This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/16/world/middleeast/syria-chemical-weapons-deal.html

The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
Obama Hails Syrian Pact, Calling It a Crucial Step G.O.P. Expresses Hope As Obama Praises Deal
(35 minutes later)
WASHINGTON — President Obama hailed the agreement reached with Russia over the weekend to seize and destroy Syria’s chemical weapons as a “foundation” that could eventually lead to a political settlement of the civil war that has gripped that nation and killed tens of thousands of people over the past two years. WASHINGTON — President Obama’s Congressional critics expressed guarded optimism about an agreement reached with Russia over the weekend to seize and destroy Syria’s chemical weapons, even as Mr. Obama hailed the diplomatic effort as a “foundation” that could lead to a political settlement in that country’s civil war.
Mr. Obama said in an interview broadcast on Sunday that the United States was in a “better position” to prevent President Bashar al-Assad of Syria from using poison gas again because of the deal hammered out by Secretary of State John Kerry and Sergey Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister. Mr. Obama said in an interview that was broadcast on Sunday that the United States was in a “better position” to prevent President Bashar al-Assad of Syria from using poison gas again because of the deal produced by Secretary of State John Kerry and Sergey V. Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister.
“Look, we’re not there yet,” Mr. Obama said in the interview, taped Friday, with George Stephanopoulos for the ABC News program “This Week.” “We don’t have an actual, verifiable deal that will begin that process. But the distance that we’ve traveled over these couple of weeks is remarkable.”“Look, we’re not there yet,” Mr. Obama said in the interview, taped Friday, with George Stephanopoulos for the ABC News program “This Week.” “We don’t have an actual, verifiable deal that will begin that process. But the distance that we’ve traveled over these couple of weeks is remarkable.”
Mr. Obama said the United States was not going to “get in the middle of somebody else’s civil war.” But he said the chemical weapons agreement could be a first step toward a political settlement that would “deal with the underlying terrible conflict.” In interviews on Sunday, lawmakers in Washington described the agreement as a risky one, with potential benefits for stability in the Middle East if it succeeds and huge risks for Mr. Obama — both abroad and at home — if it fails. Several senators said Mr. Obama would deserve credit for avoiding a military strike if the chemical weapons could be eliminated in the midst of a civil war.
Asked about the possibility of an overall political settlement that would leave Mr. Assad in power in Syria, Mr. Obama said, “It is hard to envision how Mr. Assad regains any kind of legitimacy after he’s gassed, or his military has gassed, innocent civilians and children.” Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, who just days earlier had described Mr. Obama as seeming “uncomfortable” in the role of commander in chief, said the president may have turned a “muddled” and “clunky” foreign policy response into a tentative diplomatic win.
Mr. Obama took credit for creating the pressure that led to the deal by threatening — and then backing off from — a military strike in Syria. He also defended his actions over the past two weeks, saying that his critics were judging him on style, not on the substance of his policies. “It’s hard for anybody to pooh-pooh the idea that we may be on the way to a diplomatic solution,” said Mr. Corker, the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
“Had we rolled out something that was very smooth and disciplined and linear they would have graded it well, even if it was a disastrous policy,” Mr. Obama said, adding: “We know that, because that’s exactly how they graded the Iraq war.” Another Republican, Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, said the United States now had the opportunity to “parlay” the negotiations over chemical weapons into broader talks to find a political end to Syria’s civil war and the removal of Mr. Assad from power.
He said his administration over the past several weeks had focused on preventing Mr. Assad from using chemical weapons again, after an attack last month that is said to have killed more than 1,400 civilians. “If the framework can actually be implemented, obviously it will be a big step in the right direction,” Mr. Johnson said. Of Mr. Obama and his strategy, he said: “I hope it works out. I truly do. If he succeeds with this framework, people have to give him credit.”
“If that goal is achieved, then it sounds to me like we did something right,” he said. But senators from both parties also expressed deep concern about the possibility that the diplomacy could fail, perhaps spectacularly, and that Mr. Obama’s actions over the past two weeks had strengthened the credibility of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia at the expense of America’s reputation around the world.
Mr. Obama also responded to criticism that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia had been “playing” his American counterpart by seizing control of the diplomatic efforts. He said the Russian president did not have the same “values” as the United States, but still played an important role in the Syrian conflict. “I have to be honest with you, it’s also fraught with danger,” said Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey. “The president will reap whatever achievements can be gleaned from this agreement — if it is successful.”
“I welcome him being involved,” Mr. Obama said. “I welcome him saying, ‘I will take responsibility for pushing my client, the Assad regime, to deal with these chemical weapons.’ ” In the ABC interview, Mr. Obama said his critics had been judging him on the style but not the substance of his policies during the past several weeks. He said he was not concerned with earning “style points” in the conduct of foreign policy, and he pointed to President George W. Bush’s decision to go to war in Iraq as an example of making the wrong call.
Mr. Obama added that despite the disagreements between the United States and Russia recently over a range of issues — including the granting of asylum to Edward J. Snowden, who is wanted by the United States government for leaking classified documents — the two presidents were still able to work together on issues like the chemical weapons in Syria. “Had we rolled out something that was very smooth and disciplined and linear, they would have graded it well, even if it was a disastrous policy,” Mr. Obama said, adding, “We know that, because that’s exactly how they graded the Iraq war.”
After watching the interview, Mr. Johnson said Mr. Obama’s international credibility would be repaired somewhat if the chemical weapons were neutralized through the diplomatic process. But he said that did not excuse some of the choices the president had made.
“This process has not been particularly stylish. It hasn’t been pretty,” Mr. Johnson said. “Unfortunately, President Obama’s credibility hasn’t been strengthened.”
Lawmakers expressed both concern about and appreciation of Mr. Putin’s role. Some, like Senator Tim Kaine, Democrat of Virginia, said Russia’s willingness to be at the center of negotiations over the chemical weapons may foreshadow a willingness to be part of talks aimed at ending the Syrian civil war.
“If the parties are at the table negotiating over this chemical weapons issue,” Mr. Kaine said in an interview, such talks might eventually “roll right over to a negotiated resolution to the overall civil war.”
But others said they were dismayed that Mr. Putin, as Mr. Corker put it, now had his “hands firmly on the steering wheel of this policy.” And Representative Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican and the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said Mr. Obama had been badly outmaneuvered by a cannier opponent who, he said, had gotten everything he wanted.
“Right now, we are being led by the nose by Putin through this horrible morass that is the United Nations,” Mr. Rogers said on the CNN program “State of the Union.” “He wanted Assad there. He gets to keep his warm-water port, he gets to keep his military contracts, and he gives breathing space to both Hezbollah, which is fighting on behalf of Assad, and Assad.”
Mr. Obama, in the television interview, responded to criticism that by seizing control of the diplomatic efforts, Mr. Putin has been “playing” his American counterpart. He said the Russian president did not have the same “values” as the United States, but still played an important role in the Syrian conflict.
“I welcome him being involved,” Mr. Obama said. “I welcome him saying, ‘I will take responsibility for pushing my client, the Assad regime, to deal with these chemical weapons.’ ”
Mr. Obama added that despite the recent disagreements between the United States and Russia over a variety of issues — including the granting of temporary asylum to Edward J. Snowden, who is wanted by the United States government for leaking classified documents — the two presidents were still able to work together on issues like the chemical weapons in Syria.
“I know that sometimes this gets framed or looked at through the lens of the U.S. versus Russia, but that’s not what this is about,” he said.“I know that sometimes this gets framed or looked at through the lens of the U.S. versus Russia, but that’s not what this is about,” he said.
Mr. Obama declined to say how long the Syrian government should be given to identify and destroy the chemical weapons. He said those were details that were being worked out by Mr. Kerry and Mr. Lavrov.
But he said the outcome of the negotiations should send a strong signal to other countries, including Iran, that the United States and the rest of the international community were willing to use force, and diplomacy, to resolve disputes.
He said he had had indirect communications with Iran’s new president, Hassan Rouhani. He said he believed that the Iranians understood that the United States viewed the possibility of a nuclear-armed Iran as an even bigger threat to national security and regional stability than Syria’s chemical weapons.
“My suspicion is that the Iranians recognize they shouldn’t draw a lesson that we haven’t struck to think we won’t strike Iran,” Mr. Obama said. “On the other hand, they should draw from this lesson that there is the potential of resolving these issues diplomatically.”
In the interview, Mr. Obama also addressed his looming clash with Republicans over the nation’s debt and budget. He vowed not to negotiate with the House speaker, John A. Boehner, over whether to raise the debt ceiling.
The president said if “the other party can simply sit there and say, ‘Well, we’re not gonna pay the bills unless you give us what we want,’ that changes the constitutional structure of this government entirely.”
He added flatly, “We can’t negotiate around the debt ceiling.”
Mr. Obama also previewed remarks he was scheduled to give on Monday at the White House regarding the five-year anniversary of the collapse of the financial firm Lehman Brothers. He said that the country had seen “progress across the board” since the financial collapse in 2008, but that long-term trends like globalization and technology had continued to hurt working Americans.
He said the Republican fiscal agenda would exacerbate those trends, not make them better.
“There’s no serious economist out there that would suggest that, if you took the Republican agenda of slashing education further, slashing Medicare further, slashing research and development further, slashing investments in infrastructure further, that that would reverse some of these trends of inequality,” Mr. Obama said.
Asked about the political futures of Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, Mr. Obama demurred.
“I suspect if you asked both of them, they’d say, ‘It’s way too premature to start talking about 2016,” Mr. Obama said. “My focus is on the American people right now. I’ll let you guys worry about the politics.”