Priorities

"All the aid we are giving is like a pain killer, but the killing machine will continue to kill people and to create refugees and people will continue to need medical treatment and other things. 
"The Russian government is very serious about winning the war. The U.S. and other countries want to talk and to have meetings in Geneva. It is only when the international community decides that Assad will go that the killing will stop."
IT specialist Louay Sakka, Syrian Support Group, Oakville, Ontario

Nearly six million people representing almost a third of the Syrian population are now homeless. They are refugees of the sectarian violence that is tearing their country apart. They flee the violence, entire communities uprooted, families desperate to survive the mounting chances of death visited upon them either by the regime, determined to brutally bring an end to the Sunni-led revolution, or in cross-fire between the military and the rebels.

Most of the Syrian refugees live in a state of removal from immediate danger and face other dangers instead; physical and psychological insecurity, food and water shortages, no medical attention, and fear for the lives and well-being of their children, both for the present and beyond, into the uncertain future. The towns, villages and cities that were once intact and represented their ancestral homes are now mere vestiges of what they once represented; shattered infrastructure remains.

A million and a half Syrian refugees have migrated for safe haven to Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey; fewer to Iraq and Egypt. There they live in vast, rambling refugee camps, while a handful with money, live in cities where they are able to pay for their accommodation and their needs, some even finding basic employment. The vast majority live in tent camps, dependent on food and water handouts and basic medical attention.

What began as a tentative, expectant protest with the hope that President Bashar al Assad might respond by recognizing that the country's Sunni majority's wish for equality under his reign could be feasible in the interests of social harmony quickly degenerated into a brutal no-holds-barred crackdown on protesters who in response became instant rebels and the Free Syrian Army and an official Opposition was born.

The Arab League, looking on, along with Western powers indulge in wishful thinking -- that they can persuade the belligerents, each now so hatefully estranged from notional civility and a shared nationhood by the virulent divisions of sectarian hostility -- to agree to meeting across a peace conference table for the purpose of hammering out mutually agreed-upon initiatives to lead to peace and a shared government.

A restoration of the nation into a cohesive whole is ruefully envisioned, but not by the Baathist Alawite regime and not by the Syrian National Coalition. Hopes that the opportunistic jihadists would melt their way out of the country back to the conflicts from which they absented themselves elsewhere, will certainly not materialize. Syria is in danger of destroying its infrastructure, its civil service, its ancient heritage.

The G-8 presented a Russian-demanded watering down of a proposal so weakly ineffectual that no one can possibly entertain positive expectations of it. The possibility of a free and democratic Syria emerging from the raging violence of this sectarian civil war is as remote as wildfires raging out of control in Antarctica.

But Brigadier-general Salim Idriss, leading his 80,000-strong Free Syrian Army still begs for NATO to establish a no-fly zone, to open and protect a humanitarian corridor, and to provide him with adequate arms to match those of the regime. After all, the White House has acknowledged that the Assad regime has used sarin gas.

And while the Syrian National Coalition acknowledges charitable assistance in welfare-directed funding from Western democracies to help humanitarian NGOs and the United Nations cope with the burdensome tasks of looking after the welfare of Syria's millions of war refugees, it, along with the Free Syrian Army would very much like to be in receipt of anti-tank, anti-aircraft missiles.

• 'G7 plus one'? Isolated Russia holds line on Syria.

The G8 summit ended today with Russia far from agreement with the West over how to resolve the Syrian civil war. Russian experts say the rift is probably permanent.

By Fred Weir, Correspondent / June 18, 2013

• 

President Barack Obama (l.) meets with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Enniskillen, Northern Ireland, on Monday. Though both Moscow and Washington still officially support the idea of a joint US-Russia peace conference on Syria, the likelihood of agreement between the two on how to move forward on Syria appears to be dwindling.    Evan Vucci/AP

Moscow

Russia's fundamental differences with the West over how to seek peace in war-torn Syria has left Moscow isolated and this year's summit of the Group of Eight industrial democracies in some disarray – creating a situation that Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper bluntly described as "G7 plus one."

And though a sour-faced President Vladimir Putin soldiered his way through the two-day meeting at a golf resort in Northern Ireland – he avoided the G8 altogether last year – some Russian experts say that Moscow may not care much if its stubbornness over the shape of a Syrian peace settlement isolates it, or even compromises the G8 membership that former Russian President Boris Yeltsin worked so hard to attain in 1997.

"We're a new member of this club and we have our own views, which we will express," says Andrei Klimov, deputy chair of the State Duma's international affairs committee.

"Just because the other seven have a different view doesn't mean we should change ours. It's not the last word. For example, when the G20 meets, Russia is not alone. There are lots of other countries that share our views, even if they're not in the G8," he says.

Though both Moscow and Washington still officially support the idea of a joint US-Russia peace conference, in which each would shepherd their proxies to the negotiating table in Geneva before August to hammer out a settlement, it was the mutual admission of key differences that seemed to speak loudest at a press conference following a face-to-face meeting between President Vladimir Putin and President Barack Obama on Monday.

"Our opinions do not coincide, but all of us have the intention to stop the violence in Syria, to stop the growth of victims, and to solve the situation peacefully, including by bringing the parties to the negotiations table in Geneva," said Mr. Putin. "We agreed to push the parties to the negotiations table."

Mr. Obama's take: "With respect to Syria, we do have differing perspectives on the problem, but we share an interest in reducing the violence; securing chemical weapons and ensuring that they're neither used nor are they subject to proliferation; and that we want to try to resolve the issue through political means, if possible."
The key disagreement that neither leader spelled out concerns the fate of Syria's embattled leader, Bashar al-Assad. The US, its Arab allies, and the Syrian rebels want guarantees that Mr. Assad will be removed as a precondition for any talks on the way forward in Syria. The Russians, who have blocked every attempt over the past two years to sanction Syria or bring international pressure to bear on Assad, insist that peace must be negotiated between the actual warring parties.

In an interview with a Kuwaiti news agency Tuesday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov insisted that Moscow has done its part in persuading the Assad regime to come to the table. He insisted that Putin and US Secretary of State John Kerry had agreed at a May 7 Kremlin meeting that there would be no preconditions – such as Assad's removal – set before the peace conference begins.

"We worked hard with the [Syrian government], and convinced them to participate in the peace conference and name a negotiating team, which will be led by Deputy Prime Minister Walid Muallem," Mr. Lavrov said.

"The main task before us is to seat representatives of the government and opponents of the regime at a negotiating table with the prospect of reaching agreement to start a political process based on broad national dialogue," he added.

Lavrov complained that the West, particularly the US, have not done their part in compelling the fractious Syrian rebels to come, without preconditions, to Geneva. He admitted that it's "a much more difficult" problem.

Many Russian Middle East experts say it's more like a hopeless problem.
"The Geneva-2 peace conference is a pipe dream," says Vladimir Sazhin, an analyst at the official Institute of Oriental Studies in Moscow.

"The Syrian opposition is totally divided. There is no front line, the battle goes on within each village, and every head of an armed group thinks of himself as a national leader.... Assad's regime has at least what's left of a central state and a regular army, so why should anybody think he would just agree to go away?" Mr. Sazhin says.

"There are so many different forces inside Syria, and so many interested outside parties. They're all of different size, and have differing goals. It will be real progress indeed if anyone can make them sit down together," he adds.
Other disagreements have flared in recent days, including Russia's insistence that Western claims that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons are "fabricated."

On Monday, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Lukashevich told journalists that the idea of imposing a Libya-style no-fly zone over Syria is strictly illegal. "I think [Russia] fundamentally will not allow this scenario," he told journalists.

Russia, and the USSR before it, maintained a strong client-state relationship with Syria under the two-generational Assad regime, and many critics have argued that Moscow's staunch defense of Assad is rooted in fear of losing the estimated $5 billion in arms contracts that are in the pipeline with Damascus, the use of a naval supply station at Tartus – Russia's only military base outside the former Soviet Union – and the political influence that flows from having a close partner in the Arab world.
But the Russians insist that it's not about material issues, nor are they wedded to Assad. They argue that it's the West that doesn't know what it's doing in trying to impose a simplistic "dictatorship versus democracy" template upon Syria's complicated increasingly tribal and sectarian civil war, and that previous Western efforts to intervene – as in Libya – have only succeeded in sowing chaos and fomenting jihadi blowback across the region.
The G8 summit ended Tuesday with a final communique that papered over the main differences between Russia and the organization's other members by avoiding any mention of Assad's fate. But some Russian experts say the rift is probably permanent, regardless of what happens in Syria, because the Russia of Vladimir Putin is rapidly drawing away from the West and adopting views and behaviors that are basically incompatible with G8 membership.

"This G8 summit will probably go down in history as the meeting that revived the old formula of 'G7 plus one,' just as the Canadian prime minister remarked," says Sergei Strokan, a foreign affairs columnist with the Moscow daily Kommersant.

When Russian joined the G7 in 1997, it was admitted on the basis of its democratic aspirations and not because it was an economic equal, says Mr. Strokan. The recipe of 'G7 plus one' referred to Russia only being admitted to the political deliberations of the group. Since Putin came to power, Russia has experienced a dramatic economic revival and, for several years now, people have referred to the organization simply as the G8.

"Now the expression 7+1 is creeping back, not because of any Russian economic weakness, but because Western leaders no longer have any illusions about Russia being a democracy. The Syria issue is just a litmus test that reveals to all that Russia and the West have fundamentally differing views of the world," he adds

Putin will address G8 summit as head of winning Syrian war camp

DEBKAfile Special Report June 17, 2013, 11:04 AM (IDT)

Tags:  Vladmir Putin,  Barack Obama,  G8,  Syria,  Iran,

Vladimir Putin at G8 summit

Russian President Vladimir Putin set the tone for the discussion on Syria at the G8 summit which opened  in Northern Ireland Monday, June 17, when he rounded harshly on British Prime Minister David Cameron in London Sunday for supporting rebels who “kill their enemies and eat their organs.” Hitting back at this week’s decision by US President Barack Obama – whom he will meet privately at the summit - to give the rebels “military support” – Putin asked: “Are these the people you want to supply weapons?”

The lovely lakeside venue for the two-day gathering of US, Russian, Canadian, French, German, Italian, British and Japanese leaders was worlds away from the Syrian killing fields, where 93,000 people have died, according to conservative estimates. But the Russian president will make sure that the voices of his allies, Bashar Assad, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Hassan Nasrallah, are heard loud and clear in the conference hall, until they are acknowledged the victors of the vicious Syrian war. If world leaders hold back, the Syrian and Hizballah armies will continue their march on Aleppo, Syria’s biggest town, for their next bloodbath.

The light arms President Obama proposes to release for the Syrian rebels don’t give them the smallest fighting chance against the fighter-bomber jets, heavy tanks, and unlimited ordnance supplied Bashar Assad’s army by Russia and the missiles and troops coming in from Hizballah and Iran.

This unbeatable preponderance makes the fall of Aleppo and Assad’s victory a foregone conclusion
Israel Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon, speaking in Washington over the weekend, argued that the Syrian army’s successes did not add up to a strategic victory. The Russian leader will present the opposite case to which his fellows in the Group of Eight have no answer. They will therefore hammer at the only point on which they agree, the quest for a political solution of the Syrian crisis by means of an international conference, i.e., getting Geneva-2 off the ground. 

Putin and Obama will therefore need to put their heads together on accepted ground rules for this event.

Although on the face of it, nothing could be more reasonable, debkafile’s Russian and Middle East sources report it is a tall order indeed, given the list of at least four pre-conditions Putin plans to put before the US President on the strength of his partners’ war successes:

1. Geneva-2 will not be convened by the US or Russia, as first agreed, but by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. This would force Washington to stay within the bounds of UN resolutions and not act as did the US and NATO in Libya to overthrow Muammar Qaddafi outside their Security Council mandate.

2.  Bashar Assad must remain in power as the legitimate ruler of Syria. Russia’s sale of arms to the Syrian government in Damascus was therefore legal.

3.  Iran must be given a seat at Geneva-2.

The Russian president is determined to thwart any attempt by Obama to take advantage of Hassan Rouani’s election as president of Iran to supersede the battlefield successes of Russia, Iran and Hizballah in Syria. Ayatollah Khamenei will go along with him on this.

Sunday night, Washington was evidently exploring new diplomatic ground with Tehran when Denis McDonough, White House chief of staff commented that Hassan Rouhani’s election as president of Iran was a potentially hopeful sign. “If he is interested in, as he has said in his campaign events, mending his relations… with the rest of the world – there’s the opportunity to do that.”

But then, he said: “But doing so would require Iran to come clean on its illicit nuclear program.”
This was the Obama administration’s answer to Putin’s comment Tuesday, June 11 when he said: “I have no doubt that Iran is adhering to international commitments on nuclear non-proliferation, but regional and international concerns about Tehran’s nuclear program should not be ignored,” said the Russian leader.

4.  Putin has gone back on his earlier consent to a single, united delegation representing the Syrian opposition at the projected international conference. He now maintains that the rebel front is hopelessly divided and the delegation should truly represent the real situation.

This too will be a Russian attempt to frustrate Western plans for a united opposition camp to speak with one voice opposite the Assad regime, by accentuating the rifts dividing the rival Syrian opposition factions and militias.

As matters look now, Assad’s drive to recapture all of Aleppo will continue after the G8 leaders have gone home. Putin, Khamenei, Assad and Nasrallah will continue their hideous victory march and the US, West and Israel will continue to hold back from intervention that could reverse the tide.

Bluntly Unequivocal

"We are not in Canada, at the present time, we are not contemplating arming the opposition in Syria. I understand -- fully understand -- why our allies would do that, particularly given recent actions by Russia, Iran and others. But our aid, at the present time and our aid for now, will continue to be humanitarian aid.
"I don't think we should fool ourselves. This is G7 plus one. OK, let's be blunt. We in the West have a very different perspective on this situation. Mr. Putin and his government are supporting the thugs of the Assad regime for their own reasons that I do not think are justifiable, and Mr. Putin knows my view on that. But we will not, unless there's a big shift of position in his part, we're not going to get a common position with him at the G8."
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper

Nothing bland and uncontroversial about those statements. They're clear, concise and to the point. And the emphasis on Russian President Vladimir Putin's resolve not to abandon his support for the Alawite Syrian regime of President Bashar al Assad places the G8 meeting in perspective. The group will have the situation in Syria at the top of their agenda.

The 'situation' of dire misery for the civilian population of Syria, the thousands dead, the millions bereft of their homes and security and constantly under threat is one that cannot be set aside.

Mr. Putin seeks to secure his country's advantage in befriending Syria, Iran and Hezbollah and their cause, ensuring Russia a foothold in the region, clients for Russia's munitions manufacturing and its nuclear industry. And a handy port for its Black Sea Fleet. In fact, Russia has decided to restore the presence on a permanent basis of the Russian Federation Fleet. And part of the reason for that is its commitment to Syria's regime survival, partly to restore its historical presence in the Mediterranean.

Russia bridled at the decision by the Obama administration to relent and arm the rebels against the superior arms of the regime which, with the invaluable aid of Hezbollah has routed the rebels from towns they had held for over a year. The setback seen for the Free Syrian Army and prospects for additional setbacks are alarming for Western nations looking in on the brutal conflict. All the more so with the United Nations adding its voice in dismay at the deteriorating conditions for Syrian civilians and the growing numbers of refugees.

Prime Minister Harper's emphasis on the G7 [+1] placing pressure on Russia to re-think its position in support of Syria's tyrannical regime still leaves no doubt that nothing will be gained in the nature of turning President Putin in the direction of joining the other nations in condemning Syria and supporting the opposition. President Putin speaks with theatrical disgust of the rebels as fiercely cannibalistic and who would in their right minds arm such barbarians?

One demented video produced for show-and-tell to emphasize the degree to which each side demonizes the other through a primitive demonstration of just how low in brutal excess a combatant can stoop, now serves as an instrument for Vladimir Putin to bludgeon his critics with. But Prime Minister Harper has pledged himself on Canada's behalf to continue to work with allies in the G7 and NATO to dredge up a practical solution toward an alternative government in Syria "not embracing of terrorist or extremist elements".

Far more readily enunciated than produced out of a hat of tricks. "The Russians and Americans are so polarized on this issue that there are few countries that can play the middle ground. Canada may find itself in a position here, as it becomes more polarized among the superpowers, it may try to revert to its traditional position to be an honest broker", commented Christian Lepreucht, military strategy expert from Queen's University and Royal Military College.

Harper rules out arming Syrian rebels, blasts Putin for supporting ‘thugs of Assad regime’

Steve Rennie, Postmedia News | 13/06/16 6:12 PM ET

THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld    Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper speaks with Irish Prime Minister Enda Kenny following a joint news conference at Farmleigh House in Dublin, Ireland, Sunday, June 16, 2013. 

 

When leaders of the world’s eight wealthiest countries meet in Northern Ireland on Monday, it’s pretty clear how Prime Minister Stephen Harper sees the seating arrangements at the leaders’ table.
Russian President Vladimir Putin on one side. Everybody else on the other. At least when it comes to Syria.

On the eve of the G8 summit, while he was in Dublin meeting the Irish prime minister, Harper suggested that trying to get Russia to drop its long-standing support of the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is an exercise in futility.

In doing so, the Canadian prime minister effectively drew a sharp line between Putin’s Russia and the rest of the G8.

GRIGORY DUKOR/AFP/GettyImages     Russian President Vladimir Putin, right, and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper chat during their meeting at the Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit in Vladivostok on September 8, 2012.

 

“Look, I think that dialogue will be interesting. I think it’s important to have that kind of dialogue. But I don’t think we should fool ourselves. This is G7 plus one. OK, let’s be blunt. That’s what this is, G7 plus one,” Harper said Sunday.

“We in the west have a very different perspective on this situation. Mr. Putin and his government are supporting the thugs of the Assad regime for their own reasons that I do not think are justifiable, and Mr. Putin knows my view on that.”

“But we will not, unless there’s a big shift of position on his part, we’re not going to get a common position with him at the G8.”

Topping the agenda at the annual meeting of G8 leaders is how to end the bloody conflict that has now raged for two years in Syria.

Anthony Devlin/AFP/Getty Images    British Prime Minister David Cameron, left, meets with Russian President Vladimir Putin inside 10 Downing Street, central London, on June 16, 2013.  

 

Cameron held talks with Putin on Syria's civil war, a meeting which could set the tone for the G8 summit, with the West at odds with Moscow over the conflict.

 

Tensions escalated this past week after the United States announced it would begin arming opponents of Assad’s regime because it has proof chemical weapons were used against the rebels.

Russia — which is in the G8 and has a permanent seat on the United Nations security council — has dismissed those U.S. claims, saying they’re based on flimsy evidence.

Putin and British Prime Minister David Cameron met Sunday in London ahead of the G8. According to a Reuters report, Putin criticized the West for backing the Syrian rebels.

“One does not really need to support the people who not only kill their enemies, but open up their bodies, eat their intestines in front of the public and cameras,” Putin is quoted as saying.

“Are these the people you want to support? Are they the ones you want to supply with weapons? Then this probably has little relation to the humanitarian values preached in Europe for hundreds of years.”

Putin was apparently referring to a Syrian rebel commander caught on tape last month cutting into a dead soldier and biting into one of his organs.

Harper said the rest of the G8 and NATO need to find a way to end the Syrian conflict without Russia.

“I think what’s important,” Harper said, “is that we continue to work with our allies in the G7 and in NATO to see how we can move the situation in a positive direction where we get the transition towards a government that is genuinely representative, broadly based, democratic, not a threat to the world and certainly, not embracing of terrorist or extremist elements.”

Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images    Oxfam charity volunteers wear masks depicting the G8 leaders outside City Hall on June 16, 2013 in Belfast, Northern Ireland. The G8 group of world leaders will meet tomorrow in Fermanagh, Northern Ireland.

 

Earlier Sunday, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird told CTV and Global News that he is loathe to criticize the U.S. for arming the rebels, and he expressed confidence the Americans will be careful about who they give weapons to.

But Harper ruled out — for now — Canada arming the rebels.
“We are not, in Canada at the present time, we are not contemplating arming the opposition in Syria,” Harper said.

“I understand — fully understand — why our allies would do that, particularly given recent actions by Russia, Iran and others. But our aid, at the present time and our aid for now, will continue to be humanitarian aid.”

G8 ministers condemn North Korea nuclear moves

BBC News online - 11 April 2013

UK Foreign Secretary William Hague: "If there is a missile test, we will advocate further measures to the UN security council"

Foreign ministers from the G8 group of nations have condemned in the "strongest possible terms" North Korea's nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programmes.

Tensions have risen on the Korean peninsula in recent weeks.

The ministers also expressed "deep concerns about the increasing human tragedy of the conflict in Syria".

They also endorsed what they called a historic pledge on preventing sexual violence in conflict.
The Group of Eight nations comprises the US, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Canada and Russia.

Britain currently holds the rotating chairmanship of the G8 and the talks are a prelude to the annual G8 summit later this year in Northern Ireland.

Analysis

Jonathan Marcus BBC Diplomatic Correspondent

When all was said and done it was the film actress - Angelina Jolie - who stole the show. And this was not just due to her star quality. The nuclear dialogue with Iran is going nowhere. North Korea is unlikely to be deterred by the strong words coming from the G8 in London. And the Syrian crisis is doubly intractable because the UN Security Council is divided, with Russia and China opposing any strong statements, let alone action. So this was a meeting of the G8 that emphasised the art of the possible.
The measures taken to combat sexual violence in armed conflict were thrust into the limelight. Many will say that a scourge that has afflicted societies from the Balkans to Africa and now the Middle East merits this kind of attention. But its billing at this G8 is a measure not just of its importance but of the intractability of so many of the other issues facing the premier league of world diplomats.

In a news conference after the talks, UK Foreign Secretary William Hague said that "if the DPRK [North Korea] conducts another missile launch or nuclear test, we have committed ourselves to take further significant measures".

Correspondents say Japan, present at the talks, had been looking for a strong statement of solidarity over Korea.

North Korea has been making bellicose threats against South Korea, Japan and US bases in the region.

Mr Hague said the ministers condemned North Korea's "current aggressive rhetoric", saying it would "only serve further to isolate the DPRK".

The G8 ministers also pledged to work to end sexual violence in conflict, calling for urgent action to address "comprehensively" the "culture of impunity" in conflict zones.

UK Foreign Secretary William Hague had said the issue of sexual violence in conflict zones was his own "personal priority" for the talks.

BBC Diplomatic Correspondent James Robbins says ministers agree that the combination of warlike threats from North Korea and preparations for new missile tests amount to dangerous provocation.
South Korea has raised its alert level amid indications that the North is preparing for a missile test.

Musudan missile

• The Musudan, also known as the Nodong-B or the Taepodong-X, is an intermediate-range ballistic missile. Its likely targets are Okinawa, Japan, and US bases in the Pacific
• Range estimates differ dramatically. Israeli intelligence suggests 2,500km, while the US Missile Defense Agency estimates 3,200km; other sources put the upper limit at 4,000km
• These differences are due in large part to the fact that the missile has never been tested publicly, according to the Center for Nonproliferation Studies. Its payload is also unknown

Pyongyang has moved two Musudan missiles to its east coast. Estimates of the ballistic missile's range vary, but some suggest it could travel 4,000km (2,500 miles).

A missile therefore has the potential of hitting US bases on Guam, although it is not known whether the Musudan has been tested before.

There is also no evidence the North has miniaturised a nuclear weapon sufficiently to be used on a ballistic missile.

North Korea has increased its fiery rhetoric following fresh UN sanctions imposed after its third nuclear test and joint military manoeuvres by the US and South Korea.

The North says it will restart a mothballed nuclear reactor, has shut an emergency military hotline to the South and has urged countries to withdraw diplomatic staff, saying it cannot now guarantee their safety.

However, in the past few days North Korea's media appear to be in more of a holiday mood, due to the approach of Kim Il-sung's birthday on Monday - a potential launch date for a new missile test.

North Korea has been making bellicose threats against South Korea, Japan and US bases in the region 

Mr Hague said he was "delighted" that ministers had agreed on plans to tackle "the horrific use of rape and sexual violence as a weapon of war in conflicts around the globe", which he described as "one of the greatest and most persistent injustices in the world".

Mr Hague said the G8 had "committed to the development of a comprehensive international protocol on the investigation and documentation of rape and sexual violence in conflict".

The UK announced £10m ($15.4m) of fresh funding to supports efforts against sexual violence.
In a statement welcoming the moves, the Save the Children charity said: "The majority of victims of sexual violence, especially in conflict situations, are children so we must ensure these funds reach the most vulnerable children as a matter of urgency."

Key North Korean anniversaries

• 11 April - Kim Jong-un elected first secretary of the Workers' Party and late father Kim Jong-il named General Secretary for Eternity in 2012
• 13 April - Kim Jong-un appointed first chairman of the National Defence Commission in 2012
• 15 April - Birthday of state founder Kim Il-sung (1912-1994)

The UN special envoy for refugees, Angelina Jolie, said that wartime rape should not be regarded as inevitable, saying: "It can be prevented and must be confronted.

On Syria, Mr Hague admitted that "the world has failed so far in its responsibilities, and continues to do so", adding that divisions over the conflict continue.

"This is on track to be the biggest humanitarian catastrophe of the 21st Century so far," he added.
Ministers called for greater humanitarian assistance to Syrians affected by the conflict.

They affirmed their support for a "political transition", but did not mention any punitive measures against President Bashar al-Assad.

Fresh evidence of links between some opposition fighters and al-Qaeda has made it even harder for governments to decide a course of action, correspondents say.

G8 ministers met Syrian opposition figures on Wednesday on the sidelines of the two-day forum.

Actress Angelina Jolie, UN's Zainab Hawa Bangura, UK Foreign Secretary William Hague on bid to end sexual violence

More than 60,000 people are estimated to have died since the uprising against the government of President Assad began in March 2011.

The London talks were also the first chance for G8 ministers to discuss face-to-face the failure of last week's meeting in Almaty, Kazakhstan, on curbing Iran's nuclear programme.
Mr Hague called that failure "disappointing".

"We will continue to work with the twin-track approach of sanctions and negotiations, but... the window of diplomacy will not remain open forever," he went on.

Tehran says it only wants to produce energy but the US and its allies suspect it is trying to develop a nuclear weapon.

Burma, Somalia and cyber-security were also topics on the agenda.