8 juillet 2013
1
08
/07
/juillet
/2013
06:17
In my opinion, organizations need to embrace the notion that during periods of change it is critical to ensure that policies and procedures are in place to adopt an “Open Minded Approach” to change management. It is important for organizations to acknowledge that during periods of change, the best “Change Management Approach” is one whereby organizations encourage freedom of thought and freedom of speech as opposed to repression under a Dictatorship regime. That is, if an organization desires the best ideas to surface on the table during periods of change, then an organization’s actions should be in line with this objective. Examples of actions in line with this objective of encouraging freedom of thought and freedom of speech is rewarding Trendsetters for their actions as opposed to punishing them like some sort of Leopards because they desire to be a Sheppard. Furthermore, actions in line with this objective of encouraging freedom of thought and freedom of speech is not rewarding the Blind for leading the Blind who superficially promote change when in substance their actions encourage everything to stay the same old way. It is important to note that any “Superficial Approach” to change management is by its very nature and design contrary to an “Open Minded Approach” because it is predicated on a façade whereby everybody reads between the lines and knows that any major change is in reality a punishable crime. Thus, it is imperative during periods of change for Change Management Leaders to not only talk the talk but to also walk the talk. There is nothing worse that a Change Management Leader who says one thing, “freedom of thought and freedom of speech” but then wants to hang like a martyr the first person who speaks openly and freely in order to discourage others who are weak. Although this might sound like a paradox in theory, in practice, there are some Change Management Leaders who promote change verbally because it has been pushed onto them from the top down. However, the last thing some Change Management Leaders really want is anything to change as they love everything as is such that the covert goal in practice is for all to remain virtually the same. It is important to note that it is this ingrained desire to preserve the sacred Status Quo which can result in abnormal, irrational and/ or erratic behaviours beyond the realm of Sigmund Freud. Therefore, it is critical during any major period of change to have a strong, vibrant and pragmatic Change Management Leader who brings an “Open Minded Approach” to the table as opposed to a “Superficial Approach” whereby the Change Management Leader brings covert storytelling fables encapsulated in smoke and mirrors to preserve the sacred Status Quo seer. Although in theory it may seem counterproductive to adopt a “Superficial Approach” to change management, it is important to note that with size and complexity comes hierarchy such that there is always someone one step above who tends to impose change on a Disciple who sees this imposition as a form of blasphemy or heresy against one’s personal beliefs.
In summary, I refer to “Change Management Gangnam Ivan Style” as the belief that a “Superficial Approach” to change management is predicated on the imposition of change from hierarchy seen by Disciples as a form of blasphemy or heresy.
PSY - Gangnam Style:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyT_KyAqDEc
Published by ivancacpa
-
dans
Gestion Changement
4 juillet 2013
4
04
/07
/juillet
/2013
12:32
As a continuation from my last blog whereby I believe the root of “World Peace” is centered on peace in the Middle East with the first step being negotiated peace between Israel and the Palestinians, I would like to remain objective and independent in my views such that I would like to now once again focus on Syria in my views as they seem to be the closest at this time to a full fledge military war of rage like wild animals stuck together in a cage. As a friendly reminder, the wave of Arab unrest that began with the Tunisian revolution reached Syria on March 15, 2011. By the end of February 2013, more than 70,000 people, mostly civilians, were thought to have been killed and tens of thousands of others had been arrested. More than two million had been displaced and more than four million needed assistance, according to the United Nations. It is important to note that the proposed peace conference in Geneva and more access for deliveries of humanitarian aid continue to be deferred as thousands and thousands more suffer each day that all Parties choose to continue to play war games. Meanwhile, British Foreign Secretary William Hague said President Bashar al-Assad must halt his assault on Homs. It is clear that President Bashar al-Assad is not interested in peace for Syria but rather is prepared to kill tens of thousands of innocent people and deprive millions more of humanitarian aid rather than work for a resolution of this conflict, which has already killed too many. I call upon the Assad regime to cease its brutal assault on Homs and to allow full humanitarian access to the country. In Bahrain, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and the foreign ministers of the GCC pledged to pool their efforts to help bring peace to Syria. They underscored the utmost urgency of finding a political settlement of the Syrian conflict and vowed to spare no efforts to help convene a conference on Syria, which the US and Russia have been striving to hold in Geneva. Without getting into further excessive detail, the key point to note is that it’s been over 2 years since this conflict first commenced on March 15, 2011 and still there is no imminent solution in sight. In my opinion, everybody seems to agree that there can only be an end to the Syrian conflict via a peace conference in Geneva yet nobody wants to make the first move and actually agree to a proposed date and time. This is a problem which tends to arise when you have too many big shots with big egos on all sides whereby President Bashar al-Assad is backed by Russia, Iran and Hezbollah and the National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces is backed by the USA, EU and Israel. Thus, everybody is so focused on saving their face that all Parties are heading in the direction of converting Syria into an extinct dinosaur race. That is, the current formula in Syria is a toxic brew by design whereby both opposing parties want to win at all costs whereas the Syrian ingredients by design must be mixed into a vegetable stew. Furthermore, like children who hate vegetable stews, nobody wants to take a bight out of a coalition brew whereby power is shared such that everybody has to swallow that which nobody really likes but everybody knows is the most healthy and right.
In summary, I refer to “World Peace Lennon Ivan Style – Part XXV” as the belief that Syria needs a vegetable stew although nobody wants to take a bight out of a coalition brew which nobody really likes but everybody knows is the most healthy and right.
John Lennon – Stand By Me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4_ghOG9JQM
Published by ivancacpa
-
dans
World Peace
1 juillet 2013
1
01
/07
/juillet
/2013
06:37
In my opinion, organizations need to embrace the notion that during periods of change it is critical to ensure that policies and procedures are in place to adopt a “Non-Interest, Non-Partisan, Neutral Approach” to change management. It is important for organizations to acknowledge that during periods of change, the best “Change Management Approach” is one whereby organizations focus on the business at hand which is in the best interest of the entire organization and not in the best interests of individuals who are linked by interest attributes such as race, religion, culture or other personal attributes. Although this “Non-Interest, Non-Partisan, Neutral Approach” may sound easy in theory, in practice this can represent quite the challenge especially when individuals within the organization are members of covert “Clicks” who stick together at all costs to promote their respective personal interests. The key point to note is that when there are covert “Clicks”, there tends to be a tug-of-war effect which kicks in whereby each “Click” starts to pull the “Change Rope” to the benefit of their respective interests as opposed to what is in the best interest of the organization as a whole. When the “Click” tug-of-war commences, an organization commences to deviate from a “Non-Interest, Non-Partisan, Neutral Approach” to change management into a “Biased, Leveraged, Manipulative Approach” to change management. That is, under a “Biased, Leveraged, Manipulation Approach” to change management each “Click” commences to twist and turn the facts and circumstances in their favour in order to manage change in their favour regardless of the underlying merits of their respective directions. In simple English, when “Clicks” are formed based on race, religion, culture or other personal attributes, the change management game becomes one of protecting one’s turf while riding the change management surf. There can be no successful change under a “Biased, Leveraged, Manipulative Approach” to change management as this approach is counterproductive to coming up with the best decision as it is based on coming up with the best self-serving personal interests incision. Thus, it is imperative that any organization which desires to properly manage change have a strong, vibrant, non-interest bound, non-partisan bound and neutral “Change Management Leader” to manage the multiple “Clicks” which tend to form when an organization operates under a “tug-of-war” form. In an ideal world, there would be no “Biased, Leveraged, Manipulative Approach” to change management but in the reality of the human sphere everybody’s instincts tend to be to protect one’s own at all cost regardless of the merits of the situation at hand like a “Rock’N’Roll” band. Thus, for those looking for what is fair, finding this is ultimately rare when everybody tends to twist and turn any change situation in their favour which can result in unusual, abnormal and/ or erratic behaviour.
In summary, I refer to “Change Management Gangnam Ivan Style” as the belief that finding what is fair is rare when everybody twists in their favour resulting in unusual, abnormal and/ or erratic behaviour.
PSY - Gangnam Style:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60MQ3AG1c8o
Published by ivancacpa
-
dans
Gestion Changement
27 juin 2013
4
27
/06
/juin
/2013
07:58
As a continuation from my last blog whereby I believe the root of “World Peace” is centered on peace in the Middle East with the first step being negotiated peace between Israel and the Palestinians, I would like to remain objective and independent in my views such that I would like to now once again focus on Syria in my views as they seem to be the closest at this time to a full fledge military war of rage like wild animals stuck together in a cage. As a friendly reminder, the wave of Arab unrest that began with the Tunisian revolution reached Syria on March 15, 2011. By the end of February 2013, more than 70,000 people, mostly civilians, were thought to have been killed and tens of thousands of others had been arrested. More than two million had been displaced and more than four million needed assistance, according to the United Nations. It is important to note that the proposed peace conference in Geneva and more access for deliveries of humanitarian aid continue to be deferred as thousands and thousands more suffer each day that all Parties choose to continue to play. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov stressed the Kremlin wanted each of the Syrian sides in the talks to select not only their own delegations but the future terms of any transitional government. Mr Ryabkov sidestepped the question of whether this could leave open a role for President Bashar al-Assad in the future. On June 26, 2013, Israeli leaders warned against attacks from Syria while visiting a military drill held near the border with the country in the Golan Heights. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Moshe Yaalon spoke Wednesday, as Israel worries fighting from Syria's civil war could reach its territory. Netanyahu said at the drill Israel “is not looking to challenge anybody but nobody will harm Israel." Yaalon said Israel will not tolerate its sovereignty breached. Without getting into further excessive detail, the key point to note is that it’s been over 2 years since this conflict first commenced on March 15, 2011 and still there is no imminent solution in sight. In my opinion, if the Syrian conflict crosses any major borders, but in particular the border with Israel, all hell will break loose since as we all know Israel is against President Bashar al-Assad since he is backed by the Palestinian Hezbollah, an arch nemesis of Israel. Therefore, it is critical at this stage for the international community to attempt to pressure all sides to attend a peace conference in Geneva as opposed to wasting excessive time, effort and resources preparing for a full fledge military war whereby everybody will try to even the score but will ultimately destroy Syria to its core whereby Syria will never be able to repair the damage done no more. At this stage, it is obvious to me that both sides to this conflict could fight a never ending 20 year war since President Bashar al-Assad is backed by Russia, Iran and Hezbollah whereas the National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces are backed by the USA, EU and Israel. In my opinion, with two opposing sides so heavily militarized a full fledge military war would never end until every party to this conflict currently living in a bubble see their beloved Syria turned into a pile of rubble.
In summary, I refer to “World Peace Lennon Ivan Style – Part XXIV” as the belief that a full fledge military war would never end until everybody currently living in a bubble sees their beloved Syria turned into a pile of rubble.
John Lennon – Stand By Me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4_ghOG9JQM
Published by ivancacpa
-
dans
World Peace
25 juin 2013
2
25
/06
/juin
/2013
08:12
In my opinion, organizations need to embrace the notion that during periods of change it is critical to ensure that policies and procedures are in place to adopt a “Can Do Approach” to change management. It is important for organizations to acknowledge that during periods of change, the best “Change Management Approach” is one whereby organizations encourage those empowered with change to believe in themselves and their abilities to deliver the required changes with a “Can Do Approach”. Although this “Can Do Approach” may sound easy in theory, in practice this can represent quite the challenge especially when individuals within the organization do not want the change to occur. Therefore, the root of a “Can Do Approach” is centered on the weakest link in an organization. That is, the weakest link in an organization during the process of change is any man, woman or transvestite who refuses to jump aboard the wings of change for whatever reason, be it, love for the “Status Quo” or hate for the “New Trending Approach”. It is important to identify the weakest links in an organization during the early stages of change in order to bring them on board before they contaminate with negativity the remaining herd. That is, one negative person or “Change Hater” with a “Cannot Do Attitude” will tend to counteract ten positive people or “Change Accepters” who believe in a “Can Do Approach”. Therefore, it is imperative during periods of change to ensure that any negative people or “Change Haters” first have the opportunity to convert to “Change Accepters” or be given the opportunity to be excluded from the scope of the initial implementation stage as change cannot be successful when there are “Change Haters” coming to work every day in a negative, angry and hate rage. In these circumstances, it should be quite easy to identify such negative individuals who are “Change Haters” by simple observations of their demeanours, mood or behaviours after initiation of the proposed change. Generally, abnormal, irregular or strange behaviours after commencement of a significant change should be a clear sign that the person will not be supporting the proposed change during the initial implementation phase. In these cases, it is most often best to have the “Change Haters” concentrate on the old “Status Quo” until the point where the old “Status Quo” is no longer an option at hand at which point the “Change Haters” will tend to conform to the change like the drummer in a marching band. That is, when the “Change Accepters” who believe in a “Can Do Approach” succeed under the initial phase of the proposed change, there will be like a marching band hymn which will tend to numb the “Change Haters” bums until they succumb to the new march before becoming “Dumb Dumbs”. That is, “Change Haters” by their nature will tend to only say “Yes” to change when they are confronted with dinosaur duress that their skill sets will become extinct unless they accept the change and join the march of the new fresh start.
In summary, I refer to “Change Management Gangnam Ivan Style” as the belief that to adopt a “Can Do Approach” to innovation and change must control “Change Haters” until forced to adapt to new instinct before becoming dinosaur extinct.
PSY - Gangnam Style:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60MQ3AG1c8o
Published by ivancacpa
-
dans
Gestion Changement
20 juin 2013
4
20
/06
/juin
/2013
07:48
As a continuation from my last blog whereby I believe the root of “World Peace” is centered on peace in the Middle East with the first step being negotiated peace between Israel and the Palestinians, I would like to remain objective and independent in my views such that I would like to now once again focus on Syria in my views as they seem to be the closest at this time to a full fledge chemical warfare military strike. As a friendly reminder, the wave of Arab unrest that began with the Tunisian revolution reached Syria on March 15, 2011. By the end of February 2013, more than 70,000 people, mostly civilians, were thought to have been killed and tens of thousands of others had been arrested. More than two million had been displaced and more than four million needed assistance, according to the United Nations. Effective June 1, 2013, the European Union decided to lift the arms embargo on the Syrian opposition while maintaining all other sanctions against President Bashar Assad's regime. As a counter-measure, Russia went ahead with deliveries of S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to Syria with the said purpose of the arms being to help deter foreign intervention. Deputy Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said the missiles were a “stabilising factor” that could dissuade “some hotheads” from entering the conflict as Russia criticised the EU decision not to renew the arms embargo on Syria. Leaders at the G8 summit in Northern Ireland are said to be close to signing a joint statement on Syria, despite their differences whereby Russia and the US are backing opposite sides in the conflict. This could include the proposed peace conference in Geneva, and more access for deliveries of humanitarian aid. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov stressed the Kremlin wanted each of the Syrian sides in the talks to select not only their own delegations but the future terms of any transitional government. Mr Ryabkov sidestepped the question of whether this could leave open a role for President Bashar al-Assad in the future. Without getting into further excessive detail, the key point to note is that it’s been over 2 years since this conflict first commenced on March 15, 2011 and still there is no imminent solution in sight. In my opinion, President Bashar al-Assad cannot be forced to step-down from power by anyone other than the Syrian mass population themselves as part of future democratic elections. Therefore, at this stage it is best for all Parties to this conflict to focus on getting to a conference in Geneva as opposed to wasting excessive time, effort and resources setting pre-conditions to a peace deal. In my opinion, the aforementioned series of manoeuvres by the respective parties to this conflict, in favour of current President Bashar al-Assad by Russia, Iran and Hezbollah and in favour of the National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces by the USA and EU clearly indicates that no individual Party can be ignored as part of a peace deal including President Bashar al-Assad who still seems to have the brass to kick some ass.
In summary, I refer to “World Peace Lennon Ivan Style – Part XXIII” as the belief that it is better for all Syrians to focus on getting to Geneva peace week then setting complicated preconditions to speak.
John Lennon – Stand By Me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4_ghOG9JQM
Published by ivancacpa
-
dans
World Peace
17 juin 2013
1
17
/06
/juin
/2013
07:52
In my opinion, organizations need to embrace the notion that during periods of change it is critical to ensure that policies and procedures are in place to adopt a “Holistic Approach” to change management. It is important for organizations to acknowledge that during periods of change, the best “Change Management Approach” is one whereby organizations develop a Holistic formal system for innovation because Companies with Holistic formal innovation systems are very likely to pursue breakthrough innovation and less likely to miss value added business development opportunities. I define “Holistic Approach” as an approach predicated on honesty, integrity and respect as any attempt to develop a superficial approach to innovation and change management will ultimately backfire. For example, if an organization states in its mission statement on change management that it desires to promote innovation but then punishes individuals within the organization who are innovators and promote a “Holistic Approach” to change management, an organization will actually position itself in the sphere of change management as adopting a “Hypocritical Approach” as opposed to “Holistic Approach”. Although this might sound absurd in theory, in practice an organization is dealing with the unique dynamics of people and culture whereby there is generally a difference between what is said in theory and what is actually done in practice. This difference is generally attributable to poor communication combined with poor human resource management policies in the context of innovation and change management. In terms of poor communication, the root of the problem tends to be with a lack of formalized training for those individuals required to adopt a “Holistic Approach” to innovation and change management. That is, an individual who loves the “Status Quo” and everything about their historical past will tend to see a “Holistic Approach” to innovation as a form of an “Exorcism” such that rather than supporting the proposed change, the opposite is most likely to occur in practice whereby the change is resisted by an indirect approach as direct resistance is not an option when the mission statement of the organization is clear that it wishes to adopt a “Holistic Approach” to innovation and change management. In terms of poor human resource management, in practice, an individual who is most adept to implementing a “Holistic Approach” to innovation and change management will tend to be least recognized and rewarded because innovators tend to be the minority amongst “Status Quo” majorities. Therefore, if an organization wishes to pursue a “Holistic Approach” to innovation and change management, it needs to ensure that everyone within an organization is formally trained on a new way of thinking, which likely differs from the current culture and style at hand, while rewarding the innovators who lead a “Holistic Approach” to innovation and change and not punish them like some sort of outlaw renegade.
In summary, I refer to “Change Management Gangnam Ivan Style” as the belief that to adopt a “Holistic Approach” to innovation and change must not punish Innovator like some sort of outlaw renegade.
PSY - Gangnam Style:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHfZiQEB0tE
Published by ivancacpa
-
dans
Gestion Changement
13 juin 2013
4
13
/06
/juin
/2013
07:49
As a continuation from my last blog whereby I believe the root of “World Peace” is centered on peace in the Middle East with the first step being negotiated peace between Israel and the Palestinians, I would like to remain objective and independent in my views such that I would like to now once again focus on Syria in my views as they seem to be the closest at this time to a full fledge chemical warfare military strike. As a friendly reminder, the wave of Arab unrest that began with the Tunisian revolution reached Syria on March 15, 2011. By the end of February 2013, more than 70,000 people, mostly civilians, were thought to have been killed and tens of thousands of others had been arrested. More than two million had been displaced and more than four million needed assistance, according to the United Nations. Effective June 1, 2013, the European Union decided to lift the arms embargo on the Syrian opposition while maintaining all other sanctions against President Bashar Assad's regime. As a counter-measure, Russia went ahead with deliveries of S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to Syria with the said purpose of the arms being to help deter foreign intervention. Deputy Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said the missiles were a “stabilising factor” that could dissuade “some hotheads” from entering the conflict as Russia criticised the EU decision not to renew the arms embargo on Syria. It is important to note that much of northern Syria has been controlled by rebel groups since last year, and the front lines inside Aleppo have been largely static for months. However, the fall of Qusair last Wednesday, June 5, 2013, has reportedly been seized on by the military leadership in Damascus as a decisive victory. On Monday, opposition activists in Aleppo told the BBC that military reinforcement and weapons to militias loyal to President Bashar al-Assad had been sent to the north-western parts of the city. The army would be trying, they said, to recapture towns in the northern and southern countryside of the city to control vital supply lines from Turkey. The activists added that the ultimate goal was to fully control the heart of Aleppo. Without getting into further excessive detail, the key point to note is that it’s been over 2 years since this conflict first commenced on March 15, 2011 and still there is no imminent solution in sight. In my opinion, President Bashar al-Assad is now trying his best to get an upper hand in the conflict before any proposed United States and Russia peace process through national accord based on the Geneva proposals kick-in. The risk with this military strategy adopted by President Bashar al-Assad is that the international community will eventually get fed-up with this blatant stalling tactic to any peace process in order to consolidate as much power as possible under his control before any negotiations take place. In simple English, President Bashar al-Assad is quickly losing credibility with the international community because he is not abiding by any code of honour predicated on honesty, integrity and respect which is the only code under which any peace deal can be brokered by Russia and the US. Therefore, it is long overdue that President Bashar al-Assad put his personal ego aside and to attempt once and for all to put an end to this conflict which has shattered his beloved Syria into pieces by trying to concede to the notion of dialogue for peace.
In summary, I refer to “World Peace Lennon Ivan Style – Part XXII” as the belief that President Bashar al-Assad must put his personal ego aside and try once and for all to concede to the notion of dialogue for peace.
John Lennon – Stand By Me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4_ghOG9JQM
Published by ivancacpa
-
dans
World Peace
10 juin 2013
1
10
/06
/juin
/2013
07:54
In my opinion, organizations need to embrace the notion that during periods of change it is critical to ensure that policies and procedures are in place to remedy early symptoms of “Sheep Syndrome” generally resulting from a strong desire to preserve the past whereby everybody tends to stick together like an irritating rash to fight against proposed changes with backlash. It is important for organizations to acknowledge that during periods of change everyone tends to feel a certain degree of hatred against the proposed change which in the extreme cases can feel like someone attempting to erase the memories of one’s past by changing that which has in substance become a shrine attesting to the existence of a past tribe. In general, the longer a group of individuals have grown together from within, the stronger the ties that bind to preserve the past sacred shrine. Thus, like sheep accustomed to grazing in the same grass, they tend to get a little bit stir crazy when there is a new wolf passing through their matured pasture path. Thus, like sheep which tend to feel threatened at the sight of a wolf, they tend to form a herd to punch and kick the wolf from behind where the wolf tends to have a blind side. The key point to note is that during periods of change, there will tend to be a far greater ration of sheep to wolves such that the problem with change by design is that there is the risk that the sheep combine in order to strike the wolf from the blindside in order to protect their sacred grazing shrine. Therefore, the risk during periods of change is that the sheep combine to preserve their sacred past grazing shrine while contemporaneously taking out the wolf which brings change from the blind side. In order to counteract the strength in numbers created by sheep during periods of change, the wolf needs allies in his pack in order to surprise the sheep when they are focused on the rear end of the wolf with the backup of a herd who can steer the sheep in line with the ultimate goal of change management success under “Sheep Syndrome” duress. As can be seen from this simple metaphor of actions and reactions of sheep and wolves, there is an inherent dynamic that results from any change in the underlying environment which if not managed properly can result in multitudes of unusual, strange and bizarre psychological reactions beyond the realm of Sigmund Freud. The question is not whether it is better to be a sheep or a wolf but rather the question is do we want a wolf in order to manage the sheep through the change. If the answer is no to the wolf, then it is better to not initiate any change as sheep by design have no interest in change other than a little bit of rain to fertilize their graze. If the answer is yes to the wolf, then change will tend to successfully transpire albeit the stir craziness of the sheep looking to preserve their sacred field to forever eternally graze and stay.
In summary, I refer to “Change Management Gangnam Ivan Style” as the belief that for true change to occur, one needs a wolf who by design will make sheep a little bit stir crazy due to sacred field desire to eternally graze and stay.
PSY - Gangnam Style:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHfZiQEB0tE
Published by ivancacpa
-
dans
Gestion Changement
6 juin 2013
4
06
/06
/juin
/2013
08:02
As a continuation from my last blog whereby I believe the root of “World Peace” is centered on peace in the Middle East with the first step being negotiated peace between Israel and the Palestinians, I would like to remain objective and independent in my views such that I would like to now once again focus on Syria in my views as they seem to be the closest at this time to a full fledge chemical warfare military strike. As a friendly reminder, the wave of Arab unrest that began with the Tunisian revolution reached Syria on March 15, 2011. By the end of February 2013, more than 70,000 people, mostly civilians, were thought to have been killed and tens of thousands of others had been arrested. More than two million had been displaced and more than four million needed assistance, according to the United Nations. The White House said forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al Assad probably used “Sarin” gas against rebel fighters on a “small scale”, but emphasised that more assessments were needed. Washington said any use of chemical weapons would cross a “red line”, triggering possible military action. On May 15, 2013, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated, Russia expects support for Russian & U.S. agreements on Syria from Syrian opposition members during meetings in Istanbul and Madrid. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry welcomed the fact that both the United States and Russia share the confidence that it is very important for them to work together in the spirit of cooperation to promote a peace process through national accord based on the Geneva proposals. Effective June 1, 2013, the European Union decided to lift the arms embargo on the Syrian opposition while maintaining all other sanctions against President Bashar Assad's regime. As a counter-measure, Russia says it will go ahead with deliveries of S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to Syria, and that the purpose of the arms will be to help deter foreign intervention. Deputy Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said the missiles were a “stabilising factor” that could dissuade “some hotheads” from entering the conflict as Russia criticised the EU decision not to renew the arms embargo on Syria. Without getting into further excessive detail, the key point to note is that it’s been over 2 years since this conflict first commenced on March 15, 2011 and still there is no imminent solution in sight. In my opinion, the aforementioned series of manovours by the respective parties to this conflict, in favor of current President Bashar al-Assad by Russia, Iran and Hezbollah and in favor of the National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces by the USA and EU clearly indicates that all Parties to this conflict are operating under an eye-for-an-eye principal such that blood will be reciprocated accordingly with blood while peace will be reciprocated accordingly with peace. Therefore, it is best at this stage by the respective parties to avoid a full fledge war as in my opinion there will be bombardments without cease until there is no man, woman or animal left standing after the dust settles and the shrapnel has all been fired with nothing left to save other than millions of unmarked graves.
In summary, I refer to “World Peace Lennon Ivan Style – Part XXI” as the belief that it is best to avoid a full fledge war in Syria before shrapnel has all been fired with nothing left to save other than millions of unmarked graves.
John Lennon – Stand By Me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4_ghOG9JQ
Published by ivancacpa
-
dans
World Peace
/image%2F1573812%2F20160628%2Fob_f0b671_therockswebmarket-logo-eng-small.png){kind=logo}