Obama
‘not yet made a decision’ on Syria as UK political rows stall
intervention
Facing
strong opposition in the UK parliament, military action against the
Syrian regime over the alleged use of chemical weapons could be
delayed. Meanwhile, US president Barack Obama said he has not yet
made a final decision about the military attack.
RT,
28
August, 2013
On
Thursday, the House of Commons will be asked by the government to
approve a "strong humanitarian response" to the Syrian
government’s alleged war crimes.
However,
British opposition leader Ed Miliband said he would call on his MPs
to vote against the government motion if the amendment calling for
the delay of any military action is defeated, the Guardian reports.
"We
will continue to scrutinise this motion but at 5.15pm David Cameron
totally ruled out a second vote, an hour and a half later he changed
his mind,” a Labour source told the Guardian. “Ed was determined
to do the right thing. It has taken Labour forcing a vote to force
the government to do the right thing."
The
delay of parliamentary approval could push back the military response
timetable until next Tuesday when MPs are expected to have another
vote.
Among
other conditions the Labour Party said it would support military
action only if members of the UN Security Council saw the chemical
weapons inspectors report first.
“The
United Nations Security Council must have the opportunity immediately
to consider that briefing and that every effort should be made to
secure a Security Council Resolution backing military action before
any such action is taken,” the motion says.
Obama:
'No final decision yet'
Meanwhile,
US President Obama said he has not made a decision on whether to
order a strike in Syria, although the US has concluded that the
Syrian government carried out chemical weapons attacks near Damascus
last week.
"We
have not yet made a decision, but the international norm against the
use of chemical weapons needs to be kept in place,” Obama said in
an interview with PBS Wednesday evening.
Obama
said direct military engagement with Syrian forces during their civil
conflict would not ease tensions on the ground.
"If
we are saying in a clear and decisive but very limited way, we send a
shot across the bow saying, stop doing this, that can have a positive
impact on our national security over the long term," he said.
Obama
disavowed an open-ended conflict with Syria while reiterating that
those who use chemical weapons must be held responsible.
"I
have no interest in any open-ended conflict in Syria, but we do have
to make sure that when countries break international norms on weapons
like chemical weapons that could threaten us, that they are held
accountable," Obama said, adding that Syria has "one of the
largest stockpiles in the world of chemical weapons.”
While
the UN team is still due to release any details of the August 21
chemical attack, Obama has claimed that the US, having “looked at
all the evidence,” does not believe the opposition possesses
chemical weapons “of that sort.”
“We
do not believe that, given the delivery systems, using rockets, that
the opposition could have carried out these attacks,” Obama said.
“We have concluded that the Syrian government in fact carried these
out. And if that’s so, then there need to be international
consequences.”
In
a US State Department briefing Wednesday, a spokesperson admitted the
department does not know who in the Syrian government could have
ordered the chemical attack.
"The
commander-in-chief of any military is ultimately responsible for
decisions made under their leadership, even if ... he's not the one
that pushes the button or said, 'Go,' on this," Marie Harf said.
"I don't know what the facts are here. I'm just, broadly
speaking, saying that he is responsible for the actions of his
regime. I'm not intimately familiar with the command and control
structure of the Syrian military. I'm just not. But again, he is
responsible ultimately for the decisions that are made."
Earlier,
US Speaker of the House John Boehner has written a letter to
President Obama asking for clarification on a host of questions ahead
of any attack on Syria.
"Now,
having again determined your red line has been crossed, should a
decisive response involve the use of the United States military, it
is essential that you provide a clear, unambiguous explanation of how
military action – which is a means, not a policy – will secure US
objectives and how it fits into your overall policy."
Russia
urges patience on ‘all necessary measures’ UN resolution on Syria
Earlier
on Wednesday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov urged his UK
counterpart William Hague to wait for the results of the UN chemical
weapons inspection in Syria, before submitting a Security Council
resolution that would permit the use of force against Bashar Assad.
Hague
phoned Lavrov on Wednesday night, hours after presenting a resolution
to use “all necessary measures under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter to
protect civilians from chemical weapons.”
Chapter
7 allows the use of military force.
The
UK, the United States and the Arab League believe that on August 21,
Syria’s government forces launched a chemical attack against
civilians in a suburb of Damascus. Medical aid agency Doctors without
Borders says at least 355 people died after a toxic gas release.
A
United Nations chemical weapons inspection is currently underway in
the Syrian capital, and is expected to produce a report on the
alleged attack by Sunday at the latest.
The
five members of the UN Permanent Security Council – which will have
the final say in whether any resolution is implemented – met in New
York on Wednesday, to unofficially discuss the text of the draft
resolution.
None
of the officials present revealed the result of the talks, though
earlier this week Lavrov warned against military intervention “in
line with the Libya and Iraq scenario.” He has also claimed to be
unconvinced by US assertions that government forces were behind the
attack.
United
Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has also urged the sides to let
the inspectors, who he said had “collected valuable samples,”
finish their job, before submitting any proposal for intervention.
“Give
diplomacy a chance,” he pleaded in a televised statement.
Meanwhile,
Washington sources claim the White House is preparing to present a
portfolio of evidence indicting the government for the chemical
attack in the coming days. Among the materials that are expected to
be made public are intercepted phone conversations, photos and
eyewitness accounts from August 21.
Obama
"Concludes" That Assad Carried Out Chemical Attack
28
August, 2013
One
week after the fact, without the UN inspectors having completed their
job, and without any actual evidence presented to the general
public...
And
also this:
- OBAMA SAYS U.S. CONCLUDED SYRIAN GOVT WAGED CHEMICAL ATTACK
- OBAMA SAYS U.S. CONCLUDES SYRIAN OPPOSITION LACKS CHEMICAL ARMS
- OBAMA SAYS HE'S RECEIVED OPTIONS FROM PENTAGON ON SYRIA
- OBAMA CITES NEED FOR `PRETTY STRONG SIGNAL' TO SYRIA'S ASSAD
- OBAMA SAYS DIRECT MILITARY INVOLVEMENT WON'T HELP END CIVIL WAR
- OBAMA SPEAKS IN INTERVIEW WITH PBS
It
is unclear if he was using a teleprompter at the time
Here’s
What Candidate Obama Said About Military Intervention In 2007
Q.
In what circumstances, if any, would the president have
constitutional authority to bomb Iran without seeking a use-of-force
authorization from Congress? (Specifically, what about the strategic
bombing of suspected nuclear sites — a situation that does not
involve stopping an IMMINENT threat?)
Obama:
The President does not have power under the Constitution to
unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not
involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.
- Interview with Charlie Savage, December 20, 2007
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.