“The Obama administration’s extraordinary commitment to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian dispute is also difficult to justify. Even before the recent breakdown in talks, the dispute didn’t appear ripe for resolution. And it must be acknowledged that the Israeli-Palestinian dispute no longer occupies center stage in the Middle East. The emergence of a separate Palestinian state wouldn’t affect the troubling events in Syria, Egypt or Iraq.”
Richard Haass, WSJ
Secretary of State John Kerry said today that Russia “has refused to take a single step in the right direction” to defuse the crisis in Ukraine.
Time to forget more talks and apply more sanctions.
From “How Assad Could Twist a Chemical Weapons Treaty to Keep His Poison Gas,” Yochi Dreazen, “The Cable,” Foreign Policy:
“‘The Chemical Weapons Convention was created to deal with a very different type of set of circumstances,’ said Daryl Kimball, the executive director of the Arms Control Association. ‘It was designed to deal with a country that was willing to renounce its chemical weapons voluntarily and not under coercion, a country where there was no real chance of them being used again, and a country that was stable enough that they could be destroyed safely. None of those conditions exist in Syria.
“‘It’s not inconceivable that he adopts the Saddam Hussein playbook from the 1990s — refusing access to facilities, having the inspectors run around the country chasing their own tails — as a way of playing out the clock,’ said Brian Finlay of the Stimson Center. ‘The more time that passes, the more the shock of the chemical weapons attack will fade away and the more the momentum for a strike will begin to disappear. It’s clearly in his favor for this [to] stretch out as long as possible.'”
We’ve got nothing, people.
John Kerry and Sergei Lavrov came up with a four-page agreement that brings peace in our time removes the threat of U. S. missile strikes against Syria.
The agreement gives Syria until the middle of next year to get rid of its chemical weapons. You know, until just before our mid-term elections.
They side-stepped the issue of the threat of force if Syria fails to live up to the agreement. The agreement says that the non-compliance would go to the Security Council, where we know Russia would just veto any use of force. Obama could still use force unilaterally, but we all know that ain’t gonna happen. If he didn’t do it two weeks ago, before he got his enemies, foreign and domestic all enmeshed in the decision, he’s not doing it.
Syria is supposed to provide a list of its chemical weapons in a week, then outside inspectors are supposed to finish checking out Syria’s sites — in the middle of the civil war! — by November.
One of the Syrian rebel commanders reacted, “Let the Kerry-Lavrov plan go to hell.” This is how you get to hell, on a road paved with good intentions.
So here’s the latest on the voting, and it’s not putting any smiles on West Wing faces.
In the Senate, Obama has 31 yes, 20 no, and 49 undecided. He needs 60 yes votes for cloture.
In the House, Obama has 47 yes votes, 232 no votes, and 153 undecided. So he’s lost the House.
Meanwhile, Kerry may promise there won’t be boots on the ground, but we definitely will have more of Kerry inserting his boot into his own mouth. Apparently “thinking out loud” yet again and going off script, he suggested that Syria put its chemical weapons under international control, which led Putin and then the Syrians to chime in that that was a fantastic idea. Ain’t gonna happen, of course, but it certainly muddies the waters for a strike. Can’t anybody in the executive branch play this game?
I can’t see Russia from my house, but I certainly can hear Putin laughing.
Secretary of State John Kerry says Assad definitely used chemical weapons:
“What we saw in Syria last week should shock the conscience of the world. It defies any code of morality. Let me be clear: The indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, the killing of women and children and innocent bystanders by chemical weapons is a moral obscenity. By any standard it is inexcusable, and despite the excuses and equivocations that some have manufactured, it is undeniable. The meaning of this attack goes beyond the conflict in Syria itself. That conflict has already brought so much terrible suffering. This is about the large-scale indiscriminate use of weapons that the civilized world long ago decided must never be used at all.”
From “Why Chuck Hagel Is Obama’s Pentagon Pick,” Bob Woodward, WaPo:
“The two [Obama and Hagel] share similar views and philosophies as the Obama administration attempts to define the role of the United States in the transition to a post-superpower world.
“This worldview is part hawk and part dove. It amounts, in part, to a challenge to the wars of President George W. Bush. It holds that the Afghanistan war has been mismanaged and the Iraq was unnecessary. War is an option, but very much a last resort.
“So, this thinking goes, the U. S. role in the world must be carefully scaled back — this is not a matter of choice but of facing reality; the military needs to be treated with deep skepticism; lots of strategic military and foreign policy thinking is out of date; and quagmires like Afghanistan should be avoided.
“The bottom line: The United States must get out of these massive land wards — Iraq and Afghanistan — and, if possible, avoid future large-scale war.
“Although much discussion of the Hagel nomination has centered on his attitudes about Iran, Israel and the defense budget, Hagel’s broader agreement with Obama on overall philosophy is probably more consequential.”
I am hopeful that Obama/Kerry/Hagel will spend the next four years devising foreign and military policy that protects our power by getting the best bang for the buck and then uses that power wisely. Applying our power conservatively — that would make them the neo-neo-cons.
After 9/11, we knew the world had changed, but it’s taken us over a decade to figure out how to change with it.
I would say the Iraq war wasn’t just unnecessary, but was very harmful to our interests because it took Iraq away as a counter-weight to Iran and upset the balance of power in the region. Saddam Hussein was a bastard, but he was a useful bastard. Bush 41 recognized this when he freed Kuwait, but didn’t march to Baghdad.
And the idea that we were going to change Afghanistan was always absurd. No one changes Afghanistan — they just bang their heads against a wall and eventually leave.
President Obama has officially nominated John Kerry to be the next Secretary of State. A happy day for defeated Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown, who is tap dancing against semi-automatic weapons and high-capacity clips as fast as he can, and who will now get another bite at the senatorial apple after his loss to Elizabeth Warren.
Meanwhile, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) has officially come out against former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska) for Secretary of Defense. Cornyn is both a member of the Armed Services Committee and the GOP whip, so he’d be a major player in a Hagel confirmation.
Former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska) is set to replace Leon Panetta as Secretary of Defense.
Like John Kerry at State, he will be an easy confirmation.
A solid choice on the merits, I like this one better than Kerry.
“Political strategists in both parties look on Romney with a combination of frustration and sympathy — and, among Democrats, undisguised glee. Some of Romney’s woes are genuinely of his own creation, but there’s also a recognition on both sides that the former Massachusetts governor is caught in a classic downward political spiral where the perception of weakness drives one negative story after another, and political reporters compete ferociously to draw the most blood from a sinking candidate.” Emphasis added.
Alexander Burns, “Mitt Romney, man of constant sorrow,” Politico
Mitt definitely has that Dukasis/Kerry loser stench about him. Once you have it, it’s almost impossible to wash off. Mitt is metaphorically trapped in the tank, looking goofy.
Embattled Farmers 