We will regret our show of weakness

Published 9:15 pm Thursday, September 19, 2013

 

President Barack Obama showed weakness and a lack of resolve in his handling of Syria; that’s now bearing fruit, as a gleeful Iran says it wants “greater cooperation” with the West on its nuclear program.

It’s clearly a delaying tactic and an attempt by Iran to get international sanctions lifted. And why not? As Obama demonstrated, it just takes a little bit of “diplomacy” to get the nation’s last superpower to back down.

Even Obama’s staunchest allies acknowledge he bungled the Syria crisis.

“The Russian-American deal to destroy Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal gives President Obama some breathing space after a politically damaging few weeks,” Peter Baker wrote in the New York Times. “But the list of things that could still go wrong is extensive and daunting.”

What could go wrong?



“The two sides could deadlock over the text of a United Nations Security Council resolution codifying the agreement,” Baker explains. “Syria could insist on deal-breaking conditions or fail to turn over a complete accounting of its weapons within a week, as mandated. International inspectors could be obstructed on the ground or chemical stocks could be hidden from them.”

In fact, those conditions have already been imposed, by implication. Russia — seriously, Russia — is the key peacemaker here, and Russia won’t move forward with the plan unless the U.S. pledges to take a military strike off the table.

Not that a military strike, as outlined by the U.S. Secretary of State, was very intimidating. As the administration sought to gain support from its own party, it downplayed the size of any strike. John Kerry said it would be an “unbelievably small, limited kind of effort.”

That must have had the rogue dictator Bashar Assad quivering with fear.

By no measure was this embarrassing episode a victory for Obama.

“No one can rely on Russian promises and Syrian good will,” Ruth Marcus noted in the Washington Post. “This may well be a bullet only temporarily dodged, a pause in the crisis rather than a signpost of its solution. Even a successful outcome of a chemical weapons deal risks the perverse impact of further entrenching a regime that has murdered tens of thousands of its own people.”

After Obama unconvincingly declared victory on a Sunday talk show, Iran saw its chance. On Monday, it announced it wanted to resolve the nuclear issue.

“New Iranian atomic energy chief Ali Akbar Salehi pledged greater cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog, delivering a conciliatory message before talks this month about activities that the West suspects are aimed at developing a nuclear weapons capability,” Reuters reported. “Iran was also optimistic that broader negotiations with major powers could achieve a deal if the parties came with good intentions, Salehi told the annual meeting of the 159-nation International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).”

The Obama administration “welcomed” this, but said Iran must “match words with action.”

Whatever for? As the administration has demonstrated, all it takes to get the United States to back down is a few words and maybe the endorsement of Russia (Syria’s and Iran’s protector).

We’re now reaping what Obama sowed.