Kerry says Syria's Assad not ready to go yet

Comments (6)
BillRozar wrote:

Kerry should emphasize that 1)Assad must leave voluntarily or be a party to the partitioning of Syria and 2)that no American citizens take part in any peacekeeping missions which have a potential to result in injury or death.Americans have seen enough of the conflicts in the Middle East it is time for them to police themselves.

Jan 23, 2014 2:15pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Is Kerry as insane as he sounds?

If Assad stepped aside today, some format of “al Qaeda” (generically) would step in tomorrow – with far more bloodletting, just in Syria. Any victory by “al Qaeda” would instantly translate to insufferable weaponry being unleashed anywhere on the planet – whether ‘supplied’ or sold.

Whatever anyone wants to say about Assad, without him, ‘al Qaeda’ is postured to achieve “sovereignty;” with the borders of Syria as it’s defensible turf. It would take nuclear weapons – with all obvious ‘civilian’ consequences – to defeat the consequent “al Qaeda” state.

Absent Assad, it’s reasonably certain that that the “good rebels” would quickly be defeated by the “bad rebels;” leaving Israel with the obvious resolve.

The notion that “…. Assad has to go” leaves both Russia and Iran with the mandate to reverse the ‘line-in-the-sand’ against all comers.

In the periphery, Iraq’s future is increasingly linked to Syria’s future.

Jan 23, 2014 5:25pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Bumsteer wrote:

What is Assad’s incentive/reason/rational for participating in these talks if he will not be included in them or in the possible transition from the current to new government?

We may not like it, but Assad still maintains the support of the majority of the population as well as the military, is the recognized head of a sovereign nation and must be included in the future direction of his country. The government in place has been in power for decades and the sudden change from this to another will result in complete failure if all parties are not wholly committed to its success.

The chaos of factional fighting within Iraq, Libya and Egypt between the various tribal groups after the overthrow of the established government have left those countries in shambles. All the counties listed were once ruled by an authoritarian government who stifled dissent harshly but provided basic services and kept the population “relatively” safe and their country stable.

Ask the people of Iraq, Libya and Egypt if they feel safer now than before. They may now enjoy the “freedoms” that were promised with the demise of their ruler, but are they in a better state to use these in their current situation? No one dares leave their homes for fear of being shot. Add to this the situation in Afghanistan. The amount of time, money and lives spent to “stabilize” the country will be lost when the current administration crumbles without strong outside and ongoing support.

“IF” our “only” goal in Syria is to stop the bloodshed, the fastest way to end this is to withdraw support from the rebels and let Assad finish this. …..Our goal in Syria has always been regime change.

Jan 23, 2014 8:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
willich6 wrote:

“Kerry says Assad Not Yet Ready To Go”… Duh.. Ya Think!! Kerry’s just figuring this out now????

So lets schedule ‘peace talks’ when we KNOW the two (three or more)syrian groups won’t show up; but let’s schedule them anyway at the same time and just ‘down the road’ from Davos so all the boys can go up and hang out with the ‘rich and famous’.. Kerry is a CLOWN…

Jan 24, 2014 11:30am EST  --  Report as abuse
Harry079 wrote:

“Kerry says Syria’s Assad not ready to go yet”

This man is the absolute Albert Einstien of diplomacy!

With his 90 day tour in Viet Nam I still can’t figure out how we lost that one.

Jan 24, 2014 12:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse
mlnw wrote:

How can Kerry demand adherence to Geneva I and dictate the terms of the transition when by doing so, he himself is in violation of the provision of Geneva I which states: “It is for the Syrian people to determine the future of the country. All groups and segments of society in Syria must be enabled to participate in a National Dialogue process…” ?

Nowhere is it stated that Assad must abdicate and refrain from participating in the political process- certainly nowhere is it stated that the U.S. shall have any power to dictate the political future of Syria. Furthermore, by continuing to fund and facilitate the mercenaries and violence against the Syrian State, its people and its territorial integrity the US has breached the terms and spirit of the Communique. Furthermore, from the very outset Geneva I contained a fundamental contradiction- namely, that the Syrian Government and Syrian people were excluded from any decision making or input in the
Action Group or their drafting of the document, even though the Government was never delegitimized by the United Nations General Assembly or the Security Council.

Geneva I also failed the recognize that Syria did draft a new constitution in 2011 which incorporated many of the democratic reforms set forth in Geneva I, and was overwhelmingly endorsed by the Syrian people in February, 2012.

The sooner the US and every other country or coalition that has violated Syria’s sovereignty and/or waged aggressive war against it is gone from Syria- i.e., the US, NATO (including Turkey), Saudi Arabia, the GCC and Israel the better it will be for the nation and its people. (And in the case of Israel, get the hell out of the Golan Heights.)

So, Obama, Kerry, Hof and Ford, stop facilitating the war and its violence and accept what the Syrian people want.

Jan 26, 2014 9:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.