Skip to comments.Russia balks at French plan for U.N. Security Council resolution on Syrian chemical arms
Posted on 09/10/2013 11:19:53 AM PDT by oxcart
A last-ditch effort to avert a U.S. military strike by transferring control of Syrian chemical weapons ran into obstacles Tuesday, as Russia balked at a French plan to enforce an international agreement under a binding U.N. Security Council resolution with a military option if necessary.
An unexpected Russian proposal to place Syrias chemical weapons under international monitoring and ultimately destroy them had appeared to be gaining traction earlier in the day, as Syria embraced it, China and Iran voiced support, and the United States said it would explore the idea seriously.But a telephone conversation between French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius and his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, revealed a deep divide over their visions of the Security Councils role and particularly over the prospect of military action to ensure that an agreement would be honored.
There were also doubts about how Syrias stockpiles of chemical weapons could be transferred to international monitors in the midst of a bloody and protracted civil war that has claimed more than 100,000 lives.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
A cagy manager told me a trick and it always works. Sit down with the other side and talk until THEY have your idea. Once it’s theirs, you don’t have to deal with resistance. He said the resistance comes from the ego associated with Not Invented Here. (NIH.)
This whole thing is a ruse to blow by 9/11 and Bengahzi.
The house needs to get back on track and demand answers my.
I work with people too smart to fall for the trick, but with proportionately bigger egos.
Gosh, you’re right! Those terrorists in Syria are hidden ninjas for Hillary!
All kidding aside, the House really does need to dig into Bengahzi, and call forward those who are responsible for letting that slaughter happen, and then doing nothing when they had the tools available to save American lives. No ambassador should ever be killed with impunity, either by terrorists or by inaction by administration officials.
“I work with people too smart to fall for the trick, but with proportionately bigger egos.”
Smart people know what has happened. But, the idea you gave them is too good for them not to have. The bigger the ego the more certain they want it to be their idea. Try it. I guarantee it works. I can’t even count the number of problems permanently resolved by this technique.
Better still, they know you’re willing to work for them and not grab the credit. If they’re thinking people they’ll take you along with them. I went from managing Reliabilty Engineering to managing the Engineering department, then to running a corporate wide re-engineering effort and got the money to go with it.
For the US, the red-line has been uncrossed? All is good now, right?
The devil is always in the details.
One solution in that case is to
1. Let them have their way.
2. Create a paper trail so they can’t blame you when they discover that they were wrong. This will also provide them with a face-saving out, so they don’t torpedo the project. They will, of course, take credit for you ideas, or minimize your role in offering them.
There will be military action because there has to be. Obama wants this solution to fail(Assad will be blamed) to save his bacon with the Saudis.
Did I sleep through a week or two of this comedy of errors?? When was it ever last-ditch?
Check out the new tagline!
These are good strategies. I have a somewhat similar one, but I need to learn to avoid smirking or sighing or rolling my eyes when I execute it. Alas.
IF we had MAN in the White House:
“We’re not going waste time arguing about the shape of the damn table! We want the complete map of all Chem Weapons storage locations NOW, and they need to begin turning them over by Sunday.”
“Any UN participants will be ready to support by then, or stand aside.”
It would be freeking impossible!!! Looks like another political head fake to me. BTW, the Syrian rebels (who probably are the ones who used the gas in the first place) are against the deal. Now why would that be? Hmmmmmm!
Working as an R&D engineer in the aerospace industry I had several experiences with proposing off the wall solutions to problems. Higher ups would let me go but I knew failure was all mine. However, the company I worked for and the higher ups were all honorable persons who acknowledged success without claiming personal glory. A good bunch of people and company to work for.
Since when democrates wanted us to win diplomatically or militarily. The end deal is always the same.