Vladimir Putin Puts John Kerry In Check On Syria

[FarCenter]

On Monday, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said Syria could avoid an American attack by turning over "every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week."

Russia immediately jumped on the offer, as Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Moscow will urge Syria to place its chemical weapons under international control in a bid to avert military intervention.

This is a deft political move on Russia's part, especially since the State Department immediately walked back Kerry's comments by saying that he "was making a rhetorical argument about the impossibility and unlikelihood of Assad turning over chemical weapons he has denied he used."

The Wall Street Journal's Tom Gara observes that Russia is capitalizing on a "silly Kerry mistake," since even though Assad would never turn over chemical weapons, beginning such a process would serve an ideal delay to any U.S. decision to attack Syria.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-quickly-jumped-on-kerrys-rhetorical-offer-of-no-us-strike-if-assad-gives-up-chemical-weapons-2013-9

Or Putin is throwing Obama a fig-leaf with which to cover himself, should he choose to cut his losses.

[JustAnotherGen]

1. Or that was really

A death 'glare' from Obama last week telling Putin to get his boy under his control

[FarCenter]

9. Judo is about taking advantage of the attacker's mistakes.

[JustAnotherGen]

15. Obama doesn't know Judo - never heard that about him before.

Putin is more of that type (mid size galoot flexing his muscles with his shirt off) - whereas Obama is more a subtle, gentlemanly - yet MANLY - egghead.


Anyone with a black father (my dad was) . . . knows that 'glare' - daddy won't hit ya - but he sure is shit is pissed you aren't doing the right thing.

[FarCenter]

18. Putin has a black belt; Obama didn't have a black father.

Obama's parents separated when he was about 6 months old. The father figure in his life was Indonesian up to age 10 and white thereafter.

[JustAnotherGen]

35. It's instinct

And he IS a black father. I'm sure his daughters are quite familiar with that look. And he did have a black father and he's black/mulatto(a) like me. White wash him alllllllllllllllllll you want my friend - bu the had to survive on the same playground in the same era as I did.

You obviously can't relate to us or you wouldn't understand that smile . .. a bi-racial person with black heritage can give someone that is filled with pure venom. It's how we survied in the 60's, 70's, and 80's. It's why I can relate and identify with him - he's got true grit that when you are the only black kid on the playground and your dealing with a snot nosed bully who thinks he's better than you - you give to get by.

I'm sorry - I know some folks around here all but wish Puti was the President and running shit in America - but to me he is just a Plutocrat loving bully.

And since he is such a bully - he needs to bully his lackey into give up the weapons. He is totally loving this discourse - it's like he wants America to forget how he one upped us with his little spy Snowden.

[andym]

2. Interesting. Kerry is not in "check"; more like Kerry played a "gambit" and Putin accepted

which will much better than any strike.

There is a new article with Kerry backpedaling, suggesting that the gambit was "rhetorical" (an accident.) But who cares, something good can come of this.

[rdharma]

13. I agree with your assessment. nt

[Schema Thing]

3. Damn, you are worse at propaganda than Karl Rove!

[rdharma]

16. "Wall Street Journal's Tom Gara observes ......."

That tells you all you need to know about this right wing "spin job"!

[HappyMe]

4. More like Putin being told

to get his buddy Assad under control.

[markiv]

5. a Russian/American solution would be far better than

a restart of the Cold War

that's the big picture here

[leftstreet]

7. +1

[HereSince1628]

11. On its face it certainly seems to present an opportunity for cooperation

between Russia and the US.

I welcome this.

Getting control of the CW away from Assad/Syrian military actually does something to reduce the risk of cw to the Syrian people.

It's also a solution that minimizes damage to all parties and the damage is mostly the cost of the chemical weapons.

It's a path that brings the international community together.

It doesn't require the US to escalate its involvement in the Syrian civil war.

[TwilightGardener]

6. If Kerry threw it out there, and Russia and Assad immediately accepted, then

there may be more to it than meets the eye. I wouldn't assume anything yet. I wonder how Obama's public address will go, with this new move.

[blm]

8. This was more expected than many of you will want to admit.

For those paying attention to Syria matters over the past decade, we are NOT surprised.

http://www.rferl.org/content/syria-lavrov-kerry-geneva/25071543.html

[Avalux]

10. This is exactly what should be happening....

Syria's biggest supporter and supplier, Russia, pressuring them to turn over chemical weapons.

As I've been saying, Obama is a genius, even if getting to this point has freaked everyone out. Congress has a monkey on their back, and Russia will take action.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

12. Brilliant move by Putin. It gives the wavering congress critters a reason to vote "no".

[LittleBlue]

14. Assad has no better friend than Kerry

If anyone could convince the public that war is a bad idea, it's the bumbling, stumbling Kerry.

Putin has played this masterfully.

[stevenleser]

17. No one comes out of this looking like they won or lost. That's not a masterful play.

Putin had to back down from preventing any consequences to his buddy Assad.

Obama/Kerry and their supporters on Syria had to back down from military action.

Assad had to back down from keeping his chemical weapons stockpile.

It's the best outcome for those of us who didn't want war. Again, assuming all of this works out.

[LittleBlue]

20. Putin comes out of this the clear victor

Having deterred by threats the "bloodthirsty" Obama and "evil" America. Massive domestic political victory for him, expect his immense popularity to be even higher.

Kerry and Obama come out of this the big losers. They have backed themselves into a corner with a dilemma: backtrack and look weak, or start a deeply unpopular war.

The main difference between Obama and Putin is that Putin positions himself into situations he can win, where Obama does the opposite. Kerry's whirlwind push for war in DC has been amateur hour.

[stevenleser]

23. That is not a clear victory for him. A clear victory doesnt involve forcing your ally to give up

something. A clear victory would have been forcing the US to back down on a strike with no concessions from Assad.

Kerry and Obama have been given a completely face-saving out by this proposed compromise. I hope they recognize that and take it.

[LittleBlue]

29. What is he giving up?

Did you read the OP?

The Wall Street Journal's Tom Gara observes that Russia is capitalizing on a "silly Kerry mistake," since even though Assad would never turn over chemical weapons, beginning such a process would serve an ideal delay to any U.S. decision to attack Syria.

[stevenleser]

31. He is forcing his ally to give something up. Thats a compromise, not a clear victory. nt

[LittleBlue]

33. Know when to stop digging, Steve

the State Department immediately walked back Kerry's comments by saying that he "was making a rhetorical argument about the impossibility and unlikelihood of Assad turning over chemical weapons he has denied he used."

[stevenleser]

34. I think you should look in the mirror when you say Know when to stop digging". if the compromise

and that is what it is, a 'compromise' goes through, not only is it not a clear victory for Putin, its completely face saving for Obama and Kerry.

Everyone here on DU, those pro and anti the war, seems to recognize that except for you.

On edit, here is a good link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3629417
see responses

[HappyMe]

26. Wow.

That's some spinning there.

[LittleBlue]

28. It is correct

But if you prefer not to believe it, go right ahead.

[HappyMe]

32. Okay.

Don't let me stop your Pooty-mania.

[HereSince1628]

25. That seems true only under the "only a weak leader/nation changes their public position"

I know contemporary media interpretations of politics believe in that theorem, but there is no reason to believe that holding on to one's original position is at all useful in international politics.


If anyone understands changing their public positions it ought to be John Kerry.

[stevenleser]

30. I agree. In some cases the outcome is all that is important. If this goes through it might be one of

those. It's what I thought Bush should have done in March of 2003 when the UN Weapons inspector reports came out. Declare victory for your policy of trying to ensure X country did not have/use WMD and move on without war.

If Obama gets out of this that Russia forces Assad to give up its chemical weapons, its a qualified victory for Obama. He needs to take it and consider himself lucky that he was saved from himself here.

[HappyMe]

36. Yes, I agree.

I really don't understand the 'hooray for Putin' attitude here.

Putin and Assad are buddies. Putin is out to save Assad - that's all. Putin isn't the big hero here.

[stevenleser]

37. That person is the only one doing that. Everyone else on DU recognizes it for what it is.

Obama and Kerry would luck out if this were to happen.

[HappyMe]

39. They would luck out.

I'm hoping this happens for the simple reason that Assad won't gas anybody again. I really don't want to get dragged into yet another ME mess. I don't have much hope for peace there ever. Crap like this keeps happening there over and over.

[KittyWampus]

22. your need to spin anything and everything against Democrats is noted.

[stevenleser]

24. It's a really bizarre spin in this case. nt

[LittleBlue]

27. Your desperate push for war has been noted

[karynnj]

44. I think this is a possible break - it may be the world moving to avoid a strike from happening

There were several comments made yesterday and today where Kerry suggested that Obama might "listen to our friends" and wait for the UN report and he did not rule out trying again to get a UN resolution - here's a link. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/08/syria-john-kerry-un-resolution

[LittleBlue]

45. Avoiding war would be great

I think someone would have informed Susan Rice by now that an agreement has been accepted. She's demonizing Russia and pushing for military strikes live on TV.

http://live.reuters.com/Event/Syria_9

[Bobbie Jo]

38. +1000

Nailed it.

[lumpy]

40. Yes indeed. Some people give themselves away.

[karynnj]

43. I think people need t see that this source and the WSJ have pushed for war for 2 years

They also dishonestly distort the State Department comment. Apparently, the words - ""making clear its desire to strike could be tempered by a Syrian offer." have no meaning.

[ProSense]

19. UN Chief Urges Syria to Transfer Chemical Weapons

UN Chief Urges Syria to Transfer Chemical Weapons
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023629253

[lumpy]

41. Good to hear, pressure by UN on Assad might bring results.

[NCTraveler]

21. Don't see how he is putting him in check.

Looks more like Putin is willing to work to keep his buddy in power.

[karynnj]

42. This article is from the people who wanted an invasion for 2 years

This was not a "silly" Kerry mistake. Kerry and Obama have clarified many many times that this was because of the CW attack and the strike would be limited and designed to limit use of CW.

There have always been at least three camps - those (lets represent by McCain) who have been for a major strike, a small group (Obama, Kerry and people like Menendez and Boxer) who wanted a limited response, and a group that wanted no attack at all.

I would not call this a fig leaf - I would call it a big victory for Obama - if it pans out. Of the groups I defined, the last two would likely be very happy. It is the former - and the WSJ and businessinsider - who lose the war they want and hope to expand.

Note that they leave out part of the State Department's comment - "making clear its desire to strike could be tempered by a Syrian offer."