Gwynne Dyer: Syria delivers the unexpected

    1 of 1 2 of 1

      When someone pulls a rabbit out of a hat, it’s natural to be suspicious. Magicians are professionals in deceitand so are diplomats. But sometimes the rabbit is real.

      On Monday (September 9) morning, the world was heading into the biggest crisis in years: a looming American attack on Syria, a Russian response that could set off the first major confrontation between Washington and Moscow since the Cold War, and the possible spread of the fighting from Syria to neighbouring countries. Or alternatively, a Congressional rejection of President Barack Obama’s plans that would have left him a lame duck for the next three years.

      By Tuesday (September 10) morning all that had changed. A Russian proposal for Syria to get rid of all its chemical weapons was promptly accepted by the Syrian foreign minister, Walid al-Moallem, and the Senate vote on Obama’s planned strikes on Syria was postponed, probably for weeks. If Syria keeps its word, the vote may never be held. What a difference a day makes.

      Now for the cavils. Nothing has been signed. Nothing has even been written up for signature. Maybe Syria is just playing for time. Perhaps Obama will want to pursue the Syrian regime legally for the poison gas attacks that he claims it has already carried out (though he sounded very relieved on hearing the news and didn’t mention any “red lines”).

      The sequence of events, so far as can be made out, was as follows. At the Moscow G20 summit last week, Obama and Russian president Vladimir Putin had a one-to-one chat on the side at which one of them broached the possibility of persuading Syria to give up its chemical weapons entirely. Which one isn’t clear, and the idea was not pursued by either of them.

      Yet both men had reason to want such a thing, for the alternative was that Obama would lead the United States into another Middle Eastern war, not exactly what he was elected foror that he would not get Congressional approval to do so and end up completely discredited. Putin would feel obliged to respond to a U.S. attack on his Syrian ally, but that could end up with Russian missiles shooting down American planes.

      There was then silence until Monday, when John Kerry, the U.S. Secretary of State, gave an off-the-cuff reply in London to a question about whether Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad could avoid an American attack. “Sure. He could turn over every bit of his (chemical) weapons to the international community within the next week, without delay,” said Kerry with a shrug. “But he isn’t about to.”

      Then Kerry got on a plane to fly home, and halfway across the Atlantic he got a call from the Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, saying that he was about to announce that Russia would ask Syria to put all its chemical weapons storage facilities under international control, join the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, and finally destroy them all.

      The Syrian foreign minister happened to be in Moscow, so within an hour he declared that Assad’s regime “welcomes Russia’s initiative, based on the Syrian government’s care about the lives of our people and security of our country.” By Monday evening Obama was saying that the Russian plan “could potentially be a significant breakthrough,” and the pot was off the boil.

      The whole thing, therefore, was made up on the fly. That doesn’t necessarily mean that it won’t work, but it is a proposal that comes without any of the usual preparation that precedes a major diplomatic initiative. The reason we don’t know the details is that there aren’t any. What we do know is that everybodyObama, Putin and Assadis clearly desperate to avoid going to war, and that gives us reason to hope.

      Two things that have to happen fast, if this rabbit is really going to run. First, Syria has to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention and ratify the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention right away. That could be done within a week, and it would legally commit it to getting rid of all its chemical weapons and the factories that make them.

      Secondly, the United Nations Security Council has to pass a resolution demanding that Syria reveal the size and location of its entire stock of chemical weapons and place them under international control. France has already put such a resolution on the Security Council’s agenda; the test will be whether Russia vetoes it. It probably won’t.

      There is a great deal of suspicion in Washington that this is merely a delaying tactic meant to stall an American attack and sap the already weak popular support in the United States for military action. Moreover, it will be hard to send international troops in to secure Syria’s chemical weapons (at least 40 storage sites, plus some weapons in the hands of military units) unless there is a ceasefire in the civil war now raging all over the country.

      But the American military will be pleased, because they were really unhappy about the job that Obama was giving them, and Obama himself looks like a man who has been granted a new lease of life. There will be time to try to make this work.

      Comments

      15 Comments

      Sue

      Sep 10, 2013 at 11:01am

      So basically, tell the guy who just mass murdered over 1000 of his own citizens, including 100's of young children, in the most horrific and painful way to give up his weapons and we'll not retaliate!!?

      Enough with the milquetoast negotiations... flatten this fuckin guys regime today - end it already without hesitation! Cut the head off the snake, THEN go in and get the chemical weapons.

      I Chandler

      Sep 10, 2013 at 12:08pm

      "Perhaps Obama will want to pursue the Syrian regime legally for the poison gas attacks that he claims it has already carried out "

      Turkish security forces found a 2kg cylinder with sarin gas in the homes of Syrian militants. The gas was reportedly going to be used in a bomb.

      A improvised weapon with a cylinder fixed to rocket here is shown here:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dkamZg68jpk#t=770

      DR-Montreal

      Sep 10, 2013 at 4:09pm

      All this feigned revulsion and horror from the very people that purvey the stuff globally, including white phosphorus ("Willy Pete", used by the US Army against Falluja in Iraq and Israel in Gaza).

      Sarin gas is no complex high tech WMD in any case, as some nutjob cultist in Japan demonstrated, ordering his cult followers to make the stuff and dispense it on the Tokyo subway.

      Death by gas, burning petroleum jelly, or "Willy Pete" which will burn to the bone even if you jump in a lake... which is the worst? Should we draw up a "disgust and horror" gauge as to which worse to die from in terms of the agony preceding death and judge those who use it accordingly?

      In fact it's all nauseatingly cruel, and the real criminals in all this are the pernicious arms manufacturers and merchants who distribute this evil to the world and sit well back, counting their profits.

      P.Peto

      Sep 10, 2013 at 7:29pm

      Perhaps it's too good to be true, if resolving the "crises" were that simple, why didn't the US suggest this in the first place? Why the brinkmanship?How ironic,that Putin,the evil dictator, has come to rescue the Middle East and perhaps the world. It's commendable that Syria would surrender it's only deterrent to Israel's Nuclear arsenal but perhaps they might expect some assurance from Israel and the US that they won't be attacked in the future, under the guise of some other alleged provocation. The US shouldn't expect to get something for nothing, even if it was only just a threat of war. Just wait, this isn't going anywhere,the US will refuse to bargain or give any assurance because the US neoliberal elite and APIC will not accept anything less than the complete subjugation and dissolution of the Syrian government so it can be made friendly to Israel and western corporate interests. It's not a rabbit; it's not even a glint of sunlight amid the gathering of dark storm clouds."Have a nice day."

      cassius

      Sep 11, 2013 at 4:29am

      Who knows? It could happen. The West co-existed with the Soviet Union and the "Beast of Budapest," Nikita Khruschov. He got that name for ruthlessly crushing the Hungarian Revolution. It could live with Assad. That's unfortunately the unhappy fate of those opposed to Assad - not everyone in Syria is. But no American attack would be "surgical." The war could spread. And may still. But did you notice the fleeting reference to Iran, the real enemy in U.S. eyes and the eyes of Israel, Saudi Arabia and the rest of them? Iran's not coming in from the cold. The agreement will not be a first step to a detente with Iran. Oh, and if the agreement takes shape, Obama promises to let the UN inspectors finish their report on the use of chemical weapons in Syria. After painting a Guernica-like picture of the atrocities the US says Assad and company committed, do you think Obama wants to be embarrassed by a report that paints a different picture? Meaning, the odds in favour of a military strike are 3-1.

      Dennis Ryan

      Sep 11, 2013 at 6:32am

      A big question comes to my mind about all this. This horrid chemical attack is the result of the Syrian uprising, part of the so-called "Arab spring". Yet the Assads have been in power in Syria long before this, and Syria has been a dictatorship, one of many in the region, for a long time. Is this really the first time Assad has abused his people, or have they always kept quiet, knowing that any uprising would be met
      with a ruthless putdown. It seems to me that this horrific incident is only the "icing on the cake" and that there's a hell of a lot more we should know, but don't. Big secrets are being kept by vested interests.

      RUK

      Sep 11, 2013 at 10:03am

      Sue, the use of chemical weapons is grotesque and a war crime. I believe that whoever is responsible should be brought to the international war crimes tribunal in the Hague, which has the jurisdiction to make findings of fact and to make punishments. I also believe that as private citizens in a foreign country, we are entitled to be shocked by this horrific human rights abuse, and to pressure our government to put pressure on Syria to fix their troubles.

      What I have a problem with is punishing Assad by bombing people who, by definition, are mostly not Assad.

      There is also the law of unintended consequences as Rumsfeld notes. The good guys and bad guys change all the time. Remember when the Russians were the bad guys in Afghanistan and those fierce warrior rebels were the good ones? Who then became Al-Qaida.

      Finally, bombing sets a very bad example. Al-Qaida thinks that it is alright to bomb Western targets because the West, offensively, maintains military power in the territory of what they hope will be a reunited caliphate. They think this sincerely. They think the punishment is justified.

      We think Al-Qaida is full of shit for using bombs to make their point. So what can we offer as a counterexample? More bombs? It can't be the way.

      Now, of course, if a Syrian air strike were to be launched against on our territory, then I would be in favour of using arms - heck, of using massive retaliation. But that's not the situation here.

      I Chandler

      Sep 11, 2013 at 10:24am

      If Kerry wants to run for president, he must first create a Middle East Study Task Force, for the purpose of writing an encyclopedic history of US - Middle East Relations, 1980–2013. He then might have a friend leak it...

      Former CIA station chief, John Stockwell , predicted the end of the cold war in Red Sunset, published in 1982. Secret Wars are nothing new. In CIA's War on Humans, John Stockwell describes how the CIA encouraged minorities to fight many decades ago:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3ioJGMCr-Y

      aMonster

      Sep 11, 2013 at 3:05pm

      I suppose that someone along the way should tell the Syrian rebels the truth, that we in the West really only care about containing the civil war from spilling into other countries. We do not want the Syrian government to fall because we think religious fanatics might take over and while we'd really be quite pleased to see Assad gone as leader, that too is of lesser importance than containment.

      I Chandler

      Sep 12, 2013 at 10:13am

      Another false flag...Assad not Responsible for Ghouta Sarin Gas Attack, Says Freed Belgian Hostage Pierre Piccinin:

      "Piccinin said that he and fellow hostage Domenico Quirico, an Italian war reporter, heard their jailers talking about the chemical weapon attack and saying that Assad was not to blame."

      http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/504735/20130909/syria-chemical-attack-...