An unprecedented face-to-face discussion among world leaders ahead of a possible U.S.-led military mission failed – as expected – to bridge the strong divide over how best to address the Syrian crisis.
U.S. President Barack Obama left St. Petersburg, Russia, with a letter of support signed by the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, Turkey, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Australia, and Saudi Arabia. The discussion took place while Group of 20 leaders met in Russia to discuss global economic issues.“We support efforts undertaken by the United States and other countries to reinforce the prohibition on the use of chemical weapons,” the letter states, giving the U.S. new political support.
It is clear though by the limited list of signatories that there remain G20 countries – such as Germany and the broader European Union – that are in-between the U.S. position and that of Russia and China, who strongly oppose military intervention in Syria.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper, for his part, said he strongly urged fellow leaders Thursday night to consider the consequences of inaction in the context of history.
“I may be oversimplifying it somewhat, but broadly speaking, we have two camps here,” said Mr. Harper, referring to those who support the position of U.S. and France and those who oppose a military strike in Syria. “We’re at an impasse here in terms of what the world community believes should or shouldn’t be done, and those who want to act have our full support.”
He criticized the fact that some G20 leaders are of the view that no action can take place unless it has the support of the UN Security Council, where both Russia and China have a veto.
President Obama told reporters that the world needs to consider the consequences of not acting in Syria and the message that would send.
He also said that he and Russian President Vladimir Putin did have a conversation on the margins of the summit. The President said that while the media has been analyzing the body language of their exchanges, the conversations between the two of them are always cordial.
“On Syria, I said ‘Look, I don’t expect us to agree,’” Mr. Obama said. However he said he reminded Mr. Putin that they both do agree that there must be a political transition in order to end the fighting in Syria and that both of them should work to help that happen.
“It remains important for us to work together,” he said.
The President declined several times to answer whether or not the U.S. would act in Syria without the support of Congress, dismissing the questions as "parlour games."
In a detailed answer that looked back on past military decisions, Mr. Obama said politicians sometimes have to make decisions that are right, but not necessarily popular.
"These kinds of actions are always unpopular because they seem distant and removed," he said. "People are struggling with jobs and bills to pay and they don't want their sons or daughters put in harm's way... When people say that it is a terrible stain on all of us that hundreds of thousands of people were slaughtered in Rwandwa, well imagine if Rwanda was going on right now?"
On Friday, Canada announced $45-million in additional support for the region. The money is aimed at providing food, clean water and sanitation, medical assistance, shelter and protection – both in Syria and for Syrian refugees in neighbouring countries.
Ottawa says it has now contributed $203-million in humanitarian assistance related to the Syrian crisis since January 2013.
British Prime Minister David Cameron – who chaired a meeting Friday morning focused on Syria that was attended by Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird – announced about $85-million in aid.
While speaking with reporters following the summit, Mr. Harper referenced the fact that chemical weapons have not generally been used since the First World War. He noted that he grew up near Sunnybrook hospital in Toronto – created in 1948 as Canada’s largest veterans’ hospital – and had the opportunity to hear from victims of chemical weapons.
“Terrible stories,” he said, in reference to visits veterans would make to his classroom.
“I can tell you it was a very real recollection when I was a boy that those kinds of things had happened. But as I pointed out last night, even in the Second World War, even in the war against fascism and Hitler, those forces did not on the battlefield resort to chemical weapons. So I really do believe here that if we’re going to sit back and allow a regime to try and win a military conflict through the use of chemical weapons, we are in new territory, we are in brand new territory that is extremely dangerous and that there will be no turning back from. Even the most ferocious, despicable and brutal powers from the past 100 years have all stayed away from this kind of warfare. So as I say, I think we’re in new territory and I think it demands a different kind of response from our allies than we would have been prepared to do in other circumstances.”
No comments:
Post a Comment