![]() That’s why France repeats the messages, notably to the Americans, to clarify their position,” Jean-Marc Ayrault told RTL radio. On Tuesday, the French foreign minister vented his frustration at the confusion at the heart of Trump’s Syria policy, arguing that the Idlib attack was carried out by the Damascus government to explore the boundaries and responses of the new US adminstration. And when we’re looking at this, it’s about changing up priorities, and our priority is no longer to sit and focus on getting Assad out.” On Thursday, Haley told reporters: “You pick and choose your battles. Tillerson declared during a visit to Turkey this week that the “longer-term status of President Assad will be decided by the Syrian people”. However, US allies and Syrian opposition figures questioned the coherence of the administration’s position, noting that the attack followed statements from both Tillerson and Haley that appeared to formalise a change in US policy, away from demanding an end to the Assad regime. In New York, the US envoy to the UN, Nikki Haley, said she would use the US presidency of the security council to convene a special session on Syria on Wednesday morning. The tone of the statement was reminiscent of the previous administration, both in terms of its condemnation of the role of Russia and Iran as enablers – and in its absence of references to future US action. Save your ‘powder’ for another (and more important) day!” There is no upside and tremendous downside. ![]() On 7 September of that year, he tweeted: “President Obama, do not attack Syria. There was nothing in Trump’s statement to indicate how the US might respond differently from the Obama administration.Īfter the Ghouta attack in 2013, Trump had argued vociferously against US military action in Syria. Obama did not carry out airstrikes but organised with Russia to move Syria’s declared arsenal of chemical weapons out of the country to be destroyed. He pointed out that Obama had set down a “red line” in 2012 on the use of chemical weapons in Syria, but argued that Obama then “did nothing” when the Assad regime carried out a mass gas attack against the town of Ghouta in August 2013. It was only later in the day that the White House spokesman read out a statement from the president, in which Trump used the occasion to score a domestic political point against the Obama administration. On Tuesday morning, Trump addressed a builders’ conference, but made no mention of the attack. He recently described himself as “not a media press access person”. The Idlib attack was swiftly condemned by western capitals and congressional leaders, but the US secretary of state, Rex Tillerson – who was visiting neighbouring Jordan at the time – ignored a press question about it, retaining his customary silence in the face of daily world events. In the absence of a clear vision, the initial response to on Tuesday was silence. The reflex illustrated Trump’s enduring sense of being in his predecessor’s shadow, reinforcing the impression given by his obsessive tweeting of unsubstantiated claims that Obama wiretapped him.Īs with healthcare, Trump’s policy on Syria has been defined by the desire to unpick Obama’s legacy – without a clear picture of what would replace it. “President Obama said in 2012 that he would establish a ‘red line’ against the use of chemical weapons and then did nothing.” ![]() “These heinous actions by the Bashar al-Assad regime are a consequence of the last administration’s weakness and irresolution,” he said in a statement.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |