" Obama Holds Fire on Syria, Waits on Russia Plan: "

 

        WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama told Americans Tuesday he would pursue a newly energized diplomatic course to try to resolve the standoff with Syria, but he insisted that the U.S. must conduct military strikes, if needed, in response to the Assad regime's alleged use of chemical weapons.
Mr. Obama said in a televised address that he asked Congress to postpone a vote on a resolution to authorize military force, which he looked likely to lose. Instead he said he would reserve the option of military strikes while pursuing a Russian proposal for Syria to hand over its chemical-weapons under an international agreement.
"It's too early to tell whether this offer will succeed," Mr. Obama said, "and any agreement must verify that the Assad regime keeps its commitments."
Mr. Obama's address, which showed no immediate sign of changing minds in Congress, came on a day of fast-moving developments in which U.S. lawmakers and officials from France, Russia and other nations scrambled to develop proposals under which Syria would relinquish its chemical weapons.

 
         Syria for the first time directly admitted that it possesses chemical weapons and said it would cease their production and disclose the locations of the stockpiles to the international community, including the United Nations and Russia, which is at the center of the negotiations.
         While Mr. Obama agreed to explore the possibility of a Syrian chemical-weapons handover, his administration expressed skepticism that a deal could be reached, and a dispute emerged quickly among members of the U.N. Security Council over how such a measure could be enforced, with France seeking language that leaves military action on the table and Russia rejecting such a move.
          Secretary of State John Kerry, who will meet Thursday with his Russian counterpart in Geneva to continue talks, told Congress Tuesday that reaching any agreement on details of a chemical-weapons plan would be "exceedingly difficult."
The speech showed Mr. Obama trying to navigate a difficult political environment. With support for military strikes eroding in Congress, and the president facing the prospect of an embarrassing defeat, Mr. Obama said he was committed to pursuing negotiations to rid Syria of chemical weapons that only days ago had seemed to come to a dead end.

          At the same time, he sought to build support during his 15-minute address for the idea that strikes could be needed, as he discussed the Syrian regime's alleged chemical-weapons attack on Aug. 21 that the U.S. says killed more than 1,400 of its own citizens, including children, outside Damascus.
"Let me make something clear: The United States military doesn't do pinpricks,'' he said. "Even a limited strike will send a message to Assad that no other nation can deliver." He said he had ordered the military "to maintain our current posture and to be in a position to respond if diplomacy fails."
        At the same time, Mr. Obama acknowledged that the limits of U.S. power to resolve the Syrian civil war and that military action, "no matter how limited, is not going to be popular'' after the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He said any U.S. action would be constrained: "I will not put American boots on the ground in Syria,'' he said. "I will not pursue an open-ended action like Iraq or Afghanistan…This would be a targeted strike to achieve a clear objective: deterring the use of chemical weapons and degrading Assad's capabilities."
        Initial reaction to Mr. Obama's speech suggested that he hadn't changed minds in Congress.
        Rep. Trey Radel (R., Fla.) said the speech hadn't altered his stance that taking military action against Syria would be a mistake. "It still leaves me and the American people confused," Mr. Radel, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said after the speech, pointing to what he described as conflicting descriptions from the administration of how much force would be used in Syria. "Is this a slap on the wrist or is it an actual bombing campaign?"
        Sen. Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.), who had opposed a Senate resolution authorizing military force in Syria, said his position hadn't shifted. "If you think military might and money will change the outcome in that part of the world, then we'd have done it by now," Mr. Manchin said in an interview after the speech. He said he was encouraged by the president's talk of diplomatic options.
        Senate Armed Services Chairman Sen. Carl Levin (D., Mich.) said he supported the president's diplomatic efforts but that Congress should still vote to support a military strategy to keep up pressure on Syria.

        After the diplomatic opening materialized Monday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) canceled an initial test vote in the Senate for Wednesday. On Tuesday, after meeting with the president and Senate Democrats at the Capitol, Mr. Reid said the vote has been put on hold indefinitely, pending the outcome of diplomatic efforts.

         President Obama agreed to explore a Russian-backed proposal that would have Syria hand over its chemical weapons, while senators are working on alternative legislation regarding U.S. intervention. Justin Vogt, senior editor at Foreign Affairs, joins the News Hub to discuss. 

     "Gauri Kesarwani."

       PGDM- 1st sem

      10-sep-2013.