As we've previously stated, those darn red lines can be very annoying. President Obama has now put the U.S. in a position where we must do something or risk complete humiliation in the eyes of the world. We are still working on anecdotal evidence which, as President Bush found out in the case of WMD in Iraq, can be a very iffy proposition. If the U.N. inspectors find no evidence, how are we going to walk back Secretary of State Kerry's comments? Obama Mulling Response to WMD Use in Syria
President
Obama worked Monday to muster a coordinated international response to
retaliate against Syria’s apparent deadly use of chemical weapons near
Damascus on Aug. 21.
Faced with video evidence and some first-person accounts of lethal gassing, and under renewed pressure to react, the president weighed options as Syria’s more than two-year-old civil war crossed the “red line” Obama laid out a year ago.
“President Obama believes there must be accountability,” and will
decide on “an informed response,” Secretary of State John Kerry said
during brief remarks Monday. While Kerry’s words were heated -- he
described the Syrian deaths as a “moral obscenity” that “should shock
the conscience of the world” -- he did not indicate a timetable for U.S.
action.
United Nations inspectors worked Monday to collect forensic evidence that could independently identify the toxic substance that killed hundreds of Syrians, including children, and injured many more. The U.N. team has been tasked to determine what chemical agent caused the deaths, but not who was responsible.
In the absence of conclusive results from investigators’ tests, Kerry said the administration was nevertheless certain, based on observable data, that “chemical weapons were used in Syria.” Administration officials said their certainty Monday -- after equivocation last week -- was based on open-source information, such as the videos and photographs; information provided by international organizations tied to the Syrian opposition forces; and witnesses in or near the capital city suburbs that were attacked.
The secretary described spending part of Sunday reviewing the now-familiar but unsubstantiated videos of apparently gassed victims, which have ricocheted around the world. Kerry called the images “gut wrenching.”
The administration said it holds the regime of Bashar al-Assad responsible, expressing “very little doubt” that it used chemical weapons to kill Syria’s own people. Officials offered no explanation for the regime’s motive, since the attack occurred as U.N. investigators arrived in Damascus with Syria’s permission to gather information about previous attacks blamed on chemical exposures.
The administration’s acceptance that weapons of mass destruction killed innocent people, some in their sleep, forced U.S. officials to review military and other options over the weekend. The White House continued to rule out deployment of American troops into Syria, but military strikes by air or launched from warships in the Mediterranean are under discussion at the Pentagon and in the White House.
The administration is mindful that attacking a sovereign nation could become an unpleasant reminder among Americans of the “coalition of the willing” that President Bush amassed against Saddam Hussein, who never possessed the WMD in Iraq that the Bush administration claimed were there.
Although the Obama administration seeks the ouster of Assad and his government, and is supporting opposition forces by providing U.S. trainers, equipment and military support, the White House stopped short Monday of vowing to use the alleged chemical attacks in Ghouta as a rationale for regime change.
“There needs to be a response that reflects the seriousness of this transgression,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said Monday when asked to describe Obama’s aims in light of previous assertions. (Obama first said the use of WMD in Syria is a national security concern for the United States; the administration later described the deaths “an atrocity” that breached international “norms.”)
The president, in a CNN interview broadcast Friday, said America is viewed as the indispensable nation in this situation, but he suggested that the United States would need either clear evidence of the use of chemical weaponry by the Assad forces or a United Nations mandate to attack Syria in retaliation, or both.
“There are questions of whether international law supports it, [and] do we have the coalition to make it work?” he said.
Carney said Obama views Assad’s alleged use of chemical weapons as a separate question from the administration’s overall aim to reduce or eliminate the proliferation of WMD that are banned internationally, as well as the stockpile known to be hidden in Syria.
The president “has, obviously, very clear and broad nonproliferation goals,” Carney said. “His position on chemical weapons in Syria remains separate from this incident [Aug. 21] -- a matter of great concern to us and to the international community. And that will be the case going forward, separate from the response that is decided upon in reaction to this use of chemical weapons.”
With four U.S. destroyers now positioned in the Mediterranean, those options are said to include missile strikes, sustained bombing raids, additional assistance to rebel forces battling the Assad regime, and the international defense of a no-fly zone.
The president is consulting with his national security advisers, the United Nations, international allies and heads of state, and members of Congress, Carney said.
A spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner confirmed the White House consulted with the Ohio congressman Monday.
“This afternoon, the speaker had preliminary communication with the White House about the situation in Syria and any potential U.S. response,” Brendan Buck said in a statement. “The speaker made clear that before any action is taken there must be meaningful consultation with members of Congress, as well as clearly defined objectives and a broader strategy to achieve stability."
The White House declined to name all the lawmakers consulted by the president and his advisers, and hedged when asked if Obama would seek a congressional resolution of approval for U.S. military action or some other specific green light from lawmakers. Congress returns to Washington after a month-long break on Sept. 9.
In 2011, some House and Senate members criticized the president and his administration for avoiding provisions of the War Powers Act that require congressional approval during the deployment of U.S. air power to help defend a NATO no-fly zone established over Libya.
Obama now awaits the results of a review by the U.S. intelligence community and its counterparts abroad to refine the fragmented and unsubstantiated information coming out of Syria, the White House indicated.
“The intelligence community is further assessing and evaluating what happened, and we will be able to share with you an assessment of the IC [intelligence community] in the coming days about the use of chemical weapons on August 21s,” Obama’s spokesman told reporters.
RCP congressional reporter Caitlin Huey-Burns contributed to this report.
Faced with video evidence and some first-person accounts of lethal gassing, and under renewed pressure to react, the president weighed options as Syria’s more than two-year-old civil war crossed the “red line” Obama laid out a year ago.
United Nations inspectors worked Monday to collect forensic evidence that could independently identify the toxic substance that killed hundreds of Syrians, including children, and injured many more. The U.N. team has been tasked to determine what chemical agent caused the deaths, but not who was responsible.
In the absence of conclusive results from investigators’ tests, Kerry said the administration was nevertheless certain, based on observable data, that “chemical weapons were used in Syria.” Administration officials said their certainty Monday -- after equivocation last week -- was based on open-source information, such as the videos and photographs; information provided by international organizations tied to the Syrian opposition forces; and witnesses in or near the capital city suburbs that were attacked.
The secretary described spending part of Sunday reviewing the now-familiar but unsubstantiated videos of apparently gassed victims, which have ricocheted around the world. Kerry called the images “gut wrenching.”
The administration said it holds the regime of Bashar al-Assad responsible, expressing “very little doubt” that it used chemical weapons to kill Syria’s own people. Officials offered no explanation for the regime’s motive, since the attack occurred as U.N. investigators arrived in Damascus with Syria’s permission to gather information about previous attacks blamed on chemical exposures.
The administration’s acceptance that weapons of mass destruction killed innocent people, some in their sleep, forced U.S. officials to review military and other options over the weekend. The White House continued to rule out deployment of American troops into Syria, but military strikes by air or launched from warships in the Mediterranean are under discussion at the Pentagon and in the White House.
The administration is mindful that attacking a sovereign nation could become an unpleasant reminder among Americans of the “coalition of the willing” that President Bush amassed against Saddam Hussein, who never possessed the WMD in Iraq that the Bush administration claimed were there.
Although the Obama administration seeks the ouster of Assad and his government, and is supporting opposition forces by providing U.S. trainers, equipment and military support, the White House stopped short Monday of vowing to use the alleged chemical attacks in Ghouta as a rationale for regime change.
“There needs to be a response that reflects the seriousness of this transgression,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said Monday when asked to describe Obama’s aims in light of previous assertions. (Obama first said the use of WMD in Syria is a national security concern for the United States; the administration later described the deaths “an atrocity” that breached international “norms.”)
The president, in a CNN interview broadcast Friday, said America is viewed as the indispensable nation in this situation, but he suggested that the United States would need either clear evidence of the use of chemical weaponry by the Assad forces or a United Nations mandate to attack Syria in retaliation, or both.
“There are questions of whether international law supports it, [and] do we have the coalition to make it work?” he said.
Carney said Obama views Assad’s alleged use of chemical weapons as a separate question from the administration’s overall aim to reduce or eliminate the proliferation of WMD that are banned internationally, as well as the stockpile known to be hidden in Syria.
The president “has, obviously, very clear and broad nonproliferation goals,” Carney said. “His position on chemical weapons in Syria remains separate from this incident [Aug. 21] -- a matter of great concern to us and to the international community. And that will be the case going forward, separate from the response that is decided upon in reaction to this use of chemical weapons.”
With four U.S. destroyers now positioned in the Mediterranean, those options are said to include missile strikes, sustained bombing raids, additional assistance to rebel forces battling the Assad regime, and the international defense of a no-fly zone.
The president is consulting with his national security advisers, the United Nations, international allies and heads of state, and members of Congress, Carney said.
A spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner confirmed the White House consulted with the Ohio congressman Monday.
“This afternoon, the speaker had preliminary communication with the White House about the situation in Syria and any potential U.S. response,” Brendan Buck said in a statement. “The speaker made clear that before any action is taken there must be meaningful consultation with members of Congress, as well as clearly defined objectives and a broader strategy to achieve stability."
The White House declined to name all the lawmakers consulted by the president and his advisers, and hedged when asked if Obama would seek a congressional resolution of approval for U.S. military action or some other specific green light from lawmakers. Congress returns to Washington after a month-long break on Sept. 9.
In 2011, some House and Senate members criticized the president and his administration for avoiding provisions of the War Powers Act that require congressional approval during the deployment of U.S. air power to help defend a NATO no-fly zone established over Libya.
Obama now awaits the results of a review by the U.S. intelligence community and its counterparts abroad to refine the fragmented and unsubstantiated information coming out of Syria, the White House indicated.
“The intelligence community is further assessing and evaluating what happened, and we will be able to share with you an assessment of the IC [intelligence community] in the coming days about the use of chemical weapons on August 21s,” Obama’s spokesman told reporters.
RCP congressional reporter Caitlin Huey-Burns contributed to this report.
No comments:
Post a Comment