Suchergebnisse

Problem setting. The presence of a combination of global environmental, economic, social, political and cultural processes indicates that the "era of turbulence" has come, which is reflected in the instability of the world system in general and of the socio-political situation in a single country. The existing balance of relationships between man and nature, man and society, society and the state due to turbulent phenomena and metamorphoses can be disrupted, resulting in chaos and unpredictability of events.Recent research and publications analysis. The concept of "turbulent society" and the phenomenon associated with it is devoted to a number of works E. Shchekotin and S. Chudinova. In the works of O. Panchenko the concept of "turbulence" was studied from the point of view of the individual in society and the information environment. The study of social metamorphoses is devoted to the work of S. Kravchenko. The ideas of metamorphization of society, economy, power, violence, justice were investigated by Canadian sociologists W. Vanderburg and V. Mosco.Highlighting previously unsettled parts of the general problem. It is determined that both turbulence and social metamorphoses are considered mainly from the point of view of sociology and psychology. At the same time, consideration of these phenomena from the perspective of public administration is gaining relevance. The purpose of the article: to investigate the causal relationship between turbulence and metamorphoses in modern society and the associated risks of state control of the quality of life of citizens.Paper main body. The emergence of a critical point of turbulence is associated with a number of trends in modern world development, accompanied by irreversible radical changes – metamorphoses. Five most significant arguments have been singled out, emphasize the causal relationship between turbulence and metamorphoses of society.1. The society itself, which is changing, is a permanent generator of metamorphoses; first of all, it is a confrontation between elites in the struggle for power and political "dissatisfaction" of the population.2. Turbulent phenomena associated with globalization and periodic economic crises.3. The change in the relationship between humanity and the biosphere has led to the emergence of complex social and techno-natural hybrids, the internal contradictions of which become generators of turbulence. 4. A dangerous development of events, which is characterized by a metamorphosis of erasing the dividing lines between the state of peace and war, where the general concept of anti-fighting was "hybrid warfare – hidden aggressive actions that run counter to international law".5. The process of informatization of the world system has generated problematic phenomena: a) requirements for greater transparency of information relations, which leads to a violation of rights and freedoms; b) the advent of "post-paper" culture significantly changes the structure and functions of the institutes of management, education and science; c) the struggle between global players for the role of "programmers" and "switches" of the media and network systems that help shape global politics is escalating. It is noted that the comprehensive process of turbulence also affects public administration institutions, weakening them, which in turn directly affects the quality of life of people – functions that the state has largely monopolized, cease to be performed, at best, are not properly performed. For example, the phenomenon of modern terrorism is considered, in relation to which the traditional institutions that are involved in security are often ineffective, and their counter-terrorism measures only limit the constitutional rights of citizens. At the same time, the skillful and purposeful manipulation of anxieties, fears and confusion of the average citizen allows us to form the basis for closing the project of the rule of law state itself.Based on the study, the author considers three ways to solve the problem: a) strengthening authoritarian trends in government regulation; b) weakening the role of the state, strengthening local self-government; c) the symbiosis of delegating broad powers to the local level with proper control of the center and the "safety culture" as a form of self-care.Conclusions of the research and prospects for further studies. The main metamorphosis of modern society is its transformation into a turbulent state, where the main feature is flow reality, and because of this, society is riddled with chaotic, uncontrolled processes. These turbulent phenomena can lead both to new revolutionary changes and the opening of new opportunities for humans, as well as to catastrophic consequences. An important task for the state is to understand the new realities and develop appropriate policies. A solution to the problem may be a symbiosis of delegation of broad authority to the local level with proper control of the center and the "safety culture" as a form of self-care. Additional research and analysis is required, including – what proportion of participation falls on the state, society, local government and the individual in the implementation of the proposed concept. ; Розкрито сутність причино-наслідкового зв'язку між турбулентністю іметаморфозами суспільства. Наголошено, що головною метаморфозою сучасного суспільства є перетворення його в турбулентний стан, де основною ознакою є потокова реальність, і в силу цього суспільство пронизане хаотичними, неконтрольованими процесами. Зазначено, що нестабільне середовище продукує як високі ризики, так і високі шанси для держави не втратити управлінські функції. Зауважено, що важливим завданням є розуміння нових реалій і вироблення відповідної політики. Вказано, що варіантом вирішення проблеми може стати симбіоз делегування широких повноважень на локальний рівень при належному контролі центру і "культури безпеки" як форми реалізації турботи про себе.

Die Frage nach einer gerechten, möglichst von allen Mitgliedern eines Gemeinwesens als legitim erachteten, Verteilung verfügbarer Ressourcen stellt sich unweigerlich in jedem kollektiv finanzierten Gesundheitssystem. Sie ist nicht beschränkt auf monetäre oder materielle Ressourcen, sondern betrifft zum Beispiel auch die Arbeitszeit von Fachkräften oder die Allokation von Spenderorganen. In Deutschland wurden solche Verteilungsfragen in der medizinischen Versorgung bisher erstens häufig einzelfallbezogen und ohne eine vorhergehende systematische Klärung der gesellschaftlichen Prioritäten behandelt; zweitens wurden sie vorwiegend von Leistungserbringern und Experten innerhalb von Fachöffentlichkeiten thematisiert. Eine in einigen inner- und außereuropäischen Ländern bereits erprobte Möglichkeit zur Vorbereitung der konsistenten Klärung von Verteilungsfragen in der Gesundheitsversorgung ist die systematische Priorisierung auf Basis einer gesellschaftlich geklärten Axiologie und Methodik. Die gestiegene Patienten- und Bürgerorientierung in der Gesundheitspolitik legt es nahe, Bürger auch in den regelmäßig umstrittenen Fragen nach den Werten, Kriterien und Verfahrensregeln für die Klärung von Priorisierungsfragen frühzeitig in die politische Meinungs- und Willensbildung mit einzubeziehen. Als besonders vielversprechend für die partizipative Bearbeitung komplexer Probleme gelten deliberative Formate, die im Anschluss an die sog. ´Konsensuskonferenzen´ in der Medizin entwickelt wurden. Allerdings ist die Frage, ob und in welcher Weise sich solche deliberativen Beteiligungsformate tatsächlich zur Anregung und Förderung von Prozessen der Meinungs- und Willensbildung zu normativ anspruchsvollen und zukunftsorientierten Problemen eignen, immer noch umstritten. Die vorliegende Arbeit bearbeitet diese politisch-praktisch motivierte Frage im Rahmen einer in der Theorie der deliberativen Demokratie fundierten Mixed-Methods Analyse eines deliberativen Modellprojekts – der ´Lübecker Bürgerkonferenz zur Priorisierung in der medizinischen Versorgung´. Im Rahmen dieses Verfahrens sind im Frühsommer 2010 in Lübeck 20 zufällig ausgewählte Bürgerinnen und Bürger an insgesamt vier Wochenenden zusammengekommen. Sie haben sich intensiv in die Frage nach Werten, Kriterien und Verfahrensregeln für die Priorisierung in der medizinischen Versorgung eingearbeitet, Experten hierzu befragt und zum Abschluss die Ergebnisse ihrer Diskussionen in einem gemeinsamen Bürgervotum festgehalten und der Öffentlichkeit übergeben. Die Bearbeitung der oben genannten Fragestellung erfolgt in drei Analyseschritten: Im Rahmen einer Potenzialanalyse wird zuerst untersucht, ob und in welchem Maß sich die Potenziale, die in der einschlägigen Literatur solchen Bürgerbeteiligungsverfahren zugeschrieben werden, im vorliegenden Fall der Lübecker Bürgerkonferenz tatsächlich entfaltet haben. In einem zweiten Schritt wird im Sinne einer Evaluation untersucht, ob die Anforderungen an die Qualität deliberativer Bürgerbeteiligungsverfahren, die in der einschlägigen Literatur formuliert werden, im und vom Lübecker Projekt erfüllt worden sind. Im dritten Schritt geht es im Sinne einer Kontextanalyse um die Frage, wie sich die spezifischen Bedingungen, die mit dem Thema, dem Design und den Verfahrensentscheidungen gesetzt wurden, auf den Verlauf der Bürgerkonferenz und ihre Ergebnisse sowie auf ihre Bedeutung für die öffentliche und politische Meinungs- und Willensbildung außerhalb der Bürgerkonferenz ausgewirkt haben Auf Grundlage der Analyse der Lübecker Bürgerkonferenz zeigen sich verschiedene in der Literatur bereits beschriebene Wirkungen deliberativer Verfahren auf die verfahrensinterne und öffentliche Meinungs- und Willensbildung. Aus der Analyse von Qualität und Kontexteffekten des Verfahrens werden hinderliche und förderliche Faktoren für die Entfaltung dieser Wirkungen identifiziert worden. Hieraus können 1.) einige Schlussfolgerungen für das analysierte Modellprojekt selbst gezogen, 2.) Empfehlungen für zukünftige ähnliche Beteiligungsverfahren zu zukunftsorientierten, komplexen Fragestellungen abgeleitet und 3.) einige Perspektiven für die Partizipations- und Deliberationsforschung entwickelt werden. So wird die Bürgerkonferenz explizit als Teil eines sie umgebenden deliberativen Systems verstanden. Diese Perspektive hat sich in verschiedener Hinsicht als vorteilhaft für die Analyse eines einzelnen deliberativen Beteiligungsprojekts erwiesen. Die Tauglichkeit dieses Ansatzes ist im Rahmen zukünftiger empirischer Studien zu überprüfen. Die in der vorliegenden Arbeit präsentierten detaillierten Ergebnisse zur Lübecker Bürgerkonferenz können hierfür als Vergleichsmaterialien dienen. ; Every publicly financed health care system has to deal with the question of how to organise the just allocation of its resources. This does not only include financial resources but also the always limited time of health care professionals or scarce donated organs. In Germany, allocation in health care has usually been organised without systematically clarifying society´s priorities in advance; also, they have been discussed amongst health care professionals and experts with very scarce involvement of patients or the general public. To allow for a more consistent allocation, several countries around the world have developed a systematic methodology for prioritization in health care. Many countries also have been involving the public to identify publicly assessed and approved principles, criteria and procedural rules for prioritisation in health care. Deliberative fora (e.g. mini-publics) are considered as most promising methods to involve members of the public in the formation of public opinions and political wills on complex problems like prioritisation in medicine. But, the applicability of deliberative methods as an actual contribution to process of the formation of public opinions and political wills on such normatively challenging and future-oriented questions remains uncertain. This thesis aims to contribute to the clarification of this question by means of a mixed-methods analysis of a local model-project: ´The Lübeck citizen conference on prioritisation in medicine´. In the course of this project, in the summer of 2010 20 randomly selected inhabitants of the German city of Lübeck were invited to discuss the following question: What principles, criteria and procedural rules should guide processes of prioritisation in the German health care system? Participants were able to interview several experts on this issue. After four weekends of deliberations, they summarized the results of the citizen conference in a mutual document which was presented to the public. The analysis of the citizen conference in this thesis follows three steps: firstly, it is analysed whether potential impacts of deliberative mini-publics, which are being discussed in the relevant literature, have been realised in the Lübeck citizen conference. Secondly, in an evaluative step, it is analysed whether the requirements for a high quality deliberation have been fulfilled in the citizen conference. In a third step, context factors and their potential impacts on the course and the results of the Lübeck project are analysed. For these three steps of analysis, different types of data are used: 1.) transcripts of discussions during the citizen conference, 2.) documents which have been used during the citizen conference (like sets of questions for experts or the participants´ mutual outcome document), 3.) semi structured qualitative interviews with some participants before and after the conference, 4.) a full selection of press- and media-reports on the project,5.) the documentation of a scientific symposium on the citizen conference, and 6.) a postal survey with about 400 stakeholders in the German health care system. The results of the analysis indicate that several impacts which have been described in the literature are actually realised within and by the Lübeck citizen conference. According to the results of steps two and three (quality requirements and context factors), promotive and obstructive factors for the realisation of potential impacts are identified. These results can be used 1.) for a final assessment of the Lübeck citizen conference and its value for the formation of public opinions and political wills on prioritisation in health care, 2.) to make recommendations for future mini-publics on complex issues, and 3.) to hint towards some new perspectives for participation research and empirical research in the field of deliberative democracy.

In 188 B.C.E., a Roman commission awarded most of Anatolia (Asia Minor) to the Attalid dynasty, a modest fiefdom based in the city of Pergamon. Immediately, the Roman commissioners evacuated along with their force of arms. Enforcement of the settlement, known as the Treaty of Apameia, was left to local beneficiaries, chiefly the Attalids, but also the island republic of Rhodes. The extraction of revenues and the judicious redistribution of resources were both key to the extension of Attalid control over the new territory and the maintenance of the empire. This dissertation is a study of the forms of taxation and public benefaction that characterized the late Attalid kingdom, a multiscalar state comprised of many small communities, most prominent among them, ancient cities on the Greek model of the polis. It argues that the dynasty's idiosyncratic choices about taxation and euergetism help explain the success of the Attalid imperial project. They aligned interests and created new collectivities. Civic values as much as royal interests determined the cultural categories within which taxation and redistribution took place. To a greater extent than Rhodes, the Attalids integrated and taxed their new subjects, no easy task in a world of flimsy bureaucracy and taxpayers who spoke of the taxman and the pirate in the same breath. Previous research has explained the Attalid success in two divergent ways. Either the Attalids were fiscally predatory and manipulated civic institutions, or they were laissez-faire "constitutional monarchs." Neither picture accords well with the evidence, primarily inscriptions and coins. These documents reflect a social process of mutual implication in fiscal structures. This dissertation builds on models of the Hellenistic king as interactive with his subjects, and of the Greek city as capable of imposing ideological constraints on monarchs, but it advocates a new model for the Hellenistic kingdom that assigns a permanent, predictable, and rational role to the king in the economy of the city.Part I explores royal acts of giving. Ch. 1 treats the Attalid habit of applying certain royal revenues for the provision of specific public goods in the cities where they were collected, the practice of "earmarking." I argue that earmarking arrangements were neither a form of sugarcoating the bitter pill of imperialism, nor simply the city's re-appropriation of what were in origin civic resources, but the end product of a social bargaining process. Negotiations over earmarking provided the Attalid king with an arena for the display of the virtue of providence (pronoia). They also necessitated frequent forays into the domain of private property. Ch. 2 examines Attalid patronage of civic gymnasia, which in its intensity distinguished the dynasty from its rivals in this period. I explain the Attalid preference for giving to the gymnasium by re-conceptualizing that institution in the political landscape of the city. While the Hellenistic gymnasium is often seen as a miniature version of the civic community, I draw attention to its autonomy, both institutional and ideological. This autonomy invited royal participation in the finances of the gymnasium. It also rendered the gymnasium a privileged site of negotiation between city and crown where kings, princes, and courtiers interacted with civic elites.Part II presents the other, less generous side of Attalid political economy after Apameia: the extraction of revenues. Chapter 3 tells a story of wide-scale monetary change, since we now agree that the Attalids instituted their new coinage, the cistophori, after 188. Light weight and strangely decorated, the cistophori are one of the greatest puzzles of Greek numismatics. Against the common view that the production of these coins was highly centralized, I argue that a series of negotiations stands behind the successful imposition of the new monetary regime and that its responsibilities - and profits - were shared. Further, the cistophoric monetary system was not a closed currency zone. The Attalid kingdom operated on a ramified system, in which different currencies were required for different payments. Coinage helped to integrate economic microregions oriented in very different directions, and thus should be seen as integral to a process of state formation. Chapter 4 analyzes the fiscal system of the Attalids. It systematically reviews the evidence for the types of taxes, the personnel of tax collection, and tax rates. For direct taxation of agriculture, assessment by community was the norm, and negotiation over the annual rate seems to have been routine. Military settlers (cleruchs), on the other hand, paid individually on allotments granted by royal authority. Their taxes were a mixed liability of cash and kind, the mixed-phoros regime known in Anatolia since the Achaemenids. Direct taxation of persons, typically those living in non-polis communities, was irregular. The bulk of our evidence for indirect taxation points to a focus on customs dues and usage taxes levied on different parts of the royal patrimony, such as coastal lagoons, saltpans, mines, and royal forests. Contrary to conventional wisdom, the Attalids did not employ tax farmers directly, but relied on the subject communities to collect royal taxes as they wished. In this, as in many other respects, continuity with the earlier Seleukid kingdom is evident. Under the pressure of a highly competitive interstate political system, the Attalids pursued greater revenues. Yet royal fiscality always remained a calque on civic: it did not create new categories of taxation, and civic fiscality survived the encounter intact. Generally, fiscal intensification was pursued through indirect taxation. The Attalids aimed to capture revenue on goods moving between the different fiscal zones of Anatolia. To this end, they built up what is described as an infrastructure of surveillance.

The Situation In The Middle East ; United Nations S/PV.8260 Security Council Seventy-third year 8260th meeting Wednesday, 16 May 2018, 10 a.m. New York Provisional President: Ms. Wronecka. . (Poland) Members: Bolivia (Plurinational State of). . Mr. Inchauste Jordán China. . Mr. Ma Zhaoxu Côte d'Ivoire. . Mr. Djédjé Equatorial Guinea. . M. Ndong Mba Ethiopia. . Mr. Alemu France. . Mr. Delattre Kazakhstan. . Mr. Umarov Kuwait. . Mr. Alotaibi Netherlands. . Mr. Van Oosterom Peru. . Mr. Meza-Cuadra Russian Federation. . Mr. Polyanskiy Sweden . Mr. Skoog United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland . Ms. Pierce United States of America. . Ms. Eckels-Currie Agenda The situation in the Middle East This record contains the text of speeches delivered in English and of the translation of speeches delivered in other languages. The final text will be printed in the Official Records of the Security Council. Corrections should be submitted to the original languages only. They should be incorporated in a copy of the record and sent under the signature of a member of the delegation concerned to the Chief of the Verbatim Reporting Service, room U-0506 (verbatimrecords@un.org). Corrected records will be reissued electronically on the Official Document System of the United Nations (http://documents.un.org). 18-14999 (E) *1814999* S/PV.8260 The situation in the Middle East 16/05/2018 2/12 18-14999 The meeting was called to order at 10.15 a.m. Adoption of the agenda The agenda was adopted. The situation in the Middle East The President: In accordance with rule 39 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure, I invite Mr. Staffan de Mistura, Special Envoy of the Secretary- General for Syria, to participate in this meeting. Mr. De Mistura is joining today's meeting via video-teleconference from Geneva. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. I give the floor to Mr. De Mistura. Mr. De Mistura: When I last briefed the Security Council on 9 April, it was at an emergency meeting (see S/PV.8225). On that occasion, I warned of the threats to regional and international peace and security arising from developments in or related to Syria. I know that today it is not an emergency meeting. However, the circumstances of an emergency very much remain. I do not need to remind members that tensions are high and regional and international confrontations have occurred several times. Allow me to highlight some recent events since 9 April. On 13 April, the United States, France and the United Kingdom conducted missile strikes in response to the allegations of the use of chemical weapons in eastern Ghouta. Those countries say that the strikes targeted three research and production facilities near Damascus and Homs. On 29 April, strikes were reported on Syrian Government military facilities in Hamah and Aleppo. Some media outlets attributed those strikes to Israel, alleging that those killed included Iranian personnel. Neither Israel nor Iran responded to those claims. On 8 May, strikes were reported just south of Damascus. Syrian State media attributed those strikes to Israel. Israel did not confirm that claim. Israel then said that it had detected "irregular Iranian activity" in the occupied Golan, which it put on high alert. Between 9 and 10 May, Israel carried out dozens of strikes against presumed Iranian and Syrian Government military targets across southern Syria. The Israeli authorities claim that they were responding to Iranian forces firing rockets from Syrian territory at Israeli military targets in the occupied Syrian Golan. Iran condemned the Israeli strikes and denied those claims. We are not is a position to independently verify every aspect of those incidents. However, even an incomplete picture shows the troubling trajectory of the increasingly frequent and ever more intense international confrontations over Syria, unprecedented since 1973. As the Security Council knows, the Secretary- General has followed those developments with great concern and called for restraint by all parties in order to avoid any acts that could escalate the situation and worsen the suffering of the Syrian people. The Secretary-General stressed that the United Nations has a "duty to remind Member States that there is an obligation, particularly when dealing with matters of peace and security, to act consistently with the Charter of the United Nations, and with international law in general." (S/PV.8233, p. 2) On the issue of chemical weapons, let me again echo the Secretary-General's call for the Security Council to "agree on a dedicated mechanism for ensuring effective accountability for the use of chemical weapons in Syria" (ibid.). As the Council well knows, as of now, we await the results of the ongoing investigation by the Fact-finding Mission of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons following its visit to Douma, with a report to be issued to States parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention. However, we have also seen worrying developments elsewhere in Syria. Evacuations from eastern Ghouta were similarly repeated in the eastern Qalamoun area, southern Damascus and northern rural Homs. First, on the military escalation, the pattern has been one of incoming air strikes and artillery and outgoing mortars and rockets towards Damascus. Then there was a negotiation, followed by an agreement for the evacuation of those civilians and fighters unwilling to remain under Syrian Government control or Russian Federation protection guarantees. We have also seen similar evacuation agreements 16/05/2018 The situation in the Middle East S/PV.8260 18-14999 3/12 being discussed in Idlib province but in a completely different format — the reverse format. This time we are talking about civilians and fighters in Government-controlled areas, namely, Kafraya and Fo'ah, while considering evacuations — beginning with medical evacuations — following the three-year siege and intermittent attacks from armed groups surrounding that area.Let me share with the Council a recurrent concern that I know that all members have. If civilians and fighters are simply funnelled into northern Syria — mostly into Idlib — then that might only postpone another conflict affecting many additional people, which I will discuss later. Therefore, it is important to keep close watch on future developments in Idlib province. Meanwhile, civilians continue to pay a terrible price. To be precise, 110,000 people have been evacuated to north-western Syria and Operation Euphrates Shield areas in the past two months. Many of them are reportedly traumatized and in urgent need of assistance and protection. Humanitarian partners are overwhelmed and stretched quite thin by the scale of those evacuations, but continue to do their utmost to respond to the growing needs, with the Council's assistance.Returning to the topic of Idlib, if a Ghouta scenario were to play out there, the situation could be six times worse, affecting 2.3 million people, half of whom are already internally displaced and would have nowhere else to go. But that is not purely a question of the Syrians' suffering. We fear that any substantial escalation in Idlib, Dar'a or in the north-east might also result in risks not only to Syrian civilians, but also for international peace and security. As we know, many of those areas contain external and international forces. Conflict there might entail confrontations with those forces, thereby leading us down a slippery slope towards regional or potential international conflict. Therefore, discussions at the international level on how to prevent that and on de-escalation are needed, and, although they are taking place, they also need to be very intensive.I was therefore very encouraged to see concrete discussions on de-escalation when I attended the ninth high-level Astana meeting yesterday, which covered the issue of Idlib in particular, as the three guarantors have a say and the means to avoid it. That round of discussions in Astana saw constructive discussions on how that might be achieved. While fully stressing the need to respect Syria's sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity, we saw at first-hand the parties engage actively on how to avoid a worst-case scenario in Idlib. Moreover, the working group, of which the United Nations is a member and a proactive supporter — as hundreds of thousands of people in Syria expect of us — held its second meeting on the release of detainees, abductees and bodies, and on the identification of missing persons. The members of the working group held constructive discussions on practical and concrete steps to address that key humanitarian issue. The guarantors informed us that they have secured the parties' support — which, if confirmed, is good news — for the activities taking place under the auspices of the working group, which is a positive development. As it is a matter of preliminary discussions, I hope that we will see progress with regard to that complex issue at the working group's next meeting, which we understand will be held in Ankara.De-escalation is indispensable, as the Syrians themselves are telling us, but it is only one of the ingredients necessary to move forward the political process. We also need to overcome concrete challenges to meaningfully follow through with the Geneva process so as to implement resolution 2254 (2015). As instructed by the Secretary-General, I have consulted with a broad spectrum of relevant stakeholders and proactively identified options for a meaningful relaunch of the United Nations-facilitated Geneva process. Over a period of two weeks, I conducted an exhaustive tour of consultations with members of the League of Arab States; representatives of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and Iraq; the European Union (EU) High Representative; representatives of several key European countries, Turkey, the Russian Federation and the Islamic Republic of Iran; and all members of the Council, during what I believe was a very productive and useful retreat in Sweden; United States authorities during my visit to meet with them in Washington, D.C., several days ago; and also the Syrian Government and the opposition, with whom I had constructive discussions on the sidelines of the Astana meeting over the past two days. My deputy, Mr. Ramzy, was also in the region this past weekend in continuous political contact with regional stakeholders, and my chief of political affairs, Mr. Robert Dann, is visting China as we speak to exchange views with officials of that important member of the Security Council.What did I learn from that long tour? Not surprisingly, I returned to Geneva with a mixed picture. S/PV.8260 The situation in the Middle East 16/05/2018 4/12 18-14999 Clearly, significant differences remain, but there is also much common ground and interest on the need, first, to de-escalate, secondly, to form a constitutional committee under the auspices of the United Nations, thirdly, to facilitate the establishment of a safe, calm and neutral environment — leading to our shared goals in the political process — and, fourthly, to respect Syria's sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence. However, those commonalities risk getting glossed over, especially in the absence of serious international dialogue. I will say more on that later. During my tour, my message to all was the need — now more than ever — for robust, strong, proactive and urgent dialogue and consensus at the international level to create the minimum conditions necessary for a realistic and credible political process. As we know, much water has flowed under the bridge and much has happened since resolution 2254 (2015) was adopted. We are therefore becoming increasingly realistic and know that we need a credible political process that takes into account the current situation and does not forget resolution 2254 (2015).As the Secretariat, we are not sitting idle in that regard. We are assessing a number of creative options to update, revive and advance the Geneva-based political process. Let me state for the record that the United Nations remains ever-mobilized and -ready to work on the formation of a constitutional committee in accordance with the final statement of the Syrian National Dialogue Congress in Sochi. I therefore welcome the intention of the Astana guarantors to actively and regularly engage with the United Nations in Geneva so as to see through a concrete follow-up to the statement since its adoption three and a half months ago.I was also pleased to see a significant number of Member States reaffirm the primacy of the United Nations-led Geneva process, in general, and the need for a constitutional committee working under United Nations auspices, when I was at the EU-United Nations Brussels conference from 24 to 25 April. Those at the conference nearly unanimously reiterated the message that the only solution to the crisis will be political and that only such a political solution will pave the way for reconstruction efforts. Also in Brussels, we saw the entire United Nations system highlight the increasing needs of millions of Syrians, including internally displaced persons (IDPs) and neighbouring countries hosting refugees.Let me also note the important contribution of Syrian civil society in Brussels, in particular during a side event organized by the EU and my own Office. Those present did not shy away from debating with one another constructively and intensively on complex issues, such as transitional justice and sanctions. They all demanded the release of all detainees, abductees and missing persons. They all affirmed that any political solution must protect the right of refugees and IDPs. Despite their differences, Syrians — Syrian civil society — displayed a genuine commitment to dialogue and a spirit of negotiation that I hope can be replicated in the formal negotiations.In Brussels I also met with a group of Syrian women activists who stressed that not enough has been done to secure the direct participation of Syrian women in the political process. I committed to translating our collective commitment to that inclusion into concrete measures, and I will count on the Council's support to keep that promise. For instance, in future intra-Syrian talks, I will insist that the relevant number of seats be reserved exclusively for Syrian women. When I am criticized, I hope that the Council will support me. I know it will not be popular, but it needs to be done.Let me briefly touch on an issue that was raised by the civil society in Brussels and by many Syrians elsewhere who have been writing to us, that is, the possible implications of the newly adopted Law No. 10. We are quite aware of the concerns surrounding that law. We, as well as other United Nations partners, are seeking clarifications on the law's goals and repercussions, especially for refugees and IDPs who do not have access to legal documentation.Let me conclude with two bottom lines.First, de-escalation is critical between the Syrian and international stakeholders, both regional and global. We hope that the relevant players can re-establish some overarching rules of the road in that regard. We stand ready to facilitate such a discussion, with focused support from the Council and key countries for the good offices of the Secretary-General and myself.Secondly, we must revive the political process in terms of the constitutional committee, as well as in terms of some initial steps towards the establishment of a safe, calm and neutral environment. We stand ready to facilitate discussions on both. Let me stress that a critical component of either aspect of the political process is active, continuous and positive United 16/05/2018 The situation in the Middle East S/PV.8260 18-14999 5/12 Nations engagement with the Syrian parties. I repeat once again that we stand ready, today as always, to engage with the Syrian Government in Damascus. We will also continue our contacts with the opposition and Syrian civil society.To unlock and lock those two aspects, careful diplomacy is required more than ever — careful, but proactive diplomacy, including at a high level. Hence, we look with interest to the forthcoming visits to Moscow and meetings of Chancellor Merkel and, later on, President Macron with President Putin, which undoubtedly will not avoid the issue of a political process in Syria. The United Nations believes that there is an urgent need for high-level diplomacy to support de-escalation, avoid any miscalculation and ensure a genuine communication system about a sustainable end to the conflict. With the support of the Secretary-General, we will increase our own efforts to contribute to that endeavour, including by offering further ideas and —if required, which we hope it will be — bridging proposals.The President: I thank Mr. De Mistura for his briefing.I shall now give the floor to the members of the Security Council who wish to make statements.Ms. Eckels-Currie (United States of America): Since this is my first opportunity to congratulate you upon assuming the presidency, Madam President, I would like to do so at this time. I also thank Staffan for his briefing.Last week the world witnessed a new and extremely dangerous escalation in Syria. It should not surprise anyone on the Security Council that Iran was responsible. Iranian forces operating from Syrian territory launched a rocket attack against Israeli citizens — citizens of a sovereign State Member of the United Nations. The United States strongly supports Israel's right to act in self-defence. Iran's reckless and provocative acts last week prove what we have been saying: wherever Iran shows up in the Middle East, chaos follows. Last week's rocket attack against Israel is the latest in a pattern of destabilizing behaviour that is a dire threat to the region's stability.Iran's rocket attack against Israel shows something else too. It puts to bed any myths about why Iran is present in Syria, or what its true objectives might be. The fact is that Iran has installed offensive rocket and missile systems in Syria aimed at Israel. Iran has introduced those threats that were not present in Syria before the conflict; they are now. Iran, together with Hizbullah and other militias, is taking advantage of Syrian territory to establish bases and training camps. They are moving ever closer to Israel. The United States calls on Iran, Hizbullah and their other proxies to take no further provocative steps. If they do, Iran will bear full responsibility for its actions.It is also important to emphasize that Iran's actions do not serve the interests of the Iranian or the Syrian people. The Syrian people get no say in whether Iran threatens war against Syria's neighbours, but it is they who have to live with the consequences.All of us on the Security Council have an important choice to make: we can stay quiet and watch as Iran builds up the infrastructure to create another Hizbullah in Syria, or we can speak up and take steps to put real pressure on Iran to stop. For our part, the United States refuses to stay quiet. Russia in particular has a special responsibility here. Its troops are on the ground, sometimes alongside Iran's. Russia must know that Iran's provocative actions do nothing to help resolve the war in Syria. Russia must know that Iran's actions do just the opposite. They only inflame, prolong and widen the conflict.We heard once again from Staffan today that there has been very little progress on the political track. There has been no progress at all in Geneva, or following Russia's own conferences in Astana and Sochi. Since January, the United Nations was supposed assemble a new constitution drafting committee that would help kick off a new round of talks. The United Nations was supposed to have the ability to choose which people would serve on the committee, and the United Nations was supposed to be empowered to facilitate those talks. Instead, the Al-Assad regime has backtracked, stalled and then refused to cooperate.At the same time, the Syrian regime escalated its brutal military campaign. It seized eastern Ghouta, at the cost of thousands of lives and tens of thousands displaced. It used chemical weapons in Douma. Just yesterday, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons Fact-finding Mission released a report determining that chlorine was used during attacks on 4 February in Saraqib.As reported by the Fact-finding Mission, the facts of that chemical-weapons attack bear the hallmarks S/PV.8260 The situation in the Middle East 16/05/2018 6/12 18-14999 of similar attacks conducted by the Al-Assad regime. As we have said before, the United States assesses that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons well over 50 times since the start of the civil war. The Al-Assad regime, with Iran's and Russia's full support, is choosing to pursue a military solution instead of a political solution, and that goes against everything we should stand for as the Security Council.In the aftermath of eastern Ghouta, the need for a real ceasefire could not be more obvious. Already, we see the Al-Assad regime launching new attacks in Idlib and the south-west. As Staffan noted, a Ghouta scenario in Idlib would be six times worse than the horror we saw in recent months in Ghouta. Air strikes in the south-west have tripled in the last month, even though that area is part of a de-escalation zone. Russia is supposed to be a sponsor of that zone. It must urgently meet its commitments to prevent the regime from carrying out attacks and stop Iranian militias from expanding their foothold in the south.Members of the Security Council — all of us — must push the political process forward. There is Council unity behind that goal. There is a clear blueprint for a political solution in resolution 2254 (2015), which we adopted unanimously. We have to send a clear message to the Al-Assad regime and its backers: the end of the conflict can be reached only via the United Nations-led political process. There must be constitutional reform and free and fair elections under United Nations supervision. If the Al-Assad regime does not comply, we need to be prepared to impose real costs on it for its years of defiance and the devastation it has wrought in Syria. If we take those steps, we can start to change the calculus of the Al-Assad regime and its allies in Syria. We can show them that further conflict is not in their interests and that it is time for them to genuinely commit to a political solution. But as we saw last week, the longer we wait, the greater the risk of confrontation. Now is the time to act to reduce tensions and address Iran's designs in Syria. That is how we can prevent further escalation and even worse suffering. There is no time to waste.Mr. Polyanskiy (Russian Federation) (spoke in Russian): We thank Mr. De Mistura for his briefing. We can see that his personal participation in the meeting on Syria in Astana enabled him to make it a substantive one. We appreciated his call for active diplomacy, which Russia has advocated for from the very beginning. We continue to make significant efforts to facilitate a political settlement in Syria despite the undermining effects of the aggressive action by the United States, the United Kingdom and France in April against a number of civilian structures in Syria. I discerned no sympathy about what happened there in the statement by my United States colleague, despite the fact that it was a blatant breach of international law and did absolutely nothing to advance any kind of a settlement. Furthermore, her statement had an odd, confrontational tone that I felt certainly did not correspond to the message that Mr. De Mistura wanted to convey to all of us today, which is that it will be important for diplomacy to function if the peace that the Syrians have awaited for so long is to finally be established on the ground.Unlike some Security Council member States, which prefer taking unilateral measures to finding ways to solve problems, Russia is focusing on steps to genuinely improve the situation on the ground and advance the prospects for a political settlement. As Mr. De Mistura already noted, the ninth meeting of the participants in the Astana process concluded yesterday in the capital of Kazakhstan, and the guarantors adopted a joint statement. We are grateful to the leadership of Kazakhstan for its steadfast support. The meeting in Astana considered concrete measures for resolving a number of political and humanitarian issues and analysed the situation in the de-escalation zones, which play a key role in maintaining the ceasefire regime, reducing the level of violence and generally stabilizing the situation in Syria. The importance was noted of increasing efforts to help all Syrians and restore normal civilian life and, to that end, of providing fast, safe and unhindered humanitarian access and essential humanitarian and medical assistance, and creating the conditions needed to enable the safe and voluntary return of refugees and internally displaced persons to their homes, as well as people's freedom of movement.A second meeting was held of the working group on the liberation of detainees and hostages to discuss the handover of the bodies of the dead and the search for missing persons, with the participation of experts from the United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross. The importance of continuing joint efforts with the aim of building trust among the conflicting parties in Syria was emphasized. The Syrian Government declared its willingness to engage with the working group and decided to appoint a special representative on issues related to its work.16/05/2018 The situation in the Middle East S/PV.8260 18-14999 7/12 In line with the provisions of resolution 2254 (2015), the meeting affirmed its determination to continuing to promote a political settlement by helping to implement the recommendations of the Syrian National Dialogue Congress held in Sochi. The consultations with the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General and the Syrian parties will continue, with a view to establishing the conditions conducive to starting the work of a constitutional committee in Geneva as soon as possible, whose parameters will have to be agreed on by the Syrians themselves. We will get nowhere without their consensus, so there is no point in proposing artificial frameworks for the process, especially if they are based on provisional plans of some kind. Thanks to the Astana process, we have succeeded in generating momentum for a political process based on intra-Syrian talks under the auspices of the United Nations, although, as we have noted, the triple alliance's aggression against the Syrian Arab Republic has significantly limited the room for manoeuvre in that regard.Concerted efforts by the guarantor countries are bringing us steadily closer to eliminating the presence of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), Jabhat Al-Nusra and other terrorist groups altogether. The recent situation in Syria has continued to be difficult. The guarantor countries' efforts are certainly not being helped by provocative initiatives from external actors, which merely strengthen radical sentiments among groups opposing the legitimate Government and fuel their reluctance to work for negotiated solutions.In Damascus, the operation to liberate the southern regions and suburbs of the capital from ISIL-affiliated groups continues, but Yalda, Babila and Bayt Saham are now fully under the Syrian authorities' control and civilian life there is returning. Russian specialists are helping the Syrian authorities to restore civilian infrastructure. Mines are being cleared, socially significant facilities are being rebuilt and electricity and water services are being restored. In eastern Ghouta, some 65,000 residents previously evacuated from the area have returned to their homes. However, in some other regions where the Syrian Government lacks access, the situation has continued to deteriorate. That is especially true of the Rukban and Al-Tuwaihina refugee camps, as well as the former ISIL capital, Raqqa, where the humanitarian situation is disastrous. Measures must be taken to rectify it without delay. The solution is simple — restore Damascus's sovereignty over those territories as soon as possible.Government forces and Palestinian volunteers, with aerial and artillery support, have continued to combat fierce resistance from terrorist detachments in the Palestinian refugee camp in Yarmouk. The militias wounded several dozen civilians in mortar strikes on residential areas in the north-east area of the camp. In the past week, the territory held by the illegal armed groups in Yarmouk has been significantly reduced.The Syrian army's assault on ISIL positions in Deir ez-Zor province has also been ramped up. ISIL's adherents have incurred considerable losses in manpower and equipment and have been driven out of an area of about 1,500 square kilometres. A large-scale operation to eliminate ISIL is being conducted in the eastern part of Syria with the aim of completely defeating the terrorists based in hard-to-reach desert areas, who have been increasing their attacks on Government forces in the Euphrates region and Homs province.We will continue the difficult work of restoring peace in Syria. Frankly, we are disturbed by some international and regional actors' disrespectful attitude to the issue of Syrian sovereignty, of which we have recently seen alarming manifestations. It is important to understand that this will not help to normalize the situation in Syria or the region as a whole. It fuels the conflict and reduces the prospects for a political settlement. For example, how can we be sure that reckless and illegal actions similar to those that occurred a month ago will not be repeated on some other trumped-up pretext? The reckless conduct of a number of international and regional players who claim to have common sense has considerably slowed progress regarding a settlement of the situation in Syria. If they cannot or will not help us with that, they should at least not interfere.In conclusion, I would like to touch briefly on the remarks by my American colleague. Basically, more than half of her statement was about Iran, not Syria, and Syria is the item on our agenda today, after all. I would also like to ask the Americans some questions we have about that. Before they blame Russia or Iran, I would like to ask what the reason is for the presence of United States forces in Syria and what their real objective is. The territories under their control have become grey areas where extremists of various stripes and real terrorists roam freely. In particular, what is going on with the several hundred ISIL followers who are being held by forces loyal to the United States under United States oversight in the region beyond the S/PV.8260 The situation in the Middle East 16/05/2018 8/12 18-14999 Euphrates? They are not being investigated, and nor are they being returned to their countries of origin. We are worried that ISIL will re-emerge in those areas when the United States withdraws from them, which it must do sooner or later.In conclusion, I would like to once again assure the Council of Russia's willingness to support any diplomatic efforts that can bring an end to the miseries of the Syrian people and peace to that long-suffering land.Mr. Ma Zhaoxu (China) (spoke in Chinese): I would like to begin by thanking Mr. De Mistura, Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria, for his briefing. I appreciate his tireless efforts to find a political solution to the conflict.In recent weeks various members of the international community have made tremendous efforts to restore momentum in the political process. China welcomes the latest round of Astana talks and its joint communiqué, and salutes Russia, Kazakhstan, Turkey and Iran for their efforts. We hope that this dialogue will continue to play a positive role in helping to maintain a ceasefire in Syria and advance the Geneva negotiations.China has always maintained that a political solution is the only possible option where the issue of Syria is concerned, and that achieving that goal will require efforts on the international, regional and national fronts. First, the international community should continue to give its support to the United Nations, as the main channel for mediation, and to Mr. De Mistura's efforts to relaunch the Geneva negotiations as soon as possible, on a basis of full respect for Syria's sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity and with a view to helping the conflicting parties to engage in negotiations on political governance, the Constitution, elections and counter-terrorism. The Council should remain united in moving the Syrian political process forward.Secondly, the countries involved in the region should take the country's long-term interests and stability into consideration and play a constructive role in helping to find a political solution. China notes that there have been attacks on targets inside Syria. We hope that the parties concerned will remain calm, show restraint and work together to maintain regional peace and stability.Thirdly, both the Syrian Government and the opposition, based on concern for the future of their country and the fundamental interests of their people, should proceed to participate in the Geneva negotiations without preconditions, in accordance with the principle of a dialogue that is Syrian-owned and -led, and on the basis of resolution 2254 (2015), with a view to actively engaging in gradual efforts to reach a settlement that is acceptable to all the parties.For its part, China has been working relentlessly to find a solution. On 13 and 14 May, in the first instance of such an event being held on Syria in China, we hosted an international symposium in Shanghai on the prospects for a political settlement to the Syrian issue. It was attended by Xie Xiaoyan, China's Special Envoy for Syria, a representative of the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General, and the Special Envoys of the United Kingdom and France for Syria, as well as experts and scholars from many countries. Participants held in-depth discussions on the prospects for a solution, the factors bearing on a political settlement and the role of the international community. Our Special Envoy remains in close contact with the parties concerned in his continuing efforts to help reach a solution. Together with the rest of the international community, China stands ready to continue to play a positive and constructive role in finding a political solution to the issue.Mr. Umarov (Kazakhstan): We thank the Special Envoy for Syria, Mr. De Mistura, for his update, and we were glad to hear some encouraging notes of optimism in his briefing.Despite the numerous problems on the humanitarian and political fronts in Syria, Kazakhstan believes that it is imperative to continue to promote a settlement of the crisis while implementing resolution 2254 (2015). We are glad that at their meetings held on 14 and 15 May in Astana, the representatives of Syria's Government and opposition, along with those of the guarantor States, unanimously confirmed the importance of continuing the process. Among other issues, they addressed the importance of increasing efforts to ensure compliance with the various agreements reached during the previous eight rounds of the Astana talks. On the other hand, they also agreed that Geneva should remain the main international platform from which to seek and implement a political settlement of the Syrian crisis. It will also be important to continue to support the aims of the Astana talks and further Geneva negotiations, while ultimately merging those important platforms with the aim of achieving positive results.16/05/2018 The situation in the Middle East S/PV.8260 18-14999 9/12 We thank the Special Envoy for his consultations with various Foreign Ministers at the recent summit of the League of Arab States, as well as with Ms. Federica Mogherini, the European Union's High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. His high-level meetings in Moscow, Tehran, Riyadh and Ankara, as well as his consultations with several European ministers and senior representatives of the United States, are also commendable. We are encouraged by his summary today of his meetings and the outcomes of the Astana process, and we note his hopes for progress and his readiness to increase his own efforts and those of several of the principal stakeholders to revive the political process.We can all see that de-confliction and the precautionary measures to safeguard protected sites under humanitarian law are working. So far this year, 500 additional sites have been de-conflicted, as the process is known. Their coordinates have been voluntarily submitted through the United Nations, and today the total number of sites stands at 661.We are hearing a number of continuing questions and concerns about the outlook for Idlib, which should certainly be our top priority, simply because it has such a large population of vulnerable ordinary citizens. We agree with Mr. De Mistura that since Idlib is six times larger than eastern Ghouta, and therefore has six times more civilian residents, it is in an extremely vulnerable position. We cannot afford a war in Idlib and we therefore call on the main stakeholders with an influence on the conflicting parties to hold negotiations at the national and local levels and in the wider region in order to mitigate the potential tensions.We are impressed by the courageous stance of and the sacrifices made by the United Nations, the Red Crescent, the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Norwegian Refugee Council, which are serving under the most challenging circumstances.To conclude, we also hope that the Brussels Conference, held on 24 and 25 April, will help to generate conditions conducive to the peaceful resolution of the Syrian crisis.Finally, we emphasize once again that the most important condition for the settlement of the Syrian crisis is a political process, through direct dialogue and the use of confidence-building measures among the parties, without which there can be no lasting results. We should not forget that it is the Syrians themselves who should begin to shape the future political system of the Syrian State, with the necessary legislative reforms, its territorial and administrative structure, and presidential and parliamentary elections, in accordance with resolution 2254 (2015).Mr. Inchauste Jordán (Plurinational State of Bolivia) (spoke in Spanish): We express our gratitude for the briefing that we heard from Mr. Staffan de Mistura, the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria, to whom we reiterate our support in the discharge of his duties.Once again we cannot but express our sorrow at the fact that this conflict has gone on for six years now and we are still witnessing the ongoing siege and violence suffered by the Syrian people, mainly children, who, in addition to living with the psychological aftermath of the situation, are also in urgent need of humanitarian assistance. We deplore any act of violence that puts human lives at risk and therefore call for an end to the violence and urge the parties to refrain from any hostile, provocative or unilateral actions, in order to prevent any further suffering of the Syrian people and any further destabilization of the region.We welcome the holding of the summit of the three ceasefire guarantors in Ankara, Turkey, in March. We will be focusing closely on the next summit, which will be sponsored by the Islamic Republic of Iran. Likewise, we welcome the recent Astana meeting. We deem its outcome positive, as were the agreements reached one year ago exactly, when the important de-escalation zones were established. We believe that that international initiative has served to reduce the level of violence and has facilitated, and will continue to facilitate, the path to peace and stability in Syria.We therefore call for greater coordination among the local authorities within the de-escalation zones, humanitarian agencies and the Syrian Government, which will make it possible to improve the living conditions of the local population, with a view to contributing to international efforts to end the conflict in Syria.We call once again for efforts to continue with respect to the full implementation of resolution 2401 (2018), so as to ensure safe, sustained and unhindered humanitarian access to all those who require it. The protection of the civilian population and civilian infrastructure must also be a priority within the S/PV.8260 The situation in the Middle East 16/05/2018 10/12 18-14999 framework of respect for international law and international humanitarian law.We deem imperative the voluntary return of internally displaced persons in a safe and dignified manner, as soon as the situation permits. For that to happen, demining will be vital in those areas where it is necessary. We would urge that the political dialogue agenda continue to focus on the release of detainees and abductees, as well as on the identification of missing or deceased persons.We stress the efforts made towards the voluntary return of thousands of people to eastern Ghouta and other cities north and south of Damascus and their subsequent full return. My delegation would draw the attention of the Security Council to the need to protect thousands of innocent civilians, including children and the elderly, and move them to Idlib. It is urgent and pressing that peace be maintained and any escalation of violence avoided in that area, as the aftermath could be tragic.We believe that measures must continue to be taken to reduce the level of violence on the ground, promote confidence among the parties involved, alleviate the humanitarian situation and promote ongoing initiatives aimed at finding a peaceful political solution. The process must take place on the basis of the various initiatives taken and meetings held at different levels. We therefore underscore once again the commitments made at the Syrian National Dialogue Congress, held in Sochi on 30 January, with a focus on strengthening the United Nations-led political process in the framework of the road map set out in resolution 2254 (2015), in particular through the drafting of a new constitution and the establishment of a constitutional committee, which we believe must be representative and impartial. We hope that the work of that committee, in Geneva, should start as soon as possible and should be active and dynamic and include the participation of all parties to the conflict.We welcome the good offices and mediation of the Secretary-General and his close collaboration with the members of the Security Council in the quest for a peaceful solution to the crisis in Syria.To conclude, we reject any attempt to divide or fragment Syria along ethnic lines or to foster sectarianism there. It is the Syrian people themselves who must freely decide their future and their political leadership, in the framework of their sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity, without any external pressure or interference.We reiterate that the only way to resolve the conflict in Syria is through a Syrian-owned and Syrian-led political process that is inclusive and based on consultation and dialogue and that will allow for a peaceful solution to be reached among all the parties involved.Ms. Pierce (United Kingdom): I had not intended to speak today in the Chamber, but I wanted to respond to some of the things that we have just heard. I will therefore take this opportunity to thank Staffan de Mistura and his team for all their work, which is not proving as fast or as productive as all of us would like, but I think that we are very grateful to Staffan for all his efforts. I was also interested to hear the Chinese account of the work of their envoy.We all know what needs to be done. We have had very many discussions in this Chamber and in the Consultations Room about Syria. I think that what we struggle with is how to get it done and how to take the next step, so I hope that when we leave the Chamber and go next door into closed consultations, we can actually have a proper discussion, without polemics, about what it will take to get the constitutional committee up and running; what are the concrete steps that need to be taken and how we as the Council can best facilitate and support that; and what it takes to get Idlib protected. Lots of speakers today have referred to Idlib; I think that we all know its importance, scale and significance. I would urge those Astana progenitors to do what they can to ensure that on the ground, people in Idlib are safe and that we avert a humanitarian catastrophe there. But I would like to have a proper discussion next door about how the Council can actually support that.I wanted to turn to the issue of the Syrian Government engaging with the United Nations. The Russian representative referred to backsliding from a political settlement and entrenching Syrian unwillingness for a negotiated solution. I think that those two statements are very damning, but they are not damning about us; they are damning about the Syrian regime. We really need all those with influence on Syria, including Russia and Iran, to encourage it to set aside a military strategy as a way to resolve the conflict and to engage with the United Nations across the board, so that we can get back to Geneva and to a political settlement. It is not we in the West who are stopping 16/05/2018 The situation in the Middle East S/PV.8260 18-14999 11/12 that happening. The onus is truly on Syria to follow the will of the Security Council and its resolutions and to allow the United Nations to do its work to help the people of Syria. Those are the main things I wanted to say, but I would like to touch on three more points as well, if I may.We support what the Special Envoy said about bringing women in, which I think is long overdue, and he can count on the United Kingdom's full support for that. I would also like to refer to Iran and the strikes on Israel from Syrian territory, on which we are in full agreement with the United States representative's comments and have been very vocal about in public. I also want to comment on the Russian representative's remarks about the air strikes. I will not rehearse why France, the United States and the United Kingdom took the action we did, except to say that we did it to avert a humanitarian catastrophe, and in doing so we helped to protect civilians on the ground, deterred and degraded Syria's ability to use chemical weapons and thereby upheld the global prohibition on weapons of mass destruction.While I think those things remain very important, they should not be used by anyone on the Council as a reason to let the Syrian Government off the hook where engaging with the United Nations on the political process is concerned. The political process has been essential since 2012, when the Geneva talks were started. It has been increasingly essential since then, and it continues to be essential now. I therefore hope that when we go next door we can have a very detailed discussion about how we as the Council can get back to the spirit of Sweden and actually help Staffan de Mistura and his team do something concrete to achieve that, and have no more mud-slinging.The President: In accordance with rule 37 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure, I invite the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic to participate in this meeting.I now give the floor to the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic.Mr. Mounzer (Syrian Arab Republic) (spoke in Arabic): To begin with, the delegations of the United States and the United Kingdom have tried to promote false claims justifying their aggression against sovereign States, particularly my country, Syria, with the aim of concealing their direct involvement in terrorism and their part in the responsibility for the bloodshed in Syria. I would like to say to them that the testimony, as cited in the media, of the thousands of Syrians who have escaped the blockades of armed terrorist groups in eastern Ghouta, has proved that those countries have been involved in making those citizens suffer through their support of those terrorist groups. Through their positions, their malicious acts and their illegal occupation of various areas of Syria, they have shown that, contrary to their claims, they cannot let go of their history of greed, occupation and imperialism. When speaking in the Council, they claim falsely that they are trying to find a political solution to the situation in Syria, but let me point out, briefly, that we have been able to defeat their agenda in Aleppo and eastern Ghouta, and we will be able to ensure that they cannot win in any part of my country.For the past seven years, since the beginning of the terrorist war in Syria, the United States, Britain and France have been working relentlessly to support and help conduct that war. They have also used the United Nations as a political tool to put pressure on the Syrian Government to implement their hegemonic agenda, interfere in our internal affairs and destabilize my country. They have not used the United Nations to fight terrorism and its sponsors or to help Syria overcome the suffering inflicted on it by armed terrorist groups, which should have been the goal.The Special Envoy devoted part of his statement to discussing the humanitarian situation. In that regard, I want to reiterate that the Syrian Government gives priority to providing every kind of humanitarian assistance to all Syrians in need, wherever they are in Syria. That is our duty, and we are doing our duty. The legal and constitutional obligations established under international decisions and Security Council resolutions on combating terrorism obliged my Government to undertake military operations in eastern Ghouta in order to rescue civilians from the armed terrorist groups holding them hostage and using them for years as human shields. In that regard, I want to state that contrary to some false narratives, the successful military operations conducted by the Syrian Arab Army and its allies against the armed terrorist groups controlling a number of areas that the United Nations has classified as besieged or hard to reach — along with the settlement and reconciliation agreements — have all mitigated civilians' suffering, reduced the numbers of those areas and facilitated humanitarian access to them, including eastern Ghouta.S/PV.8260 The situation in the Middle East 16/05/2018 12/12 18-14999 We deplore the fact that the United States speaks of its eagerness to reach a political agreement while it has been committing acts of aggression against my country based on lies, simply because it is working to give support to the armed groups because they have suffered losses in eastern Ghouta. It was the United States that supported Israel's aggression on 9 May when Israel was unable to protect its own proxy terrorist groups and implement its conspiracy against my country's unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity. Israel has continued its dangerous acts of aggression, which would not have been possible without the continuing unstinting support of the United States Government, because it enjoys impunity as a result of the support it has from the United States in the Security Council, enabling Israel to continue its terrorist acts threatening international peace and security in the region and the world. The Syrian Arab Republic reaffirms that through its military and armed forces it is able and ready to fend off all acts of aggression against its sovereignty and independence. However, we want to reiterate that any attempts to support this failing terrorism will not work. Such flagrant violations will not present obstacles to us in combating terrorism throughout Syrian territory.Yesterday we concluded round nine of the Astana process, and we are pleased with the results. We thank the delegations of Russia, Iran and the host country, Kazakhstan, for making the Astana process a success with regard to combating terrorism. The outcome document of the meeting stresses the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic against any external entities that attempt to violate them.In cooperation with our friends and allies, the Syrian army has succeeded in liberating eastern Ghouta and the southern area of Damascus, making the capital and its surrounding areas safe. With the cooperation of our friends and brothers, we have also expelled the terrorists from the northern area of Homs and the southern area of Hama. Today we reaffirm that we will continue to fight terrorism and to work to liberate each and every part of our territory from terrorism and from countries that seek to undermine our sovereignty.In conclusion, the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic will spare no effort to support all genuine efforts to arrive at a political solution whereby Syrians, and only Syrians, will decide their future and make choices aimed at safeguarding Syria's sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity.The President: The representative of the United Kingdom has asked for the floor to make a further statement.Ms. Pierce (United Kingdom): I just wanted to comment on the Syrian representative's last statement, in which he said that the Syrian Arab Republic will spare no effort to arrive at a political solution. That is obviously a welcome statement. I would like to ask him if he could tell the Council, or is willing to say today, that Syria will put the same amount of effort into engaging with the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria and with the Council in order to take concrete steps to get the Geneva process to work and to get a constitutional committee off the ground. If Syria were able to make that commitment today in the Chamber, I believe that would unlock a lot of things for the Council.The President: The representative of the Syrian Arab Republic has asked for the floor to make a further statement. I now give him the floor.Mr. Mounzer (Syrian Arab Republic) (spoke in Arabic): We have said time and again that we are working with the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria. A delegation from the Syrian Arab Republic is working directly with him. We are eager, as we have said repeatedly, to find a peaceful, Syrian-led solution to the Syrian crisis.The President: There are no more names inscribed on the list of speakers. I now invite Council members to informal consultations to continue our discussion on the subject.The meeting rose at 11.25 a.m.

The Situation In The Middle East This Record Contains The Text Of Speeches Delivered In English And Of The Translation Of Speeches Delivered In Other Languages. ; United Nations S/PV.8260 Security Council Seventy-third year 8260th meeting Wednesday, 16 May 2018, 10 a.m. New York Provisional President: Ms. Wronecka. . (Poland) Members: Bolivia (Plurinational State of). . Mr. Inchauste Jordán China. . Mr. Ma Zhaoxu Côte d'Ivoire. . Mr. Djédjé Equatorial Guinea. . M. Ndong Mba Ethiopia. . Mr. Alemu France. . Mr. Delattre Kazakhstan. . Mr. Umarov Kuwait. . Mr. Alotaibi Netherlands. . Mr. Van Oosterom Peru. . Mr. Meza-Cuadra Russian Federation. . Mr. Polyanskiy Sweden . Mr. Skoog United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland . Ms. Pierce United States of America. . Ms. Eckels-Currie Agenda The situation in the Middle East This record contains the text of speeches delivered in English and of the translation of speeches delivered in other languages. The final text will be printed in the Official Records of the Security Council. Corrections should be submitted to the original languages only. They should be incorporated in a copy of the record and sent under the signature of a member of the delegation concerned to the Chief of the Verbatim Reporting Service, room U-0506 (verbatimrecords@un.org). Corrected records will be reissued electronically on the Official Document System of the United Nations (http://documents.un.org). 18-14999 (E) *1814999* S/PV.8260 The situation in the Middle East 16/05/2018 2/12 18-14999 The meeting was called to order at 10.15 a.m. Adoption of the agenda The agenda was adopted. The situation in the Middle East The President: In accordance with rule 39 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure, I invite Mr. Staffan de Mistura, Special Envoy of the Secretary- General for Syria, to participate in this meeting. Mr. De Mistura is joining today's meeting via video-teleconference from Geneva. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. I give the floor to Mr. De Mistura. Mr. De Mistura: When I last briefed the Security Council on 9 April, it was at an emergency meeting (see S/PV.8225). On that occasion, I warned of the threats to regional and international peace and security arising from developments in or related to Syria. I know that today it is not an emergency meeting. However, the circumstances of an emergency very much remain. I do not need to remind members that tensions are high and regional and international confrontations have occurred several times. Allow me to highlight some recent events since 9 April. On 13 April, the United States, France and the United Kingdom conducted missile strikes in response to the allegations of the use of chemical weapons in eastern Ghouta. Those countries say that the strikes targeted three research and production facilities near Damascus and Homs. On 29 April, strikes were reported on Syrian Government military facilities in Hamah and Aleppo. Some media outlets attributed those strikes to Israel, alleging that those killed included Iranian personnel. Neither Israel nor Iran responded to those claims. On 8 May, strikes were reported just south of Damascus. Syrian State media attributed those strikes to Israel. Israel did not confirm that claim. Israel then said that it had detected "irregular Iranian activity" in the occupied Golan, which it put on high alert. Between 9 and 10 May, Israel carried out dozens of strikes against presumed Iranian and Syrian Government military targets across southern Syria. The Israeli authorities claim that they were responding to Iranian forces firing rockets from Syrian territory at Israeli military targets in the occupied Syrian Golan. Iran condemned the Israeli strikes and denied those claims. We are not is a position to independently verify every aspect of those incidents. However, even an incomplete picture shows the troubling trajectory of the increasingly frequent and ever more intense international confrontations over Syria, unprecedented since 1973. As the Security Council knows, the Secretary- General has followed those developments with great concern and called for restraint by all parties in order to avoid any acts that could escalate the situation and worsen the suffering of the Syrian people. The Secretary-General stressed that the United Nations has a "duty to remind Member States that there is an obligation, particularly when dealing with matters of peace and security, to act consistently with the Charter of the United Nations, and with international law in general." (S/PV.8233, p. 2) On the issue of chemical weapons, let me again echo the Secretary-General's call for the Security Council to "agree on a dedicated mechanism for ensuring effective accountability for the use of chemical weapons in Syria" (ibid.). As the Council well knows, as of now, we await the results of the ongoing investigation by the Fact-finding Mission of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons following its visit to Douma, with a report to be issued to States parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention. However, we have also seen worrying developments elsewhere in Syria. Evacuations from eastern Ghouta were similarly repeated in the eastern Qalamoun area, southern Damascus and northern rural Homs. First, on the military escalation, the pattern has been one of incoming air strikes and artillery and outgoing mortars and rockets towards Damascus. Then there was a negotiation, followed by an agreement for the evacuation of those civilians and fighters unwilling to remain under Syrian Government control or Russian Federation protection guarantees. We have also seen similar evacuation agreements 16/05/2018 The situation in the Middle East S/PV.8260 18-14999 3/12 being discussed in Idlib province but in a completely different format — the reverse format. This time we are talking about civilians and fighters in Government-controlled areas, namely, Kafraya and Fo'ah, while considering evacuations — beginning with medical evacuations — following the three-year siege and intermittent attacks from armed groups surrounding that area.Let me share with the Council a recurrent concern that I know that all members have. If civilians and fighters are simply funnelled into northern Syria — mostly into Idlib — then that might only postpone another conflict affecting many additional people, which I will discuss later. Therefore, it is important to keep close watch on future developments in Idlib province. Meanwhile, civilians continue to pay a terrible price. To be precise, 110,000 people have been evacuated to north-western Syria and Operation Euphrates Shield areas in the past two months. Many of them are reportedly traumatized and in urgent need of assistance and protection. Humanitarian partners are overwhelmed and stretched quite thin by the scale of those evacuations, but continue to do their utmost to respond to the growing needs, with the Council's assistance.Returning to the topic of Idlib, if a Ghouta scenario were to play out there, the situation could be six times worse, affecting 2.3 million people, half of whom are already internally displaced and would have nowhere else to go. But that is not purely a question of the Syrians' suffering. We fear that any substantial escalation in Idlib, Dar'a or in the north-east might also result in risks not only to Syrian civilians, but also for international peace and security. As we know, many of those areas contain external and international forces. Conflict there might entail confrontations with those forces, thereby leading us down a slippery slope towards regional or potential international conflict. Therefore, discussions at the international level on how to prevent that and on de-escalation are needed, and, although they are taking place, they also need to be very intensive.I was therefore very encouraged to see concrete discussions on de-escalation when I attended the ninth high-level Astana meeting yesterday, which covered the issue of Idlib in particular, as the three guarantors have a say and the means to avoid it. That round of discussions in Astana saw constructive discussions on how that might be achieved. While fully stressing the need to respect Syria's sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity, we saw at first-hand the parties engage actively on how to avoid a worst-case scenario in Idlib. Moreover, the working group, of which the United Nations is a member and a proactive supporter — as hundreds of thousands of people in Syria expect of us — held its second meeting on the release of detainees, abductees and bodies, and on the identification of missing persons. The members of the working group held constructive discussions on practical and concrete steps to address that key humanitarian issue. The guarantors informed us that they have secured the parties' support — which, if confirmed, is good news — for the activities taking place under the auspices of the working group, which is a positive development. As it is a matter of preliminary discussions, I hope that we will see progress with regard to that complex issue at the working group's next meeting, which we understand will be held in Ankara.De-escalation is indispensable, as the Syrians themselves are telling us, but it is only one of the ingredients necessary to move forward the political process. We also need to overcome concrete challenges to meaningfully follow through with the Geneva process so as to implement resolution 2254 (2015). As instructed by the Secretary-General, I have consulted with a broad spectrum of relevant stakeholders and proactively identified options for a meaningful relaunch of the United Nations-facilitated Geneva process. Over a period of two weeks, I conducted an exhaustive tour of consultations with members of the League of Arab States; representatives of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and Iraq; the European Union (EU) High Representative; representatives of several key European countries, Turkey, the Russian Federation and the Islamic Republic of Iran; and all members of the Council, during what I believe was a very productive and useful retreat in Sweden; United States authorities during my visit to meet with them in Washington, D.C., several days ago; and also the Syrian Government and the opposition, with whom I had constructive discussions on the sidelines of the Astana meeting over the past two days. My deputy, Mr. Ramzy, was also in the region this past weekend in continuous political contact with regional stakeholders, and my chief of political affairs, Mr. Robert Dann, is visting China as we speak to exchange views with officials of that important member of the Security Council.What did I learn from that long tour? Not surprisingly, I returned to Geneva with a mixed picture. S/PV.8260 The situation in the Middle East 16/05/2018 4/12 18-14999 Clearly, significant differences remain, but there is also much common ground and interest on the need, first, to de-escalate, secondly, to form a constitutional committee under the auspices of the United Nations, thirdly, to facilitate the establishment of a safe, calm and neutral environment — leading to our shared goals in the political process — and, fourthly, to respect Syria's sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence. However, those commonalities risk getting glossed over, especially in the absence of serious international dialogue. I will say more on that later. During my tour, my message to all was the need — now more than ever — for robust, strong, proactive and urgent dialogue and consensus at the international level to create the minimum conditions necessary for a realistic and credible political process. As we know, much water has flowed under the bridge and much has happened since resolution 2254 (2015) was adopted. We are therefore becoming increasingly realistic and know that we need a credible political process that takes into account the current situation and does not forget resolution 2254 (2015).As the Secretariat, we are not sitting idle in that regard. We are assessing a number of creative options to update, revive and advance the Geneva-based political process. Let me state for the record that the United Nations remains ever-mobilized and -ready to work on the formation of a constitutional committee in accordance with the final statement of the Syrian National Dialogue Congress in Sochi. I therefore welcome the intention of the Astana guarantors to actively and regularly engage with the United Nations in Geneva so as to see through a concrete follow-up to the statement since its adoption three and a half months ago.I was also pleased to see a significant number of Member States reaffirm the primacy of the United Nations-led Geneva process, in general, and the need for a constitutional committee working under United Nations auspices, when I was at the EU-United Nations Brussels conference from 24 to 25 April. Those at the conference nearly unanimously reiterated the message that the only solution to the crisis will be political and that only such a political solution will pave the way for reconstruction efforts. Also in Brussels, we saw the entire United Nations system highlight the increasing needs of millions of Syrians, including internally displaced persons (IDPs) and neighbouring countries hosting refugees.Let me also note the important contribution of Syrian civil society in Brussels, in particular during a side event organized by the EU and my own Office. Those present did not shy away from debating with one another constructively and intensively on complex issues, such as transitional justice and sanctions. They all demanded the release of all detainees, abductees and missing persons. They all affirmed that any political solution must protect the right of refugees and IDPs. Despite their differences, Syrians — Syrian civil society — displayed a genuine commitment to dialogue and a spirit of negotiation that I hope can be replicated in the formal negotiations.In Brussels I also met with a group of Syrian women activists who stressed that not enough has been done to secure the direct participation of Syrian women in the political process. I committed to translating our collective commitment to that inclusion into concrete measures, and I will count on the Council's support to keep that promise. For instance, in future intra-Syrian talks, I will insist that the relevant number of seats be reserved exclusively for Syrian women. When I am criticized, I hope that the Council will support me. I know it will not be popular, but it needs to be done.Let me briefly touch on an issue that was raised by the civil society in Brussels and by many Syrians elsewhere who have been writing to us, that is, the possible implications of the newly adopted Law No. 10. We are quite aware of the concerns surrounding that law. We, as well as other United Nations partners, are seeking clarifications on the law's goals and repercussions, especially for refugees and IDPs who do not have access to legal documentation.Let me conclude with two bottom lines.First, de-escalation is critical between the Syrian and international stakeholders, both regional and global. We hope that the relevant players can re-establish some overarching rules of the road in that regard. We stand ready to facilitate such a discussion, with focused support from the Council and key countries for the good offices of the Secretary-General and myself.Secondly, we must revive the political process in terms of the constitutional committee, as well as in terms of some initial steps towards the establishment of a safe, calm and neutral environment. We stand ready to facilitate discussions on both. Let me stress that a critical component of either aspect of the political process is active, continuous and positive United 16/05/2018 The situation in the Middle East S/PV.8260 18-14999 5/12 Nations engagement with the Syrian parties. I repeat once again that we stand ready, today as always, to engage with the Syrian Government in Damascus. We will also continue our contacts with the opposition and Syrian civil society.To unlock and lock those two aspects, careful diplomacy is required more than ever — careful, but proactive diplomacy, including at a high level. Hence, we look with interest to the forthcoming visits to Moscow and meetings of Chancellor Merkel and, later on, President Macron with President Putin, which undoubtedly will not avoid the issue of a political process in Syria. The United Nations believes that there is an urgent need for high-level diplomacy to support de-escalation, avoid any miscalculation and ensure a genuine communication system about a sustainable end to the conflict. With the support of the Secretary-General, we will increase our own efforts to contribute to that endeavour, including by offering further ideas and —if required, which we hope it will be — bridging proposals.The President: I thank Mr. De Mistura for his briefing.I shall now give the floor to the members of the Security Council who wish to make statements.Ms. Eckels-Currie (United States of America): Since this is my first opportunity to congratulate you upon assuming the presidency, Madam President, I would like to do so at this time. I also thank Staffan for his briefing.Last week the world witnessed a new and extremely dangerous escalation in Syria. It should not surprise anyone on the Security Council that Iran was responsible. Iranian forces operating from Syrian territory launched a rocket attack against Israeli citizens — citizens of a sovereign State Member of the United Nations. The United States strongly supports Israel's right to act in self-defence. Iran's reckless and provocative acts last week prove what we have been saying: wherever Iran shows up in the Middle East, chaos follows. Last week's rocket attack against Israel is the latest in a pattern of destabilizing behaviour that is a dire threat to the region's stability.Iran's rocket attack against Israel shows something else too. It puts to bed any myths about why Iran is present in Syria, or what its true objectives might be. The fact is that Iran has installed offensive rocket and missile systems in Syria aimed at Israel. Iran has introduced those threats that were not present in Syria before the conflict; they are now. Iran, together with Hizbullah and other militias, is taking advantage of Syrian territory to establish bases and training camps. They are moving ever closer to Israel. The United States calls on Iran, Hizbullah and their other proxies to take no further provocative steps. If they do, Iran will bear full responsibility for its actions.It is also important to emphasize that Iran's actions do not serve the interests of the Iranian or the Syrian people. The Syrian people get no say in whether Iran threatens war against Syria's neighbours, but it is they who have to live with the consequences.All of us on the Security Council have an important choice to make: we can stay quiet and watch as Iran builds up the infrastructure to create another Hizbullah in Syria, or we can speak up and take steps to put real pressure on Iran to stop. For our part, the United States refuses to stay quiet. Russia in particular has a special responsibility here. Its troops are on the ground, sometimes alongside Iran's. Russia must know that Iran's provocative actions do nothing to help resolve the war in Syria. Russia must know that Iran's actions do just the opposite. They only inflame, prolong and widen the conflict.We heard once again from Staffan today that there has been very little progress on the political track. There has been no progress at all in Geneva, or following Russia's own conferences in Astana and Sochi. Since January, the United Nations was supposed assemble a new constitution drafting committee that would help kick off a new round of talks. The United Nations was supposed to have the ability to choose which people would serve on the committee, and the United Nations was supposed to be empowered to facilitate those talks. Instead, the Al-Assad regime has backtracked, stalled and then refused to cooperate.At the same time, the Syrian regime escalated its brutal military campaign. It seized eastern Ghouta, at the cost of thousands of lives and tens of thousands displaced. It used chemical weapons in Douma. Just yesterday, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons Fact-finding Mission released a report determining that chlorine was used during attacks on 4 February in Saraqib.As reported by the Fact-finding Mission, the facts of that chemical-weapons attack bear the hallmarks S/PV.8260 The situation in the Middle East 16/05/2018 6/12 18-14999 of similar attacks conducted by the Al-Assad regime. As we have said before, the United States assesses that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons well over 50 times since the start of the civil war. The Al-Assad regime, with Iran's and Russia's full support, is choosing to pursue a military solution instead of a political solution, and that goes against everything we should stand for as the Security Council.In the aftermath of eastern Ghouta, the need for a real ceasefire could not be more obvious. Already, we see the Al-Assad regime launching new attacks in Idlib and the south-west. As Staffan noted, a Ghouta scenario in Idlib would be six times worse than the horror we saw in recent months in Ghouta. Air strikes in the south-west have tripled in the last month, even though that area is part of a de-escalation zone. Russia is supposed to be a sponsor of that zone. It must urgently meet its commitments to prevent the regime from carrying out attacks and stop Iranian militias from expanding their foothold in the south.Members of the Security Council — all of us — must push the political process forward. There is Council unity behind that goal. There is a clear blueprint for a political solution in resolution 2254 (2015), which we adopted unanimously. We have to send a clear message to the Al-Assad regime and its backers: the end of the conflict can be reached only via the United Nations-led political process. There must be constitutional reform and free and fair elections under United Nations supervision. If the Al-Assad regime does not comply, we need to be prepared to impose real costs on it for its years of defiance and the devastation it has wrought in Syria. If we take those steps, we can start to change the calculus of the Al-Assad regime and its allies in Syria. We can show them that further conflict is not in their interests and that it is time for them to genuinely commit to a political solution. But as we saw last week, the longer we wait, the greater the risk of confrontation. Now is the time to act to reduce tensions and address Iran's designs in Syria. That is how we can prevent further escalation and even worse suffering. There is no time to waste.Mr. Polyanskiy (Russian Federation) (spoke in Russian): We thank Mr. De Mistura for his briefing. We can see that his personal participation in the meeting on Syria in Astana enabled him to make it a substantive one. We appreciated his call for active diplomacy, which Russia has advocated for from the very beginning. We continue to make significant efforts to facilitate a political settlement in Syria despite the undermining effects of the aggressive action by the United States, the United Kingdom and France in April against a number of civilian structures in Syria. I discerned no sympathy about what happened there in the statement by my United States colleague, despite the fact that it was a blatant breach of international law and did absolutely nothing to advance any kind of a settlement. Furthermore, her statement had an odd, confrontational tone that I felt certainly did not correspond to the message that Mr. De Mistura wanted to convey to all of us today, which is that it will be important for diplomacy to function if the peace that the Syrians have awaited for so long is to finally be established on the ground.Unlike some Security Council member States, which prefer taking unilateral measures to finding ways to solve problems, Russia is focusing on steps to genuinely improve the situation on the ground and advance the prospects for a political settlement. As Mr. De Mistura already noted, the ninth meeting of the participants in the Astana process concluded yesterday in the capital of Kazakhstan, and the guarantors adopted a joint statement. We are grateful to the leadership of Kazakhstan for its steadfast support. The meeting in Astana considered concrete measures for resolving a number of political and humanitarian issues and analysed the situation in the de-escalation zones, which play a key role in maintaining the ceasefire regime, reducing the level of violence and generally stabilizing the situation in Syria. The importance was noted of increasing efforts to help all Syrians and restore normal civilian life and, to that end, of providing fast, safe and unhindered humanitarian access and essential humanitarian and medical assistance, and creating the conditions needed to enable the safe and voluntary return of refugees and internally displaced persons to their homes, as well as people's freedom of movement.A second meeting was held of the working group on the liberation of detainees and hostages to discuss the handover of the bodies of the dead and the search for missing persons, with the participation of experts from the United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross. The importance of continuing joint efforts with the aim of building trust among the conflicting parties in Syria was emphasized. The Syrian Government declared its willingness to engage with the working group and decided to appoint a special representative on issues related to its work.16/05/2018 The situation in the Middle East S/PV.8260 18-14999 7/12 In line with the provisions of resolution 2254 (2015), the meeting affirmed its determination to continuing to promote a political settlement by helping to implement the recommendations of the Syrian National Dialogue Congress held in Sochi. The consultations with the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General and the Syrian parties will continue, with a view to establishing the conditions conducive to starting the work of a constitutional committee in Geneva as soon as possible, whose parameters will have to be agreed on by the Syrians themselves. We will get nowhere without their consensus, so there is no point in proposing artificial frameworks for the process, especially if they are based on provisional plans of some kind. Thanks to the Astana process, we have succeeded in generating momentum for a political process based on intra-Syrian talks under the auspices of the United Nations, although, as we have noted, the triple alliance's aggression against the Syrian Arab Republic has significantly limited the room for manoeuvre in that regard.Concerted efforts by the guarantor countries are bringing us steadily closer to eliminating the presence of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), Jabhat Al-Nusra and other terrorist groups altogether. The recent situation in Syria has continued to be difficult. The guarantor countries' efforts are certainly not being helped by provocative initiatives from external actors, which merely strengthen radical sentiments among groups opposing the legitimate Government and fuel their reluctance to work for negotiated solutions.In Damascus, the operation to liberate the southern regions and suburbs of the capital from ISIL-affiliated groups continues, but Yalda, Babila and Bayt Saham are now fully under the Syrian authorities' control and civilian life there is returning. Russian specialists are helping the Syrian authorities to restore civilian infrastructure. Mines are being cleared, socially significant facilities are being rebuilt and electricity and water services are being restored. In eastern Ghouta, some 65,000 residents previously evacuated from the area have returned to their homes. However, in some other regions where the Syrian Government lacks access, the situation has continued to deteriorate. That is especially true of the Rukban and Al-Tuwaihina refugee camps, as well as the former ISIL capital, Raqqa, where the humanitarian situation is disastrous. Measures must be taken to rectify it without delay. The solution is simple — restore Damascus's sovereignty over those territories as soon as possible.Government forces and Palestinian volunteers, with aerial and artillery support, have continued to combat fierce resistance from terrorist detachments in the Palestinian refugee camp in Yarmouk. The militias wounded several dozen civilians in mortar strikes on residential areas in the north-east area of the camp. In the past week, the territory held by the illegal armed groups in Yarmouk has been significantly reduced.The Syrian army's assault on ISIL positions in Deir ez-Zor province has also been ramped up. ISIL's adherents have incurred considerable losses in manpower and equipment and have been driven out of an area of about 1,500 square kilometres. A large-scale operation to eliminate ISIL is being conducted in the eastern part of Syria with the aim of completely defeating the terrorists based in hard-to-reach desert areas, who have been increasing their attacks on Government forces in the Euphrates region and Homs province.We will continue the difficult work of restoring peace in Syria. Frankly, we are disturbed by some international and regional actors' disrespectful attitude to the issue of Syrian sovereignty, of which we have recently seen alarming manifestations. It is important to understand that this will not help to normalize the situation in Syria or the region as a whole. It fuels the conflict and reduces the prospects for a political settlement. For example, how can we be sure that reckless and illegal actions similar to those that occurred a month ago will not be repeated on some other trumped-up pretext? The reckless conduct of a number of international and regional players who claim to have common sense has considerably slowed progress regarding a settlement of the situation in Syria. If they cannot or will not help us with that, they should at least not interfere.In conclusion, I would like to touch briefly on the remarks by my American colleague. Basically, more than half of her statement was about Iran, not Syria, and Syria is the item on our agenda today, after all. I would also like to ask the Americans some questions we have about that. Before they blame Russia or Iran, I would like to ask what the reason is for the presence of United States forces in Syria and what their real objective is. The territories under their control have become grey areas where extremists of various stripes and real terrorists roam freely. In particular, what is going on with the several hundred ISIL followers who are being held by forces loyal to the United States under United States oversight in the region beyond the S/PV.8260 The situation in the Middle East 16/05/2018 8/12 18-14999 Euphrates? They are not being investigated, and nor are they being returned to their countries of origin. We are worried that ISIL will re-emerge in those areas when the United States withdraws from them, which it must do sooner or later.In conclusion, I would like to once again assure the Council of Russia's willingness to support any diplomatic efforts that can bring an end to the miseries of the Syrian people and peace to that long-suffering land.Mr. Ma Zhaoxu (China) (spoke in Chinese): I would like to begin by thanking Mr. De Mistura, Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria, for his briefing. I appreciate his tireless efforts to find a political solution to the conflict.In recent weeks various members of the international community have made tremendous efforts to restore momentum in the political process. China welcomes the latest round of Astana talks and its joint communiqué, and salutes Russia, Kazakhstan, Turkey and Iran for their efforts. We hope that this dialogue will continue to play a positive role in helping to maintain a ceasefire in Syria and advance the Geneva negotiations.China has always maintained that a political solution is the only possible option where the issue of Syria is concerned, and that achieving that goal will require efforts on the international, regional and national fronts. First, the international community should continue to give its support to the United Nations, as the main channel for mediation, and to Mr. De Mistura's efforts to relaunch the Geneva negotiations as soon as possible, on a basis of full respect for Syria's sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity and with a view to helping the conflicting parties to engage in negotiations on political governance, the Constitution, elections and counter-terrorism. The Council should remain united in moving the Syrian political process forward.Secondly, the countries involved in the region should take the country's long-term interests and stability into consideration and play a constructive role in helping to find a political solution. China notes that there have been attacks on targets inside Syria. We hope that the parties concerned will remain calm, show restraint and work together to maintain regional peace and stability.Thirdly, both the Syrian Government and the opposition, based on concern for the future of their country and the fundamental interests of their people, should proceed to participate in the Geneva negotiations without preconditions, in accordance with the principle of a dialogue that is Syrian-owned and -led, and on the basis of resolution 2254 (2015), with a view to actively engaging in gradual efforts to reach a settlement that is acceptable to all the parties.For its part, China has been working relentlessly to find a solution. On 13 and 14 May, in the first instance of such an event being held on Syria in China, we hosted an international symposium in Shanghai on the prospects for a political settlement to the Syrian issue. It was attended by Xie Xiaoyan, China's Special Envoy for Syria, a representative of the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General, and the Special Envoys of the United Kingdom and France for Syria, as well as experts and scholars from many countries. Participants held in-depth discussions on the prospects for a solution, the factors bearing on a political settlement and the role of the international community. Our Special Envoy remains in close contact with the parties concerned in his continuing efforts to help reach a solution. Together with the rest of the international community, China stands ready to continue to play a positive and constructive role in finding a political solution to the issue.Mr. Umarov (Kazakhstan): We thank the Special Envoy for Syria, Mr. De Mistura, for his update, and we were glad to hear some encouraging notes of optimism in his briefing.Despite the numerous problems on the humanitarian and political fronts in Syria, Kazakhstan believes that it is imperative to continue to promote a settlement of the crisis while implementing resolution 2254 (2015). We are glad that at their meetings held on 14 and 15 May in Astana, the representatives of Syria's Government and opposition, along with those of the guarantor States, unanimously confirmed the importance of continuing the process. Among other issues, they addressed the importance of increasing efforts to ensure compliance with the various agreements reached during the previous eight rounds of the Astana talks. On the other hand, they also agreed that Geneva should remain the main international platform from which to seek and implement a political settlement of the Syrian crisis. It will also be important to continue to support the aims of the Astana talks and further Geneva negotiations, while ultimately merging those important platforms with the aim of achieving positive results.16/05/2018 The situation in the Middle East S/PV.8260 18-14999 9/12 We thank the Special Envoy for his consultations with various Foreign Ministers at the recent summit of the League of Arab States, as well as with Ms. Federica Mogherini, the European Union's High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. His high-level meetings in Moscow, Tehran, Riyadh and Ankara, as well as his consultations with several European ministers and senior representatives of the United States, are also commendable. We are encouraged by his summary today of his meetings and the outcomes of the Astana process, and we note his hopes for progress and his readiness to increase his own efforts and those of several of the principal stakeholders to revive the political process.We can all see that de-confliction and the precautionary measures to safeguard protected sites under humanitarian law are working. So far this year, 500 additional sites have been de-conflicted, as the process is known. Their coordinates have been voluntarily submitted through the United Nations, and today the total number of sites stands at 661.We are hearing a number of continuing questions and concerns about the outlook for Idlib, which should certainly be our top priority, simply because it has such a large population of vulnerable ordinary citizens. We agree with Mr. De Mistura that since Idlib is six times larger than eastern Ghouta, and therefore has six times more civilian residents, it is in an extremely vulnerable position. We cannot afford a war in Idlib and we therefore call on the main stakeholders with an influence on the conflicting parties to hold negotiations at the national and local levels and in the wider region in order to mitigate the potential tensions.We are impressed by the courageous stance of and the sacrifices made by the United Nations, the Red Crescent, the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Norwegian Refugee Council, which are serving under the most challenging circumstances.To conclude, we also hope that the Brussels Conference, held on 24 and 25 April, will help to generate conditions conducive to the peaceful resolution of the Syrian crisis.Finally, we emphasize once again that the most important condition for the settlement of the Syrian crisis is a political process, through direct dialogue and the use of confidence-building measures among the parties, without which there can be no lasting results. We should not forget that it is the Syrians themselves who should begin to shape the future political system of the Syrian State, with the necessary legislative reforms, its territorial and administrative structure, and presidential and parliamentary elections, in accordance with resolution 2254 (2015).Mr. Inchauste Jordán (Plurinational State of Bolivia) (spoke in Spanish): We express our gratitude for the briefing that we heard from Mr. Staffan de Mistura, the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria, to whom we reiterate our support in the discharge of his duties.Once again we cannot but express our sorrow at the fact that this conflict has gone on for six years now and we are still witnessing the ongoing siege and violence suffered by the Syrian people, mainly children, who, in addition to living with the psychological aftermath of the situation, are also in urgent need of humanitarian assistance. We deplore any act of violence that puts human lives at risk and therefore call for an end to the violence and urge the parties to refrain from any hostile, provocative or unilateral actions, in order to prevent any further suffering of the Syrian people and any further destabilization of the region.We welcome the holding of the summit of the three ceasefire guarantors in Ankara, Turkey, in March. We will be focusing closely on the next summit, which will be sponsored by the Islamic Republic of Iran. Likewise, we welcome the recent Astana meeting. We deem its outcome positive, as were the agreements reached one year ago exactly, when the important de-escalation zones were established. We believe that that international initiative has served to reduce the level of violence and has facilitated, and will continue to facilitate, the path to peace and stability in Syria.We therefore call for greater coordination among the local authorities within the de-escalation zones, humanitarian agencies and the Syrian Government, which will make it possible to improve the living conditions of the local population, with a view to contributing to international efforts to end the conflict in Syria.We call once again for efforts to continue with respect to the full implementation of resolution 2401 (2018), so as to ensure safe, sustained and unhindered humanitarian access to all those who require it. The protection of the civilian population and civilian infrastructure must also be a priority within the S/PV.8260 The situation in the Middle East 16/05/2018 10/12 18-14999 framework of respect for international law and international humanitarian law.We deem imperative the voluntary return of internally displaced persons in a safe and dignified manner, as soon as the situation permits. For that to happen, demining will be vital in those areas where it is necessary. We would urge that the political dialogue agenda continue to focus on the release of detainees and abductees, as well as on the identification of missing or deceased persons.We stress the efforts made towards the voluntary return of thousands of people to eastern Ghouta and other cities north and south of Damascus and their subsequent full return. My delegation would draw the attention of the Security Council to the need to protect thousands of innocent civilians, including children and the elderly, and move them to Idlib. It is urgent and pressing that peace be maintained and any escalation of violence avoided in that area, as the aftermath could be tragic.We believe that measures must continue to be taken to reduce the level of violence on the ground, promote confidence among the parties involved, alleviate the humanitarian situation and promote ongoing initiatives aimed at finding a peaceful political solution. The process must take place on the basis of the various initiatives taken and meetings held at different levels. We therefore underscore once again the commitments made at the Syrian National Dialogue Congress, held in Sochi on 30 January, with a focus on strengthening the United Nations-led political process in the framework of the road map set out in resolution 2254 (2015), in particular through the drafting of a new constitution and the establishment of a constitutional committee, which we believe must be representative and impartial. We hope that the work of that committee, in Geneva, should start as soon as possible and should be active and dynamic and include the participation of all parties to the conflict.We welcome the good offices and mediation of the Secretary-General and his close collaboration with the members of the Security Council in the quest for a peaceful solution to the crisis in Syria.To conclude, we reject any attempt to divide or fragment Syria along ethnic lines or to foster sectarianism there. It is the Syrian people themselves who must freely decide their future and their political leadership, in the framework of their sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity, without any external pressure or interference.We reiterate that the only way to resolve the conflict in Syria is through a Syrian-owned and Syrian-led political process that is inclusive and based on consultation and dialogue and that will allow for a peaceful solution to be reached among all the parties involved.Ms. Pierce (United Kingdom): I had not intended to speak today in the Chamber, but I wanted to respond to some of the things that we have just heard. I will therefore take this opportunity to thank Staffan de Mistura and his team for all their work, which is not proving as fast or as productive as all of us would like, but I think that we are very grateful to Staffan for all his efforts. I was also interested to hear the Chinese account of the work of their envoy.We all know what needs to be done. We have had very many discussions in this Chamber and in the Consultations Room about Syria. I think that what we struggle with is how to get it done and how to take the next step, so I hope that when we leave the Chamber and go next door into closed consultations, we can actually have a proper discussion, without polemics, about what it will take to get the constitutional committee up and running; what are the concrete steps that need to be taken and how we as the Council can best facilitate and support that; and what it takes to get Idlib protected. Lots of speakers today have referred to Idlib; I think that we all know its importance, scale and significance. I would urge those Astana progenitors to do what they can to ensure that on the ground, people in Idlib are safe and that we avert a humanitarian catastrophe there. But I would like to have a proper discussion next door about how the Council can actually support that.I wanted to turn to the issue of the Syrian Government engaging with the United Nations. The Russian representative referred to backsliding from a political settlement and entrenching Syrian unwillingness for a negotiated solution. I think that those two statements are very damning, but they are not damning about us; they are damning about the Syrian regime. We really need all those with influence on Syria, including Russia and Iran, to encourage it to set aside a military strategy as a way to resolve the conflict and to engage with the United Nations across the board, so that we can get back to Geneva and to a political settlement. It is not we in the West who are stopping 16/05/2018 The situation in the Middle East S/PV.8260 18-14999 11/12 that happening. The onus is truly on Syria to follow the will of the Security Council and its resolutions and to allow the United Nations to do its work to help the people of Syria. Those are the main things I wanted to say, but I would like to touch on three more points as well, if I may.We support what the Special Envoy said about bringing women in, which I think is long overdue, and he can count on the United Kingdom's full support for that. I would also like to refer to Iran and the strikes on Israel from Syrian territory, on which we are in full agreement with the United States representative's comments and have been very vocal about in public. I also want to comment on the Russian representative's remarks about the air strikes. I will not rehearse why France, the United States and the United Kingdom took the action we did, except to say that we did it to avert a humanitarian catastrophe, and in doing so we helped to protect civilians on the ground, deterred and degraded Syria's ability to use chemical weapons and thereby upheld the global prohibition on weapons of mass destruction.While I think those things remain very important, they should not be used by anyone on the Council as a reason to let the Syrian Government off the hook where engaging with the United Nations on the political process is concerned. The political process has been essential since 2012, when the Geneva talks were started. It has been increasingly essential since then, and it continues to be essential now. I therefore hope that when we go next door we can have a very detailed discussion about how we as the Council can get back to the spirit of Sweden and actually help Staffan de Mistura and his team do something concrete to achieve that, and have no more mud-slinging.The President: In accordance with rule 37 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure, I invite the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic to participate in this meeting.I now give the floor to the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic.Mr. Mounzer (Syrian Arab Republic) (spoke in Arabic): To begin with, the delegations of the United States and the United Kingdom have tried to promote false claims justifying their aggression against sovereign States, particularly my country, Syria, with the aim of concealing their direct involvement in terrorism and their part in the responsibility for the bloodshed in Syria. I would like to say to them that the testimony, as cited in the media, of the thousands of Syrians who have escaped the blockades of armed terrorist groups in eastern Ghouta, has proved that those countries have been involved in making those citizens suffer through their support of those terrorist groups. Through their positions, their malicious acts and their illegal occupation of various areas of Syria, they have shown that, contrary to their claims, they cannot let go of their history of greed, occupation and imperialism. When speaking in the Council, they claim falsely that they are trying to find a political solution to the situation in Syria, but let me point out, briefly, that we have been able to defeat their agenda in Aleppo and eastern Ghouta, and we will be able to ensure that they cannot win in any part of my country.For the past seven years, since the beginning of the terrorist war in Syria, the United States, Britain and France have been working relentlessly to support and help conduct that war. They have also used the United Nations as a political tool to put pressure on the Syrian Government to implement their hegemonic agenda, interfere in our internal affairs and destabilize my country. They have not used the United Nations to fight terrorism and its sponsors or to help Syria overcome the suffering inflicted on it by armed terrorist groups, which should have been the goal.The Special Envoy devoted part of his statement to discussing the humanitarian situation. In that regard, I want to reiterate that the Syrian Government gives priority to providing every kind of humanitarian assistance to all Syrians in need, wherever they are in Syria. That is our duty, and we are doing our duty. The legal and constitutional obligations established under international decisions and Security Council resolutions on combating terrorism obliged my Government to undertake military operations in eastern Ghouta in order to rescue civilians from the armed terrorist groups holding them hostage and using them for years as human shields. In that regard, I want to state that contrary to some false narratives, the successful military operations conducted by the Syrian Arab Army and its allies against the armed terrorist groups controlling a number of areas that the United Nations has classified as besieged or hard to reach — along with the settlement and reconciliation agreements — have all mitigated civilians' suffering, reduced the numbers of those areas and facilitated humanitarian access to them, including eastern Ghouta.S/PV.8260 The situation in the Middle East 16/05/2018 12/12 18-14999 We deplore the fact that the United States speaks of its eagerness to reach a political agreement while it has been committing acts of aggression against my country based on lies, simply because it is working to give support to the armed groups because they have suffered losses in eastern Ghouta. It was the United States that supported Israel's aggression on 9 May when Israel was unable to protect its own proxy terrorist groups and implement its conspiracy against my country's unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity. Israel has continued its dangerous acts of aggression, which would not have been possible without the continuing unstinting support of the United States Government, because it enjoys impunity as a result of the support it has from the United States in the Security Council, enabling Israel to continue its terrorist acts threatening international peace and security in the region and the world. The Syrian Arab Republic reaffirms that through its military and armed forces it is able and ready to fend off all acts of aggression against its sovereignty and independence. However, we want to reiterate that any attempts to support this failing terrorism will not work. Such flagrant violations will not present obstacles to us in combating terrorism throughout Syrian territory.Yesterday we concluded round nine of the Astana process, and we are pleased with the results. We thank the delegations of Russia, Iran and the host country, Kazakhstan, for making the Astana process a success with regard to combating terrorism. The outcome document of the meeting stresses the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic against any external entities that attempt to violate them.In cooperation with our friends and allies, the Syrian army has succeeded in liberating eastern Ghouta and the southern area of Damascus, making the capital and its surrounding areas safe. With the cooperation of our friends and brothers, we have also expelled the terrorists from the northern area of Homs and the southern area of Hama. Today we reaffirm that we will continue to fight terrorism and to work to liberate each and every part of our territory from terrorism and from countries that seek to undermine our sovereignty.In conclusion, the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic will spare no effort to support all genuine efforts to arrive at a political solution whereby Syrians, and only Syrians, will decide their future and make choices aimed at safeguarding Syria's sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity.The President: The representative of the United Kingdom has asked for the floor to make a further statement.Ms. Pierce (United Kingdom): I just wanted to comment on the Syrian representative's last statement, in which he said that the Syrian Arab Republic will spare no effort to arrive at a political solution. That is obviously a welcome statement. I would like to ask him if he could tell the Council, or is willing to say today, that Syria will put the same amount of effort into engaging with the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria and with the Council in order to take concrete steps to get the Geneva process to work and to get a constitutional committee off the ground. If Syria were able to make that commitment today in the Chamber, I believe that would unlock a lot of things for the Council.The President: The representative of the Syrian Arab Republic has asked for the floor to make a further statement. I now give him the floor.Mr. Mounzer (Syrian Arab Republic) (spoke in Arabic): We have said time and again that we are working with the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria. A delegation from the Syrian Arab Republic is working directly with him. We are eager, as we have said repeatedly, to find a peaceful, Syrian-led solution to the Syrian crisis.The President: There are no more names inscribed on the list of speakers. I now invite Council members to informal consultations to continue our discussion on the subject.The meeting rose at 11.25 a.m.

Este estudio contiene relatos de practicas ancestrales, entrevistas, caracterización de oficios, imagenes de mujeres, hombres, tipologia de las viviendas, artesanias, mapa y ubicacion geografica del resguardo Totumal. Un abordaje de identidad de genero y una reflexión profunda al rol de la mujer indigena. ; Esta investigación analiza las transformaciones de identidad y roles de género de las mujeres embera chami, en el resguardo Totumal, ubicado en Belalcázar, Caldas, y las condiciones que han permitido estos cambios durante las últimas tres décadas. Históricamente, estas mujeres han sido ignoradas por su comunidad, que es patriarcal: no participan de la vida política y social, no se reconocen sus aportes a las luchas por el territorio. Las emberas se han dedicado, fundamentalmente, a las labores domésticas. La metodología empleada en este trabajo es de carácter cualitativa y descriptiva. Se emplearon las siguientes técnicas: observación simple, observación participante, entrevistas, entrevista en profundidad, entrevista informal, talleres de memoria histórica. La investigación evidenció que las mujeres de Totumal han desempeñado papeles importantes en la vida de su comunidad: no solo son dadoras de vida y cuidadoras de la cultura —sus roles tradicionales—, sino que, han contribuido históricamente, y de modo silencioso, a la construcción de los territorios embera: luchan, resisten y defienden sus tradiciones junto a los hombres, incluso desde antes que aparecieran las organizaciones indígenas. No obstante, la cultura patriarcal de los emberas y la baja visibilidad de las mujeres en los procesos comunitarios han opacado su participación y contribución. El contacto con los mestizos, la Constitución de 1991, los cambios sociales, económicos y culturales, entre muchos factores, han promovido otras formas de participación de las mujeres embera en la vida comunitaria, en organizaciones indígenas y en la sociedad. ; This investigation analyzes the transformations of identity and gender roles of the embera chami women in the Totumal reservation located in Belalcázar, Caldas, and the conditions that have permitted those changes during the last three decades. Historically, these women have been ignored by their community, which is patriarchal: they don't participate in the political and social life nor are their contributions to the struggle for territory recognized. The emberas have dedicated themselves, fundalmently, to domestic labor. The methodology utilized in this investigation is qualitative in nature and descriptive. The following techniques were implemented: simple observation, participant observation, interviews, in depth interviews, informal interviews, historical-memory workshops. The investigation reveals that the women of Totumal have performed important roles in community life: they are not only givers of life and caretakers of culture - their traditional roles -, but rather they have contributed historically, and quietly, to the construction of embera territories: they fight, resist, and defend their traditions along with the men, even before the appearance of indigenous organizations. However, patriarchal culture of the embera and the reduced visibility of the women in community processes have detracted from their participation and contribution. Contact with mestizos, the 1991 Constitution, social, economic, and cultural changes, among other factors, have promoted other forms of participation of embera women in the life of the community, in indeginous organizations, and society. ; Maestría ; Magíster en Historia ; Tabla de contenido 1. Introducción . 14 1.1. Planteamiento del problema . 16 1.2. Justificación. 17 1.3. Objetivos. 18 1.3.1. Objetivo general . 18 1.3.2. Objetivos específicos . 18 1.4. Antecedentes. 19 2. Marco Teórico . 22 2.1. Identidad y género . 22 2.1.1. Identidad. 23 2.1.2. Identidad de género. 24 2.1.3. Género y sexo . 25 2.1.4. Mujeres indígenas. 27 2.1.5. Roles de género . 29 2.1.6. Ablación del clítoris . 31 2.1.6.1. La curación . 31 2.1.6.2. La operación. 32 2.1.6.3. Convertirse en mujer. 34 2.2. Identidad ancestral embera chamí . 37 2.2.1. Historia. 37 2.2.2. Formas de explotación indígena . 40 2.2.3. El despojo . 41 2.3. Economía . 43 2.3.1. La horticultura . 44 2.3.2. La caza. 44 2.3.3. La pesca. 45 8 2.4. Organización Sociopolítica. 46 2.4.1. De la familia al cabildo: la vida en comunidad . 46 2.4.2. Los planes de vida . 47 2.4.3. Organizaciones indígenas. 48 2.4.3.1. ONIC. . 49 2.4.3.2. Cridec. 50 2.4.4. La mujer indígena dinamizadora de procesos. 51 2.4.4.1. Consejo Nacional de Mujeres Indígenas. 51 2.4.4.2. Coordinación Nacional de Juventudes. 52 2.5. Cosmogonía . 53 2.5.1. Pensamiento en espiral. 54 2.5.2. Educación. 54 2.5.3. Aculturación. 57 3. Metodología. . 60 3.1. Diseño de la investigación. 60 3.2. Enfoque de la investigación. 60 3.3. Población. 61 3.4. Técnicas de recolección de información. 61 3.4.1.Observación simple . 61 3.4.2. Observación participante . 62 3.4.3. Entrevistas. 62 3.4.4. Entrevista en profundidad . 62 3.4.5. Entrevista informal . 63 3.4.6. Talleres de memoria histórica . 63 3.4.7. Matriz de coherencia investigativa. 64 9 4. La Comunidad de Totumal. 65 4.1. Caracterización . 65 4.1.1. Ubicación. 65 4.1.2. Suelos. 68 4.1.3. Clima. 68 4.1.5. Economía. 69 4.2. Historia de Totumal. 70 4.2.1. Hijos de un mismo árbol. 70 4.2.2. La lucha por el territorio . 72 4.2.3. Escrituración de tierras . 75 4.3. Lazos de Identidad . 77 4.3.1. Organización social y política de Totumal. 77 4.3.2. Organización sociopolítica . 78 4.3.3. La asamblea comunitaria . 79 4.3.4. El consejo de mayores o consejo de gobierno. 80 4.3.5. La junta directiva . 80 4.3.6. Órgano de Control . 80 4.3.7. Plan de vida y estatutos. 81 4.4. Referentes culturales . 82 4.5. Identidad y sus transformaciones. 90 4.5.1. Oficios de mujeres. 91 4.5.2. De niña a mujer. 96 4.5.3. Diversas identidades sexuales. 98 4.5.4. Ablación de clítoris en el resguardo Totumal. 102 5.Condiciones que han permitido cambios en el orden de la identidad en las mujeres de Totumal. 105 10 5.1. Identidad y participación Wera Totumal. 105 5.2. Mujeres y territorio . 107 5.3. Hacia una nueva participación . 110 5.3.1. Mujeres y Cabildo . 111 5.3.2. Asambleas comunitarias. 116 5.3.3. Mujeres y cultura . 120 5.3.4. Equipo femenino Kajuembera. 124 5.3.5. Educación, Wera Totumal. 127 5.3.6. Globalización y tecnología. 132 5.4. Hacia una participación inclusiva . 135 5.4.1. Las fiestas del campesino. 136 5.4.2. Asomujeres. 137 6. Conclusiones. 141 Referencias. 144 Anexos. 149

Azerbaijan People Republic the new sovereign state, created in May 1918 in the Muslim East, has lived and worked in hard and difficult conditions for 23 months. The Republic had to fight against the political and economic policies of the world's major powers, including Russia, the United States, England and France, and resorted to all means to maintain its sovereignty, and faced very complex challenges along the way. Under the pressure of these states, on May 29, 1918, the National Council of Azerbaijan was forced to decide on the issue of Iravan to the armenians in order to maintain their sovereignty while discussing the border problem between Azerbaijan and Armenia and he considered this decision a "historic necessity", a "unavoidable disaster" for heartbreak. During the Azerbaijan People Republic, neighboring countries made a number of territorial claims against Azerbaijan. At that time, its territory was 113.895, 97 sq. km. Its 97,296,67 sq. km was undeniable, and 16,598,30 sq. km was disputed. To resolve such issues, the Treaty of Friendship was first signed on June 4, 1918, between the Ottoman Empire and the Republic of Azerbaijan. It was the first agreement signed by the Azerbaijan People Republic with any foreign state. The second article of the Batumi Treaty sets the border between Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia. According to the Batumi contract, Azerbaijan also suffered territorial losses. According to the agreement, the Sharur section of the Sharur-Daralayaz province and the Nakhchivan accident, except for Ordubad, were transferred to Turkey. In addition, the regions of Kamarly, Ulukhanli and Vedibasar of the Iravan provincewere transferred to Turkey. On March 12, 1921, the Moscow Treaty was signed. With the participation of a representative of the Soviet Russia to clarify some of the territories following the Moscow Treaty, Turkey signed an agreement on October 13, 1921, between the three South Caucasus republics. With the participation of a representative of the Soviet Russia to clarify some of the territories following the Moscow treaty, Turkey signed an agreement on October 13, 1921, between the three South Caucasus republics. The contract consisted of 20 articles and 3 annexes. A number of provisions of this treaty were consistent with the relevant articles of the Moscow Treaty. In general, this document was rejecting unequal rights, forcible contracts, and the Sevr treaty. Article 5 of the agreement was directly related to the fate of Nakhchivan. Thus, the Moscow and Kars treaties also resolved Nakhchivan's autonomy status. ; Новое суверенное государство, созданное в мае 1918 г. на мусульманском Востоке, уже 23 месяца живет и работает в трудных и сложных условиях. Республика должна была бороться против политической и экономической политики крупнейших мировых держав, включая Россию, Соединенные Штаты, Англию и Францию, и использовать все средства для сохранения своего суверенитета, и на этом пути столкнулась с очень сложными проблемами. Под давлением этих государств 29 мая 1918 г. Национальный Совет Азербайджана, обсуждая вопрос о границе между Азербайджаном и Арменией, был вынужден принять решение о передаче Еревана армянам в целях сохранения их суверенитета. Во время Азербайджанской Демократической Республики соседние страны выдвинули ряд территориальных претензий к Азербайджану. В то время его территория составляла 113,895, 97 кв. км. 97 296,67 кв. км были неоспоримыми, а 16 598,30 кв. км оспаривались. Для решения таких вопросов договор о дружбе был впервые подписан 4 июня 1918 г. между Османской империей и Азербайджанской Республикой. Это был первый контракт, подписанный Азербайджанской Демократической Республикой с любым иностранным государством. Вторая статья Батумского договора устанавливает границу между Азербайджаном, Грузией и Арменией. Согласно Батумскому договору, Азербайджан также понес территориальные потери. В соответствии с соглашением, в результате район Шарур – одна из частей Шарур-Даралагезского уезда и Нахчываньского уезда, за исключением Ордубада, – был передан Турции. Кроме того, районы Гамарли, Улуханлы и Ведибасар Иреванского уезда были переданы Турции. 12 марта 1921 г. был подписан Московский договор. При участии представителя Советской России для уточнения некоторых территорий после Московского договора Турция подписала 13 октября 1921 г. в Карсе соглашение между тремя Южнокавказскими республиками. Контракт состоял из 20 статей и 3 приложений. Ряд положений этого договора соответствовал соответствующим статьям Московского договора. В целом этот документ отклонил неравные права, принудительные контракты и договор Севр. Статья 5 соглашения была напрямую связана с судьбой Нахчываня. Таким образом, Московский и Карский договоры также разрешили статус автономии Нахчываня. ; Нова суверенна держава, створена у травні 1918 р. на мусульманському Сході, уже 23 місяці живе і працює у важких і складних умовах. Республіка мала боротися проти політичної і економічної політики найбільших світових держав, зокрема Росії, Сполучених Штатів, Англії та Франції, і використовувати всі засоби для збереження свого суверенітету, і на цьому шляху зіткнулася з дуже складними проблемами. Під тиском цих держав 29 травня 1918 р. Національний Рада Азербайджану, обговорюючи питання про кордон між Азербайджаном і Вірменією, була змушена ухвалити рішення про передачу Єревана вірменам з метою збереження їх суверенітету. Під час Азербайджанської Демократичної Республіки сусідні країни висунули низку територіальних претензій до Азербайджану. У той час його територія становила 113,895, 97 кв. км. 97 296,67 кв. км були незаперечними, а 16 598,30 кв. км оскаржувалися. Для вирішення таких питань договір про дружбу був вперше підписано 4 червня 1918 р. між Османською імперією та Азербайджанською Республікою. Це був перший контракт, підписаний Азербайджанської Демократичної Республікою з будь-якою іноземною державою. Друга стаття Батумського договору встановлює межу між Азербайджаном, Грузією і Вірменією. Згідно з Батумським договором, Азербайджан також поніс територіальні втрати. Відповідно до угоди, у результаті район Шарур – одна з частин Шарур-Даралагезского повіту і Нахчиванського повіту, за винятком Ордубади, – був переданий Туреччині. Крім того, райони Гамарлі, Улуханли і Ведібасар Іреванского повіту були передані Туреччині. 12 березня 1921 р. був підписаний Московський договір. За участю представника Радянської Росії для уточнення деяких територій після Московського договору Туреччина підписала 13 жовтня 1921 р. у Карсі угоду між трьома Південнокавказькими республіками. Контракт складався з 20 статей і 3 додатків. Низка положень цього договору відповідали відповідним статтями Московського договору. Загалом цей документ відхилив нерівні права, примусові контракти і договір Севр. Стаття 5 угоди була безпосередньо пов'язана з долею Нахчиваня. Таким чином, Московський і Карський договори також дозволили статус автономії Нахчиваня.

[EN] 'Social pedagogy' is not a familiar term in South Africa. Instead, everything to do with education outside or beyond schooling is subsumed under 'adult education'. Community education or alternatives are generally known as 'radical' or 'popular' education' concerned with social, economic and political transformation. Based on the pedagogy of Paulo Freire and participatory development paradigms these are rooted in the mass democratic struggles against apartheid. This paper is based on extensive research by the authors as participant observers and activists, conducted over many years into university-based adult education on the one hand, and praxis outside academic institutions, on the other. The authors have a history of engagementinworker education, and key elements of education in the non-racialtrade union movement as one ofthe mostimportant organised forces ofinternal politicalresistance are suggested as informing curricula of university-based adult education. Since 1994 and the change to democracy, adult education departments in universities have increasingly been eroded or disappeared as separate departments or programmes. Like elsewhere in the north,we have witnessed the undermining and increased professionalization and institutionalization of adult education across contexts – and with it a marked reduction in radical outlook and purpose. However, the methodological approach has remained committed to participation and dialogue, and, with the waning of community-based studentswho bringwith them extensive experience from the field,there is a consistent emphasis on other, practice-based knowledges through guest educators, and by sending students to design and conduct research and small interventions, at community level. Popular education outside the university takes numerous forms, and as an 18-month research project has shown, there are still many initiatives that target members of working class communities who have no other access to education. Much of this work is based on a 'pedagogy of contingency' in that itresponds directly to local needs and concerns. However, not all of the popular education practices continue the tradition of radical, conscientising education. We describe three tensions or contradictions experienced by educators concernedwith transformation;firstly,the tension between participation as a principle or a technique; secondly,the tension between individual or collective change;thirdly,the tension betweenworking 'bottomup' or 'top-down' in designing curricula and asking 'Who leads, and who follows?' in attempts to work democratically. We conclude that constraints and demands informed by neoliberal politics have made thework of activist academics and academic activists increasingly difficult. The paper concludes by suggesting that building global solidarity amongst adult educators who have carried their struggles from the past into the future, and younger educators who create new forms of radical pedagogy forward, are important ways of keeping social justice agendas and practices alive. [ES] La Pedagogía Social no es un término común en Sudáfrica. En su lugar, todo cuanto hace referencia a la educación que quede fuera o más allá de la escolaridad se integra en la enseñanza de adultos. La educación de la comunidad u otras alternativas son conocidas generalmente como educación radical o popular, y se ocupa de la transformación social, económica o política. Según la pedagogía de Paulo Freire y paradigmas de desarrollo participativo, esta pedagogía hunde sus raíces en la lucha democrática de masas contra el apartheid. Este artículo se basa en una extensa investigación realizada por los autores como observadores participantes y activistas, llevada a cabo durante varios años en la educación de adultos con base universitaria por una parte, y en la praxis fuera del ámbito académico por la otra. Los autores han estado comprometidos con la educación obrera, y los elementos esenciales de la educación en el movimiento sindicalista antirracista, considerado como una de las fuerzas organizadas de resistencia política interna más importantes, son sugeridos como planes de estudio de la educación de adultos con base universitaria. Desde 1994 y el cambio hacia la democracia, los departamentos de educación para adultos en las universidades se han visto cada vez más mermados o directamente han desaparecido en otros departamentos o programas diferentes. Como en cualquier otro lugar en el norte, nosotros hemos sido testigos de una extenuante e incrementada profesionalización e institucionalización de la educación de adultos independientemente del contexto -y, con ello, de una notable reducción en punto de vista y propósito. Sin embargo, el enfoque metodológico ha permanecido comprometido con la participación y el diálogo, y, con la disminución de estudiantes localizados a nivel comunitario que aporten amplia experiencia obtenida en el terreno. Por ese motivo existe un continuo énfasis en otros conocimientos basados en la práctica a través de educadores invitados, y en enviar estudiantes a diseñar y realizar investigaciones y pequeñas intervenciones a nivel comunitario. La educación popular fuera de la universidad presenta numerosas formas, y como un proyecto de investigación de 18 meses de duración ha mostrado, aún hay muchas iniciativas cuyo objetivo son miembros de comunidades de clase trabajadora que no tienen ningún otro acceso a la educación. Gran parte de este trabajo se basa en una 'pedagogía de la contingencia' que responde directamente a las necesidades y problemas locales. Sin embargo, no todas las prácticas de educación popular continúan la tradición de una educación radical y de concienciación. Describimos tres tensiones o contradicciones experimentadas por educadores preocupados porla transformación; en primerlugar, la tensión entre la participación como principio o como técnica; en segundo lugar, la tensión entre el cambio individual o colectivo; en tercer lugar, la tensión entre trabajar de arriba abajo o en sentido contrario a la hora de diseñar planes de estudio y preguntarnos '¿Quién lidera, y quién sigue?' en un intento de trabajar democráticamente. Concluimos que las limitaciones y las exigencias de los políticos neoliberales han hecho el trabajo de los académicos activistas y de los activistas académicos cada vez más difícil. El artículo concluye sugiriendo que construir la solidaridad mundial entre educadores de adultos que han transmitido sus luchas desde el pasado hasta el futuro, y educadores más jóvenes que crean nuevas formas de pedagogía radical, es una manera importante de mantener vivas las agendas y prácticas de la justicia social.

We observe from the 1970s theoretical models and diversification mechanisms of scientific publicizing seeing compile the three forms are popular, scientific and cultural activities more recently public debate establishing a democratic dialogue in social controversies scientists. This phenomenon of theoretical diversification takes place at the intersection of issues combining epistemological, communicative and ultimately political questions. However, if the philosopher Jürgen Habermas saw a direct determination of epistemological positioning of actors / agents research into their communication practices within such devices, this perspective appears ill-suited in terms of observations and contemporary sociological theory. A theoretical practice giving a prevalence of the theory of communicative practice can satisfactorily address or social issues taking place in the theory itself, or to objectify so distanced phenomena own objectification of social relations complex science companies. The main risk is the integration of cultural norms and values of a specific scientific field in the results of theoretical activities themselves socio-professional habitus. This work on the cultural values and practices of the actors / agents involved in the research phenomena publicizing science, we have developed four empirical components in the preparation of a thesis in Information Science and communication. The first three components are based on a semi-structured interview corpus, observations and analysis of content generated by research actors involved in three separate devices and corresponding, within certain limits, the above theoretical models: a popular publication, the 2009 and 2010 editions of the Festival of Science, and the deliberations of the National Commission for Public Debate on Nanotechnology and issues. The fourth part focuses on the study of intra-academic training of doctoral recipients multidisciplinary communication, information and scientific mediation, opening our analysis to the observation of phenomena of socialization research stakeholders by publicizing science . These devices all taking place in the same geographical and temporal context, their study allows us to observe the relationship of convergence between them and potential polypratiques actors / agents research. In a sociological study of scientific communication deployed against the public, extension and its ideological corollary (a "knowledge gap", a "lay public," a "neutral science", etc.) To suggest rather in as a community-based social habitus, participating in a phenomenon of socialization identity and generating perceptual schemes and practicality into the areas of communicative theory and the theory of knowledge. Extension tends to overflow the only part of its formal mechanisms to redefine the practice forms of publicizing theoretically divergent. Devices institutionalized public debates taking place in the socio-scientific controversies conduct staged hegemonic superiority of scientific experience in social experiments "external", modeled on a division of the social world based on a distinction functional. This tradition by helping to define the conditions of access of actors / agents to institutionalized social democratic dialogue instances, is inserted between the potential of participation and representation in public space and prioritize forms of intervention stakeholders / social workers according to their proximity to the alleged instances of construction of scientific knowledge. ; Nous observons depuis les années 1970 une diversification théorique des modèles et dispositifs de la publicisation scientifique, voyant se compiler les trois formes que sont la vulgarisation, l'animation culturelle scientifique et plus récemment les débats publics instaurant un dialogue démocratique au sein des controverses socio-scientifiques. Ce phénomène de diversification théorique prend place au croisement de problématiques alliant des questionnements épistémologiques, communicationnels et finalement politiques. Cependant, si le philosophe Jürgen Habermas voyait une détermination directe du positionnement épistémologique des acteurs/agents de la recherche sur leurs pratiques communicationnelles au sein de tels dispositifs, cette perspective apparaît peu adaptée au regard des observations et de la théorie sociologique contemporaines. Une pratique théorique accordant une prévalence de la théorie sur la pratique communicationnelle ne permet de relever de manière satisfaisante ni les enjeux sociaux prenant place dans la théorie elle-même, ni d'objectiver de manière distanciée les phénomènes d'objectivation des relations sociales propres au complexe sciences sociétés. Le principal risque étant l'intégration des normes et valeurs culturelles d'un habitus socioprofessionnel spécifique au champ scientifique au sein des résultats des activités théoriques elles-mêmes. Ce travail portant sur les valeurs et pratiques culturelles des acteurs/agents de la recherche engagés dans les phénomènes de publicisation des sciences, nous avons développé quatre volets empiriques dans le cadre de la préparation d'une thèse en Sciences de l'Information et de la Communication. Les trois premiers volets s'appuient sur un corpus d'entretiens semi-directifs, d'observations et d'analyse des contenus produits par des acteurs de la recherche engagés dans trois dispositifs distincts et correspondant, dans certaines limites, aux modèles théoriques susmentionnés : une publication de vulgarisation, les éditions 2009 et 2010 de la Fête de la Science, et les débats de la Commission Nationale du Débat Public sur les nanotechnologies et leurs enjeux. Notre quatrième volet porte sur l'étude des formations intra-académiques des doctorants allocataires pluridisciplinaires à la communication, l'information et la médiation scientifiques, ouvrant notre analyse à l'observation des phénomènes de socialisation des acteurs de la recherche par la publicisation des sciences. Ces dispositifs prenant tous place dans un même contexte géographique et temporel, leur étude permet d'observer les liens de convergence entre eux et les polypratiques potentielles des acteurs/agents de la recherche. Au cours d'une étude sociologique de la communication scientifique déployée face aux publics, la vulgarisation et son corollaire idéologique (un « fossé des connaissances », un « public profane », une « science neutre », etc.) se laissent entrevoir plutôt sous la forme d'un habitus socio-communautaire, participant à un phénomène de socialisation identitaire, et générant des schèmes perceptifs et un sens pratique jusque dans les domaines de la théorie communicationnelle et de la théorie de la connaissance. La vulgarisation tend à déborder du seul cadre de ses dispositifs formels pour redéfinir par la pratique les formes de publicisation théoriquement divergentes. Les dispositifs de débats publics institutionnalisés prenant place au sein des controverses socio-scientifiques procèdent à une mise en scène hégémonique d'une supériorité de l'expérience scientifique sur les expériences sociales « externes », calquée selon une division du monde social reposant sur une distinction fonctionnelle. Cette tradition s'intercale entre les potentiels de participation et de représentation dans l'espace public et hiérarchise les formes de l'intervention des différents acteurs/agents sociaux selon leur proximité supposée aux instances de construction des savoirs scientifiques.

La tesis doctoral titulada "La enseñanza de la Historia de España y el desarrollo de las competencias ciudadanas. El conocimiento del alumnado al finalizar el Bachillerato", tiene como objetivo general conocer la contribución de la materia de Historia en la formación ciudadana de los jóvenes. La creciente necesidad de formar a la juventud en el conocimiento del sistema democrático en el que viven y del que deben participar activamente está constituyendo un nuevo contexto de enseñanza y aprendizaje. La evolución de una sociedad democrática pasa porque sus ciudadanos conozcan y valoren su sistema y sean capaces de participar activamente tanto desde el plano político como desde la realidad social. En esta coyuntura, la enseñanza de la Historia de España en segundo curso de Bachillerato, se presenta como una importante materia para el desarrollo de la formación personal y social de la juventud, tal y como queda reflejado en sus finalidades y objetivos, donde la adquisición de competencias que fomenten su formación ciudadana y democrática aparece como una de sus finalidades principales. Así, la consideración de la Historia como vehículo a través del cual formar en los valores propios de nuestra sociedad permite establecer una estrecha relación entre su función educativa, sus propósitos y finalidades, con la formación ciudadana. Para llevar a cabo esta investigación hemos contado con la participación de cincuenta alumnos de primero de grado de una representación de todas las ramas de conocimiento (Artes y Humanidades, Ciencias, Ciencias de la Salud, Ciencias Sociales e Ingenierías) de siete universidades españolas (Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Universidad de Alicante, Universidad de Murcia, Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena, Universidad de Almería, Universidad de Sevilla y Universidad Pablo Olavide). El instrumento de recogida de datos ha sido una entrevista semiestructurada donde se hace referencia tanto al conocimiento de Historia de España y su vinculación con el desarrollo ciudadano, como a una metareflexión sobre su aprendizaje. El análisis de la información se ha realizado a partir de un sistema de categorías, con cinco variables divididas en tres niveles que actúan como hipótesis de progresión del conocimiento (García Díaz, 1999). La codificación y el tratamiento informático de las 1690 unidades de información se ha realizado a partir del programa de análisis cualitativo Atlas.ti. Estos datos nos han permitido realizar diversos tipos de análisis de los que hemos podido concluir que los estudiantes presentan dificultades para extrapolar el conocimiento histórico aprendido en las aulas de Historia a situaciones reales que les afectan como ciudadanos. Dos de las teorías que barajamos residen en la presentación fragmentada que se hace del contenido histórico y la desconexión de esta enseñanza con los problemas que actualmente vive la sociedad y de la que son partícipes nuestros alumnos. Proponemos, ante estos resultados, algunas estrategias didácticas referidas a la organización curricular de la materia en torno a problemas relevantes, fomentar la participación de los estudiantes en el aula, tomar como base las concepciones previas del alumnado y formar a un docente comprometido con su labor de educador de ciudadanos activos, participativos y democráticos. The doctoral thesis called "The education of the History of Spain and the development of the citizen competitions. The knowledge of the students finish the Secundary school", general objective is to know the contribution of the subject of History at the civic education of young. The growing need to train youth in the knowledge of the democratic system in which they live and who should participate actively is developing a new teaching and learning context. The evolution of a democratic society is because the students must know and value your system and be able to participate actively both from the political and social reality. In this situation, the teaching of the History of Spain in the High school is very important area for the students, its developing personal and social education. This objectives of democratic citizenship education appears as one of its main purposes. Therefore, the History is considered as a vehicle through which form in the values of our society can establish a close relationship between their educational role, its aims and objectives, with civic education. To carry out this research, we had the participation of fifty students from first grade of a representation of all branches of knowledge (Arts and Humanities, Science, Health Sciences, Social Sciences and Engineering) from seven Spanish universities (University of Rovira I Virgili, University of Alicante, University of Murcia, University Polytechnic of Cartagena, University of Almería, University of Seville and University Pablo Olavide). The data collection instrument was a semistructured interview which refers both to the knowledge of History of Spain and its relationship to citizenship development, and a meditation on their learning. The data analysis was performed from a system of categories, with five variables divided into three levels which act as progression of knowledge hypothesis (García Díaz, 1999). The coding and computer processing units of the 1690 information has been made from the Atlas.ti program. These data have allowed us realise diverse types of analysis of which have been able to conclude that the students present difficulties to extrapolate the historical knowledge learnt in the classrooms of History to real situations that affect them like citizens. Two of the theories that lie in the shuffle are done piecemeal presentation of historical content and the disconnection of this teaching with the problems that society currently lives and our students are participating. We propose to these results, some teaching strategies related to curriculum organization of matter around relevant issues, encourage participation of students in the classroom, to build on student's preconceptions and become a teacher committed to his work of educating active citizens, participatory and democratic.

The Swedish mountain region makes up about one third of the country but includes less than 2 per cent of the population. It stretches for over 1000 km and includes 90 per cent of the total nature conservation area in Sweden. With its 8000 km of hiking trails and 100 mountain huts and lodges it is one of the most important areas for outdoor recreation and tourism - visited by one fourth of the Swedish adult population every year. With the current decline of the extractive industries tourism has become an important development issue in the area. Effective spatial planning in the mountains presupposes good information on tourism and outdoor recreation. Municipalities need adequate data to base planning on. One precondition for more effective information supply to spatial planning is research and development of methods. It must be possible to follow developments, predict environmental effects and effects on user attitudes, satisfaction etc. There are big differences between visitors in the mountains. Their needs and interest in different nature experiences, their tolerance towards crowding and contacts with other users vary a lot. It is important for planning and management to find out which qualities users are looking for and appreciating and to have a clear picture of the variance between different users. Management of recreation areas is normally combined with conservation and often has two goals: i) to maintain "natural conditions" and ii) to provide recreation opportunities. These two goals will often be contradictory. Resolving this conflict is both a theoretical and practical problem. The discourse within spatial planning differs from the nature conservation discourse. While the nature conservation discourse comes from a tradition of "calculating rationality" and a scientific, central view that points out the foremost values – "national interests", national parks, world heritage areas – the basis of the spatial planning ideology in Sweden is a conception of local, political decision making. The Swedish planning system with a planning monopoly and veto of the municipalities is in theory a system with deliberative or communicative rationality: the plan is supposed to express citizens' will and needs expressed through their representatives. How to provide the planning system with relevant information on different levels, i.e. information that can be used for predicting different reactions to different management actions in order to be able to handle conflicts will be one of the central questions in the thesis. Special attention will be paid to different methods of measuring nature tourism and outdoor recreation. Self registration combined with satisfactory studies on non participation can give a relatively good synoptic picture of the use of the area. At the same time it is obvious that the non participation varies too much geographically and between different points of time for self registration alone to be used for studying frequencies and patterns of use. Flight observations carried out as a part of the study in Södra Jämtlandsfjällen (article II) proved to be a good method of studying the patterns of camping. They were also important for conflict analysis and studying divergences. The indirect methods for estimating the total number of visitors have to be calibrated often, which can be difficult (for example number of visitors in a car or a buss). The indirect methods risk missing factors that make it possible to get indications of possible tendencies in the use of an area. In situations where conflicts exist, it is important that the picture of the present situation is well established and legitimate. This means that both methods and the actors participating in the study have to be experienced as legitimate by all parties taking part in the planning process. A general conclusion is that there are not any good shortcuts to useful knowledge about outdoor recreation and tourism for planning as a whole, for management or for EIA. Need for predictions is far too big to make indirect data useful alone. Three studies are presented: i) a national screener study on current tourism patterns in the Swedish mountain region, ii) a case study among the visitors in Södra Jämtlandsfjällen and iii) a case study among the residents in Södra Jämtlandsfjällen. ; Effektiv fysisk planering i fjällen förutsätter tillförlitlig och bra kunskap om turism och friluftsliv. Kommunerna behöver lämplig data att basera sin planering på. En förutsättning för effektivare kunskapsförsörjning är forskning och utveckling av metoder. Det måste vara möjligt att följa utveckling, förutsäga effekter på miljön och brukares attityder, tillfredställelse etc. Den svenska fjällregionen omfattar ca en tredjedel av landet men bara mindre än 2 procent av svenska befolkningen bor i området. 90 procent av alla skyddade naturområden ligger i området. Med sina 8000 kilometer vandringsleder och 100 fjällstugor och -stationer är det ett av de viktigaste områdena för friluftsliv och turism. Området besöks av en fjärdedel av den svenska vuxna populationen varje år. Turism har fått allt större betydelse och roll i utvecklingen av området, mycket på grund av råvaruindustrins nedgång. Det finns stora skillnader mellan besökare i de svenska fjällen. Deras behov och intressen för olika naturupplevelser, deras tolerans för trängsel och kontakt med andra besökare varierar mycket. Det är viktigt för planering och förvaltning att ta reda på vilka kvalitéer besökare söker och uppskattar. Förvaltning av friluftsområden är vanligen kombinerad med bevarande och har ofta två mål: i) att bevara "naturligt tillstånd" och ii) ge möjligheter till friluftsliv. Dessa mål står ofta i strid med varandra. Lösning av denna konflikt är både ett teoretiskt och praktiskt problem. Hur man borde förse fysisk planering med relevant information som kan användas för att förutse reaktioner på olika förvaltningsåtgärder för att kunna hantera konflikter är en av de centrala frågorna i den här avhandlingen. Olika metoder för att mäta naturturism och friluftsliv diskuteras. Tre studier presenteras: i) en nationell studie om svenskarnas fjällvanor, ii) en fallstudie bland besökarna i Södra Jämtlandsfjällen och iii) en fallstudie bland lokalbefolkningen i Södra Jämtlandsfjällen.

Child labors effect on academic achievement is estimated using unique data on third and fourth graders in nine Latin American countries. Cross country variation in truancy regulations provides an exogenous shift in the ages of children normally in these grades, providing exogenous variation in the opportunity cost of children's time. Least squares estimates suggest that child labor lowers test scores, but those estimates are biased toward zero. Corrected estimates are still negative and statistically significant. Children working 1 standard deviation above the mean have average scores that are 16 percent lower on mathematics examinations and 11 percent lower on language examinations, consistent with the estimates of the adverse impact of child labor on returns to schooling.

This Systematic Country Diagnostic (SCD) aims to identify the major constraints on and opportunities for sustaining poverty reduction and shared prosperity in Serbia. The SCD serves as the analytic foundation on which the World Bank Group and the Government of Serbia will define a new Country Partnership Framework for FY2016 to FY2020. It is based on the best possible analysis, drawing on available evidence, and not limited to areas where the World Bank Group is currently engaged. The SCD is structured as follows: Chapter 2 presents the political and economic context. The economic context describes recent trends in growth, shared prosperity, and poverty reduction and briefly discusses factors behind them. Chapter 3 discusses pre-crisis patterns of growth and opportunities for future growth and inclusion in Serbia. Chapter 4 presents drivers of economic growth in Serbia and the principal constraints on growth and competitiveness. Chapter 5 discusses drivers of and constraints to economic inclusion. Chapter 6 outlines risks to sustainable shared prosperity and poverty reduction. Chapter 7 presents priorities for action.