Will the U.S. and allies move on Syria

[bumper]

I don't think we are out of the woods just yet. But it's a start. Obama says he won't rule out a strike, Russia isn't buying off on that. If only they has worked this hard fixing our Country.

News > World
US and Russia reach Syria deal

Published: 14 Sep 2013 at 18.02
Online news: World

GENEVA - The United States and Russia have reached agreement on a framework for Syria to destroy all of its chemical weapons, with UN punishment if it fails to do so.

US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov announced the agreement after three days of talks in Geneva.

They said they would seek a UN Security Council resolution that could authorise sanctions - short of military action - if President Bashar al-Assad's government fails to comply.

Under the pact, Syria must begin by submitting a "comprehensive listing" of its chemical weapons stockpiles within one week, said Kerry.

In Washington, President Barack Obama said he was willing to give diplomacy a chance but warned the military option was still on the table.

"We are not just going to take Russia and Assad's word for it. We need to see concrete actions to demonstrate that Assad is serious about giving up his chemical weapons," Obama said in his weekly address on Saturday.

The deal announced by the diplomats includes what Kerry called "a shared assessment" of Syria's weapons stockpile, and a timetable and measures for Syria to comply.

It calls for international inspectors to be "on the ground in Syria by November" and to complete their initial work by the end of that that month.

All of Syria's chemical weapons stocks, material and equipment would have to be destroyed or removed by mid-2014.

US Secretary of State John Kerry (right) and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov (back to camera) meet with senior aides at a hotel in Geneva on Saturday. (AP Photo)

But the stakes have been especially high in Geneva, because the negotiations between the United States and Russia on securing Syria's chemical weapons also are considered key to breaking the international stalemate that has so far blocked a resumption of peace talks to end the Syrian civil war, now in its third year.

"We have committed to a standard that says, verify and verify," Kerry told a news conference in the InterContinental Hotel in Geneva, where he has been staying and the negotiations were conducted since Thursday night.

Among the highlights of the agreement is that the US and Russia would agree to work together on a new, binding Security Council resolution that would ensure verification of the agreement to secure and destroy Syria's chemical weapons stocks and remove its capability to produce such weapons.

The resolution would allow for punitive measures for non-compliance, but stop short of military action, if the 16-nation Security Council approves them.

The US and Russia are two of the five permanent Security Council members with a veto. The others are Britain, China, and France.

Another major feature of the agreement is that the US and Russia plan to give Syria one week, until Sept 21, to submit "a comprehensive listing, including names, types and quantities of its chemical weapons agents, types of munitions, and local and form of storage, production, and research and development facilities".

In addition, the US and Russia have agreed that international inspectors should be on the ground in Syria by November and complete their initial work by the end of the month. They must be given "immediate and unfettered" access to inspect all sites.

Notably, Kerry said they had agreed on grounds under which they might request a Security Council "Chapter 7" resolution at the UN, which is a measure that could include military and non-military sanctions.

But Lavrov, who said the agreement was "based on consensus and compromise and professionalism", indicated there would be limits to using a Chapter 7 resolution, which Russia would almost certainly veto if it specifically authorised a military strike such as what Obama has threatened.

"Nothing is said about the use of force or about any automatic sanctions. All [responses to] violations should be approved by the Security Council," Lavrov said.

Kerry said the two countries' teams of experts had come to agreement on the exact size of Syria's weapons stockpile, which had been a sticking point before their meetings in Geneva.

The agreement over the Russian proposal to inventory, isolate and eventually destroy Syria's chemical weapons stocks comes as the Obama administration warned that there is a timetable for a diplomatic resolution of the weapons issue.

Obama underlined his stand in his weekly radio address on Saturday by saying: "Since this plan [to give up chemical weapons] emerged only with a credible threat of US military action, we will maintain our military posture in the region to keep the pressure on the Assad regime."

[FrazeeDK]

I am sure Assad can bring in some of his North Korean friends to teach his folks how to weasel out of any agreements without suffering any negative consequences! Assad is already whining about getting the U.S. to stop providing aid to the rebels.. I'm betting that within a week we'll see a U.S. press release stating that the U.S. has ceased "lethal" aid to the rebels as part of the process. Funny though, I don't see Assad lambasting the Saudis, the Turks or the Qatari's for providing aid and comfort to the rebels...

[bumper]

Well I don't think there was a good answer to this. There is no more big stick. That is what brought this to this point. There is no clear and present danger to Assad now. If nothing else it is buying time for everything to cool down. Unless Assad uses them again. If that happens agreement or no agreement all bets will be off. Assad has not agreed to this yet.

http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs ... r-on-syria

[KHONDAHM]

I don't see any "indecisiveness" going on at all. I see a magnanimous and historic decision to have a debate within Congress before launching what could be considered acts of war absent a formal declaration of war. I see a decision to give diplomacy a final chance to work.

Any reasonable person evaluating the facts and the situation in proper context would conclude Obama won't hesitate to strike if Syria plays games. Iraq will not be repeated here. That is gaar-un-teed. Assad has zero wiggle room unlike Saddam. I am sure evac support personnel with escorts will be at the ready wherever the inspectors decide to go.

As for Assad learning to speak Russian...that might not be a bad idea...

[gudtymchuk]

My advice to Assad - you and your family should keep studying Russian. You're probably going to eventually end up living in that fun country. May be Snowden can tutor your family in IT.

Assad isn't going anywhere anytime soon. He is sitting in his palace laughing his arse off. His benefactor negotiated an agreement that has no chance to succeed all the while this same benefactor is continuing to weaponize and support the Syrian regime.

[LilRed]

GTC:

I believe this supports ur position nicely:

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/12/opini ... ?hpt=hp_c1


ATB

[LilRed]

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/12/opini ... ?hpt=hp_c1


Ahhh, so, we gonna take away Assad's WMDs...

Wonder if da world gonna prosecute him for war crimes, or, pardon him?


ATB

[Laan Yaa Mo]

Another analyst gives President Obama a reality check and comes up with...

MARGARET WENTE
Barack Obama, the 98-pound weakling
MARGARET WENTE
The Globe and Mail
Published Saturday, Sep. 14 2013, 8:00 AM EDT
Last updated Sunday, Sep. 15 2013, 12:28 AM EDT


So, let me get this straight. Some red lines cannot be crossed, and gassing Syrian children is one of them. That’s what Barack Obama told us Tuesday evening. “The images from this massacre are sickening,” he said. “Men, women, children lying in rows, killed by poison gas, others foaming at the mouth, gasping for breath. A father clutching his dead children, imploring them to get up and walk.”

The moral imperative is clear, he argued. We cannot let dictators get away with this. On the other hand, the United States can’t be expected to solve all the world’s problems, either. Therefore, the way ahead is to outsource U.S. foreign policy on Syria to … Vladimir Putin!

So much for the credibility of the world’s only superpower. Mr. Obama’s staff have been tweeting that this delaying tactic is an incredible display of smart diplomacy. But to most of us, it just makes him look gullible. The President has allowed himself to be hog-tied and hornswoggled by Lilliputians. He was determined not to repeat the mistakes of the past, when a blundering giant threw its weight around and only wound up showing the world how incompetent it is. But if there’s one thing worse than being a blundering giant, it’s being a 98-pound weakling.

On Thursday, Mr. Putin kicked more sand in his face. On the op-ed page of The New York Times no less, he lectured Mr. Obama on diplomacy and peace. “From the outset, Russia has advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for their own future,” he said with a straight face. “We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law.”

This from the guy who has been arming Bashar al-Assad to the teeth and blocking the United Nations from doing anything about it. Mr. al-Assad has been using Russian weapons to slaughter his own people.

I guess it’s always possible that the Syrian dictator (memorably likened to a “human toothbrush” by Christopher Hitchens) will immediately surrender his stockpiles of chemical weapons (which he has claimed he doesn’t have), welcome UN weapons inspectors with open arms and give armed protection to the squads of experts who will be necessary to decommission and destroy his various caches of nerve gas, who will somehow do their jobs in the midst of a the bloody civil war that has already destroyed half the country. Or maybe the UN can send in peacekeepers to put it under international control. Or maybe the Easter Bunny will intervene.

More likely is that Mr. al-Assad will use the newly opened diplomatic track to obfuscate, delay, prevaricate and continue killing people, while tying up the process in endless procedural knots. He has now promised to sign the UN Chemical Weapons Treaty – just not quite yet, and only if the U.S. stops arming the rebels, and only if Israel ratifies it first.

Like most everybody else, I’m confused as hell over Syria. The trouble is, Mr. Obama is confused, too. This is not reassuring. He appears to be making it up as he goes along. The only thing that’s clear is that he hates – really hates – being commander-in-chief. He was the guy who was going to get the United States out of all of George W. Bush’s messes. And now this!

Mr. Bush’s problem was that once he made decisions, he never second-guessed himself. Mr. Obama’s problem is that he overthinks. He changes his mind and paints himself into a corner. At first, he said Mr. al-Assad had to go. Then he said regime change wasn’t in the cards. He said there was a red line Mr. al-Assad mustn’t cross. Then, when Mr. al-Assad crossed it, he said it wasn’t his red line, it was the world’s – even as it became excruciatingly clear that the world wasn’t about to do a thing about it.

He said Syria poses no threat to America, but also that attacking it would be in the national interest. On his own, he decided to seek Congressional approval – then trapped himself when it turned out Americans had no taste for another foreign (mis)adventure of the kind he had promised to extricate them from.

No wonder seasoned foreign-policy types are tearing their hair out in clumps. “Words like ad hoc and improvised and unsteady come to mind,” Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, told the Times.

I’ve always been deeply skeptical of the case for intervening, for the simple reason that it might wind up doing more harm than good. The two strongest reasons, it seems to me, were to show that there are consequences for violating international norms, and to demonstrate that the United States means what it says.

But Mr. Obama doesn’t really mean what he says. So why should anybody take him seriously? In fact, there are no consequences, and everything he and his comically inept sidekick John Kerry have said about human rights and justice and the “moral obscenity” of chemical weapons is just a bunch of hot air. His message to rogue states like Iran is: You can get away with anything. His message to greater powers such as China is that he’s incapable of strategic thinking. And his message to allies such as Israel is that they can’t rely on him to have their back.

Mr. Obama’s Middle East policy is in ruins. He looks like he’s way over his head. Now he’s let himself get rolled by the biggest bully on the block. In the immortal words of Mr. Kerry, he looks “unbelievably small.” And that’s not good.

TOPICS:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commenta ... e14315072/

[akwoodworker]

I guess since his middle east policy is in ruins he is merely copying the failed policies in America.

[gudtymchuk]

Yep, Obama done in by the Putin "Rope a dope".......

[parrot]

Opposed to Obama's methods in Syria?

Having listened to a number of prominent republicans on the political talk shows last night, I consider myself lucky to have Obama at the helm.......cringe at the thought of McCain or much worse yet, Michelle Bachmann.
Things may not be perfect, but they could be a lot worse.

[KHONDAHM]

...which is why in every state currently under Republican control, they are continuing to pass legislation to disenfranchise as many voters as possible and resorting to underhanded practices to help them win...

Without that sort of stuff, they have no hope at all in future national politics. No Prez. No Congressional control. No SCOTUS picks. The majority of Americans are sick of Republicans and their evil, twisted, shady ways...

If a Republican were in office (McCain, for example), Syria would be the 3rd war he would have put us in.

[LilRed]

And, LYM:

About this Margie Wente, another CANADIAN liar?

"In September 2012, Wente was found to have committed plagiarism by Carol Wainio, a blogger and artist who accused Wente of lifting quotes and rewording passages from published sources without credit.[4] Wainio documents on her blog, Media Culpa, a series of columns and articles published from 2009 to 2012, which plagiarize sources including the Ottawa Citizen, the New York Times and Foreign Affairs.[5][6] On 21 September 2012, the Globe and Mail's public editor addressed the allegations, conceding that "there appears to be some truth to the accusations but not on every charge."[7]

The Globe and Mail subsequently took unspecified punitive actions against Wente for a column written in 2009. Editor John Stackhouse acknowledged that "the journalism in this instance did not meet the standards of The Globe and Mail," noting that the work in question was "unacceptable." However, Wente continued to write for the Globe and Mail.[8] Wente herself wrote a column to defend herself against accusations of being a "serial plagiarist" but acknowledged she was "extremely careless".[9] She took a break from writing her column for a week. On 11 October she resumed with a column explaining her actions, but never explicitly apologizing.[10]

She was also suspended from CBC Radio where she appeared as a biweekly media panelist on the program Q due to her not meeting the CBC's journalistic standards.[11]"


Since I know there must be some honest Canucks, won't you please quit badmouthing the standing President of the US, during a time of war, using tarnished sources, Canadian, or, otherwise? Might as well cite Zawahiri as a source...


ATB

[KHONDAHM]

I don't think anyone who's been on the forum for awhile pays any attention to the sources posted by the far-right cadre here. I know I sure don't. After finding 100% of such "sourced" posts to be dubious or debunked/able, it is silly to even waste one's time reading them and then waste more time debunking them.

My kingdom for an "ignore" feature to simply skip right past them all. =D>

It sure would make for a more interesting site...

[Laan Yaa Mo]

And, LYM:
Since I know there must be some honest Canucks, won't you please quit badmouthing the standing President of the US, during a time of war, using tarnished sources, Canadian, or, otherwise? Might as well cite Zawahiri as a source...
ATB

Khun LR, 555+. Finally, I can understand one of your posts.

Which war are you talking about? And, are you talking about the world in general having wars at the moment, or the U.S. in particular? Thanks.

[gudtymchuk]

Sadly the world is finding Obama's foreign policy very much like his domestic economic policy. Detroit the classic example - give a grand TelePrompTer speach promising the only way to save Detroit is to spend billions of hard working taxpayers dollars bailing out the auto industry and what happens? Detroit goes bankrupt anyway….. The Liberal response, Whoops… sorry 'bout that. Now after a couple weeks waffling, obfuscating, deceiving and hiding behind congress, poof, just in the nick of time, here comes Vladimir Putin on his white horse to make magic with the wondrous, hedonistic Obama. Lets make a grand mythical fairy tale pact with the devil, and in this instance, two devils and proclaim a historical international diplomatic triumph until it all goes up in smoke…. when once again, Whoops, sorry 'bout that.

Obama has become the butt of many an intentional joke with "best buddies forever" Putin and Assad enjoying the last laugh at the bumbling buffoon… In the big, bad world of diplomacy calling Obama an "amateur" is far too kind.

[Laan Yaa Mo]

One last point, Khun LR, as far as I am concerned I am entitled to voice an opinion...free speech and all that...however much it may grate on your nerves if it is not in line with your thoughts on any given issue. I mean, who are you to tell me not to discuss ideas and views? Are you not just an expat living in Udonthani? Get a grip, man!!! 555+

[farlong68]

good for you lym we all have our own thoughts and should be able to express them without on line bullying from extreme right or left...I enjoy you thoughtful posts even though I don't always agree with you. please continue to post here more ideals not less are the way to a better future ...thanks sincerely john

[rick]

In the early days of the Syrian conflict it was obvious th at some atrocious acts were commited by the government. But as other countries got involved the issue of right and wrong has become much harder to discern, To be honest, is gassing people that much worse than chopping their heads off? Now that the rebels are largely under the thumb of islamists, any victory for the rebels will undoubtedly involve genocide, forced conversion, expulsion or virtual enslavement - for anyone who is not a sunni. And forget about democracy. The Al Nusra rebels have shown they are willing to do anything, and would not hesitate to use gas themselves if they had any.

This extremist threat is what has brought Lebanon and Iran into the war on Syria's side, and plenty of Sunni fanatics (funded by the gulf states and Saudi on the rebel side. Make no mistake, there are no winners in this conflict (except maybe in the warped minds of the fundamentalists). Previous experience in Libya and Iraq have shown that 'winning' is an abstract concept far divorced from reality for those in those countries. Get involved, and this conflict could grow - as we have seen, getting in to a war is far easier than getting out.

I'm sure there are those in the USA who are spoiling for a fight and getting one back against Iran, Russia or who ever. But those who will do the dying (and the paying via taxes) will not be the same people.

[LilRed]

I got NO complaint with free speech, LYM. Even yours...

All I asked is that you, and, others not use derogatory language when referring to President Obama... Not that you agree with him, me or anyone else...

So, I'll ask, nicely, one more time: Please stop using derogatory language when referring to President Obama.


ATB