Home > Uncategorized > Kerry Just Took the Teeth Out of the Syria Deal

Kerry Just Took the Teeth Out of the Syria Deal

September 18, 2013 Leave a comment Go to comments

This afternoon (Sept 17) in Paris, Secretary of State John Kerry announced that the United Nations, not the United States, would be enforcing the terms of the Syria chemical weapons deal agreed to this 08012013_Kerry_Israel_Palestine_articleweekend.

Kerry said that the United States, France and Great Britain “will not tolerate avoidance or anything less than full compliance.” Kerry, while visiting Israel this past weekend, also said that the “the threat of force is real” if Syria does not comply with the terms of the deal.

But by giving enforcement power to the United Nations, Kerry has essentially invalidated any threats of force by the United States. This is for a very simple reason: any use of force authorized by the United Nations needs Russia’s approval. And events in recent weeks show that Vladimir Putin is not likely to budge from his position that military forced should not be used.

Details about how the agreement would be enforced were vague all weekend. Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that the agreement would be backed by a U.N. Security Council resolution but gave no details on what that resolution would include as punishment for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s non-compliance.

Had the agreement been enforced by the United States, President Obama could authorize military strikes if Assad refused to surrender his chemical weapons. Now, the most likely punishments are sanctions against his government.

This is precisely why the terms of the Syrian deal were met with skepticism in Israel. Lawmakers there said they were excited by the prospect that a long-time regional ally would be stripped of its chemical weapons. But they were not optimistic that Assad could be trusted.

Israeli Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz called the proposal “substantive” but warned, “We know Assad. All kinds of things could happen.”

Avigdor Lieberman, chairman of the Israeli parliament’s foreign affairs and defense committee, said the only option now was to wait to see if Assad complies.

“After we see the list of what Assad has handed over in a week, we can know if his intentions are serious or if it is just deception,” Lieberman told Israeli Army Radio.

The U.S. and its closest allies laid out a two-pronged approach in Syria on Monday (Sept 16), calling for U.N. benchmarks for eradicating the country’s chemical weapons program and an international conference bolstering the moderate opposition, the following video clip:



DAVID FRANCIS – The Fiscal Times
September 16, 2013
Related link – http://tinyurl.com/lkq4uyz
  1. Thomas W. Gatus
    September 18, 2013 at 3:33 pm

    For quite awhile, headlines said President Obama was backed into a corner on the Syria problem. I’d say he’s proven to be the best chess player in the Middle East. Effectively, he manouvered the UN into a lead position on the issue – not the US. He’s pulled the US out of an immediate military confrontation in that part of the world for which half of his constituent voters agree. And now that the UN inspectors have confirmed the Syrian army’s use of sarin gas, the UN can not walk away without losing all credibility around the entire world. Yet President Obama claims to reserve the right to attack if all of the agreed chemical weapons are not destroyed. President Obama has taken the moral high ground which is forcing the world to stand up to a mass murderer. Stop demanding a short term solution that only serves DID’s Iranian oposition’s interest. When Syria changes, as it will have to, even if it turns into a political mess, Iran’s regional power will be substantially diminished.

    • September 18, 2013 at 8:36 pm

      How do you explain the almost 3-years of US admin’s delay on Syria dilemma (initially started by seculars, seeking freedom and democracy), which by now has resulted in the mass murder of +130,000 people, more than 2,000 chemically attacked civilians, and +2,000,000 refugees! Plus converting Syria into a battleground between the criminal Assad regime and the sectarians including Islamist extremists, IRGC, Al-Qaeda, Al-Nusra, which is going to plow the whole region of Middle East.

      It would be too naive to say this delay is simply a matter of US Administration’s negligence; there should be some roadmap policy behind this delay!!! GO FIGURE!

      • Thomas W. Gatus
        September 18, 2013 at 10:53 pm

        First, let me say I don’t have to explain anything. You know America is tired of Middle East wars and muddling. Obama is President of the United States, no place else. Why haven’t the countries and people living in the Middle East not taken some responsibility for solving these issues themselves? Why should more Americans die for centuries old, unresolved tribal wars? Your good at bombast and numbers but how many people died in Libya under Gaddafi? Under Mubarak how many disappeared? Under Sadam who gassed his own? Aren’t these tragedies that no one in the region had the resolve to address? Are you so naive to believe the Syrian dilemma just began with “seculars, seeking freedom and democracy”? Every country in that region is totally infiltrated by the powers of darkness. No one has clean hands. How can you be allies with people you can’t trust. Even the Shah, in his last book, commented on the extent of lying and subterfuge in Iran. This is a total mess that people in the region are going to have to dig themselves out of. No one is going to do it for them.

      • September 18, 2013 at 11:45 pm

        Oh, give me a big break! Since when the affairs of 3rd world countries are left for their own people to decide? It’s a very naive statement to say that the World Powers (led by US of course) leave these countries alone, they would have never done that and never will as long as the dirty OIL exists in there, mainly Middle East countries.
        It is not the first time that Western countries intervene in 3rd world countries’ internal affairs, you probably heard about 1953 US Coup in Iran, CIA has just released the documents on that few weeks ago. You think these IRI terrorist mullahs have occupied Iran in 1978 on its people’s wish! No way, it was a joint conspiracy by US, Britain, France, and Germany in Paris-Guadalupe conference to get rid of Shah. That was a strategy that they need to use at the time against the Red Soviet Union during the cold war to keep it from access to warm water, among other geopolitical purposes.

        So please don’t tell me that Uncle Sam is an innocent angel and has no concern in other countries’ businesses. On the contrary everything that happens in Middle East is because of some Western Powers’ (led by US and Britain of course) manipulation in the region. The Arab spring’s domino effect was actually couldn’t end up where they are today without the West’s manipulation and their secret control of the conflict. All the mess that we witness in Middle East region today is because of their covert intervention, even when the good secular people find the will to initiate the right course of action in their countries toward reaching freedom and democracy, the US government which is actually run by greedy lobbyists representing oil cartels, rich bankers, arms companies, and corporate owners, etc, who just think of their own pockets, do not allow them to go through with it because of the conflict of interest.

      • Thomas W. Gatus
        September 19, 2013 at 10:35 am

        If you want an example of when a 3rd world country could have decided its own destiny, then I would offer Iran as an example in 1953 when the Tudeh Party shifted support away from Mossadegh and actively worked to defeat him. I find it interesting that Tudeh and the Soviet Union rarely get coverage for many of the problems they created in modern Iran. Tudeh and the Communist played a major role in defeating the Shah, and they got outflanked by Khomeini whose form of theocracy has made Iran what it is today.

        I’m not saying there were not other international events at play, or that the British weren’t abusive to BP Iranian employees which is what drew America into the battle with British proclamations that Iran was becoming a communist country. The British tried selling Truman that bill of goods but he didn’t bite, in fact, he’d given money to fight malaria in Iran, so they waited for Eisenhower to take office before trying to sell the communist threat, rather than the commercial aspects of strikes and loss of revenue.

        As for the Arab Spring, I’d say technology had more to do than US meddling. Of course the US was happy to see some of the long time dictators ousted, but with the advent of cell phone cameras and texting, word got around instantly and couldn’t be stifled by Arab governments quick enough.

        I understand your frustration with the situation. I’m frustrated too that my entire life has seen nothing but bloodshed and war at various levels in the Middle East and Maghreb. But leaders of all these countries have plenty of blame to go around as they played local and regional politics – and kept a lot of the dirty oil money for themselves instead of building infrastructure in the way of schools, health and human services.

      • September 19, 2013 at 5:27 pm

        You need to check the released CIA document “CIA Confirms Role in 1953 Iranian Coup“, which indicates that US indeed acted against the will of Iranian nationalists by providing not only the strategy but the logistics to overthrow Mossadeq. Also I have enough documents on US role in bringing the terrorist Khomeini’s regime to power in Iran in 1978.

        The prime mover motivation for the Western Powers to start war or meddle in the 3rd world countries has been: Communism and Oil

        Communism has gone away but Islamic terrorism that was introduced and initiated by US government in Afghanistan and Iran has now taken over the world. It makes me sick to my stomach that Western Powers (led by US) not only do not care much about their threats as they claim they do in public, but they still haven’t learned their lessons and support the Islamic groups in different M.E. countries to the point of encouraging and facilitating the conditions for them to take over the governments in their countries, examples are: Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, Tunisia, etc. This strategy is because of geopolitics of Oil, they know that Muslim world has no respect and enthusiasm for nationalism, they are aware of the fact that it would be incomprehensible for nationalist groups, if they take over the country, to easily allow the Imperialism to plunder their country’s natural wealth. The era for Imperialism to use their secular dictator subordinates in the 3rd world countries (like Shah) has come to an end, now they prefer to use new puppets, the Islamic groups of moderate kind of course!!

        So regardless of what you think, oil is still and will be, for at least couple of centuries (or until a new source of energy replaces oil), the key factor for the Western Powers to tailor their roadmap policy in those countries with oil reserves, and they don’t hesitate to tackle any obstacle on their way of achieving it.

      • Thomas W. Gatus
        September 20, 2013 at 12:29 pm

        OK. What did the CIA paper say about Tudeh’s responsibility for destabilizing Mossadeq? This was a home grown political play by Iranian Tudeh, no? And the British and Americans got involved, yes because the Americans thought Mossadeq’s weakness was allowing the communist to gain more power in Iran against their mortal enemy, Stalin, who was able to gobble up half of Europe. So, to my initial example of a country that could have gone its own path, it was basically the Iranian’s who failed to see the wider consequences in that political climate.

        If you’d like another 3rd world country with oil riches that hasn’t been brow beaten by the West, look at Nigeria. A lot of oil flows out, and money flows in – but the people get no benefit. Great Powers don’t have to arm the region because Nigeria sells oil commercially and pose no threat to their neighbors. Nor do they constantly rail against the West as did Chavez who hypocritically sold a huge amounts of oil to the US without any physical threat except what he stirred up for domestic public opinion.

        As for the longevity of “dirty oil”, I believe your estimation of it lasting two more centuries is over stated. It’s a finite resource and has taken oil companies further and further into deep water, literally and figuratively.

  2. September 21, 2013 at 5:10 am

    Your hypothetical analysis was triply false:
    1. You assumed that Mossadeq was losing control of the situation at the time, which is not true; this is only an excuse that the monarchists use to make to justify the coup and the return of escaped Shah. Toudeh Party was small part of the Iranian population, while the majority people of Iran (as Brzezinski admitted in his interview with Fareed Zakaria) have been nationalists and still are, and so they loved Mossadeq because of his great devotion to nationalism. Iranians knew that if Mossadeq was strong enough to stand against the old Imperialist Britain, he was also as resilient to stand against communism.

    2. I bring to your attention your own statement in your second comment, where you said:
    “Why haven’t the countries and people living in the Middle East not taken some responsibility for solving these issues themselves?”
    The answer to your question is: If the Imperialism allows them to do so!!!!!! Hello!!!!!!!!!!! Does it ring the bell?!!! Why should US be worried about communism taking over Iran??? By sure it was not because they sympathize with Iranians, it was part of their strategic move of Capitalism against communism during the cold war. I’ve already verified this issue in my prior comments, but it looks like you don’t read them in depth! I repeat my sentence here:
    The prime mover motivation for the Western Powers to start war or meddle in the 3rd world countries has been: Communism and Oil
    These two factors was the prime mover for West led by US to meddle in Iran twice: first in 1953 for Oil, then in 1978 for banning communism’s progress toward warm water

    3. Again you overlook my prior comment. Believe me if any 3rd world country (including Nigeria) in the world had a Mossadeq to stand against Imperialism, no doubt there would have been a West (led by US) intervention, similar to the 1953 coup in Iran, in that country. This is exactly my point, it doesn’t matter who is running a 3rd world country, if he cares for his people or not, if he is a dictator or not, ………, he has to be a subordinate (puppet) of the Word Powers so that they have the tranquility on having the guarantee on flowing oil out of the country under their conditions. Of course this way everything from outside about that county would seem calm and peaceful but with the cost of the misery and wretchedness for its own people. However as I said before, which I repeat my prior statement here:
    The era for Imperialism to use their secular dictator subordinates in the 3rd world countries (like Shah) has come to an end, now they prefer to use new puppets, the Islamic groups of moderate kind of course!!

    This is the same dream that US have in mind about Iran, securing a moderate Islamic regime, but they don’t know yet about the genuine Iranian nationalists, which their numbers are not small, many of them have been slaughtered by the terrorist IRI regime since June 2009 uprising because of the lack of the international support, which of course was a regime’s favor for the West and US in particular, since the West cannot stand nationalists anywhere in the 3rd world countries. But the good news is that the West led by US has to run over the dead bodies of these nationalists to achieve such goal of theirs, which won’t be that easy. There is only one way for the West, they have to start not only respecting but supporting the rights of secular nationalists in the 3rd world countries, until then the world will never witness the peace.

    It appears that you don’t read my comments in depth, which make me to repeat my comments again and again, also it seems like you have plenty of time to kill by writing your comments on this post over and over, unfortunately I don’t have that privilege, so let’s kindly stop writing our comments here.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: