Video: Congressman Mike Turner on Tuesday challenged an Obama Administration official on the effects of a possible conflict with Syria on Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. View the exchange at MyDaytonDailyNews.com.
Facing what could be the pivotal moment of his presidency, President Barack Obama asked Congress to delay authorizing an attack on Syria to give a Russian diplomatic initiative one final chance to force Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to yield his stockpile of chemical weapons.
In a nationally televised speech Tuesday night from the White House, Obama argued that the United States and the international community cannot ignore the use of chemical weapons by Assad last month against Syrian civilians, warning that “if we fail to act, the Assad regime will see no reason to stop using chemical weapons.’’
“This is not a world we should accept,’’ Obama said in his address.
But faced with the fresh Russian offer and intense congressional opposition to a measure authorizing the use of force, Obama said the U.S. – in consultation with Russia and China — would support a resolution before the United Nations Security Council “requiring Assad to give up his chemical weapons and to ultimately destroy them under international control.’’
“It’s too early to tell whether this offer will succeed, and any agreement must verify that the Assad regime keeps its commitments,’’ Obama said. “But this initiative has the potential to remove the threat of chemical weapons without the use of force, particularly because Russia is one of Assad’s strongest allies.’’
“We’ll also give U.N. inspectors the opportunity to report their findings about what happened on August 21st,’’ Obama said, referring to the date of the chemical attack. “And we will continue to rally support from allies, from Europe to the Americas, from Asia to the Middle East who agree on the need for action.’’
Obama made clear he was prepared to order a military strike if diplomatic efforts failed, saying “the question now is what the United States of America and the international community is prepared to do about it, because what happened to those people, to those children, is not only a violation of international law, it’s also a danger to our security.’’
After refraining from intervening in the Syrian civil war for the past two years, Obama abruptly reversed course when evidence emerged that Assad had used chemical weapons against his own people.
“No one disputes that chemical weapons were used in Syria,’’ Obama said. “The world saw thousands of videos, cellphone pictures and social media accounts from the attack. And humanitarian organizations told stories of hospitals packed with people who had symptoms of poison gas.’’
“Moreover, we know the Assad regime was responsible,’’ Obama said. “In the days leading up to August 21st, we know that Assad’s chemical weapons personnel prepared for an attack near an area where they mix sarin gas. They distributed gas masks to their troops.’’
But in the aftermath of those attacks as the president vowed military action, a sizable majority of Americans and a large number of lawmakers expressed opposition to the United States becoming involved in another Middle East conflict, expressing fears of drawn-out campaigns such as Afghanistan and Iraq.
Faced with such doubts, Obama insisted that it was in the national interest for the U.S. to act in Syria, saying if America and the international community does not enforce international bans against chemical weapons, other tyrants will have no reason to think twice about acquiring poison gas and using them.’’
“Over time our troops would again face the prospect of chemical warfare on the battlefield, and it could be easier for terrorist organizations to obtain these weapons and to use them to attack civilians,’’ Obama said, warning that if the civil war spirals out of control, “these weapons could threaten allies like Turkey, Jordan and Israel.’’
Obama also raised the possibility that U.S. failure to act would encourage Iran to continue its efforts to build a nuclear weapon. U.S. analysts have long feared that a nuclear-armed Iran would threaten the security of U.S. allies in the region but also spark a race among Middle Eastern nations to build their own nuclear bombs.
About the Author