President Obama boasts that Russia and Syria would not be willing to consider the surrender of Syria's chemical weapons had it not been for administration's "credible threat of military force."
Wrong.
Eight years before the Syrian civil war broke out, President Bashar al-Assad, backed by most of the Arab world, proposed that the Middle East be turned into a weapons-of mass-destruction-free zone. Biological and nuclear weapons, as well as chemical weapons, would have been banned and current stockpiles destroyed. Syria proposed this in 2003 in the form of a Security Council resolution, but it was not the first time it floated the idea.
What happened in 2003?
The resolution was tabled after the Bush administration threatened to veto it. Why the veto threat? Because Israel had -- and has -- no intention of giving up its weapons of mass destruction, including its nuclear arsenal of at least 200 warheads. In fact, Israel won't even acknowledge what everyone knows: that it possesses this massive and deadly arsenal. American usually defers to Israel at the UN (and everywhere else). It would be political suicide not to. (Activists from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee are currently swarming the halls of Congress lobbying for a U.S. war against Syria, with Iran next in line.)
Thus many years ago Syria was willing to get rid of its chemical weapons without being under threat of military force. All it asked was that other states in the region possessing unconventional weapons -- such as Israel and Egypt, which are not parties to the various conventions on such weapons -- get rid of theirs.
Would the Obama administration threaten to veto the same resolution today? What do you think?
Showing posts with label chemical weapons. Show all posts
Showing posts with label chemical weapons. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
Friday, September 06, 2013
TGIF: The Cynical U.S. Policy on Chemical Weapons
President Obama says an attack on Syria would send a message condemning Bashar al-Assad's alleged use of chemical weapons. But given the U.S. government's curious record on chemical weapons, the world is likely to get a different message.
Read it here.
Read it here.
Friday, August 30, 2013
Now I Understand
I just listened to Secretary State John Kerry's speech on Syria and chemical weapons. He pointed out that such weapons were banned internationally after Word War I. That sheds light on a question that has bugged me for a long time. Now I see why Harry Truman dropped two A-bombs on Japan in 1945: Chemical weapons were illegal.
Labels:
atomic bomb,
chemical weapons,
nuclear weapons
Two Items Related to Syria
Op-ed: "U.S. Has No Moral Standing To Condemn Assad"
TGIF: "Obama and King" (Portuguese translation here.)
TGIF: "Obama and King" (Portuguese translation here.)
Labels:
chemical weapons,
empire,
intervention,
noninterventionism,
Syria,
war
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
