hello and welcome to worlds apart as the syrian war winds down so does the moral grandstanding around its conduct having spun bill last eight years denouncing serious treatment of the rabble and their families many western powers are now eager to leave their own citizens in syria including the most vulnerable how come human rights are so absent in the discussions about the fate of isis fighters and especially their children to discuss that i'm now joined by samuel ramani a doctoral candidate in international relations at the universe there of oxford ceremony is going to talk to you thank you very much for your time thank you very much for inviting me now if there is one phrase capturing do western portrayal of the syrian war that would be assad's killing his own people that was the main promise for his suppose that illegitimacy he's disregard for his own people for the civilians where is this concern for one's own people or for once own citizens now

when hundreds of western born women and their children are fleeing areas like. syria i think this is a very interesting question because the movement of foreign fighters in the movement of people who are western countries days is a relatively unprecedented phenomenon because this was the largest or territorial control of any terrorist organization has ever been so they are now under the situation where the western countries are effectively making laws on the fly but basically. they're saying that these people have lost legitimacy and lost the right this is because they participated in treasonous ativan they they supported blatantly advocated violence against individuals and some of them are the wisest poses of people who are involved for example in the paris bombing or in the. bombing so they're viewed as criminals as a choice between. there is more safe to leave them there and let them disperse to

turkey to iraq where they can see radicalized and they can stay stream us or bring them back have the trial be released in short order and then restart their activities and western style now if specialized in russian foreign policy and long enough to know that the russians never miss a chance to point out western double standards but i think it goes beyond that it's a legal issue why should these people the isis fighters and their families be dumped in somebody else's territory is developed in some outliers truly for example the way of one of the probably end is for the city in paris bombing us that they would rather one stay in syria they return to the west because the french have launched air strikes against their family but the majority if given the opportunity would definitely want to come back to their home country even if they know they're going to face trial if they know they can almost certainly it's essential prison sentence and russia has definitely invited its own people back to their own

consciousness and of course of instances where they've got like the one where they got a six year prison sentence for example and they had to face justice for children they've resettled them to their extended families in their own caucus us to try to train the least a more drop rate and more mater moderate and respectful manner for the rule of law so i think that there is just an overwhelming domestic pressure not to speak in terrorists and extremists in the us as clouding their legal and moral responsibilities to their own citizens to a degree but the choices are are rather awkward and bleak for politicians regularly in the senate but it's not just about politicians i mean this whole war has been framed through very intensely humanitarian framework i mean western countries for your is how being calling for an intervention on humanitarian grounds and here they are revoking citizenship all for women who are wedded to isis fighters made out to legally establishing that complicity in the crimes how do you think these people should be treated now by the syrians by b.

assad regime we whose record them human rights is another very good as we all know given that the own countries don't think that they deserve a fair trial. i mean i don't think that they have a future in syria realistically they're currently living large thousand of them are currently staying under the defenses of the syrian democratic forces which is a kurdish political and militia group and they have very limited resources they they're going to either their choices or rather bleak within syria they either can cross across the border to iraq because this is a weak rule of law over there and reside over there and the iraqis have to undergo even cooperate of about imposing trials on foreign fighters have to land in their territory or they can apply to go to turkey and fly the consul axis from there one of the problems bringing the syrians back to the west is the fact that syria has consular access to the western countries but it does have two other countries like russia indonesia levanon and some others but still i think that the western countries should have a moral responsibility to at least give them i hearing in a western court and then put them in jail as long as they see fit even if it's

a life in prison sentence even if they have to make up new counter terrorism laws that would be stricter and more stringent it should be better but i think some people are concerned that they won't get a fair hearing or the sentences won't match the crimes because up until two thousand and fifteen for example european countries do not really designate participation in a foreign terrorist organization as criminal activity they crack down hard on domestic terrorism but not leaving your country to syria and iraq every day and i suppose now you mentioned before that the syrian conflict is really extraordinary i mean it's in many ways a unique case for many western powers that he had done for example deep take back one tunnel prisoners who were also accused. terrorism complicity although i think in many cases that guilt was not proven why do you think this offloading practice which is really what it is offloading your problem to somebody else why do you think this overloading practice has been invented for syria well the.

justification is very common in the legal community within britain and within france and other countries is that. there's such a poor record of i was of what actually happened in syria moderates extremists are often fighting in the same brigades it's unclear who was complicit and what kind of crimes occurred and it really we very difficult to try to have a fair trial and the could be a chance in which are the smallest and if it can chance that the benefit of the doubt could be unfairly given to these as to a lack of information whereas at least in the one of the most cases they've probably been suspect to a great deal of course of interrogation and there's least a perception that having spent time at within the u.s. prison and legal system that they have gotten a star case and more information and just more and more of an ability to have ascertained right and wrong guilty and not guilty you mentioned that this land it's been more direct rebels and extremists is extremely blurred them and i think a bit to blame for it lies with the west because many western powers went out of

that waits you blurred that line and to put all the blame on the syrian government but when they get we consider that issue from the point of view of human rights i think what we have here is a new category of essentially human waste people who could be denied all their legal rights based on an administrative decision not the legal decision of a court decision but a decision by some bureaucrats do you see any discussion about that human rights aspect in the british media i don't i don't see very much discussion of that i think that these people are basically viewed within britain pretty early in this nativist climate that we're seeing all across western europe as an reformable so and they and they justify that by saying that they were involved in foreign criminal and terrorist organization and of course there will be some who will kind of turn the tables on russia which i think is in partially a legitimate way to you and say that they're just taking in these people because they want to create an image of tolerance and because that's where they want to

lend legitimacy to some of ramzan kadyrov apparent like a sensible humanitarian schemes and things like that so they tend to argue that it's their view. mission is really that different from that of the west in that we all are people with a great deal suspicion but some are just more willing to kind of create p.r. of tolerance understanding than others they would view the russians in the us i will definitely ask you about the russian policy but before we go there if the parents are presumed guilty what about the children because you know i person have done a lot of reporting on syria but what we're hearing from isis last stronghold they missed in syria now is that he's truly disturbing even by syria standards because there are lots of pregnant women and lots of very very young children grossly well norrish dobson's dying from hyperthermia and very little if any humanitarian effort on the ground if the british public is concerned about the wives and the husbands and the isis fighters etc what about the children i think. that there is

a lack of attention being considered to the children there just to be part of the family or part of a collective structure and some kind of is usually the punishment that's happening here they don't think is appropriate i think of the children should have access to education measure some other things and perhaps will be held as they feel like there's no way out of this and they actually have to be back and they actually have to hold hearings on this one thing i noticed in. the for example dutch discussion on repatriating isis families is is this significant emphasis on the where those children were born so you always have somebody saying that those children were born primarily in iraq or primarily in syria do you think there may be an effort underway to kind of. those children all of that potential citizenship because they have the normal practice is to give children the this

edition chip of the parents but now that their parents have been stripped of citizenship and they were born in. syria or iraq maybe they don't deserve the citizenship. all. of the question then that would be lead to the indication that they would have to kind of either be stateless people permanently or they would have to face the arbitrary legal structures of syria or iraq and be confined to that and stuck with that so that's something that they have to face and iraq has definitely been taking strong initiatives against former theirs with questionable rule of law with questionable adherence to the western legal standards so they are having to be born into iraq and the iraqi legal system is very likely that these people will be either kept there indefinitely and then when they grow up even be kept in prison for twenty years thirty years less now you mentioned they had the russian policy on their repatriating the isis family members and there's been an active effort for more than a year and a half that has not actually been publicized not much in the russian media because

i think the russian public opinion is also. strongly and he says in this regard people are legitimately concerned that these people may present a terrorist threat in the future and yet there has been an active effort to bring back both women and children but i think nowadays especially the children do you take that as russia's p.r. at after it all sorts or do you think that is a genuine expression of i hate this word values there that's an interesting question i don't think it's quite a neat dichotomy the way you see is that there's definitely a lot of reserve about t.t.n. former isis fighters after all they said temperature thousand and fifteen decision to intervene in syria from russia was largely determined effectively as a preemptive war that isis is going to disperse they may lead the north caucasus and we landed in russia they realize terrorist attacks against us unless we act versts unless we go in and i thanked them but of course is also left out in the

russian media that the vast majority of russian airstrikes do not target not even targeted stream as they targeted he says this. civilians opponents of the assad regime but i think that now there is a growing pressure to kind of make russia look more moralistic for example in late two thousand and seventeen putin unveiled this policy everything saying that we are acting on moral grounds are kind of upholding our moral responsibility to our own citizens while the west is not and as i mentioned earlier i think that russia wants to read this. image of tolerance that it's a state that is a orthodox state increasingly but also willing to give its muslim minorities access to the rule of law and a fair hearing and not these people as unreformable not these children just as like at people who should be cast away and as wasted talent as you know that the people who can actually be reintegrate into society through rehabilitation and be part of communities and be functioning members again so russia wants to show that it's more

open minded and tolerant than what maybe it is in keeping or open minded and tolerant in that regard because i'm sure you know that for russia the isis fighters present a much larger threat down for the west i mean just in terms of the number you know people who traveled to syria from dagestan from chechnya from other caucasus republics as well of from central asian countries they're much like cumulatively the number is much bigger and down to number all for people who traveled from britain or i suppose even from all be continental europe combined so there is said that there are security risks for russia and not policy i may not i think it is definitely our security or that also i think that the threat at times could be periodic with politicized exaggerated particularly in light of the memory of the second chechen war the moscow part of the beslan murder always say the things the russians got like this kind of institutional memory of terrorism that is willing to provoke fear. from people who live in the middle east or five people coming from

the north caucasus terrorism within its own borders that other countries perhaps do not have regularly within europe and also i. i think that yes i think that there is that there while russia has taken a more moral high ground we see trading of children which i think is a very good policy the their lack of consular access to iraq has led to some misleading figures and as many as four hundred russian fighters who are now stuck in iraq or in syria and their wives and their children who are not being repatriated to the mayor is actually only a minority who are being taken back not the majority according to some independent analysis not something that's overlooked but their war is still ongoing and they are from what i know and from what i hear in moscow they day after it's actually under way particularly with regards to the iraqi diplomacy because iraq for one doesn't want those people in that own prisons anyway mr money we have to take a short break now but we'll be back in just a few moments stay tuned. to

what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have it's crazy confrontation let it be an arms race in this spirit dramatic developments only. i don't see how that strategy will be successful very critical time to sit down and talk. there was no moby dick cheney or labor there's an environmental standards in the original nafta to five years ago those were kicked out because relations were more punitive konami but now the religion is very very close intertwined so i think it's ok to have a new treaty

a new negotiation. welcome back to will the part fifteen milligrams money a doctoral candidate in international relations at the university of oxford mr a minute before the break we started talking about doing what's right for the people and when it comes to the rebuilding of syria the russian and western positions again ah diverging wouldn't be fair to say that by this point they reckon struction has become the continuation of war by other means. yes i think that reconstruction has not been about enough attention to manage hereon side of things or development is the bit about winning the peace so now that russia feels that it's won the war with a sad retaining power it's iran as well as their western those western opponents of

us that are seeking to kind of dominate the process influence washing countries are very reluctant to recognize the fact that assad is one like formally and also to admit that they were perhaps wrong in condemning him or siding against him so whitley in the early stages of the war so they're tactically to me to undermine the reconstruction process by the prolongation of sanctions and by refusal to invest on the grounds that iran is present in southern syria or on the grounds that more legitimacy has been completely shattered over the past eight years because of his war crimes the use of chemical weapons and the like so i think that western countries would want a situation where syria's reconstructed but in a way in which is really started by a third power not russia and iran not by the west and by the g.c.c. or by china so effectively a new set of powers kind of restore influence but the prospect of those countries investing in syria appears to be quite remote at this point you wrote recently about malls close objectives in low being for syrian record struction including how

being assad to consolidate he's holding power and increasing russia's profile perhaps benefiting from it financially what about the syrian people do you think they figure at all in moscow's calculations i think that russia does want to appear like a responsible stakeholder in the world stage or does wonder peer that it does care about human rights humanitarian issues they will give the use of humanitarian aid convoys in various conflicts as including over look at how for example they were the first country in the un security council to raise the alarm about famine in the data in the saudi conduct in yemen so there's definitely a desire to appear like a responsibly humanitarian stakeholder but also a way i think that they are. are focused primarily on getting economic benefits from this conflict on perhaps backing off of the capital that other countries have more resources to invest in loans like china maybe down the line the u.a.e. and saudi arabia pump into syria russia does the projects on the ground because it

knows the tray and then they benefit economically and they can look like they're building houses building hospitals building for so these improve the education and they help the syrian people and they look like a responsible stakeholder so it's about benefit economically first and foremost and secondly appearing responsible appearing like humanitarian stakeholder advancing principles that are positive and justin's or mr money for everybody greece on the principles if everyone wants to portray himself or herself as a humanitarian in syria why is there such a difficulty for all the parties coming together supposedly they all care about the people of syria why is it so difficult for them to do something practical together to alleviate the suffering i think is a tremendous amount of distrust between the different powers and also this state of for western russia relations certainly doesn't help in that regard either but even just in terms of giving resources to assad. even though there has been cessations

in the syrian government more than eighty percent of the resources that have been going through the w.h.o. various un relief programs have been funneled directly to the syrian state and directly to the assad regime and there but also evidence of suction from the assad regime and this is you to like there were thirty three major areas of humanitarian donation they were listed in sixteen and only six of them are receiving supplies but mr money with all due respect do you think bibi assad government has any reason to mistrust the international community when it comes to distributing aid after all that he's syria off using aid convoys for smuggling weapons into rebel how territories and etc i mean. it looks like you're saying that assad is you know. is the only party here who doesn't have any reason to mistrust one another oh i don't think that this has only parades of mistrust of baby that there's just a general institutional distrust of assad and what he will do with the aid money once it's coming through so people figure it's better not to give it at all than to

have that or to reward him for his for his behavior warden for his alarm with the rather things like this but i do agree that there is a state centered bias in humanitarian aid so when it does go to rebel groups business they go to the underprivileged it has to go to the militants it is to go to the people who have territorial control and it if they in the revolution areas as ineffective sometimes in these kind of conflict zones as it is when they give it to the state so it's very difficult to establish trust at this point and yet tell me if i'm wrong really try to establish some degree of trust because when they reckon struction first began russia first turned to the united states with an offer to participate that didn't work out after that most could turn into the e.u. whole thing that the europeans at least how an interest in pacifying syria and stemming the flow off migrants that i didn't work out either now russia from what i understand from your writing has turned to china and saudi arabia so it looks like

it's not only pursuing its own agenda it's actually eagerly trying to get other people on board it definitely wants to get other people on board it wants to make sure that its investments in syria have kind of kind of duty for war as an economic perspective the syria the southwest of the stable civil state first and foremost strain of that doesn't have the resources to invest in its own people it won't be able to ever be able to convert any kind of peace settlement into a long term civil constitutional framework that will be able to prevent internal insurgencies for example it won't be able to really act as a sovereign actor ascendance own two feet so russia definitely has as they noted in that article. started by courting the west and courting by then cory non western countries brickwall in the west primarily because people it's just an institutional bias about dealing with russia and there's such a dunford in the highest levels of the military is. superficial contact at the

lower levels is such an aversion to dialogue cooperation of people are putting their own mistress and also these ahead of what's good and what's right for the syrian people finding it isn't to be a version to russia to be so much stronger. for the syrian people even though about it supposedly is a pretext for supporting the military a militant insurgency in that country for so many years anyway if you years ago that bomb administration you used to talk about how the iranians and the saudis need to learn how to share the region and i think to some extent at least the kremlin is now trying to you task this concept in syria if the saudis indeed agree to participate in they reckon structure. i think would give them some labyrinths against the iranians do you think they're likely to take up that offer so actually they both this came from in two thousand and sixteen the u.s. which has always been more pragmatic than the saudis with regards to dealing with

it for example in support of the russian military intervention in syria as long as it was targeting islamic movements they didn't support the arming rebel groups so the u.a.e. from fright max them point said that if we engage with assad we promote me into the syrian conflict we will be able to pry assad away from iran i think that's a positive and that's the angle a saudi arabia will take by by investing in syria if it does choose to invest but it's not necessarily about finding common ground with iran or finding common ground with syria or even improving their the welfare of syrians is more but investing just enough to get the government to realize that it's got an economic dependence on the gulf that can perhaps equal or supersede his military to. inside iran and then turn it away and then pry it away particularly if the sunni's in syria are seeing that the saudis are investing in humanitarian projects and they are putting pressure on the assad regime to acknowledge that and establish better relations with the gulf countries now let me also ask you about

the run as well in one of your articles you made the point that russia and iran are now facing an increasing competition over all sorts of contracts and to me even be sabotaging some of the uranium projects for example in real estate why would you do that i think that russia and iran had a very common set of interests that brought them together in two thousand and fifteen both countries invests a great deal in bashar al assad they wanted to retain power and they wanted also to have the sunni posts of the extremists of the gulf countries to be effectively removed from the syrian equation as we enter the reconstruction there's been a fundamental divide in opinion between that you know iran for example was much more willing to encourage that to recapture every inch of syria was russia has locus more and giving us had control over the most integral parts of the country and then proceeding to as a peace have a lead and these disagreements are slowly over to reconstruction if you look at as

recently as may russian foreign minister sergei lavrov was very concerned and very reticent about a new reign presence in southern syria that would last in military fashion putin you turned on that at the healthy summit because he recognizes the geo political realities of iran being there but i don't think that that distrust has died and the reconstruction sphere is a business operations business competition the iranians for example wanted access to russia's phosphate and oil in the preferential way but russia and its businesses jumped in first and were able to sign a more effective deal so even within the competition is not just driven by different visions by competing business interests and also pressure from within iran that we should act in fact. the russians are after we've cooperated and put the troops on the ground for a russian air operation there the russians are now just looking out for themselves and not the have us so there's a lot of distrust there i think in the in the russian conception of diplomacy alienating one country is just as risky as over relying on and not it doesn't that

guaranteed that the rein in interest at least at that very minimum will be mad just like the interest of all other players i think that yes that russia doesn't want to obviously be having syria completely dependent on iran doesn't want to rely too much on it because it also wants to maintain productive relationships of this rail and with the g.c.c. so it doesn't want to have a situation where iran is in trajan's of in syria and using that as the base to launch for example missile strikes against israeli targets or things like that so it wants to work with iran the reconstruction because the military partners they want to take that alliance in syria to other conflicts where they have pm and whether it be afghanistan by the also at the same time wants to look out for its own interests and those interests will come first and well i think that's the case with any country and so russia is not really an exception here anyway mr money we have to leave it there but i really appreciate your being with us today and sharing your perspective thank you very much thank you very much for inviting me again it

was a pleasure i encourage our viewers to keep this conversation going in our social media pages and hope to hear again same place same time here on a well to part. of . the world of course. lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that mainstream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door. and shouting past

each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for the truth the time is now for watching closely watching the hawks. my son doing drugs my nephew still in drugs my sister just with doing drugs it was like an epidemic of drug abuse america's public enemy number one in the united states is drug abuse he started going after the users in the prison population sewer we started treating sick people people who are addicted to these drugs like criminals while i was on the hill. with the war on drugs in the state there are countless numbers of people who are in prison for. sentences for minor minor offenders in the drug trade it's a lot watching your children grow up and miss you in waves and say by daddy as

you're walking out of a business it's just it doesn't get easier. venezuela's opposition leader won by calls on a foreign powers to intervene against president material as rivals rallies. following a nationwide blackout. is a solution to. crush the coup attempts. quite though he's a clown in the criminal. u.s. embassy staffers caught with a mortar shell in his luggage at a moscow airport russia called the incident a prompt action but washington plays it down saying there was no danger to passengers and the man has actually left the country. and the u.s. house.