Obama’s Evolution on Syria at the United Nations

From a passing comment to chemical weapons, a look at the president’s last five U.N. speeches.

President Obama addresses the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday.
National Journal
Matt Vasilogambros
Sept. 24, 2013, 7:14 a.m.

Pres­id­ent Obama on Tues­day called on the United Na­tions Se­cur­ity Coun­cil to pass a res­ol­u­tion that re­sponds strongly to Syr­ia if the coun­try does not co­oper­ate on hand­ing over chem­ic­al weapons. It was a firm ad­dress with a pre­dict­able mes­sage to the Gen­er­al As­sembly on this dif­fi­cult is­sue.

But Syr­ia wasn’t al­ways the corner­stone of Obama’s speeches at the United Na­tions dur­ing his ten­ure as pres­id­ent.

In his first ad­dress to the Gen­er­al As­sembly in 2009, he spoke of Syr­ia as one play­er in the search for broad­er peace in the re­gion. The civil war wouldn’t start for an­oth­er year.

As we pur­sue this goal, we will also pur­sue peace between Is­rael and Le­ban­on, Is­rael and Syr­ia, and a broad­er peace between Is­rael and its many neigh­bors. In pur­suit of that goal, we will de­vel­op re­gion­al ini­ti­at­ives with mul­ti­lat­er­al par­ti­cip­a­tion, along­side bi­lat­er­al ne­go­ti­ations.

While Syr­ia is men­tioned just once that year, it’s not men­tioned at all a year later in 2010. Just a few months later, vi­ol­ence would erupt in that coun­try and res­ult in the civil war between the As­sad re­gime and op­pos­i­tion forces.

However, in the early months of the con­flict, the only re­sponse by the U.S. was hard sanc­tions on the As­sad re­gime and a gen­er­al call for in­ter­na­tion­al ac­tion. Obama men­tions Syr­ia in his 2011 ad­dress, but only lim­itedly.

Already, the United States has im­posed strong sanc­tions on Syr­ia’s lead­ers. We sup­por­ted a trans­fer of power that is re­spons­ive to the Syr­i­an people. And many of our al­lies have joined in this ef­fort. But for the sake of Syr­ia — and the peace and se­cur­ity of the world — we must speak with one voice. There’s no ex­cuse for in­ac­tion. Now is the time for the United Na­tions Se­cur­ity Coun­cil to sanc­tion the Syr­i­an re­gime, and to stand with the Syr­i­an people.

In the fol­low­ing year, sev­er­al act­iv­ists and hawk­ish law­makers, such as Sen. John Mc­Cain, R-Ar­iz., called on the pres­id­ent to sup­port the mod­er­ate op­pos­i­tion with mil­it­ary aid in or­der to even­tu­ally oust As­sad. The Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion at­temp­ted to work through the U.N. Se­cur­ity Coun­cil, but Syr­ia’s al­lies, in­clud­ing Rus­sia, blocked ac­tion. In 2012, the Obama again calls for the As­sad re­gime to come to an end.

To­geth­er, we must stand with those Syr­i­ans who be­lieve in a dif­fer­ent vis­ion, a Syr­ia that is united and in­clus­ive, where chil­dren don’t need to fear their own gov­ern­ment and all Syr­i­ans have a say in how they’re gov­erned — Sun­nis and Alaw­ites, Kur­ds and Chris­ti­ans. That’s what Amer­ica stands for. That’s is the out­come that we will work for, with sanc­tions and con­sequences for those who per­se­cute and as­sist­ance and sup­port for those who work for this com­mon good.

On Tues­day, Obama not only re­cog­nized the fail­ures of the U.S. and oth­ers in the in­ter­na­tion­al com­munity — “Our re­sponse has not matched the scale of the chal­lenge” — but he also fo­cused heav­ily on Syr­ia’s chem­ic­al weapons, its al­leged at­tack on Aug. 21, and an ef­fort on be­half of Rus­sia, the U.S. and Syr­ia to rid that na­tion of its weapons of mass de­struc­tion. It was the first time that chem­ic­al weapons were cen­ter stage for Obama dur­ing this an­nu­al ad­dress.

Agree­ment on chem­ic­al weapons should en­er­gize a lar­ger dip­lo­mat­ic ef­fort to reach a polit­ic­al set­tle­ment with­in Syr­ia. I do not be­lieve that mil­it­ary ac­tion by those with­in Syr­ia or by ex­tern­al powers can achieve last­ing peace. Nor do I be­lieve that Amer­ica or any na­tion should de­term­ine who will lead Syr­ia. That is for the Syr­i­an people to de­cide. Nev­er­the­less, a lead­er who slaughtered his cit­izens and gassed chil­dren to death can­not re­gain the le­git­im­acy to lead a badly frac­tured coun­try. The no­tion that Syr­ia can re­turn to a pre­war status quo is a fantasy.

The ten­sion between the U.S. and Rus­sia was also ap­par­ent in the pres­id­ent’s ad­dress, as Obama evoked the Cold War on the is­sue of Syr­ia. While Obama al­luded to Rus­sia’s ob­struc­tion­ism in pre­vi­ous ad­dresses, this was the most dir­ect shot at Pres­id­ent Vladi­mir Putin.

We are com­mit­ted to work­ing this polit­ic­al trek and as we pur­sue a set­tle­ment, let’s re­mem­ber this is not a zero sum­mit en­deavor. We’re no longer in a Cold War. There is no great game to be won, nor does Amer­ica have any in­terest in Syr­ia bey­ond the well-be­ing of its people, the sta­bil­ity of its neigh­bors, the elim­in­a­tion of chem­ic­al weapons and en­sur­ing that it does not be­come a safe haven for ter­ror­ists. I wel­come the in­flu­ence of all na­tions that can help bring about a peace­ful res­ol­u­tion of Syr­ia’s civil war.

The pres­id­ent said that the re­cent deal between the Rus­si­ans and Amer­ic­ans could bol­ster peace talks. Maybe the peace that Obama has called for in his last three ad­dresses might be real­ized in 2014. Or the vi­ol­ence could just be an­oth­er foot­note of his speech.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

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.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Maher Weighs in on Bernie, Trump and Palin
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

“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.

Source:
×