Powered by WebAds

Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Obama administration eases up on Syria again

Well what a surprise. The Obama administration has eased up on its criticism of Syria. It's no longer calling for Assad to go.
But Clinton backed off on Saturday, saying the administration still hopes that Assad's regime will stop the violence and work with protesters to carry out political reforms. On Monday, European Union ministers also called on Assad to implement reforms and made it clear they still hoped he would do so.

The change in tone reflects the continuing debate over whether Syria's ruler is likely to survive the current turmoil, and how best to use the limited diplomatic tools available to pressure him.

For now, a State Department official said, it's unclear whether the administration will ramp up the rhetoric and officially call for Assad's departure.

"Whether we take it farther will depend on events on the ground," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivities. "We need to think through carefully what we say."
Why can't the administration make up its mind? Well, apparently it has, but it's too timid to enforce it.
U.S. officials say that although some administration officials, including Clinton, have pressed for a more forceful policy, others argue that the administration would look weak if Obama called for Assad's departure and nothing happened.

Obama has been demanding that Kadafi give up power in Libya since March, and the U.S. military is backing the North American Treaty Organization's air war against Kadafi's forces. But the Libyan leader remains in power.
How could Obama look any weaker than he does already? I suppose Syria, Iran and Venezuela could invade the United States....

Meanwhile, in yet another indication of how weak Obama appears, Syrian foreign minister Walid Moallem has warned US ambassador Robert Ford and French ambassador Eric Chevalier not to leave Damascus.
Syria's foreign minister has warned the U.S. and French ambassadors not to travel outside Damascus without permission.

Walid al-Moallem said Wednesday that if the ambassadors defy the orders, Syria will ban all diplomats from leaving the capital.

Earlier this month, the U.S. and French ambassadors traveled to the restive city of Hama, a stronghold of opposition to President Bashar Assad.

The Syrian government slammed the visit and said it was unauthorized. The regime accused the envoys of interfering in Syria's internal affairs.
Former National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams comments:
I understand the Administration’s desire not to urge people into the streets, lest there be a slaughter that we cannot halt or avert. But no one is suggesting that the president call for a mass uprising. U.S. policy needs only to show consistency and moral clarity.

I shudder to think how a Syrian protester must view the United States when he is risking his life and the secretary of state is still dreaming of “peaceful cooperation” from the government shooting him and his fellow demonstrators dead in the streets day after day. Mrs. Clinton’s remark about Assad’s loss of legitimacy was, we are told, unscripted. “The administration’s policy toward the Syrian autocrat has lately been shaped more by diplomatic improvisation than methodical planning within the White House,” the Washington Post reported.

This may explain why the secretary oscillates between tougher and weaker rhetoric and positions, but it is a terrible indictment of the Obama Administration foreign policy team that it cannot get its act together after thirty months in power. This Administration’s Syria policy has now moved from “improvisation” to incoherence.
Barack Hussein Obama is unwilling to face down Bashar al-Assad. Instead, he's hiding behind the United Nations, where he can count on Russian and Chinese vetoes to prevent anything from happening. He's turning the United States into a weak laughingstock, which will eventually result in dozens of free countries falling to Islamism and Communism. He calls it 'leading from behind.'

What could go wrong?

Labels: , , , , , , ,


At 5:43 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look, is Assad building illegal apartments for the jooz in the holy city of al-Quds? I think not! QED. Case closed!

At 10:41 PM, Blogger Sunlight said...

"What could go wrong?"

Well, not a blessed thing, from Obama's perspective. The marxist caliphate dream is what he is working for. People just can't bring themselves to believe it.

At 5:56 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

From the post; "Syria, Iran and Venezuela could invade the United States.." -------- If that happens I am afraid Obama would surrender.


Post a Comment

<< Home