Did Kerry’s “Impossible” Diplomatic Demand Just Get Met? Update: Now Possible?

/54 Comments/in /by

If you enjoy the detailed analysis that only Marcy Wheeler can bring to complex issues, please donate if you can.

Okay, this is breaking very rapidly and could turn out to be nothing, but it is amazing and would even be hilarious if it weren’t for the huge number of innocent lives that are at stake. As we learn from the New York Times this morning, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights is making one last push for diplomacy in the face of an Obama administration that is determined to carry out military strikes against Syria:

The appalling suffering in Syria “cries out for international action,” Navi Pillay, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights said on Monday in a speech in Geneva. Employing chemical weapons was “one of the gravest crimes that can be committed” and their use in Syria “seems to be in little doubt,” even if the circumstances and the party responsible remained to be clarified, Ms. Pillay said.

While the United States is calling for a limited punitive strike to punish the Syrian government, Ms. Pillay warned that “a military response or the continued supply of arms risk igniting a regional conflagration, possibly resulting in many more deaths and even more widespread misery.”

Ms. Pillay chastised the international community for being “late, very late” in acting to stop the violence in Syria that has killed more than 100,000 people. “This is no time for powerful states to continue to disagree on the way forward or for geopolitical interests to override the legal and moral obligation to save lives by bringing this conflict to an end,” she said.

In a rational world, one would expect the chief diplomat from the United States to be somewhat chastised by such strong language and to voice a new commitment to finding a peaceful solution to the problem. But this is the Obama administration we are talking about, and so John Kerry instead chose to make a statement that appears to mock calls for diplomacy. He states conditions which Syria could meet in order to avoid an attack but then immediately follows by stating that it would be impossible for Syria to meet those conditions:

When asked by a reporter whether there was anything Assad’s government could do or offer to stop any attack, Kerry said:

“Sure, he could turn over every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week – turn it over, all of it without delay and allow the full and total accounting (of it) but he isn’t about to do it and it can’t be done.”

Oh my. That is cold and beyond cynical. But it appears that Syria may well be calling Kerry’s bluff:

Wow. If the twitter account from which this came is real and if the offer is real, Kerry and the rest of the Obama administration will be facing a real conundrum. Kerry’s flip identification of an “impossible” condition which Syria could meet to avoid an attack may well have done the impossible. Stay tuned. Today could be very interesting.

Update: Twitter consensus is developing around the Brahimi twitter account being fake. There are also suggestions the State Department is doing some “walking back” of Kerry’s cynical statement.

Update: And as noted by commenter Erich Kuerschner, the twitter account has now been suspended. Even though the account was fake, it did a wonderful job of pointing out the horrible cynicism of Kerry’s “diplomacy”. What if Syria does offer up its chemical weapons? How is it Kerry’s job to pronounce that such a process is “impossible”?

Yet Another Update: It would appear that Putin appreciates the beauty of calling Kerry’s bluff:

 

And that’s AP (unless they’ve been hacked again…)

Update: New York TImes:

Syria’s foreign minister says his country welcomes Russia’s proposal for it to place its chemical weapons under international control and then dismantle them quickly to avert United States strikes.

image_print
54 replies
  1. Erich Kuerschner says:

    re update (Twitter consensus is developing around the Brahimi twitter account being fake) and twitter account:

    “Account suspended.The profile you are trying to view has been suspended.”

  3. Jessica says:

    That really would have been fabulous. But, I wish Kerry’s statement was a joke, too. Well, it is a joke – better said that I wish his statement was fake, too.

    All that aside, I have to remind myself from time to time that Kerry is the Secretary of State, not of Defense. Isn’t the State Department supposed to be about diplomatic relations?

    Or is the reality that the Department of Defense wages the “defensive” wars while the State Dept is in charge of the humanitarian attacks? “We’re going to club you over the head repeatedly with our concern for your well-being!”

  4. GulfCoastPirate says:

    Assad should tell Kerry he will turn over his chemical weapons when Israel turns over its chemical weapons and nukes. Kerry is turning out to be a real goofus.

  11. lysias says:

    RT is now reporting that Syria has confirmed that it is willing to put its chemical weapons under international control.

  12. rg says:

    Note that the reporter didn’t ask Kerry what the US could do to prevent the inevitable, only what Assad could do. Seems like a straight-man setup question.

  14. scribe says:

    Kerry reminds me of the Austro-Hungarian Foreign Ministry in July-August 1914. Issuing a laundry list of impossible, humiliating demands to Serbia which basically were for it to give up its sovreignity and turn over some malefactors. In the next week.

    Serbia agreed to do many of them and asked for a little time for the rest. Which Austria-Hungary rejected as inadequate. And, in so doing, pissed off Serbia’s guarantor/big friend: Russia.

    I’m sure the KuK Foreign Ministry will be glad to fill in the details for Kerry, should his history need refreshing.

    Oh.

    Wait.

    You mean that, after starting a war with Serbia over this, there is no more Austro-Hungarian Empire?

    Never mind.

  15. orionATL says:

    headline for an article in today’s wapo:

    “…In interview, Assad says U.S. credibility at an ‘all-time low’

    Max Fisher 10:33 AM ET

    WORLDVIEWS | Syrian president touches on U.S. concerns about the legacy in Iraq and says America stands to lose if it goes through with a strike against Syria…”

    you know you’re not gettin’ no respect when the gnat you’re threatening to squash sticks it’s tongue out at you.

  16. Bay State Librul says:

    All of a sudden everyone is scurrying/jockeying for position. Is the “threat” of strikes hastening a resolve? Time is of the essence and optimistically looking at events, perhaps a settlement…
    I know this is weighted toward idealism vs realism, but one can hope?

  17. scribe says:

    The tone of the news reports on German radio, of the Russian announcement that they welcome the proposal to place Syrian CW under international control, make clear that they Russians are only too overjoyed to be backing the Syrians on this.

    In other words, they are loving ramming Kerry’s honker in his own shit.

  18. klynn says:

    So , this move by Syria makes the humanitarian cost on us, the US, should we strike. Which means, they could declare war on US.

    We better step up and say, “Thanks, let’s move on your willingness to hand over control of CW’s.”

  21. ApacheTrout says:

    Seems to me that if the weapons are truly handed over, this would be a terrific outcome. And if it came about because of “bumbling” or was born of the words of a “goofus”, who cares? Geesh. I hope this comes to pass.

  24. emptywheel says:

    @GulfCoastPirate: Was just thinking that Kerry was really failing as a SOS. But w/Lavrov calling his “goof” bluff, he may have accidentally stumbled on peace.

    Bandar will try to force the issue some other way, of course. Which will expose what is really going on here.

  26. Jim White says:

    @ApacheTrout: Agreed. As I tweeted a couple of hours ago “Hell, if we get the peaceful outcome of Syria surrendering CW’s, I’d even let Obama and Kerry claim their bumbling was eleventy dimensional.”

  27. Bay State Librul says:

    @emptywheel:

    Not to sound like I know what fucking happened, but what’s to
    prevent one saying that Obama knows what he is doing, and played his
    cards appropriately?

  29. JThomason says:

    Should be no problem with Pres. Obama taking credit for delivering Syrian CW to international custody, just like he should get credit for understanding that the issue was one that requires Congressional scrutiny. Only hope he can close the deal. Civil war yet rages in Syria. Problems in the ME are far from being resolved. But a step by step diplomatic approach would be a shift.

    Edit: It would also open the door to see what can be done with a moderated Iranian government.

  30. orionATL says:

    @ApacheTrout:

    i agree completely, but that’s tautological – nobody’s against “less war, not more”.

    an opportunity for humor should not be passed up.

    for all any of us really know, this solution could have been conceived at the g-20 instead coming solely from whitehouse initiatives.

  31. GulfCoastPirate says:

    @emptywheel: What I would really like to know is why Obama decided to go to the mat over this chemical weapons thing. Bandar, Bibi and all the other neocons have been on his ass for quite a while now and he’s effectively held them off. Why this? Why now? If we could answer those questions then we’d know what is really going on.

  33. JTMinIA says:

    Putin is not just enjoying this. He is rightfully laughing his head off. Fresh off of his victory with Snowden, he has just made Obama look like a complete and utter idiot and lightweight.

    Bloody brilliant move.

    But he still needs to keep his man-bewbs covered when he rides a horse. Just sayin’.

  34. orionATL says:

    does anyone know whether sec kerry is asking for or receiving advice from senior foreign service officers at state?

    i would be surprised to learn that senior people would advise taking or condone using the oddly wobbly path kerry and the whitehouse have taken in the last three weeks.

  35. Garrett says:

    @CTuttle:

    I really like this correction:

    *The story moved on Sep. 9, 2013, incorrectly attributed the pull quote to Greg Thielmann, when in fact it is attributable to the unnamed former senior intelligence official cited earlier in the story.

  38. bevin says:

    “…Civil war yet rages in Syria.”

    It’s more like a proxy war with NATO and the Gulf, and all their allies, plus Israel pouring men, money and munitions, including probably sarin gas into what is laughingly called a rebellion or, as some of the weirder Trots say, a “revolution.”

  41. GulfCoastPirate says:

    @orionATL: This is all about Iran and missile defense for Israel in my opinion. The I-P stuff is dead and has been for a long time. When Kerry talks about that he’s talking out his AIPAC ass.

  42. GulfCoastPirate says:

    @lysias: Who do you think is behind all the software the Israelis, err NSA, is using? Perhaps, but I’m not so sure the NSA is what caused Obama to go for this now.

  43. GulfCoastPirate says:

    Did anyone see Susan Rice’s comments about the irascible Russians and Chinese in the Security Council? After all the resolutions the US has vetoed for Israel. Just once I’d like to see the Russians and Chinese make any deal offered dependent on the Israelis having to abide by Security Council resolutions also.

  46. thatvisionthing says:

    Excuse me, total drive-by endzone-dance comment here. And I haven’t even seen any news today period, so I hope I’m not making a fool of myself. But what do I see in HuffPo front page subheadline?

    (Foreshadowing here: http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/08/31/the-case-to-congress/#comment-615633 )

    Michelle Opposes War With Syria

    Michelle! Ma belle!

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/09/michelle-obama-syria_n_3896436.html

    First Lady Michelle Obama opposes military action in Syria, President Barack Obama told PBS and NBC News on Monday.

    Plus maybe my Princess Malia!

    “My own family members… they’re very wary and suspicious,” President Obama told PBS.

    Yes!

    … That’s all I want to say.

  51. orionATL says:

    @emptywheel:

    so let them.

    the results would almost surely be instructional for the israeli and saudi government leaders in a way they may never have imagined.

    screw this business of letting the israeli gov and saudi gov control american military actions.

    quit holding their hands and buying them ice cream, let those bastards take some actions on their own and see how the world views them afterwords.

    in fact, they won’t take any action once the u.s calls their bluff (except to bribe more congresscattle), because they are two of the most fragile nations in the entire world of nations.

    the only “power” either has is to threaten the u.s., repress palestinians and saudi citizens, and bribe american congresscattle.

    both know that if that power is ever ignored by the u.s., then the “power” goes poof.

  52. orionATL says:

    @orionATL:

    (edit permission denied)

    so let them.

    the results would almost surely be instructional for the israeli and saudi government leaders in a way they may never have imagined.

    screw this business of letting the israeli gov and saudi gov control american military actions.

    quit holding their hands and buying them ice cream, let those bastards take some actions on their own and see how the world views them afterwards.

    the fact is, they won’t take any action once the u.s calls their bluff (except to bribe more congresscattle), because they are two of the most fragile nations in the entire world of nations.

    the only “power” either has is to threaten the u.s., repress palestinians and saudi citizens, and bribe american congresscattle.

    both know that if that power is ever ignored by the u.s., then the “power” goes poof.

    oil and currency might hold a lot less danger for the u.s. if the saudis were to attack iran on their own initiative and the world were to focus on that action and that nation.

  53. Jessica says:

    @orionATL
    “oil and currency might hold a lot less danger for the u.s. if the saudis were to attack iran on their own initiative and the world were to focus on that action and that nation.”

    I agree. The more focus on the nature and actions of our “ally”, Saudi Arabia, the better. USA Today reported this back in January (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/01/21/saudi-inmates-fight-syria-commute-death-sentences/1852629/), about SA sending death row inmates to fight in Syria, in exchange for a pardon and SA paying a monthly stipend to their families. Maybe that’s been disputed since then, but it certainly wasn’t newsworthy enough for there to be a serious discussion about how “civil” the nature of this war is. Not dismissing the fact that ordinary Syrians are fighting against the Syrian gov, but they certainly aren’t the primary recipients of SA, et al, weapons and cash.

Comments are closed.