- Mandela service sign language interpreter: ‘He made up his own signs’
- Pope Francis named Time’s ‘Person of the Year’
- Ben Affleck: Fundraising for Democrats started to ‘feel gross’
- Vladimir Putin orders military to boost presence in Arctic
- Brooklyn, N.Y.: ‘Lesbian capital’ of the Northeast
- Elian Gonzalez: It’s America’s fault that my mother died
- India top court rules homosexuality is illegal
- Aaron Hernandez, ex-Patriot, on prison life: ‘I’m way less stressed in jail’
- Man pulled from water believed to be disgraced D.C. cop
- Kabul airport hit by suicide bomber who targeted NATO gate
U.N. reaches deal to eliminate Syria’s chemical weapons; U.S. and Iran open talks
The U.N. Security Council’s five permanent members reached an agreement Thursday to push through a resolution calling for the swift elimination of Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile, a key development in fast-paced day of diplomacy that also featured the highest-level U.S.-Iranian meeting in years.
While questions remained Thursday night about specific language the Security Council will adopt toward Syria, the Obama administration said there had been a “breakthrough” after “hard-fought diplomacy” geared toward bolstering the deal struck between the U.S. and Russia to persuade embattled Syrian President Bashar Assad to give up his chemical weapons stockpile.
“The Russians have agreed to support a strong, binding and enforceable resolution that unites the pressure and focus of the international community on the Syrian regime to ensure the elimination of Syria’s chemical weapons,” the administration said in a statement.
At the same time, Secretary of State John F. Kerry met with his Iranian counterpart Thursday and, according to Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, the two men and several other great-power diplomats agreed to try for a swift end to the lengthy standoff over Tehran’s nuclear program. Diplomats all around praised the new tone in the meeting, compared with the often belligerent rhetoric of past Iranian officials.
What was unclear on the Syria resolution was whether it will specifically threaten military action if Damascus does not comply — something the Obama administration sought heading into U.N. negotiations this week but which Russia, Syria’s patron for decades stretching back into the Soviet era, has consistently rejected.
The statement circulated by the White House on Thursday night said only that the resolution will make “absolutely clear that the failure of the Assad regime to comply will have consequences.”
Asserting that forces loyal to Mr. Assad carried out last month’s horrific chemical weapons attack outside Damascus, the Obama administration spent recent days pushing for the “binding” resolution that would leave the door open for a military strike on Syria.
But Russia, which has declared that there is no proof tying Mr. Assad and his military to the Aug. 21 attack and has blamed the Islamist-backed rebels for the attack, has resisted the inclusion of such a threat in any security council resolution, most recently in words Wednesday from Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov.
Winning over Moscow
Under the terms of the resolution being negotiated, according to media reports, if Syria does not comply with international operatives in destroying its chemical weapons, the Security Council would meet again to vote on whether to adopt a second resolution that could include the threat of a military strike.
However, such language would leave the door open for a Russian veto in that event.
For more than two years, the Security Council has been paralyzed over Syria — with Russia and China consistently backing the Assad government, while the U.S., Britain and France have, to varying degrees, supported opposition groups fighting for Mr. Assad’s ouster.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Guy Taylor rejoined The Washington Times in 2011 as the State Department correspondent.
As a freelance journalist, Taylor’s work was supported by the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting and the Fund For Investigative Journalism, and his stories appeared in a variety publications, from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch to Salon, Reason, Prospect Magazine of London, the Daily Star of Beirut, the ...
- Obama's antics at Nelson Mandela tribute: Jovial conversation, handshake with Raul Castro
- Democrats join GOP in grilling Kerry over Iran deal
- Ukraine leader to talk with protesters; Washington urges caution
- Obama lied about Syrian chemical attack, 'cherry-picked' intelligence: report
- Lawmakers see 'false narrative' of Obama as a terrorist fighter
Latest Blog Entries
By Donald Lambro
Growth spikes are little more than trend-free anomalies
- Teen thugs in DC run wild -- even while wearing GPS ankle bracelets
- New budget accord saves $23 billion -- after $65 billion spending spree
- VEGAS RULES: Harry Reid pushed feds to change ruling for casino's big-money foreigners
- Obama takes 'selfie' at Mandela's funeral service
- CARSON: Why did the founders give us the Second Amendment?
- Obama hits new poll lows for approval 38 percent
- Gov't Motors: Obama fudges math on auto bailout, $10.5 billion loss for taxpayers
- FITTON: A closer look at the Benghazi lie
- LAMBRO: The dark lining to the silver cloud of Obamanomics
- Somber duty: U.S. presidents in hot demand at Mandela's memorial
Independent voices from the The Washington Times Communities
Television commentary, reviews, news and nonstop DVR catch-up by Lisa King Dolloff and friends.
Helping the YOUniverse conspire on your behalf.
A column dedicated to discussing politics, national security, civil liberties, and education.
Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.
White House pets gone wild!
Let it snow