Posts
Lovers of diplomacy and “peaceful
solutions” to such “problems” as atrocities, mass murder, and
ruthless tyrants systematically reducing the nations they rule to
rubble must be in Seventh Heaven over the “framework agreement”
between the U.S. and Russia to disarm [sic!] the Assad regime
of Syria of its chemical weapons. To recap, the agreement (which the
Syrian tyranny isn't even a party to, yet) calls for Assad to turn
over by next week a complete and accurate accounting of his chemical
weapons arsenal and all relevant locations, equipment, and delivery
munitions. The regime is supposed to allow UN chemical weapons
inspectors “immediate and unfettered” access to those sites. Then
by November the regime is supposed to have destroyed its chemical
mixing equipment. And within a year the regime must be completely rid
of chemical weapons and production facilities. (Dream on.)
And if the Assad regime fails or
refuses to comply? Why, then the matter goes straight to the UN
Security Council!! Which will then duly proceed to huff
and puff and blow Assad's house down.
Well, actually, no. The Russians will
still veto any UN authorization for military action. And they are
still publicly insisting the U.S. can't attack, under this agreement
or international law.
Anyway, President Barack Obama issued a
statement hailing the deal, which said in part: “We have a duty to
preserve a world free from the fear of chemical weapons for our
children. [He invokes children a lot, whenever he feels under
pressure.] Today marks an important step towards
achieving this goal.”
And after U.S. Secretary of State John
Kerry called the British Foreign Minister William Hague, Hague put
out a statement calling the political gimmick agreement “a
significant step forward.”
An important step, a significant step,
a noteworthy step, a consequential step, a key step, a momentous
step, a meaningful step, a substantial step, a weighty step, an
awesome step, a groovy step, a neato step, an outtasight step, a fly
step, a def step, a phat step, a whatever-positive-adjective-you-like
step.
It's a pathetic, farcical, and tragic
step, BACKWARDS. It means Assad got away scot-free with the sarin
attack of August 21st. It strengthens Assad's position
politically. It makes more problematic any U.S. moves to arm the
rebels. It leaves intact Assad's air power.
The truth is, it would have been better
to let Assad keep the chem weapons and take out his air force, which
would weaken him in the civil war and likely deter his future use of
chem weapons to boot. But probably the U.S. is more worried about
some of the weapons ending up in jihadist hands in the future than
about anything else. I think that is the hidden primary motive behind
the U.S.' behavior.
But I hope I'm proven wrong about this
deal's likely futility in removing all the chemical weapons. I'd
rather be wrong this time than right. (Probably Assad will have to
come partially clean, but it will be like pulling a stubborn mule
along.)
Oh,
by the way, before I forget to mention it, the Assad regime hasn't
even actually officially agreed to any of this as of yet. But
not to worry. Unnamed Obama regime “officials” whispered into the
ears of New York Times reporters that “the American
assumption is that much, if not all, of the accord has Mr. [sic]
Assad's assent.” (Mr. Assad, indeed: the NY Times is
always polite to a fault, even to mass murdering butchers.) [1]
So the U.S. assumes Assad is on
board. (At least to “much” of the accord.) Well that
sounds like something you can take to the bank! Just blithely assume
what you want to believe is true. That's what responsible
professionals do.
Well, what is the Assad regime actually
saying? The Syrian state propaganda fake “news” agency,
SANA, called the deal the U.S. and Russia made with each other
“a starting point.” (This from the regime that is supposedly
going to provide a complete and accurate list of its huge arsenal of
poison gases by next week.) The Assad regime hasn't said it would
abide by the deal. “A starting point” for what, exactly? The
usual Assad regime evasions, dilatory tactics, prevarications and
insulting lies, plus endless U.S. “negotiating” (haggling) with
Russia, no doubt.
The Assad regime, remember- and its
Russian backers too- is still insisting that the rebels themselves
launched the sarin nerve agent attack on their
own enclave in the Damascus suburbs on August 21st.
Doesn't exactly inspire confidence in an accurate accounting of their
stockpile and its locations, much less allowing its destruction, or
of Russian efforts to compel Assad to abide by the deal he hasn't
even acceded to (yet).
The U.S. and Russia between them have
agreed that the regime has 1,000 tons of chemical weapons, including
sarin and mustard gas. That's two million pounds of deadly chemicals.
The U.S. identifies a minimum of 45 chemical weapon locations, a
number the Russians insist is too high. (Already they
disagree. Let the haggling begin!) And never mind that the Assad
regime has been shuffling the poisons around like some Three Card
Monte hustler. (How many years of searching did it take to
find Saddam Hussein's arsenals?) That's 45 sites and counting.
And Obama is still talking big,
claiming military action is still possible. Yet the first paragraph
of the NY Times article I cited above says that the
agreement “indefinitely stalled the prospect of American
airstrikes.”
It sure looks that way.
Now we can start the long process of
trying to pull Assad's innumerable teeth, one at a time. Good luck
with that.
Here's some more free advice for the
U.S. on top of the suggestion I made yesterday: when (if) Assad turns
over that lying list next week (or doesn't), take out
his six remaining airfields. That will prove the U.S. means business,
and have the additional salutary effect of giving the rebels a
much-needed leg up in the civil war. Enforce every comma and period
in the deal to the letter.
Fat chance of that happening.
From the rebels' perspective, it all
looks like a Munich-style sell-out.
From the aforementioned NY Times
article, we learn that “the sense of betrayal” (among the rebels
towards the U.S.) “has grown intensely in recent days.” A rebel
commander is cited as feeling the U.S. was abandoning the rebels and
leaving them at the mercy of the regime and its allies, Russia and
Iran.
Another rebel commander said in an
interview with the Times that “I don't care about deals
anymore. The Americans found a way out of the [air]strike.” (Just
as the British and French found a way to abandon the Czechs to the
Nazis in 1938, when they had no stomach for a possible fight. Of
course that was even worse in the sense of there being a treaty
alliance, not mere constant proclamations of support as in the case
of the U.S. and the Syrian rebellion.) He continued: “The Russians
did what they want. The Americans lied, and believed their own lie –
the U.S. doesn't want democracy in Syria. [Well duh, buddy.]
Now I have doubts about the U.S. capacities, their military and
intelligence capacities. The Iranian capacity is much stronger, I
guess.”
Ouch!
[1]
“U.S. and Russia Reach A Deal on Dismantling Syria's Chemical
Arms,” New York Times,
Sunday, September 15th,
2013, pg. 1.
{You've been sitting there all
day staring at that computer instead of signing up for Follow By
Email or RSS feed
in the upper right corner of the page. What is the matter
with you? It's like you're glued
to that screen!
Just sign up for feeds or email
alerts and then you don't have to sit staring at the computer all day
waiting for a new essay to appear!
After you do that, the lawn
needs mowing.}
No comments:
Post a Comment