As Syria talks with Russia, Obama’s ‘red line’ starts to fade

U.S. military option a sticking point

President Obama’s “red line” vow of action against Syria turned a lighter shade of pink Thursday, with Secretary of State John F. Kerry saying a U.S. military strike “might” be necessary if talks led by Russia fail to compel Syria to turn over its chemical weapons.

As negotiators met in Switzerland on the unfolding crisis, Mr. Kerry appeared to concede the diplomatic reins to the Russians, who are insisting that the U.S. withdraw its threat of missile strikes before the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad agrees to give up its chemical weapons stockpile.


SEE ALSO: Lack of mutual trust could kill Syria talks on chemical weapons


“President Obama has made clear that, should diplomacy fail, force might be necessary to deter and degrade Assad’s capacity to deliver these weapons,” Mr. Kerry said in Geneva after a meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

His comment offered less certainty than President Obama had of a missile strike. Mr. Obama said Tuesday that he was keeping U.S. forces in the region “in a position to respond if diplomacy fails.” Asked about Mr. Kerry’s remark, the White House said the secretary of state had not misspoken.

“I think that that allows for, you know, a variety of things that could happen in the next days and weeks with regard to this matter,” said White House press secretary Jay Carney, adding that “a military option is important to maintain.”

Events in the Syria crisis continued to develop at a fast-moving clip Thursday, with much of the action happening far from the White House. Russian President Vladimir Putin, after penning a New York Times op-ed panning the U.S. approach to the Syrian crisis and the idea of American “exceptionalism,” pushed forward with his own plan for resolving the crisis. In New York, Syria’s U.N. Ambassador Bashar Ja’afari told reporters that he had formally presented to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon his country’s application to join the Chemical Weapons Convention as a first step to putting the regime’s stockpiles under international control.

In Damascus, Mr. Assad announced that he had signed the papers putting the treaty accession into motion while pointedly noting that he was responding to Moscow’s offer and not to the threats from Washington.

Mr. Kerry’s comments in Geneva signaled a further downsizing of Mr. Obama’s original vow to punish the Syrian regime for an Aug. 21 sarin gas attack that the U.S. said killed 1,429 people near Damascus. Mr. Obama had been saying for a year that such an atrocity using Syria’s known chemical weapons would cross a “red line” requiring a tough U.S. response.


SEE ALSO: Russia aims to hide its role in stockpiling Syria’s arsenal: Rogers


On Aug. 31, Mr. Obama said he had decided to launch a “limited” attack on Syria to prevent it from using chemical weapons again, but he would wait for Congress to vote on the use of military force. A few days later, Mr. Obama said he hadn’t created the “red line” but the international community had, and therefore his credibility was not at stake.

On Monday, Russia seized on an offhand remark from Mr. Kerry to float its own deal through the United Nations to avoid a U.S. strike against Syria. On Tuesday, Mr. Obama asked Congress to hold off a vote indefinitely on military action while he pursued the diplomatic course.

Mr. Kerry Thursday tried to lay down new conditions before Washington would agree to any deal between Mr. Putin and Mr. Assad.

“This is not a game,” Mr. Kerry said. “It has to be real. It has to be comprehensive. It has to be verifiable. It has to be credible. It has to be timely and implemented in a timely fashion. And finally, there ought to be consequences if it doesn’t take place.”

Mr. Lavrov called for rules under which Syria would join the Chemical Weapons Convention and said a solution “will make unnecessary” a military strike on Syria.

But Mr. Assad told the Russian TV interviewer that he would agree to turn over Syria’s chemical weapons only if the U.S. drops its threat of attack.

“This does not mean that Syria will sign these documents, carry out the conditions and that’s it,” Mr. Assad said. “This bilateral process is based, first of all, on the United States stopping its policy of threatening Syria.”

Story Continues →

View Entire Story

© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Comments
blog comments powered by Disqus
TWT Video Picks