The Syrian Crisis

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
From the White House - -

Dear William:

Thank you for writing. I have heard from many Americans about the conflict in Syria and the chemical weapons attack that took place on August 21, and I appreciate your perspective.



Over the past 2 years, what began as a series of peaceful protests against the repressive regime of Bashar al-Assad has turned into a brutal civil war in Syria. Over 100,000 people have been killed, and millions more have been displaced.



In response to this crisis, we are the largest donor of humanitarian assistance to the Syrian people. We are working with friends and allies to help the moderate Syrian opposition, and we are leading the international community to shape a political settlement. But we have resisted calls for United States military action because we cannot resolve someone else's civil war through force.



The situation profoundly changed in the early hours of August 21, when the Assad regime used chemical weapons in an attack that killed more than 1,000 Syrians—including hundreds of children.



What happened to those people is not only a violation of international law. It is also a danger to our security.



If we fail to act, the Assad regime will see no reason to stop using chemical weapons. As the ban against these deadly weapons erodes, other tyrants and authoritarian regimes will have no reason to think twice about acquiring poison gases and using them. Over time, our troops could face the prospect of chemical warfare on the battlefield. It could become easier for terrorist organizations to obtain these weapons and use them to attack civilians. If fighting spills beyond Syria's borders, these weapons could threaten our allies in the region.



So after careful deliberation, I determined that it is in the national security interests of the United States to respond to the Assad regime's use of chemical weapons. The purpose of this response would be to deter Assad from using chemical weapons again, degrade his regime's ability to use them, and make clear to the world that we will not tolerate their use.



In part because of the credible threat of United States military action, we now have the opportunity to achieve those objectives through diplomacy. The Russian government has committed to joining the international community in pushing Assad to give up his chemical weapons, and our countries have agreed on a framework for moving Syria's chemical weapons under international control so they may be destroyed as soon and as safely as possible. The Assad regime has now admitted for the first time that it possesses chemical weapons, and even began the process to join the Chemical Weapons Convention, which prohibits their use.



While we have made important progress, much more work remains to be done. The United States will continue working with Russia, the United Kingdom, France, the United Nations, and others to ensure that this process is verifiable, and that there are consequences should the Assad regime not comply with the framework that was agreed to.



Moreover, since this plan emerged only with a credible threat of military action, we will maintain our military posture in the region to keep the pressure on the Assad regime. If diplomacy fails, the United States and the international community must remain prepared to act.



We have a duty to preserve a world free from the fear of chemical weapons for our children. But if there is any chance of achieving that goal without resorting to force, then I believe we have a responsibility to pursue that path.



Thank you, again, for writing. To get the most recent information about the situation in Syria, visit Syria | The White House.


Sincerely,

Barack Obama
 

SajeevJino

Long walk
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
6,017
Likes
3,364
Country flag
Last edited by a moderator:

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
My Mistake ..That one was to George Holding, Congressional Representative, 13th District, North Carolina, USA

So you send another one to President ..
Posted a message to the White House website. The reply probably was a stock message sent to thousands (at least) of other people :-D
 

happy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
3,370
Likes
1,455
Key Syrian Rebel Groups Abandon Exile Leaders

BEIRUT, Lebanon — As diplomats at the United Nations push for a peace conference to end Syria's civil war, a collection of some of the country's most powerful rebel groups publicly abandoned the opposition's political leaders, casting their lot with an affiliate of Al Qaeda.

As support for the Western-backed leadership has dwindled, a second, more extreme Al Qaeda group has carved out footholds across parts of Syria, frequently clashing with mainline rebels who accuse it of making the establishment of an Islamic state a priority over the fight to topple President Bashar al-Assad.

The fractured nature of the opposition, the rising radical Islamist character of some rebel fighters, and the increasing complexity of Syria's battle lines have left the exile leadership with diminished clout inside the country and have raised the question of whether it could hold up its end of any agreement reached to end the war.

The deep differences between many of those fighting in Syria and the political leaders who have represented the opposition abroad spilled into the open late Tuesday, when 11 rebel groups declared that the opposition could be represented only by people who have "lived their troubles and shared in what they have sacrificed."

Distancing themselves from the exile opposition's call for a democratic, civil government to replace Mr. Assad, they called on all military and civilian groups in Syria to "unify in a clear Islamic frame." Those who signed included three groups aligned with the Western-backed opposition's Supreme Military Council.

Mohannad al-Najjar, an activist close to the leadership of one of the statement's most powerful signers, Al Tawhid Brigade, said the group intended to send a message of disapproval to an exile leadership it believes has accomplished little.

"We found it was time to announce publicly and clearly what we are after, which is Shariah law for the country and to convey a message to the opposition coalition that it has been three years and they have never done any good for the Syrian uprising and the people suffering inside," he said.

The statement was issued just as Western nations are striving to raise the profile of the "moderate" Syrian political opposition, which is led by Ahmad al-Jarba. The United States and its allies have been reluctant to fully align with and arm the rebels because their ranks are heavily populated by Islamists.

France has scheduled an event on Thursday on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly at which Mr. Jarba is to speak along with foreign ministers who have backed him, including Secretary of State John Kerry.

There was no immediate comment from Mr. Jarba, whose coalition is formally known as the National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces. Mr. Jarba canceled a news conference that had also been scheduled for Thursday.

A senior State Department official who accompanied Mr. Kerry to the United Nations meetings this week said that the United States was still trying to strengthen Mr. Jarba's coalition and suggested that some of the factions that had broken with him might include extremists.

"We, of course, have seen the reports of an announcement by some Islamist opposition groups of their formation of a new political alliance," the State Department official said.

"As we've already said clearly before, we've been long working toward unity among the opposition," the official added. "But we also have had extreme concerns about extremists."

Another American official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was discussing internal deliberations, said that the coalition had recently made "real progress" in broadening its base by including an array of Kurdish parties as well as members of local councils in "liberated" areas of northern and eastern Syria.

But the official acknowledged that the coalition had more to do to build up its credibility inside the country since its headquarters are in Turkey and not Syria.

The latest split in the opposition emerged as the United States, Russia and other permanent members of the United Nations Security Council were making progress on another front: drafting a Council resolution that would enforce an agreement on eliminating Syria's vast chemical weapons arsenal.

A Western diplomat said that about 80 percent of the resolution had been agreed to and that he was "cautiously optimistic" it would be settled this week.

The rifts between the exile opposition and those fighting Mr. Assad's forces inside Syria have raised questions about whether the opposition's political leadership has sufficient influence in the country to hold up its end if an agreement was ever reached to end the civil war.

"At this stage, the political opposition does not have the credibility with or the leverage over the armed groups on the ground to enforce an agreement that the armed groups reject," said Noah Bonsey, who studies the Syrian opposition for the International Crisis Group.

"You need two parties for an agreement, and there is no viable political alternative to the coalition," he said, defining a disconnect between the diplomatic efforts taking shaping in New York and the reality across Syria.

Inside Syria, rebel groups that originally formed to respond to crackdowns by Mr. Assad's forces on political protests have gradually merged into larger groupings, some commanded and staffed by Islamists. But differences in ideology and competition for scarce foreign support have made it hard for them to unite under an effective, single command.

Seeking to build a moderate front against Mr. Assad, Western nations encouraged the formation of the opposition political coalition. Even though some of its leading members like Mr. Jarba have been imprisoned by the Assad government, the coalition has loose links to many of the rebel fighters on the ground.

The rebel groups that assailed the political opposition are themselves diverse and include a number that are linked to the coalition's supreme military council. More troubling to the West they also include Al Nusra Front, a group linked to Al Qaeda. At the same time they include groups that remain opposed to another group linked to Al Qaeda: the Islamic State of Iraq and the Syria.

"The brigades that signed have political differences with Nusra, but we agree with them militarily since they want to topple the regime," said a rebel, who gave his name as Abu Bashir.

A coalition member and aide to Mr. Jarba said the opposition was still studying the development but was surprised at some of the groups that had signed on with Al Nusra Front.

"The Islamic project is clear and it is not our project," said the coalition member, Monzer Akbik. "We don't have a religious project; we have a civil democratic project, and that needs to be clear."

Further complicating the picture is the rise of the new Qaeda franchise, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria — or ISIS, which has established footholds across northern and eastern Syria with the intention to lay the foundations of an Islamic state.

In recent months, it has supplanted Al Nusra Front as the primary destination for foreign jihadis streaming into Syria, according to rebels and activists who have had contact with the group.

Its fighters, who hail from across the Arab world, Chechnya, Europe and elsewhere, have a reputation for being well armed and strong in battle. Its suicide bombers are often sent to strike the first blow against government bases.

But its application of strict Islamic law has isolated rebels and civilians. Its members have executed and beheaded captives in town squares and imposed strict codes, forcing residents to wear modest dress and banning smoking in entire villages.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/26/world/middleeast/syria-crisis.html?pagewanted=1&src=recg
 

happy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
3,370
Likes
1,455
Key Syrian Rebel Groups Abandon Exile Leaders

BEIRUT, Lebanon — As diplomats at the United Nations push for a peace conference to end Syria's civil war, a collection of some of the country's most powerful rebel groups publicly abandoned the opposition's political leaders, casting their lot with an affiliate of Al Qaeda.

As support for the Western-backed leadership has dwindled, a second, more extreme Al Qaeda group has carved out footholds across parts of Syria, frequently clashing with mainline rebels who accuse it of making the establishment of an Islamic state a priority over the fight to topple President Bashar al-Assad.

The fractured nature of the opposition, the rising radical Islamist character of some rebel fighters, and the increasing complexity of Syria's battle lines have left the exile leadership with diminished clout inside the country and have raised the question of whether it could hold up its end of any agreement reached to end the war.

The deep differences between many of those fighting in Syria and the political leaders who have represented the opposition abroad spilled into the open late Tuesday, when 11 rebel groups declared that the opposition could be represented only by people who have "lived their troubles and shared in what they have sacrificed."

Distancing themselves from the exile opposition's call for a democratic, civil government to replace Mr. Assad, they called on all military and civilian groups in Syria to "unify in a clear Islamic frame." Those who signed included three groups aligned with the Western-backed opposition's Supreme Military Council.

Mohannad al-Najjar, an activist close to the leadership of one of the statement's most powerful signers, Al Tawhid Brigade, said the group intended to send a message of disapproval to an exile leadership it believes has accomplished little.

"We found it was time to announce publicly and clearly what we are after, which is Shariah law for the country and to convey a message to the opposition coalition that it has been three years and they have never done any good for the Syrian uprising and the people suffering inside," he said.

The statement was issued just as Western nations are striving to raise the profile of the "moderate" Syrian political opposition, which is led by Ahmad al-Jarba. The United States and its allies have been reluctant to fully align with and arm the rebels because their ranks are heavily populated by Islamists.

France has scheduled an event on Thursday on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly at which Mr. Jarba is to speak along with foreign ministers who have backed him, including Secretary of State John Kerry.

There was no immediate comment from Mr. Jarba, whose coalition is formally known as the National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces. Mr. Jarba canceled a news conference that had also been scheduled for Thursday.

A senior State Department official who accompanied Mr. Kerry to the United Nations meetings this week said that the United States was still trying to strengthen Mr. Jarba's coalition and suggested that some of the factions that had broken with him might include extremists.

"We, of course, have seen the reports of an announcement by some Islamist opposition groups of their formation of a new political alliance," the State Department official said.

"As we've already said clearly before, we've been long working toward unity among the opposition," the official added. "But we also have had extreme concerns about extremists."

Another American official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was discussing internal deliberations, said that the coalition had recently made "real progress" in broadening its base by including an array of Kurdish parties as well as members of local councils in "liberated" areas of northern and eastern Syria.

But the official acknowledged that the coalition had more to do to build up its credibility inside the country since its headquarters are in Turkey and not Syria.

The latest split in the opposition emerged as the United States, Russia and other permanent members of the United Nations Security Council were making progress on another front: drafting a Council resolution that would enforce an agreement on eliminating Syria's vast chemical weapons arsenal.

A Western diplomat said that about 80 percent of the resolution had been agreed to and that he was "cautiously optimistic" it would be settled this week.

The rifts between the exile opposition and those fighting Mr. Assad's forces inside Syria have raised questions about whether the opposition's political leadership has sufficient influence in the country to hold up its end if an agreement was ever reached to end the civil war.

"At this stage, the political opposition does not have the credibility with or the leverage over the armed groups on the ground to enforce an agreement that the armed groups reject," said Noah Bonsey, who studies the Syrian opposition for the International Crisis Group.

"You need two parties for an agreement, and there is no viable political alternative to the coalition," he said, defining a disconnect between the diplomatic efforts taking shaping in New York and the reality across Syria.

Inside Syria, rebel groups that originally formed to respond to crackdowns by Mr. Assad's forces on political protests have gradually merged into larger groupings, some commanded and staffed by Islamists. But differences in ideology and competition for scarce foreign support have made it hard for them to unite under an effective, single command.

Seeking to build a moderate front against Mr. Assad, Western nations encouraged the formation of the opposition political coalition. Even though some of its leading members like Mr. Jarba have been imprisoned by the Assad government, the coalition has loose links to many of the rebel fighters on the ground.

The rebel groups that assailed the political opposition are themselves diverse and include a number that are linked to the coalition's supreme military council. More troubling to the West they also include Al Nusra Front, a group linked to Al Qaeda. At the same time they include groups that remain opposed to another group linked to Al Qaeda: the Islamic State of Iraq and the Syria.

"The brigades that signed have political differences with Nusra, but we agree with them militarily since they want to topple the regime," said a rebel, who gave his name as Abu Bashir.

A coalition member and aide to Mr. Jarba said the opposition was still studying the development but was surprised at some of the groups that had signed on with Al Nusra Front.

"The Islamic project is clear and it is not our project," said the coalition member, Monzer Akbik. "We don't have a religious project; we have a civil democratic project, and that needs to be clear."

Further complicating the picture is the rise of the new Qaeda franchise, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria — or ISIS, which has established footholds across northern and eastern Syria with the intention to lay the foundations of an Islamic state.

In recent months, it has supplanted Al Nusra Front as the primary destination for foreign jihadis streaming into Syria, according to rebels and activists who have had contact with the group.

Its fighters, who hail from across the Arab world, Chechnya, Europe and elsewhere, have a reputation for being well armed and strong in battle. Its suicide bombers are often sent to strike the first blow against government bases.

But its application of strict Islamic law has isolated rebels and civilians. Its members have executed and beheaded captives in town squares and imposed strict codes, forcing residents to wear modest dress and banning smoking in entire villages.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/26/world/middleeast/syria-crisis.html?pagewanted=1&src=recg
 

happy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
3,370
Likes
1,455
Now who is going to be morally responsible for this????
 

happy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
3,370
Likes
1,455
Lavrov presents to Kerry evidence of using chemical weapons by rebels near Damascus

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has presented to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry the evidence confirming the involvement of the Syrian opposition in the August 21 chemical attack in a suburb of Damascus. The RF foreign minister made this statement in an interview with The Washington Post published on Thursday.
Asked whether Russia was still saying that it was the rebels who fired the chemical weapons on August 21 — not the Assad regime, Lavrov said, "Yes, we believe there is very good evidence to substantiate this." The Russian Foreign Minister added: "I just presented a compilation of evidence to John Kerry when we met a couple of hours ago (in New York). This evidence is not something revolutionary. It's available on the Internet."
According to Lavrov, the evidence includes reports of journalists who visited the scene, and had talked with the militants, who said they received unusual rockets and ammunition from abroad and didn't know how to use them. There is also evidence from monastery nuns, who were near the chemical attack site, the Russian Foreign Minister said.

Lavrov presents to Kerry evidence of using chemical weapons by rebels near Damascus | Russia & India Report
 

happy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
3,370
Likes
1,455
Lavrov presents to Kerry evidence of using chemical weapons by rebels near Damascus

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has presented to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry the evidence confirming the involvement of the Syrian opposition in the August 21 chemical attack in a suburb of Damascus. The RF foreign minister made this statement in an interview with The Washington Post published on Thursday.
Asked whether Russia was still saying that it was the rebels who fired the chemical weapons on August 21 — not the Assad regime, Lavrov said, "Yes, we believe there is very good evidence to substantiate this." The Russian Foreign Minister added: "I just presented a compilation of evidence to John Kerry when we met a couple of hours ago (in New York). This evidence is not something revolutionary. It's available on the Internet."
According to Lavrov, the evidence includes reports of journalists who visited the scene, and had talked with the militants, who said they received unusual rockets and ammunition from abroad and didn't know how to use them. There is also evidence from monastery nuns, who were near the chemical attack site, the Russian Foreign Minister said.

Lavrov presents to Kerry evidence of using chemical weapons by rebels near Damascus | Russia & India Report
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
Russians are saying sarin used by rebels was home-made.

Occam's Razor, folks. Are the rebels organic chemistry students?



Obama and Kerry continue to be buffaloed by Putin.
 

t_co

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
709
Russians are saying sarin used by rebels was home-made.

Occam's Razor, folks. Are the rebels organic chemistry students?



Obama and Kerry continue to be buffaloed by Putin.
The Syrian rebels might not be, but I wouldn't be surprised if Al-Qaeda elements in Syria had chem expertise.

And I'm thinking that Obama and Kerry know that Russia's excuses are pretty flimsy, but also are glad they don't have to fulfill their bluff. If a military 'stick' is measured in terms of how much diplomatic or political impact it can generate vis a vis deployment and equipment costs, then Obama's bluff can be thought of as a marginal victory insofar as it cements the Pentagon as the Middle East's indispensable power broker.

Saudi Arabia loses here, and i would reckon so do the prime elements of the US-Saudi alliance - pro-Saudi administration insiders like Brennan and Rice. But given how much pain the US has endured on behalf of Saudi Arabia over the past decade (high oil prices, a war in Afghanistan to clean up their mess, a war in Iraq to remove a regional Saudi enemy, and the death of Ambassador Stevens) I think some daylight in that relationship is a healthy thing.

For one, the chastening of those key stakeholders in the relationship enables Obama to actually consider reciprocating Rouhani's conciliatory gestures. Of course, whether Obama himself is clever enough to do reciprocate those gestures while maintaining US power is another matter altogether, but having that option on the table is important in and of itself.
 
Last edited:

nrupatunga

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2013
Messages
2,310
Likes
960
But given how much pain the US has endured on behalf of Saudi Arabia over the past decade (high oil prices, a war in Afghanistan to clean up their mess, a war in Iraq to remove a regional Saudi enemy, and the death of Ambassador Stevens) I think some daylight in that relationship is a healthy thing.
Saudis would have a saddam in iraq(but defanged one) than have pro iran regime in iraq any day of the week. In fact gcc were not happy with a democracy in iraq because it would bring shias into power. They would have saddam(who couldn't threaten them, but still potent enough to keep iran in check) any day.
 

t_co

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
709
Saudis would have a saddam in iraq(but defanged one) than have pro iran regime in iraq any day of the week. In fact gcc were not happy with a democracy in iraq because it would bring shias into power. They would have saddam(who couldn't threaten them, but still potent enough to keep iran in check) any day.
Except there was no guarantee that post-war Iraq would be anything resembling a weak democracy (indeed, in 2004 and 2005 it looked like Iraq was going to fragment into civil war). And Saddam regularly struck at Saudi Arabia's core interest - oil price stability, and a de facto cartel among Arab oil producers - prior to and even after the imposition of UN sanctions.

But your point is still apropos insofar as Saddam wasn't the main enemy of anyone, not in intent, and certainly not in capability. His plight is remarkably similar to Assad - just another secular dictator of a remnant Baathist state, but with even fewer friends in the region.
 
Last edited:

nrupatunga

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2013
Messages
2,310
Likes
960
Except there was no guarantee that post-war Iraq would be anything resembling a weak democracy (indeed, in 2004 and 2005 it looked like Iraq was going to fragment into civil war). And Saddam regularly struck at Saudi Arabia's core interest - oil price stability, and a de facto cartel among Arab oil producers - prior to and even after the imposition of UN sanctions.
To be frank i didn't get you at all sir. I was saying the same thing, that a outright weak sunni iraq was not something in minds of gcc. Even today iraq is in civil war unofficially with daily bombings taking place. They want a iraqi wall against any iranian onslaught. Insipte of all the latest military hardware, they just can't take iran even with outdated hardware. All the stuff is for show only and also as a means of thanking the west by buying their products thus protecting/promoting jobs in west. Only iraq can stand up to iran.

And wrt oil cartel, when did saddam threaten saudis?? Actaully saddam invaded kuwait because kuwaitis were putting more oil into market which he didn't want.
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
Most of Syria's toxins can be destroyed more easily than officials initially thought - The Washington Post

U.S. and Russian officials now believe that the vast majority of Syria's nerve agent stockpile consists of "unweaponized" liquid precursors that could be neutralized relatively quickly, lowering the risk that the toxins could be hidden away by the regime or stolen by terrorists.

A confidential assessment by the United States and Russia also concludes that Syria's entire arsenal could be destroyed in about nine months, assuming that Syrian officials honor promises to cede control of the chemical assets to international inspectors, according to two people briefed on the analysis.
 

happy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
3,370
Likes
1,455
Re: The Syrian Crisis: Lessons in statecraft from the U.N. high table

Lessons in statecraft from the U.N. high table

The draft resolution on Syria is a victory for Russia and dents the image of the U.S. as the steering force in the Security Council

Within hours of the time of writing, the United Nations Security Council will pass a resolution that not only paves the way for the elimination of Syria's chemical weapons but also sets its crisis on track for a politically mediated settlement. For all intents and purposes, this will be the first time the Council would adopt substantive measures to tackle Syria, since conflict first broke out two years ago. The Council's permanent members have signed off on the draft resolution, and its contents were discussed at a full-house meeting of all UNSC members on Thursday night. The UNSC draft resolution, which will be cleared without amendment, represents an unmitigated victory for Russian diplomacy: Moscow has extracted every pound of flesh from its bargain with the United States to destroy Syria's weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and more.

Separating the issues

The draft resolution was thrashed out by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov in New York. First, Mr. Lavrov ensured the draft would not call on the Council to refer the Syrian conflict to the International Criminal Court — this provision, which France was especially keen to incorporate, would have led to the trial and likely conviction of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for the commission of war crimes.

Second, Russia has succeeded in convincing the U.N. Security Council that the use of chemical weapons in Syria and its ongoing humanitarian crisis are to be treated separately. The U.S. and its allies intended this exercise to condemn Mr. Assad for allegedly using chemical weapons. The West also sought to introduce Chapter VII measures under the U.N. Charter to threaten the Syrian regime into disarmament. The use of WMDs in Syria provided a "legitimate" pretext to intervene militarily, and thus tip the balance of power in favour of the rebels fighting the Assad regime. Mr. Lavrov first undercut this plan in Geneva earlier this month — the "framework agreement" signed between him and Mr. Kerry ensured Chapter VII measures would only be invoked only after non-compliance, and not as a tool to command Assad's obedience. This went against French and British efforts at the U.N. Security Council, but once Mr. Lavrov had won over Mr. Kerry, there was little the Europeans could do.

In negotiations, Russia conceded the use of chemical weapons in Syria would constitute a "threat to international peace and security" – under the U.N. Charter, such a threat is a sine qua non for the Council to approve the use of force. But Mr. Lavrov's deft diplomatic manoeuvring has virtually ensured intervention in Syria is all but off the table for now. The same draft that suggests the use of WMDs is a grave threat to international security also stresses "the only solution to the current crisis" in Syria is political reconciliation based on the Geneva Communiqué of 2012. What's more, the draft resolution now reads like a general denunciation of the use and proliferation of chemical weapons, not just in Syria but "anywhere in the world." The resolution also suggests "individuals" responsible for the use of WMDs be "held accountable." Any attempt to prosecute the Syrian regime for its alleged use of chemical weapons will find it next to impossible to prove Mr. Assad himself authorised these attacks.

If the Syrian President has been let off the hook for now, Russia has also managed to turn the spotlight on the Syrian rebels. The draft resolution requires "all Syrian parties to work closely" with the U.N. to "arrange for the security" of the WMD inspection team. The provision effectively mandates a ceasefire in Syria, which the rebels are extremely reluctant to support given that violence has now become their only bargaining chip. The draft resolution also addresses the possibility of chemical weapons being transferred to the rebels and requires all States to refrain from the same.

It was clear from the beginning there was little appetite for military intervention in Syria both in the international community as well as domestic peoples in the West. But what explains the dramatic turnaround in Russia's fortunes? For the most part of the last two years, Moscow, along with China has been branded by the West as a "persistent objector" at the Security Council, standing in the way of resolving this humanitarian crisis. But now, Russia has been able to push through a draft resolution that ensures Mr. Assad will be in power for the conceivable future, while slapping down all of the western proposals at once. What gives?

American actions

The answer does not have to do with Russia's sudden popularity as much as the negative publicity that the U.S. has attracted at this year's U.N. General Assembly meetings. The UNGA opened with a blistering attack by Brazil's President Dilma Rousseff on the U.S. National Security Agency's surveillance programmes, terming them a "breach of international law." Her speech has resonated widely with heads of state and foreign ministers in attendance. At the Council, Pakistan sharply criticised U.S. drone attacks on its north-western border and suggested they ran "counterproductive" to the objective of defeating terrorism.

To complicate matters for the West, Iran, a major ally of the Syrian regime, has moderated its defence of Bashar al-Assad, choosing instead to oppose military intervention for its disastrous spillover effects. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has even expressed his country's willingness to join the Geneva-II conference to initiate political dialogue among Syria's warring constituents.

In this climate, the U.S. has found it extremely difficult to push its brief on Syria through the Security Council. The Obama administration's bluff on military intervention has been called, and its alienating posture on Iran has cut no ice at the U.N. Above all, the chickens from its intrusive, worldwide surveillance programme have come to roost in New York. The draft resolution on Syria is a severe setback to its reputation as the primary agenda-setter in the Security Council.

Lessons in statecraft from the U.N. high table - The Hindu
 
Last edited:

jmj_overlord

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2013
Messages
694
Likes
156
wow.........russians dominating the international politics after a long time. Atleast the russians have a point that if the west intervenes there is a possibility for a new terror infested country
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
wow.........russians dominating the international politics after a long time. Atleast the russians have a point that if the west intervenes there is a possibility for a new terror infested country
Obama has been weak for a long time, and is incapable of projecting the image of strength that Putin does.


Obama tells Medvedev that he will "have more flexibility" after his re-election.

He had the flexibility to bend over and grab his ankles where Putin is concerned.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

amoy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
5,982
Likes
1,849
Re: The Syrian Crisis: Lessons in statecraft from the U.N. high table

Lessons in statecraft from the U.N. high table

The draft resolution on Syria is a victory for Russia and dents the image of the U.S. as the steering force in the Security Council
probably too early to hail the resolution as a victory of "deft diplomacy" or statecraft. is Assad regime financially and technically capable of disposing of the chem. weapons, within the time frame (? 9 mon. fm now!) while the civil war is raging? the amount and manpower needed sounds hefty for a war torn Syria. so far only (?) Switzerland and China commit to contributing a fragment, and Russia"¦ also its progress has to b reviewed monthly. so still pretexts ahead for West attacks.

more practically Assad (and his allies) shall make use of the borrowed time for more battlefield gains and striking "political reconcilliation" with "some of " the opposition which has experienced internal splits in the prolonged war.

Sent from my 5910 using Tapatalk 2
 

Latest Replies

New threads

Articles

Top