Obama Delays Syria Strike to Focus on a Russian Plan
Published: September 10, 2013 1075 Comments
(Page 2 of 2)
“We need a full resolution from the Security Council to have the confidence that this has the force it ought to have,” Mr. Kerry said in a social media interview sponsored by Google. “Right now the Russians are in a slightly different place on that.”
Doug Mills/The New York Times
President Obama on his way to a meeting with the Senate Republican leadership on Tuesday after a meeting with Democrats.
LIVEUpdates on Syria
Multimedia
Related
Text: Obama’s Remarks on Syria(September 11, 2013)
In Shift, Syrian Official Admits Government Has Chemical Arms (September 11, 2013)
An Unlikely Evolution, From Casual Proposal to Possible Resolution (September 11, 2013)
Assault on Christian Town in Syria Adds to Fears Over Rebels(September 11, 2013)
Stephen Crowley/The New York Times
Secretary of State John Kerry with Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel on Tuesday during a House committee hearing on Syria.
Jacques Brinon/Associated Press
Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius of France arriving at a press conference in Paris on Tuesday.
Readers’ Comments
"The Russians are no independent party in this whole mess. My guess is that their plan will achieve nothing and we'll be back to discussing an attack in two weeks."Mike, Ohio
Mr. Kerry and Mr. Lavrov will meet in Geneva on Thursday to work out these disagreements. Before Russia made its announcement, Mr. Kerry expressed blunt skepticism that Syria could be trusted to turn over its stockpile, which is dispersed around the country. In testimony to Congress on Tuesday, he described the Obama administration’s position on the Russian plan.
“It has to be swift, it has to be real, it has to be verifiable,” Mr. Kerry told the House Armed Services Committee. “It cannot be a delaying tactic.”
In signaling his country’s cooperation, the Syrian foreign minister, Walid al-Moallem, said Tuesday that Damascus would turn over its chemical weapons arsenal to Russia, the United Nations and “other countries” — a startling concession, given that as recently as this week Mr. Assad had disputed that Syria even possessed chemical weapons.
Mr. Obama’s decision to work through the Security Council is itself a shift, given that 10 days ago he described it as “completely paralyzed and unwilling to hold Assad accountable.” But administration officials said they were swayed by the level of detail in the Russian proposal, which grew out of an impromptu conversation between Mr. Obama and President Vladimir V. Putin on the sidelines of a summit meeting in St. Petersburg, Russia, last week.
“The Lavrov statement was quite comprehensive,” a senior administration official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. “Frankly, it exceeded expectations in the level of detail it went into.”
On Capitol Hill, where opposition to a strike was hardening, senators emerged from lunchtime meetings with Mr. Obama optimistic that Congress could shift from a resolution authorizing force to one that would give diplomacy more time.
The president impressed on them the need to keep the pressure on Syria and Russia, but expressed support for a delay in any vote until the Security Council makes clear what it plans to do.
“I didn’t see any anxiety on the part of the president for an immediate need for action,” said Senator Benjamin L. Cardin, Democrat of Maryland.
While the House was considered the major obstacle for Mr. Obama in seeking approval for a strike, a shift in the Senate began taking shape before the Russian proposal Monday, when it became clear that the straightforward resolution authorizing force that the president had sought was highly unlikely to pass there either. Only a handful of Republicans were yes votes, and at least 15 Democrats were likely to vote no.
Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona and one of the strongest supporters of a strike, contacted a fellow Republican hawk, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, on Saturday to try to put together a new negotiating group.
On Monday, Mr. McCain and Mr. Graham met in the Capitol and brought in two senior Democratic senators, Carl Levin of Michigan, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and Charles E. Schumer of New York.
Mr. Levin stressed Tuesday that the alternative resolution developed by the group would authorize a military strike, but set aside that authority if Mr. Assad placed his chemical weapons under the control of the United Nations, as Russia has proposed.
“This is kind of a twofer,” Mr. Levin said. “It’s a way of keeping the pressure on Syria and on Russia to get rid of chemical weapons, which is the goal of the whole effort, and second, if they fail, it would keep the authorization to launch a strike.”
The approach quickly gained supporters in both parties. It meshed with an alternative resolution drafted by two Democratic senators, Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, which would have given Mr. Assad 45 days to join and comply with the Chemical Weapons Convention or face “all elements of national power.”
Mr. Graham cautioned that no one should conclude that the latest negotiations would produce a resolution strong enough to maintain a credible threat but capable of passing Congress. “I’m not going to embrace a U.N. path until I see it’s real,” he said.
Such wariness may be warranted. Russia quickly opposed a draft United Nations resolution circulated by France because it would authorize force if the weapons transfer fell through. The draft, Mr. Lavrov told France’s foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, was “unacceptable.”
Russia favors a presidential statement, which is far less binding. It would call on the United Nations secretary general and the organization that oversees the Chemical Weapons Convention to carry out the plan to put Syria’s arsenal under international control.
The diplomatic maneuvering brought criticism from some Arab countries. “This does not stop the bloodshed in Syria,” said Bahrain’s foreign minister, Sheik Khalid bin Ahmed al-Khalifa, after a meeting of gulf states. NY TIMES
No comments:
Post a Comment