Syria Accepts Russian Proposal on Weapons; France to Bring Resolution to Security Council

By Will Englund, Michael Birnbaum and Loveday Morris, The Washington Post

10 September 13

n unexpected Russian proposal for Syria to avert a U.S. military strike by transferring control of its chemical weapons appeared to be gaining traction Tuesday, as Syria embraced it, France said it would draft a U.N. Security Council resolution to put the plan into effect, and China and Iran voiced support.

But major questions remained over whether the specifics of a resolution backed by France and the United States could win the support of Syria's longtime patron, Russia, whose foreign minister appeared to be balking Tuesday at France's proposal of a binding Security Council resolution. There were also doubts about how Syria's 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.

In Washington, Secretary of State John F. Kerry told a House committee that the proposal "is the ideal way" to take chemical weapons away from the forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. But he warned that the United States would not tolerate "delay" or "avoidance," adding: "We're waiting for that proposal, but we're not waiting for long."

The White House said the United States would "explore seriously the viability of the Russian proposal" and would begin discussions Tuesday at the United Nations on a potential Security Council resolution.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said bringing the proposal to the Security Council would allow the world to judge the intentions of Russia and China, which until now have blocked efforts to sanction Syria for any actions during its 2 1 / 2-year-long civil conflict.

After a telephone conversation Tuesday with his Russian counterpart, Fabius said Russia is reluctant to agree to a binding U.N. Security Council resolution that would provide a framework to control Syria's chemical weapons stocks.

"I understand that the Russians, at this stage, are not necessarily enthusiastic, and I'm using a euphemism, to frame all this in a binding U.N. resolution," Fabius told French lawmakers.

Instead of a binding resolution, Russia favors a nonbinding "presidential statement" from the Security Council, Reuters news agency reported.

Russia floated the idea of handing over the weapons Monday, after a seemingly offhand remark by Kerry that such a move would be a way for Assad to avoid a U.S. military strike.

President Obama has been urging world leaders and U.S. lawmakers to endorse military action as a way of sending a message of condemnation and deterrence to Assad, whose government allegedly authorized nerve gas attacks outside Damascus on Aug. 21 that killed more than 1,400 civilians.

But on Monday evening, after Russia and Syria embraced Kerry's weapons-transfer scenario, Obama said that the idea of monitoring and ultimately destroying Syria's arsenal of weapons that have been outlawed around the globe "could potentially be a significant breakthrough." The Senate postponed a vote scheduled for Wednesday on whether to back a proposed strike.

"I think you have to take it with a grain of salt, initially," Obama said in an interview with NBC that was among several he gave Monday in pursuit of public support for a military strike. "We're going to make sure that we see how serious these proposals are."

Obama is scheduled to address the nation Tuesday evening at 9 p.m. Eastern time. His speech was originally planned as the capstone of a newly focused effort to rally a skeptical public and reluctant lawmakers in favor of a military strike. That approach could change, however, given the new proposal.

Obama spoke separately Tuesday morning with French President Francois Hollande and British Prime Minister David Cameron, a White House official said. "They agreed to work closely together, and in consultation with Russia and China, to explore seriously the viability of the Russian proposal to put all Syrian chemical weapons and related materials fully under international control in order to ensure their verifiable and enforceable destruction," the official said. "These efforts will begin today at the United Nations, and will include a discussion on elements of a potential U.N. Security Council Resolution."

Testifying before the House Armed Services Committee on Tuesday, Kerry told lawmakers that "your word is on the line, too" in enforcing the international prohibition against chemical weapons attacks. He cited the Syria Accountability Act, passed by Congress in 2003, which charges that the Syrian government "is pursuing the development and production of biological and chemical weapons" and vows that "the United States will work to deny Syria the ability to support acts of international terrorism and efforts to develop or acquire weapons of mass destruction."

"I want to emphasize that President Obama's first priority throughout this process has been and is diplomacy," Kerry said. But he said that Russia and China have vetoed U.N. Security Council resolutions on Syria, and Russia "has even blocked press releases" at the United Nations that do nothing more than express humanitarian concerns or condemn chemical weapons use without assigning blame.

"Make no mistake: No political solution will ever be achievable as long as Assad believes he can just gas his way out of this predicament," Kerry said.

He said Obama would "take a hard look" at the proposal to transfer Syria's chemical weapons but that "this cannot be a process of delay; this cannot be a process of avoidance."

"We have to continue to show Syria and Russia and the world that we are not going to fall for stalling tactics," Kerry said.

Syrian Prime Minister Wael al-Halki confirmed Tuesday that his government supports the Russian initiative to "spare the blood of Syrians" and prevent a conflict that could extend beyond the region, Syrian state television reported.

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem said the Assad government decided Monday evening to accept the plan "to stave off American aggression."

But it was not clear whether the resolution language proposed Tuesday by Fabius would be acceptable to Russian officials, who have voiced doubts about whether the Syrian government was responsible for the Aug. 21 attacks and who can veto any Security Council resolution.

The resolution will "condemn the massacre of August 21 committed by the Syrian regime," Fabius told reporters in Paris, and "require that this regime sheds light without delay on its chemical weapons program, that they be placed under international control and that they be dismantled."

The resolution would warn of "extremely serious consequences" if Syria violated those guidelines, Fabius said. It would also seek to bring to justice those responsible for the Aug. 21 attacks.

Fabius said he hoped the resolution would not be blocked by other permanent members of the council - a reference to previous efforts on Syria that were blocked by Russia and China. He said that "all options are still on the table" and acknowledged that there were many practical difficulties in actually carrying out any plans to destroy Syrian chemical weapons. "It's something that's difficult to do, that takes take time, and is very complicated in the middle of conflict, the kind of conflict that exists currently in Syria," Fabius said.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said his country will soon announce "a feasible, clear and concrete plan," which it will discuss with "the U.N. secretary general, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and the U.N. Security Council."

Alexander Kalugin, the Russian ambassador to Jordan, said the plan would need "international inspectors," likely from the United Nations, and agreement from both the Syrian government and rebel forces to secure their safety.

"We are now engaged with Syrians about working out some concrete details on how to do the job," Kalugin said by telephone from Amman. "It's certainly not an easy mission."

The Syrian government is known to have stockpiles of chemical agents including mustard gas, sarin and other nerve agents, but it has never explicitly admitted possessing them, and the exact locations and sizes of the stockpiles remain uncertain.

"Certainly we need more information from the Syrians about quantities, whereabouts, but I don't think it's an impossible mission," said Kalugin.

The Syrian Opposition Coalition described the initiative as a strategy to stall for time and said that Syria's alleged use of chemical weapons, a violation of international law, requires a "serious and proportionate response."

"Crimes against humanity cannot be absolved through political concessions, or surrendering the weapons used to commit them," the opposition coalition said in a statement.

In a 22-page report released Tuesday, New York-based Human Rights Watch said that evidence - including witness testimony and remnants of the weapons used in last month's chemical attack - "strongly suggests" that the Syrian government was responsible. It said the rights organization and arms experts have not documented Syrian rebel forces' possession of the 140mm and 330mm rockets reportedly used in the strikes.

The chairman of the international affairs committee of Russia's lower house of parliament, Alexei Pushkov, said that Russia's role in pushing the proposal is a key to its acceptance by Syria.

If the United States had demanded that Syria put its chemical weapons arsenal under international control, Pushkov told reporters, it would have looked like "blackmail at gunpoint," and Assad would very likely have rejected it.

In Beijing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei told reporters that officials "welcome and support the Russian proposal" and believe that "the international community ought to give it positive consideration."

"China always believes that a political settlement is the only realistic way to solve the Syrian issue," Hong said. "We should insist on this direction without wavering."

In Tehran, newly appointed Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Marzieh Afkham said Iran "welcomes Moscow's initiative at this stage to resolve the Syrian crisis. The Islamic Republic of Iran sees this initiative as a way to halt militarization in the region."

The possibility of placing Syrian chemical weapons under international control was discussed by Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin when they met Friday at the Group of 20 summit in St. Petersburg. On Monday, appearing before reporters, Kerry referred to it almost sarcastically when he was asked whether there was anything Assad could do to avoid a U.S. attack.

"Sure, he could turn over every bit of his weapons to the international community within the next week, without delay," Kerry responded with a shrug. "But he isn't about to."

As Kerry flew back to Washington to help lobby lawmakers, he received a midair call from Lavrov, who said he had heard the secretary's remarks and was about to make a public announcement. The statement in Moscow came before Kerry landed.

The idea of international control also quickly gained traction among diplomats and at least some senior Democrats whose backing Obama seeks for a show of force.

U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who has said a U.S. attack on Syria would be illegal without U.N. approval, signaled support, as did British Prime Minister Cameron. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has been wary of a strike, welcomed the idea.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) was the first senior lawmaker to voice support for the Russian proposal.

"I think if the U.N. would accept the responsibility of maintaining these facilities, seeing that they're secure, and that Syria would announce that it is giving up any chemical weapons programs or delivery system vehicles that may have been armed, then I think we've got something," Feinstein said.

Republican Sens. John McCain (Ariz.) and Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.) said that the proposal came only because Assad feels the threat of military force and that Congress should continue considering Obama's request for legislative backing. But the two said the proposal should be given a chance - and a test of its sincerity - by being committed to writing in a U.N. Security Council resolution.

"I am skeptical. Very, very skeptical," McCain said in an interview with CNN Tuesday morning. "But the fact is, you can't pass up an opportunity like this without trying to determine if it's real. I think we can find out very quickly whether it's valid or not."