative pacification over the occupied Golan Heights with Israel, and aiding the United States in extraordinary rendition programmes, among some. The simple fact that Assad is now in the cross-hair of international hegemons rather than besides it as it was in the past is sufficient for many self-stated leftists to immediately support Assad's struggle.

Rarely in the mind of such people the consideration that there may be a third perspective is consolidated.  In the absence of absolute proof on either side (or, rather, the equal brutality and blood-thirst of all sides), those who are not emotionally and personally invested and have no option but to observe the situation at a distance have the duty to shed light on this third perspective irregardless and independently of the other two positions - that of being against imperialist foreign western intervention which, if you live in one of the countries involved, is a duty to any self- respecting revolutionary leftist.

The fact that the revolution has long been hijacked by proxy group is a fact know to many for a long time, and the fact that these groups greatly outnumber the local non-Al-Quaeda affiliated groups has also been reported on numerous time. There are many research papers outlining the relationship between extremist Islamic groups and the western powers and intelligence agencies who finance and support them (who, ironically, are 'fighting' the same groups in Mali). There is also extensive and compelling documentation that the U.S. has been planning a regime change in Syria since as long as 20 years ago. Although the conflict with these groups was put mostly on the back-burner by the FSA and other opposition groups because of their tactical incapability to refuse the help of organizations like Jabat Al-Nusra and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant should they had wanted to continue the armed struggle. Since a few months, however, the situation has drastically changed and has become a power struggle between the Islamist western proxy factions and the more independent local factions such as the FSA. In essence, the Al-Quaeda affiliated groups have decided that "It's Takeover time!" and have started openly hunting and killing high ranking members of the FSA and other affiliated rebel groups.

The first significant confrontation took place in 2012, when the Farouq Battalions – now a main recipient of foreign aid through the SMC (Syrian Military Council) – cracked down on a fringe Islamist faction that had set up camp on the Turkish border. In 2013 the conflicts began to intensify turning out in what some people refer to as "all out war" between the two groups, and which resulted with members of the ISIL murdering members of the FSA, including Fadi al-Qash, the head of a FSA battalion and his two brothers. In July 2013 FSA battalion chief Kamal Hamami was murdered at an Islamic State checkpoint in Latakia's rural northern highlands, while in the month of August there have been videos released that would confirm similar reports.

"They [foreign nations] fund the Islamist reactionary forces to transform the Syrian revolution into a sectarian war. The victory of the revolution in Syria and its spread to the region would be a threat to their own regimes.

We must not forget also that the tensions between FSA groups and Islamist forces of Jabhat al Nusra and ISIL have expanded recently." - Joseph Daher, member of the Syrian Revolutionary Left Current.

It is not surprising that the genuine opposition forces, and those sympathizing with them, would see any sort of intervention in their favour as welcome. It is the nature of the field soldier to think in the short term, and not necessarily about the long term implications that the aid is likely to cause. Many on the revolutionary front and those supporting them do not realize that the implications of a US/NATO led offensive are bound to be disproportionately disastrous as has been witnessed by countless other nations. The collective memory of the general public (including much of the left) seems to shorten when it comes to remembering the tragedies that unfolded thanks to foreign (mostly U.S.) intervention in places like former Yugoslavia, Guatemala, Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador, Brazil, Chile, Argentina, the contras in Iran and Nicaragua, Honduras (since 1895) Afghanistan (1989 and 2001), Libya, Iraq, Panama, Mexico, El Salvador, the proxy war and genocide in Rwanda, the proxy Congolese civil war not to mention the catastrophic US/NATO/UN led interventions in Haiti, and hundreds more...

Many also seem to forget that this incident fits the modus operandi previously utilized by the United States to justify, or attempt to, their military intervention. When in American government gave chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein in the 1980s with foreknowledge that they would be used on Iran and on his own Kurdish population, the Reagan and Bush I administrations attempted to blame Iran for the chemical weapons attack on Iraq’s Kurds. This could very likely be the situation now, as the evidence is mounting that Assad was not indeed responsible for the latest alleged attack with chemical weapons. A similar incident which should be fresher in our collective memory should be the utilization of the excuse of weapons of mass destruction, and specifically chemical weapons (which were never found), to galvanize the American people into enthusiastically supporting the bombing of Iraq and the ousting of Saddam Hussein in 2003.

As reports circulate that the United States has finalized plans to move its navy into position to launch cruise missiles on Syria, those who are calling for a foreign military intervention must remember a few key additional factors. Firstly is that it is not guaranteed to end the bloodshed. On the contrary, looking at the enormous civilian casualty reports from both Libya and Iraq, it is very likely that the conflict will directly cause a huge number of civilian casualties in Syria too. This is not counting the very likely possibility (just like in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya) that the armed conflict will not cease but instead become a sectarian civil war amongst the already conflicting parties, and a civil war waged against the puppet government that is bound to be installed should the intervention be successful. In such case, the casualties over the decades through which this conflict has the potential to extent is astounding.

Secondly, it must be clarified that this action would indeed be ILLEGAL according to the UN charter and international law, which is often invoked by those who are attempting to call for military intervention. The UN Charter clearly states that:

"All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” - UN Charter, Article 2, Chapter 4.

Foreign intervention is not the answer, as it will not likely to put an end or even slow down the killing in Syria, but is instead likely to fuel more sectarian struggles and conflicts in the long term. However, it is not to be discounted that some of the small genuine revolutionary cells which continue to fight against Assad have acknowledged this. In a statement, the Revolutionary Left Current in Syria have admitted that "Our revolution has no sincere ally, except the popular revolutions of the region and of the world and of all the militants struggling against regimes of ignorance and servitude and exploitation." while another of its members has clearly states that ""...the Free Syrian Army (FSA) completely lacks any real material and financial support. The Islamists reactionary forces such as Jabhat al Nusra and the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) are being well-funded by some Gulf countries.". It is only the hope of most other revolutionary leftists across the globe that the revolutionary groups in Syria realize that this is really the case and that the the genuine parts of the resistance will be able to purge their movement of the proxy foreign interventionists within their ranks. the only problem is that the situation has become so complex that it is now nearly impossible to identify the genuine and un-compromised groups (if there are any still) and their counterparts.

Suspicious Nerve-agent Attack in Syria

Disclaimer: As it is common for people to think in dualistic terms, I would like to (or rather, am forced to) clarify that my skepticism and criticism towards the Syrian opposition are not an endorsement of Assad, or to be taken as a sign that the author is sympathetic to him and his forces. On the contrary, it is the opinion of the author that if the genuine Syrian rebellion is to succeed in ousting Assad, it must also purge itself of the proxy foreign factions (such as Jabat Al-Nusra) which have manipulated it from the commencement of the struggle, and have mostly hijacked the uprising. In addition, the information provided in this article is also to be taken with a healthy dose of healthy skepticism. 

On the morning of August 21st, an alleged massacre of many civilians in the eastern district of Damascus, took place. Discussions are still raging as to who is responsible for this atrocity, and while the mainstream media continues to echo the calls by Western Powers to use force against Assad, I would like to take the time to express my skepticism as more and more information is unearthed regarding the matter.

It is extremely suspicious that the day after the UN delegation on the monitoring of Chemical weapons in Syria arrives (welcomed by Assad), that the Syrian government would engage in a chemical weapon attack on its own population. Say what you will about Assad, but he's not dumb.

It is very suspicious that in the videos, besides the dead or dying children, there is not one mother but just men who in addition to invoking Allah and damn Assad, they only manipulate the bodies of the children for the benefit of the cameras, as if that's what they were there for. In some videos, we see the same child moved three times in three different locations around the room for no apparent reason whatsoever.

In other videos, we see a man or woman with a little face mask (as if to appear like medical personnel), but this precaution is senseless considering that the children, in most cases, are laid down on a floor (not the most hygienic place) of a room where lots of people are stepping. The majority of their clothes also have not been removed, as is standard medical practice.

Even more suspicious is the lack of symptoms that the victims fail to manifest and which are usually associated with nerve gas. The symptomatology has, granted, a wide range of manifestations dependent on a variety of factors: the quantity of gas absorbed, age of the victim, utilization of antidotes etc. However, generally, victims of nerve gas attacks overwhelmingly display incontinence and the subsequent release of bodily fluids from the orifices: urine, feces, epitaxy, reddish foam at the mouth. These symptoms were not displayed by any of the victims or survivors of the attacks in any of the videos - an almost statistic impossibility. Jean Pascal Zanders, an expert on chemical weapons and their non-proliferation, has expressed similar concerns about the use (or lack thereof) of nerve gas on the purported victims.

Perhaps most disconcerting of all is that in some of these videos, despite claiming that the children on the floor are dead, some of them are still moving. This is combined with numerous videos and photos showing the alleged "medical" personnel (those with the little masks) administering injections to he already "deceased" victims. There is no medical or moral reason for the administration of a substance through injection following the fact to these victims, but it has been largely hypothesized that they could be soporific injections to make sure that the subjects be properly sedated during the theater act. It has been argued that the injections could indeed be of Atropine, a substance that is used to counteract the effects of nerve agents, but if the victims are indeed deceased as the video claims, the reason for the administration of this substance vanishes.

All this is not mentioning a few key factors...

The Syrian opposition has already been found to have [Edit] strongly suspected of having used [original link was wrong, edited] chemical weapons on the Syrian population on at least one previous occasion.

In addition, there are some pretty solid reports circulating on Turkish television and internet press about a number of Syrian "rebels" (of the U.S. proxy Jihadist faction Jabat Al Nusra) being stopped in Turkey in possession of heavy weapons and large amounts (2kg) of Sarin nerve gas. This would seem to be consistent with Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs' claims (of course, its relationship with Syria is not to be discounted) that the the chemical attack "was of a provocative nature" and intended to Galvanize the international community into justifying western military action in Syria. This is further compounded by the fact that France, which has been supporting the Syrian rebels for years and who attempted to break a weapon's ban to supply them with arms, has already called for force to be used in light of this latest incident. 

Lastly, among the regular media freak show that the Media offers us and that we are accustomed to, there are numerous photographs about this "massacre" which actually belong to other conflicts and have nothing to do with Syria (most notably a picture from the recent massacre in Egypt. More importantly, however, are the reports that Al Jazeera, Reuters, and other news and media outlets had fabricated the news about the attack one day prior to when it allegedly took place.

UPDATE:

Calls for the military intervention in Syria continue to spread as even the Dutch "Green" Party's leader has said that it may be "inevitable". Despite no investigation having been yet completed, and no official results being provided by the UN Commission currently in Syria, it appears that the majority of institutionalized parties in 'the West' are already preparing their populations for the prospect of war.

There is also now, thanks to the retrieval of an article published in January (and quickly taken down), that a Malaysian hacker managed to get his/her hands on a number of confidential documents of the British security contractor Britam. In the internal correspondence of this company, the planned used of chemical weapons in Syria to then be blamed on Assad is discussed and referred to as having been commissioned by Qataris and approved by Washington. This suggests that the plan has at least been already thought of, and that as such there is at least definite suspicion that it may have been enacted.

I have also stumbled across a report which quotes an expert on video who is unconvinced that the attack was caused by military grade Sarin, if any nerve agent at all. He casts doubts on the symptomatology and the lack of protective material being used by the medical personnel, which should mean that they would be exposed as well and should exhibit symptoms also. I have come across similar reports:

'At the moment, I am not totally convinced because the people that are helping them are without any protective clothing and without any respirators," said Paula Vanninen, director of Verifin, the Finnish Institute for Verification of the Chemical Weapons Convention.

"In a real case, they would also be contaminated and would also be having symptoms."

John Hart, head of the Chemical and Biological Security Project at Stockholm International Peace Research Institute said he had not seen the telltale evidence in the eyes of the victims that would be compelling evidence of chemical weapons use.

"Of the videos that I've seen for the last few hours, none of them show pinpoint pupils... this would indicate exposure to organophosphorus nerve agents," he said.

Gwyn Winfield, editor of CBRNe World magazine, which specialises in chemical weapons issues, said the evidence did not suggest that the chemicals used were of the weapons-grade that the Syrian army possesses in its stockpiles.

"We're not seeing reports that doctors and nurses... are becoming fatalities, so that would suggest that the toxicity of it isn't what we would consider military sarin. It may well be that it is a lower-grade," Winfield told AFP.'

I have also come across unconfirmed (and unsubstantiated) reports that Russia has provided the United Nations with satellite images of the missiles that were allegedly used by Assad to deliver the chemical weapons. It appears that the rockets originated in Douma, a rebel controlled area, and not from a government controlled military installation whatsoever. Should this be true, it would be a key piece of evidence. Unfortunately, evidence (or the lack thereof) has never really stopped the U.S. and NATO from engaging in a military intervention on foreign soil.

Stopped by Dutch Immigration in Kiev - Accounts of a Diatribe

As activists, we are not strangers to harassment by the governments we confront and their supporters. It is an occupational hazard that we all accept, although it is an uncomfortable reality. Recently I was subject to a particular distressing form of what I believe was harassment by the Dutch government. 

On August 9th, 2013, I embarked on Ukraine International flight PS 0102 from Amsterdam to Kiev, and consequentially on Ukraine International flight PS 0715 from Kiev to Istanbul Ataturk Airport. I undertook this journey with an Italian ID Card (Carta d'Identitá). As Turkey and Italy have an arrangement which allows Italian citizens to travel to Turkey with only such a card, and I was only transiting in Kiev, my journey was rightfully uneventful.

Following an enjoyable stay in Istanbul during which I had the pleasure to meet some remarkable activists, publishers and community leaders, I embarked upon my return home on Saturday, August 17th, 2013. I boarded Ukraine International flight PS 0712 from Istanbul and arrived in Kiev. I successfully went through the transit desk where I was asked for my identity document and issued a boarding pass for my next intended flight (Ukraine International PS 9386) to return to the Netherlands, where I am currently enrolled in higher education studies. This process was handled by a third-party company on behalf of the two airlines.

I proceeded to make my way to the gate and as I was standing in line to board the flight, the lady who initially produced my boarding pass came running and asked to see my documents once more. I handed her my Italian ID card, she told me to wait at the gate, and ran off with it. After about 10-15 minutes, as the boarding was nearly complete, she returned and informed me that I could not board the flight. I asked for an explanation and they refused to provide me with one, simply telling me that I would have to wait for an airline representative. I enquired whether they could hold the plane five minutes in the hopes that I could sort this out with the representative, and they informed me that my luggage had already been unloaded. They handed my identity document to me only after the plane was already underway to the runway. It should be noted that the plane was a KLM plane (in a jointly operated flight with UIA) flying under Dutch flag. 

As the minutes passed and I witnessed my intended plane take off without me, I grew increasingly anxious as I did not have enough funds to purchase another ticket, and I could not contact anyone as my phone had been lost in Istanbul. It is now 14:00. I continued to demand for an explanation from the third company employees, and instead received mocking grins and sneering laughs. I demanded to see their name tags (which, being in Cyrillic I probably could not have read anyways) which were tucked in their shirt's pocket, and they looked at me as if I was mad. After another 15-20 minutes wait and no airline representative in sight, I approached a passing immigration official ad explained my situation. The young man took me to a door and told me to wait as he summoned a senior immigration official, a blonde lady.

After having explained my conundrum to the senior official (whose name I also am unaware of) she calmly and clearly explained to me that despite the terrible situation I was in there was nothing she could do stating that “since you [I] are not going through Ukrainian immigration, it is not our business and we cannot do anything”. At this moment I grew confused – if it was not Ukrainian immigration issue, who had denied the validity of my travel documents and to board the plane? As I took a bathroom break the employees of the third party company, who had followed me as I spoke with the immigration official, conveniently disappeared never to be seen again. I could easily identify them if provided with a picture. The immigration official however, now had to rightfully insist that since I did not have a boarding pass, I was to wait in the transit area instead as in the gates area.

At 14:30 I attempt to log in Skype and call my mother in Italy in order to explain the situation, but she was not at the computer.

I returned to the transfer area where I demanded explanations from the clerks at the transfer desk (which had changed since I first passed through it) and they frantically made numerous calls. All I was being told is that I could not travel with my Italian ID card, but was not told why. Eventually a middle-manager from another third party company (who was not handling KLM or UIA) decided to help and also made a round of calls. This went on for nearly two hours, during which I took the opportunity to look up the emergency number for the Ukrainian Embassy in Kiev, and contacted ambassadorial staff Mr. Domeniconi with the phone of a passenger who had witnessed my diatribe and distress. I explained the situation to Mr. Domeniconi, and informed him that they would not accept my Italian ID card. Mr. Domeniconi told me that since it seemed mostly like a company-related issue at that moment, there was little he could do. He did however urge me to first talk to the airline representative and try sort the issue out with the directly, and to call him back should the issue persist, in which case he would speak with the airline representative and try to convince them to rightfully accept my travel documents.

After nearly two hours of wait, it is now approaching 16:00, a representative of Ukraine International Airlines and one of his colleagues come down to speak to me. This was the first time I was allowed to speak with someone with managerial discretion in this entire time, two hours after I was informed that an airline representative would be summoned, when I was at the initial gate. I explained the situation to the gentleman, who did not seem to care much for it, as he told me that “they had received word from immigration officials in the Netherlands that my documents were not to be accepted”. I insisted that my documents were valid and that I was naturally allowed to transit through Ukraine from Istanbul into a Shengen area nation. He did not seemed convinced and got on the phone with the Immigration Liaison, although I was not told for whom or what. After a heated debate with the IL, in which I had to explain the most basic aspects of international travel laws and treaties and that Italy did not produce plastic identity cards, he told me that I had “convinced him that you [I] are allowed to travel to the Netherlands”, and was going to be issued another ticket to my intended destination as soon as possible. Finally relieved, I sat waiting and pacing in the transit area.

After an hour of wait, I enquired with the clerks at the transit area whether everything was going smoothly, and they informed me that they had been told by the airline representatives that I would be flow back to Istanbulon a flight departing not two hours from then. Outraged, I explained that I was told that I would be flown to my original destination, that I spoke in person with the Immigration Liaison and the airline representative (which they also saw), and they said that they were sorry, but that is what they had been told. During this entire debate, I asked to see whether the airline/airport computer system actually mentioned that I could not travel with an ID card, and when shown, the system clearly stated that Italian citizens could transit from Istanbul to Amsterdam with only the possession of an ID card. I re-opened my laptop and around 17:00 I was able to contact my mother in Italy and ask her to call Mr. Domeniconi and explain the situation. Via a Ukraine (Skype) – Italy (Skype and Phone) – Ukraine (Phone) connection, I was able to speak with Mr. Domeniconi and explain that they intended to fly me to Istanbul. I was able to provide him with the number of the service desk of Ukraine International Airlines before my computer battery died, and I had to hope for the best, and that Mr. Domeniconi would be able to resolve this issue.

After what I can only imagine was a large and long series of phone calls, I assume that Mr. Domeniconi was able to reach the proper authorities within the Airlines and rectify the situation. Around 19:00 I was provided with a boarding pass by the same airline representative (of UAI) as I had spoken with before. It must be noted, however, that this was not the next immediate flight which would have departed at 6:10 in the morning and was also jointly operated by KLM and UAI, but was flying under Dutch flag. When I asked why the airline representative told me that being under direct Dutch jurisdiction, KLM did not want to break the request by Dutch government officials not to accept my documents, while that was no longer an issue if I were to fly under Ukrainian flag following Mr. Domeniconi's drastic intervention.

I finally embarked the Ukraine International Airlines flight to Amsterdam at 9:40. Upon arrival my document was taken for an additional check which took no longer than 7 minutes. Later, i found out that my friends and family had been continuously calling airport immigration inquiring about me, and were told that they could not give information on individual cases. I cannot help but feel that the Dutch immigration officials may have taken advantage of the fact that I was outside the Shengen area to exercise some good old style harassment, to cause psychological distress, and as a warning sign that they are "watching".

EUGENDFOR - The Military Police Force You Are Not Being Told About

In October 2007, far from prying eyes of the European public and that of the nations involved, the ministers of Foreign Affairs and of Interiors of five EU nations signed the Treaty of Velsen, in the small town of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Don't feel bad if you have never heard of it in any mainstream media outlet, or if your elected representatives have failed to even mention its existence - the treaty was specifically signed under a shroud of secrecy in the Dutch city of Velsen, to prevent popular resistance. This is certainly understandable as the treaty was intended to establish a "multinational police force with military status... which shall be operational, pre-organised, robust, and rapidly deployable, exclusively comprising elements of police forces with military status of the Parties, in order to perform all police tasks within the scope of crisis management operations". As such, the treaty established the first supranational and multinational military body of the European Union - the European Gendarmerie Force (EUROGENDFOR, or EGF).

The Logos and Insignia of the EUROGENDFOR

The EGF is composed of the police forces of militarized natures of six member countries, the founding five with the addition of Romania in December 2008: Gendarmerie Nationale (France), Guarda Nacional Republicana (Portugal), Koninklijke Marechaussee (Netherlands), Arma dei Carabinieri (Italy), Jandarmeria Română (Romania) and the Guardia Civil (Spain). The body is currently comprised of more than 3,000 armed forces with training and permanent headquarters in Vicenza, Italy, but can be deployed among any EU member nations. It must be noted that the EUGENDFOR was founded as a complementary component, and under the direct auspices, of the NATO and the UN peacekeeping forces. (For a great analysis of the UN Peacekeeping forces' role in Haiti please check Dady Chery's wonderful article). When reading the original treaty, at its very beginning the document itself clearly states that the treaty was written with considerations to "the North Atlantic Treaty signed in Washington on 4 April 1949...the Charter of the United Nations signed at San Francisco on 26 June 1945... [and] the Agreement between the Parties to the North Atlantic Treaty regarding the Status of their Forces, signed in London on 19 June 1951" and other ad-hoc coalitions between EU member nations.

Members of the European Gendarmerie Force

Despite having read some articles pertaining to this originating from my home-countries of Italy and France, barely any English-language documentation has been compiled on this issue.

What Are the Implications?

The unification of the militarized police forces of the member countries would have far-reaching implications, especially in the balance of power between civil and military law enforcement and criminal investigations agencies. In order to understand these potential implications, one must understand the nature behind the existence of such forces.

Militarized civil law-enforcement agencies are an (almost) exclusive European idiosyncrasy. Their existence largely derives from the previous (or current, in the case of the Netherlands and Spain) monarchic protection forces, charged with protecting the monarchies and royal families. They are an integral part of the democratic expression and balance of power in such countries, as they represent a highly-trained specialized body which is independent of the political class as they receive their orders through the military chain of command. As such, these bodies are intended to stand as guards for the population against the possibility of oppressive political regimes. In contrast, civil law-enforcement agencies are intended to guarantee adequate resistance against a military takeover of the civilian government. 

In the case of Italy (my home nation) for example, the branch of the Carabinieri are considered an essential part of the balance of power between civil and military law enforcement agencies, as is the fragmentation of the various police forces into local police (municipal and provincial), forest guard, national police, the financial guard (customs, immigration, smuggling etc.), penitential police, and the Arm of Carabinieri. Each of these have their domain of operation, and their decentralized and fragmented nature is envisioned to prevent a complete control over the entire civil law enforcement body by a single person. The presence of the Carabinieri is intended to ensure civil protection outside the domain of the political class in the case that it acts against the public's interest or safety. Likewise, the other police forces are also intended to protect the civilian population from a possible military takeover, and to protect the political and civil institutions.

The Carabinieri are considered to be one of the top policing forces of Europe which, along with the Guardia di Finanza (Financial Guard), undertakes the task of investigating and arresting the more complex crimes, as well as those of an international nature, such as human trafficking, Mafia-related cases (including the search for fugitive Mafia bosses), money laundering and drug trafficking. According to a statement by the Union of Carabinieri, its sterilization and incorporation into a supranational force is "a joke as believable as the Mayan [apocalyptic] prophecies, but it is true... the Arm of Carabinieri, in a future more or less distant, but certainly not remote, is destined to an inevitable disbandment... it is only a matter of political treaties".

Doesn't need to operate in member countries

As mentioned earlier in this article, the deployment of the EGF forces is not dependent at all on the origin of the forces or the recipient nation. This is due to another piece of international law signed among EU nations known as the Prüm Treaty. This document, signed in 2008, regulates access to police databases of neighbouring countries for obvious security and criminal investigation purposes. However, since its establishment, the treaty has enlarged its scope and purview and has established the legal foundation for the exchange of riot police equipment and of personnel with the participating countries (Germany, Spain, France, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Austria, and Belgium). However, following its naturalization into EU law, the treaty allows for EUROGENDFOR forces to access virtually the entire EU territory (based on the Schengen agreement). This transnational nature is exemplified by the mobility of the force itself - While the European Police Forces Training of 2009 (EUPFT 2009) was run in Vicenza (home to EGF headquarters) the EUPFT 2010 on anti-riot tactics was run in Lehnin in Germany.

Not only the national EGF forces can be deployed to any country, even one that is not signatory to the treaty, but the civilian authorities of the receiving country will have no jurisdiction or oversight over the EGF forces deployed on their territory. As Article 25 states, "The authorities of the Sending State shall have the right to exercise exclusive jurisdiction over military and civilian personnel where such civilian personnel are subject to the law governing all or any of the police forces with military status of the Sending State". Imagine now, for example, that a member of the EUROGENDFOR force kills an innocent person in a non-signatory nation - say, Greece. That member is now immune from prosecution by the Greek state, and shall be dealt with according to the laws (and will) of the sending country. In addition (as we will see in the following paragraphs) it is not the civilian authorities of the sending nation that will oversee the criminal prosecution, but it will have to be internal to the EGF itself. As many of the bodies that make up the EGF act as the "military police" bodies in their respective nations, those who are meant to be policed are the same persons doing the policing.

These forces have already been deployed in a variety of extra-territorial operations such as the disastrous UN Stabilization mission troops in Haiti (MINUSTAH - for two great articles on the matter please check this link and this one.) which, according to diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks, were "poorly trained, spied on student groups, mismanaged and staged elections". The EUROGENDFOR has also been involved in the equally disastrous NATO training programmes in Afghanistan (which have been investigated and denounced in-depth by activists, such as Pratap Chatterjee, in articles and podcast), and the EU peacekeeping mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is notable that all the areas in which such stabilization and reconstruction efforts (whether undertaken by the EU, NATO and/or the UN Blue Helmet occupation force) are both strategically advantageous, resource-rich, and have a history of resistance and continuous fight against western and U.S.-led imperialism and the neoliberal economic policies that inevitably follow suit. As such, these forces should not be seen as anything but the extension of the military arm of western hegemony and of the global "empire" over which the U.N security council presides.

In essence, the EUROGENDFOR will be part of this arm, securing the strategic, economic and political interests of its members states and the financial and economic interests which, we know too well, are controlled by international corporations with no national allegiance, and the enormous financial and banking interests which support them.

Virtual Complete Immunity

As previously mentioned, the Treaty of Velsen is the official document which has allowed for the creation of the EUROGENDFOR. We have already seen how this supranational military police force could be used to squash dissent all across Europe, as well as participate in murderous NATO "peacekeeping" missions. There is a conclusive aspect to the treaty which must be mentioned, as it is essential to the existence of the EGF - its complete immunity from civil of criminal prosecution.

Article 21 of the Treaty of Velsen states "The authorities of the Parties may not enter the premises and buildings... without the prior consent of the EGF Commander, or where applicable, the EGF Force Commander.". This means that no civil authority has the right the investigate the premises of the EGF without their Commander's approval, effectively removing the civil oversight of the armed forces. Should the barring of physical access to the EGF not be surprising enough for you, the same Article also states that not only the premises, but also "the archives of EUROGENDFOR shall be inviolable... wherever they are located in the territory of the Parties" and makes no provision for the possible request of access to such archives by a court of law. Even if such provisions were made the following provision, Article 22, states that  "the property and funds of EUROGENDFOR and the goods which have been placed at its disposal for official purposes, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from any executive measure in force in the territory of the Parties", effectively barring any court from inspecting their financial records or property.

Lastly, but certainly not least, there are numerous provisions, such as Article 25 mentioned beforehand, which ensure that single members are under the sole and exclusive jurisdiction of the sending state. In addition to Art. 25, Article 29, Section 3 states that "A member of EUROGENDFOR Personnel shall not be subject to any proceedings  for the enforcement of any judgement given against him or her in the Host State or the Receiving State in a matter arising from the performance of his official duties". As such, each EUROGENDFOR member benefits from complete immunity when deployed, when following orders (although they may be illegal or immoral) or generally performing "his official duties".

The combination of these provisions - barring from access to premises by civilian authorities, inviolability of archives, immunity of prosecution and investigation of funds and assets, and personal immunity for EGF personnel - effectively means that the EGF is not accountable to any national civil authority and enjoys virtual immunity from prosecution.

It is also particularly disturbing that the European Union seems hell bent on pursuing the same draconian and fascist-like policies that have plagued the United States and have rendered its population sterile, docile, and effectively under siege by their own government. Thanks to the trans-Atlantic partnership programmes, spearheaded by the Atlantic Council, the European Union is (not-so) slowly becoming a de-facto extension of the United States' hegemony, of its political and economic policies through the myriads of think-tanks and summits (Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Commission, Atlantic Council, Council of Foreign Relations etc.), and of its military apparatus trough the NATO.

Is this the kind of police force that we want in Europe? Why was the European citizenship not consulted about his police forces that may, and in all possibility will, be used to squash popular dissent and maintain order through military means? Are we beginning to be the "United States of Europe? What are the implications of having a non-emotionally and nationally invested police military force in another country? How can we allow such an institution to be virtually immune from scrutiny and prosecution by civilian bodies and courts?

However, to those following the situation closely, this should come to no surprise. This is only one of the man steps the EU is taking in becoming a full-fledged fascist state in which financial institutions and corporations rule, and the police enforces and subdues. We live in dangerous times, especially if such advances are completely ignored by the apparatus which is supposed to inform the public, and the public which is informed is too small or powerless to intervene.