Why So Syrias? Quotes of the Day.
September 15, 2013 - 5:34 pm
Q. What is the agreement?
A. Following talks in Geneva, the US and Russia have agreed to work on a UN Security Council resolution that would secure and destroy Syria’s chemical weapons stocks and remove its capability to produce such weapons. The resolution would come under Chapter 7 of the UN charter, which allows for military action. But US officials have acknowledged that Russia would veto such a step and they do not contemplate seeking authorisation for the use of force.
—The Independent, “Obama defends Geneva chemical weapons deal as Syria claims ‘victory’”
Scott Pelley: Is the only agreement you would accept one in which we can be assured that all of Syria’s chemical weapons are destroyed?
President Obama: I– you know, I think it’s premature for me to start drafting language. I think, I want to see what exactly is being proposed and in the interim, it is very important for Congress and the American people to recognize that we would not be getting even ticklers like this if it weren’t for the fact that we were serious about potentially taking action in the absence of some sort of movement.
Hence, the cooing coverage of this weekend’s “agreement.” A “deal” that pretends to be about chemical-weapons inspections is, in fact, a deal that “the U.S. will not interfere in Syria’s civil war.” Under the absurd plans to send international inspectors into a war zone is an agreement by Obama and Putin that what happened to a U.S. client in Egypt and a French client in Tunisia and an Anglo-American-French client in Libya will not be permitted to happen to a Russo-Iranian client in Syria.
Whether Obama knows that’s what he’s signed on to is unclear.