Kissinger Speaks Out on the Syrian Crisis

Military strikes against Syria are in the United States' best interest, Representative Mike Rogers said Sunday, but the Obama administration "has done an awful job" explaining that to the American people." It's a confusing mess to this point," the Michigan Republican, who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, told CBS "Face the Nation." "That has been their biggest challenge on what is an incredibly important issue. This cannot be about Barack Obama. It has to be what is in the best interest of the United States of America. We have to have that debate and that discussion," Rogers said. Most Americans disagree - whether because they are opposed to Obama, or war-weary, or simply use the information available to arrive at a different conclusion. ~~~~~ Here are the latest polls : 39% for and 59% against US military attack / 21% for and 79% against the President attacking if Congress votes no / 72% say the US has no strategic security interest in Syria / 72% say a strike will lead to a greater war in the Middle East, with US troops on the ground / 59% say how their congressmen and Senators vote on the attack will not affect how they vote in the next election. ~~~~~ Here is a sampling of the positions of the players in President Obama's congressional toss of the dice. (1). Senator John McCain, although a supporter of the Obama resolution and the leader of the small congressional group urging a wider participation on the side of the Syrian Free Army, has warned that President Obama could face impeachment if he put “boots on the ground” in Syria. "No one wants American boots on the ground," the Arizona Republican told Phoenix CBS affiliate KFYI-TV on Thursday. "Nor will there be American boots on the ground because there would be an impeachment of the president if they did that. "The fact is [Syrian President] Bashar Assad has massacred 100,000 people," McCain added. "The conflict is spreading.…The Russians are all in, the Iranians are all in - and it’s an unfair fight." McCain added : “The president has bungled this beyond belief,” referring to Obama's handling of the Syrian situation. "Announced that he’s going to strike and then say, ‘No, I’m going to the American Congress.’ I can’t believe how badly he’s mishandled this issue.” He reiterated that the US would not send troops to Syria in response to al-Assad's August 21 chemical weapons attacks on rebel-held suburbs of Damascus. "I am unalterably opposed to having a single American boot on the ground in Syria,” McCain said. “The American people wouldn’t stand for it. Second of all, it would not be anything but counter-productive to do that," he added. "American blood and treasure is too precious to do that.” McCain said he understood Americans' skittishness about a Syrian strike. “They are largely against any action in Syria - and I understand their skepticism,” McCain said. (2). Michigan Republican Representative Justin Amash said Sunday that there is "overwhelming disapproval" among his constituents and most other Americans against the president's call for military strikes. "I think that there are some things being embellished in public statements," Amash said on CBS' "Face the Nation" Sunday. "The evidence is not as strong as the public statements that the president and his administration have been making." And although White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough said earlier on the TV program that "nobody" is disputing the evidence that Assad's regime was responsible for chemical attacks that killed more than 1,400 civilians in Damascus, Amash said he takes issue with the public statements from the Obama administration. "The briefings haven't given me comfort," Amash said. "[They] make me more skeptical about the situation." Further, the Michigan lawmaker said, his constituents overwhelmingly disapprove of taking action in Syria. Amash said that his office sponsored a series of town hall meetings. "Eleven meetings in two days, and what I saw was astonishing," he said. "What I saw was not just disapproval of war, it was overwhelming...you really have to take that very seriously." Amash said that lawmakers need to keep their constituents' wishes in mind, which will make a statement about democracy overseas as well. (3). Maryland Democratic Representative Elijah Cummings said that while 77% of his district voted for President Barack Obama, that support doesn't extend to military action in Syria, and the president has a long way to go to convince people. "He has to come in front of Congress and the nation," said Cummings, who remains undecided over whether he backs the President's call for action. "When you ask Congress to be involved, you're also asking our constituents." He said Obama "is being held to a higher standard, the reason being Iraq," and war-weary constituents don't want the country to become involved in a similar situation in Syria. Cummings said he plans to look at more limited plans for involvement that may come through the House before he decides how he'll vote. "If we go in and find ourselves mired in a civil war, what do we do?" he asked. ~~~~~ Henry Kissinger spoke with CNN's Christiane Amanpour today. The doyen of American diplomats, Kissinger at 90 makes more sense than most on any foreign relations topic. Today he surprised me a little, but if you think about it, he was pointing directly at what was actually happening on the ground. US Secretary of State John Kerry made an off-the-cuff remark about how to avoid a US strike. He said that the turnover in one week of all al-Assad's chemical weapons for destruction would halt a US attack. But'he added, "that isn't going to happen. It's impossible." The White House called his remark an unscripted "goof." Russia's foreign secretary jumped on Kerry's remark to suggest that Syria do just that - turn over all its chemical weapons for destruction. Syria's foreign secretary agreed that it was a good idea. UN Secretary General Ban-Ki- Moon wasted no time, announcing that the UN Security Council would propose a solution for receiving and destroying al-Assad's chemical weapons stockpile. If Henry Kissinger were still around, this proposal would have been floated privately, negotiated with Russia and Syria, and announced as a US-Russia initiative. There would have been no need to say 'unscripted goof.' But that is the difference between amateurs and the great Henry Kissinger. As it was, today, Kissinger said that he supported the Obama resolution for a limited strike against the Syrian regime, although he remains opposed to US intervention in the Syrian civil war, because of the potential disaster if chemical and other weapons of mass destruction become an acceptable part of war. He also said he greatly worries about the erosion of the power of the US presidency internationally under Obama, who, according to Kissinger, acted unwisely to put the question of the Syrian strike to Congress. He is opposed to America being the world's policeman, but he believes that America is "the world's last resort" for important things like the use of weapons of mass destruction. And, to make this work, the American president must be strong when it comes to foreign affairs. And, Kissinger added, if America had appealed to Russia's real interest here -- a Syria with WMD would endanger Russia before it would endanger America -- Russia would have seen that its interests are the same as America's and would have helped. Perhaps Russia saw that today when Kerry went off-script. ~~~~~ So, dear readers, Kissinger supports the Obama resolution. Henry Kissinger always puts everything in the right perspective. The problem is that it would be Barack Obama carrying out the program - and I have no confidence that Obama can carry it off. No confidence at all.