Syria Rebels Used Sulphur Mustard Gas- International Watchdog

http://www.newsbharati.com/ Syria Rebels Used Sulphur Mustard Gas- International Watchdog.

International Chemical Weapons Watchdog determines mustard gas used in Syrian fighting



THE HAGUE — Reuters

Chemical weapons experts have determined that mustard gas was used during fighting in Syria in August, according to a report by an international watchdog seen by Reuters.



The chemical – which causes severe delayed burns to the eyes, skin and lungs and is banned under international law – was used during a battle between Islamic State insurgents and another rebel group, diplomatic sources said.



The confidential Oct. 29 report by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), a summary of which was shown to Reuters, concluded “with the utmost confidence that at least two people were exposed to sulfur mustard” in the town of Marea, north of Aleppo, on Aug. 21.



“It is very likely that the effects of sulfur mustard resulted in the death of a baby,” it said.



The report provides the first official confirmation of use of sulfur mustard, commonly known as mustard gas, in Syria since it agreed to destroy its chemical weapons stockpile, which included sulfur mustard.



It poses a dilemma for the U.N. Security Council because Syria is supposed to have completely surrendered the toxic chemicals 18 months ago. Their use violates U.N. Security Council resolutions and the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention.



Also “it raises the major question of where the sulfur mustard came from”, one source said. “Either they (IS) gained the ability to make it themselves, or it may have come from an undeclared stockpile overtaken by IS. Both are worrying options.”



The finding, which will be formally presented to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon later this month, adds to a growing body of evidence that the Islamic State group has obtained, and is using, chemical weapons in both Iraq and Syria.





Kurdish authorities said earlier this month that Islamic State fighters fired mortar rounds containing mustard agent at Kurdish peshmerga fighters in northern Iraq during clashes in August. They said blood samples taken from around 35 fighters who were exposed in the attack southwest of the regional capital of Erbil showed “signatures” of mustard gas.



A team of OPCW experts has been sent to Iraq to confirm the findings and is expected to obtain its own samples later this month, one diplomat said.



A special session has been called by the OPCW’s 41-member Executive Council to discuss the Syrian findings and it will be held in The Hague on Nov. 23, sources at the OPCW told Reuters.



Sulfur mustard is a so-called Schedule 1 chemical agent, which means it has few uses outside warfare.



A second report by the OPCW fact-finding mission to Syria said the team had so far been unable to substantiate claims from the Syrian government that its forces had been targeted by insurgents using chemical weapons.



The mission “cannot confidently determine whether or not a chemical was used as a weapon” by militants in the Jober area on Aug. 29, 2014, it said.



Syria agreed in September 2013 to destroy its entire chemical weapons program under a deal negotiated with the United States and Russia after hundreds of people were killed in a sarin gas attack in the outskirts of the capital, Damascus.



The last of 1,300 tonnes of chemical weapons declared to the OPCW was handed over in June, 2014, but several Western governments have expressed doubt that the government of President Bashar al-Assad declared its entire arsenal.



With Syria’s civil war in its fifth year, chlorine has also been used illegally in systematic attacks against civilians, the OPCW found.



A U.N.-OPCW joint investigative mission has been assigned to determine who was behind those attacks.

Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Released- What You Need To Know

http://www.newsbharati.com/ Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Released- What You Need To Know



The Trans-Pacific Partnership is finally public. Here's what you need to know.

The Obama administration has finally released the full text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a controversial deal that would knit together the economies of a dozen Pacific Rim nations. Now Obama just needs to win one more vote in Congress for the US to accept the agreement.



But while the Obama administration says that the deal will boost the US economy and boost America's influence in Asia, critics have portrayed it as a package of giveaways to corporate interests. They're mobilizing the deny Obama the congressional majority vote he needs to get the deal over the finish line. The fight over the TPP has pushed Obama and Republican leaders into an unusual alliance against congressional Democrats who vehemently oppose the deal.



As soon as the agreement was released, interest groups began flooding my inbox with press releases praising or attacking the deal. But Simon Lester, a trade policy expert at the Cato Institute, predicts that it could take a month for a full picture of the deal's implications to emerge. "If you want to get an overall sense, you have to compare every product and every service." And there are hundreds of provisions spread over 30 chapters, so that's going to take a long time.



The TPP is a lot more than just a trade deal



The TPP is usually described as a trade deal, and it certainly will have important provisions related to trade. Negotiators have been considering liberalizing trade in cars and trucks, rice, dairy products, textiles, and a lot more.



But the agreement is also a lot more than a trade deal. It has more than two dozen chapters that cover everything from tariffs to the handling of international investment disputes. The reason these deals have gotten so complex is that people realized that they were a good vehicle for creating binding international agreements.



Modern trade deals include a dispute settlement process that helps ensure countries keep the commitments they make under trade deals. If one country fails to keep its commitment, another country can file a complaint that's heard by an impartial tribunal. If the complaining country prevails, it can impose retaliatory tariffs on the loser.



Interest groups have realized that this same mechanism can be used to enforce agreements on topics that have little to do with trade. And so a wide variety of interest groups — from Hollywood and the pharmaceutical industry to labor and environmental groups — have lobbied to include rules they favored in trade agreements. And because the US is the world's largest economy, American negotiators — and, therefore, US interest groups — have had the most power in these negotiations.



LABOR AND ENVIRONMENT GROUPS PUSHED THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO INCORPORATE THEIR PRIORITIES INTO THE AGREEMENT



For example, at the behest of Hollywood and other US copyright holders, American negotiators pushed other countries to adopt our long copyright terms: the life of the author plus 70 years. International investors pushed for an investor-state dispute settlement process that allows private investors to challenge foreign government policies before an impartial arbitration panel — a process critics such as Sen. Warren describe as a threat to American sovereignty. Drug companies wanted other countries to provide the same robust legal protections for new drugs they enjoy in the United States.



At the same time, labor and environment groups pushed the Obama administration to incorporate their priorities into the agreement. The Obama administration insists the president has done just that, but so far these changes haven't gone far enough to convince these groups to endorse the agreement.



The White House says the TPP is the most progressive deal in history



In recent decades, Republicans and their allies in the business community have tended to be more favorable toward trade deals than Democrats and their allies in the labor movement. That has led to an awkward situation for President Obama, as he has been forced to ally with Republican leaders in Congress to pass legislation that's opposed by many members of his own party.



But Republicans aren't unanimous in supporting the TPP, and the president would of course prefer to have some support from his own party for the trade deal. That helps to explain why the White House's website on the deal is framed as an appeal to progressives.



The Obama administration touts the TPP's beefed-up protections for labor rights, the environment, and "other progressive priorities." It features endorsements from three Democratic former governors, but doesn't mention the many sitting Republican governors who have endorsed the agreement.