Posts
| Daily News Brief August 26, 2013 |
Top of the Agenda: U.S., British Militaries Prep for Strikes on Syria
Britain's Royal Navy is preparing to join U.S. forces in a possible campaign of cruise missile strikes on Syrian military and government targets (Telegraph)
in response to alleged chemical weapons use by the Assad regime last
week that killed hundreds of civilians. U.S. president Barack Obama
spoke to his counterparts in the UK and France over the weekend about
addressing the use of the taboo weapon, and Washington rebuffed Syria's
agreement to allow a UN team to inspect the site where chemical weapons
were reportedly used, saying it was "too late to be credible" (WSJ).
Syrian president Bashar al-Assad said that the accusations were an
"insult to common sense" and warned the United States that if it were to
intervene in Syria, it would fail just as it had in wars from "Vietnam and up to the present day" (NYT).
Analysis
"Maintaining
a stalemate [in Syria] should be America's objective. And the only
possible method for achieving this is to arm the rebels when it seems
that Mr. Assad's forces are ascendant and to stop supplying the rebels if they actually seem to be winning," writes Edward N. Luttwak in the New York Times.
"After last week—described by Mr. Obama as 'a big event of grave concern'—the world will be watching to see if it is indeed true there are no limits.
Because, if there are none for Mr. Assad, then there will be none for
tyrants elsewhere who learn this lesson of international impunity and
emulate his depravity," writes David Gartner in the Financial Times.
"Whatever the case, the alleged use of WMDs in Syria must not be made a pretext for illegal intervention. There is no basis in international law
for drawing 'red lines'—as U.S. President Barack Obama has done—the
crossing of which would permit the unilateral use of force without U.N.
Security Council authorization," writes the Hindu in an editorial.
No comments:
Post a Comment