Tuesday, September 10, 2013

Will the World Be Patient and Find a Diplomatic Solution to Syria's Chemical WMD

It has been a very busy day in international diplomatic circles as the world scrambles to put context around Russian President Vladimir Putin's call for the al-Assad Syria regime to turn over its chemical weapon stockpiles to international authorities for destruction. Putin told reporters today that the plan "can work, only in the event that we hear trhat the American side and those who support the USA in this sense, reject the use of force." President Barack Obama has thrown his support behind a French resolution at the UN Security Council but continues to push the idea of US airstrikes against al-Assad's regime if that effort fails. The French resolution calls for inspection, placing the chemical weapons under international control, and ultimately dismantling manufacturing capabiities and destroying the chemical stockpiles. Bashar al-Assad's regime today said it will declare its chemical weapons arsenal and sign the international chemical weapons convention, as well as agreeing to the Russian proposal to put its chemical weapons under international control and stopping their production. Syria's foreign minister said Syria will also place chemical weapons locations in the hands of representatives of Russia, "other countries" and the United Nations. Meanwhile, emphasizing the threat of military might and raising hope it won't be needed, President Barack Obama threw his support behind UN Security Council talks aimed at securing Syria's chemical weapon stockpiles, while he continued to advance the fallback idea of US airstrikes against al-Assad's regime. Perhaps because of today's events, a bipartisan group of US Senators crafted a reworked congressional resolution calling for a UN team to remove the chemical weapons by a set deadline and authorizing military action if that doesn't happen. Obama will address the American people from the White House tonight, still ready to press the case for congressionally-approved military action if diplomacy fails. Today, Obama quoted President Reagan's advice : "we don't just trust, but we also verify." Obama added : "The importance is to make sure that the international community has confidence that these chemical weapons are under control, that they are not being used, that potentially they are removed from Syria and that they are destroyed." ~~~~~ Prospects for a diplomatic breakthrough unfolded rapidly Tuesday. (1). Al-Assad's government accepted a Russian plan to turn over its chemical weapons stockpile. (2). France tabled a UN Security Council resolution that woukd require Syria to turn over its chemical weapons for UN destruction and to permit inspectors to verify the disarmament. (3). The UN Security Council, at Russia's request, scheduled closed consultations for late afternoon. (4). Syria's foreign minister said the nation would declare its chemical weapons arsenal and sign an international chemical weapons treaty. (5). US Secretary of State John Kerry said Obama, French President Holland and British Prime Minister Cameron agreed to work closely together in consultation with Russia and China to explore the Russian proposal to put all Syrian chemical weapons "under the control of a verifiable destruction enforcement mechanism." (6). Russian President Putin said the US would need to renounce the use of force against Syria because no country will disarm under threat of military action. (7). Kerry countered that any deal with Syria to give up its chemical weapons must be enshrined in a binding UN Security Council resolution that sets consequences for Syrian non-compliance. He said Russian suggestions that the UN endorsement come in the form of a non-binding statement from the rotating president of the Security Council would be unacceptable to the Obama administration. (8). Russia abruptly withdrew its request for an emergency Security Council meeting this evening. ~~~~~ And opposition to Obama's military strike resolution continues to mount in the US Congress. Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell became the first congressional leader to come out against a resolution giving the president authority for limited strikes, saying, "there are just too many unanswered questions about our long-term strategy in Syria." In another blow to the administration, Democratic Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts announced his opposition, saying the resolution was too broad, "the effects of a strike are too unpredictable, and because I believe we must give diplomatic measures that could avoid military action a chance to work." Searching for an alternative, a bipartisan group of US Senators worked on a retooled resolution that would call on the United Nations to state that Syria used chemical weapons and require a UN team to remove them within a specific time period, possibly 60 days. If that can't be done, then Obama would have the authority to launch military strikes, congressional aides said. But, it seems that Russia, al-Assad's biggest international backer, championed a less forceful diplomatic path forward in the hope of preventing the instability that might arise from a broader, Iraq-like conflict involving the United States. Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem said after meeting with the Russian parliament speaker that his government had agreed to the Russian initiative to "thwart US aggression." But the rebel Syrian National Coalition, which had hoped for airstrikes to tip the balance in the 2-year-old civil war, cast al-Assad's move as a ploy to escape punishment for a crime against humanity. Obama has consistently asserted that he has the power as commander-on-chief to act regardless of any vote in Congress, and he has consistently declined to say whether he would do so if lawmakers refuse to approve the legislation he is seeking. refuse to approve the legislation he is seeking. However, for the Obama administration, even the possibility of a diplomatic solution offered an "out" since finding the 60 votes needed for Senate passage of a use-of-force resolution is failing. Reflecting the difficulty, Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid unexpectedly postponed a test vote originally set for Wednesday on Obama's call for legislation backing a military strike. Reid cited ongoing "international discussions." ~~~~~ Dear readers, we are at the beginning of an extended diplomatic effort to both avert a US military attack on Syria and to bring al-Assad's chemical weapons under international control. Syria has never admitted definitely until today that it has chemical weapons. It has never provided an accounting of the size of its stockpile, but according to an unclassified estimate by the French government, it includes more than 1,000 tons of "chemical agents and precursor chemicals,including sulfur mustard, VX and sarin gas." It seems logical that bringing the Syrian chemical weapons of mass destruction under control should outweigh most of the diplomatic positions now being put forward. An American cosmetic missile strike now or in 60 days or later would do nothing to reach this goal. There will be time to deal with the Syrian civil war and al-Assad's culpability under international law later. As might be expected - Iran supports the Russian resolution - Saudi Arabia is skeptical. So, the resolution of the Syrian chemical weapons issue will not resolve this millennium-old sunni-shiite dispute either. But that dispute could be easier to contain, and perhaps finally resolve, with al-Assad's chemical weapons safely out of the way. As we learned when we were children : "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush."

5 comments:

  1. There seems to be a scrambling or positioning of the players to end up as the maker of this final deal. This sort of sickens me.

    If there is an opportunity to secure the Syrian WMD's and get them into the hands of(preferably someone other than Russia alone)a third party then lets do it.

    As Casey Pops alludes to the other legal matters can be handled later. Just a few short hours ago the main objective was to get the WMD's away from the idiot Assad.

    Assad is unstable and so reactionary that we should take every opportunity to relieve him of even a "pellet gun" if he owns such an ineffective weapon.

    Let's all remember the main objective here folks. If some politicians image, or self worth is tarnished over a successful mission then so be it and too bad for Mr. Politician. Everyone had their chance at this brass ring and seems everyone missed except Russia, which probably had this plan put together and OK'd by Syria days ago.

    ReplyDelete
  2. And while the Diplomats are Diplomatic innocent children will continue die.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It seems that way.

      The children have fallen out of importance here - a position they were just a few short days ago

      Delete
  3. This whole mess of dickering back and forth over who gets credit and who is still at fault, makes me ill.

    When performing a long and complex task, and when you’ve gotten utterly immersed in secondary and tertiary unexpected tangential subtasks, it’s easy to lose sight of the initial objective. This sort of distraction can be particularly problematic if the all-consuming subtask or sub-subtask is not, after all, particularly vital to the original, primary goal, but ends up sucking up time and resources (out of all proportion to its actual importance) only because it seems so urgent...

    So when your up to your butt in Alligators it is sometime difficult to remember that the main objective was to drain the swamp or recover the WMD's which ever





    ReplyDelete
  4. From all that I have heard and read today it seems that just maybe "patience" is on the world's side and the USA is standing looking in.

    Obama is a scarey dud in situations like this. he would pull the string just to prove he can.

    ReplyDelete