Greece wants absolute guarantees that destroying Syria’s warfare chemicals would not endanger the Mediterranean, the Xinhua News Agency reports.
Athens is not alone in its nervousness about the plan for eliminating Damascus chemicals; British citizens also are beginning to voice safety concerns related to their nation’s involvement in the process.
Greek Foreign Minister Evangelos Venizelos asked EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton to demand the guarantees from the United Nations and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. The two organizations are overseeing efforts to eliminate the Syrian government’s chemical-warfare stockpile by the end of June.
Emma Bonino, Evangelos’ Italian equivalent, “agreed on the sending of a letter to the director of the OPCW,” the Greek Foreign Ministry added in a statement on Wednesday.
The Syrian chemical arsenal’s deadliest components are being transported through the violence-wracked nation to coastal city of Latakia, where they are to be loaded on Danish and Norwegian transport ships. The chemicals then would travel under international escort to an Italian port, where they would enter the custody of a U.S. vessel equipped to destroy them.
Greece is seeking confirmation that there is “no doubt … as to the security and protection of the Mediterranean environment during the process of the transporting and destruction of Syrian chemical weapons,” the Greek Foreign Ministry said.
In earlier discussions with Greenpeace, Oceanica and the World Wildlife Fund, OCPW Director General Ahmet Üzümcü asserted that the destruction effort would not drop any byproducts into the Mediterranean Sea. Representatives of the watchdog groups conveyed that promise to Venizelos on Wednesday, according to the ministry statement.
Meanwhile, petitioners in the United Kingdom have gathered nearly 400 signatures in opposition to the planned elimination of less-dangerous Syrian chemical-arms ingredients at Ellesmere Port, the Liverpool Echo reported.
The president of Syria, Bashar Assad, admitted his government’s possession of chemical weapons and agreed to eliminate them after Damascus was blamed for a nerve-gas strike allegedly resulting in more than 1,400 civilian deaths last August.
What We're Following See More »
Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”
“We haven’t seen a true leftist since FDR, so many millions are coming out of the woodwork to vote for Bernie Sanders; he is the Occupy movement now come to life in the political arena.” So says Bill Maher in his Hollywood Reporter cover story (more a stream-of-consciousness riff than an essay, actually). Conservative states may never vote for a socialist in the general election, but “this stuff has never been on the table, and these voters have never been activated.” Maher saves most of his bile for Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, writing that by nominating Palin as vice president “John McCain is the one who opened the Book of the Dead and let the monsters out.” And Trump is picking up where Palin left off.