facebooktwitterRSS
- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -
 

« News Home

Obama in a stronger position on Syria with diplomatic push



Published: Fri, September 13, 2013 @ 12:00 a.m.

President Barack Obama struck the right note in his address to the American people regarding greater U.S. intervention in Syria. Obama laid out the reasons the Assad government’s poison gas attack on the civilian population cannot go unchallenged, but also explained why he was willing to give a Russian proposal for the seizure and destruction of chemical weapons a chance to work before he orders missile strikes in Syria.

The president made it clear that U.S. destroyers armed with cruise missiles operating in the eastern Mediterranean will remain on alert while action on the diplomatic front continues. Obama sent Secretary of State John Kerry to meet with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Geneva, while he was continuing talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

By refusing to take the military option off the table, Obama has sent a strong message to President Bashar al-Assad and his Russian allies that delaying tactics or other attempts to keep the chemical weapons from being destroyed will not be taken lightly.

The president is seeking congressional approval for a limited strike — aimed at the Assad government’s munitions stockpiles — but the response from both Democrats and Republicans has been lukewarm, at best.

Indeed, with a majority of the American people opposed to any U.S. intervention in Syria, members of Congress are loathe to give the green light to the president for even a one-time operation.

The diplomatic solution proposed by Russia gives the Obama administration time to make the case to the members of Congress and the American people.

“If we fail to act, the Assad regime will see no reason to stop using chemical weapons,” the president said in his address to the nation. “As the ban against these weapons erodes, other tyrants will have no reason to think twice about acquiring poison gas.”

No one who has seen the photographs and video recordings of the more than 1,400 men, women and children who were killed can ignore the sheer horror of the deaths.

Obama wasn’t exaggerating when he talked about children writhing in pain and then dying on hospital floors.

Such inhumanity perpetrated by a despot against his own people demands a response. The world cannot sit idly by while Assad seeks to put down the popular uprising that began more than two years ago with a campaign of mass killings.

Heavy human toll

More than 200,000 Syrians have died, most of them rebels seeking to overthrow the regime.

While Americans are rightly worried about this nation getting bogged down in another military excursion, tyrants like Assad only back down when confronted by a superpower like the United States.

His willingness to listen to what the Russians have to say about turning over his chemical weapons to the international community for destruction suggests that he is taking the threat of a missile attack seriously.

If the diplomatic solution is embraced, the United Nations must make sure that all the chemical weapons in Syria are removed and ultimately destroyed.

To achieve this, President Obama should keep the destroyers in the Mediterranean on alert, with the missiles aimed at Damascus and other places where munitions are stored.


Comments

1ColeK(5 comments)posted 1 year, 3 months ago

How discouraging to find on the Vindicator editorial page a naïveté as breathtaking as that of the erstwhile community organizer who now occupies the seat once filled by Harry "The Buck Stops Here" Truman.

The editorial says, "By refusing to take the military option off the table, Obama has sent a strong message to President Bashar al-Assad and his Russian allies that delaying tactics or other attempts to keep the chemical weapons from being destroyed will not be taken lightly." Of course, the opposite is true. Obama has repeatedly—alas, sincerely—signaled weakness and indecisiveness.

Consider: When Syria was first credibly accused of deploying chemical weapons against its people, the administration publicly dithered in legalistic analysis of the evidence, so much so that it made Hamlet look decisive in comparison. When that dithering was, predictably, followed by a larger Syrian attack, the administration announced it would strike militarily. But it hastened to emphasize that the strike would be " incredibly small," and not designed to advance the administration's alleged policy goal that "Assad must go." Then, when Obama realized that he had no international support for his plan, he suddenly canceled the attack to consult Congress. Incredibly, in doing so, he claimed that he had the legal authority to attack Syria without consent. If he believes he has the authority, then seeking consent undermines that authority. The next act in the tragicomedy came when Obama realized that Congress would surely vote against his request for authorization. Only then did he ask Congress not to vote on the question.

If this series of flounderings may be said to have sent a strong signal, it is an oxymoronic one: a strong signal of weakness.

Now Obama has invited Russia, who along with Iran has long been propping up the Assad regime, to increase its influence in the Middle East. Obama, by all available evidence, is a foolish man, but he is not a stupid one. Even he recognizes that Russia and Syria have neither desire to weaken Assad's military strength, nor the capability of securely removing chemical weapons from the war zone if they wanted to. In exchange for advancing their real geopolitical agenda, Russia and Syria offer Obama a diplomatic fig leaf to hide the nakedness of his feckless management of foreign affairs.

Obama has proven himself unwilling to exercise a power he claims to have, and unable to persuade the a congress and the people that he should have the authority to do so. He is widely seen by our friends and adversaries as a bluff, a blowhard.

The Prussian military theorist Clausewitz once observed that warfare was diplomacy conducted by different means. In the farce which is our negotiation with Russia, we see the reverse, that diplomacy may be warfare by other means. In this diplomatic battle, the United States has been more than defeated. It has been humiliated.

Suggest removal:


News
Opinion
Entertainment
Sports
Marketplace
Classifieds
Records
Discussions
Community
Help
Forms
Neighbors

HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2014 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes