Obama delays Syrian vote for talks

While stepping back from what looked to be a certain defeat in his bid for domestic political support for a strike against Syrian president Bashar Assad’s military, Mr Obama still spent most of an address to the nation making the case for action as a deterrent to further use of chemical weapons and a warning to other countries tempted to use them.

“The images from this massacre are sickening. Men, women, and children lying in rows, killed by poison gas, others foaming at mouth, gasping for breath, a father clutching his dead children, imploring them to get up and walk,” he said.

But he said he would give the proposal by Syria’s ally Russia to stockpile the weapons a try.

Polls show a majority of Americans want no more US military involvement in the Middle East after the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“It’s too early to tell whether this offer will succeed, and any agreement must verify that the Assad regime keeps its commitments,” Mr Obama said. “But this initiative has the potential to remove the threat of chemical weapons without the use of force.”

The diplomatic deal that is under discussion would put Syria’s chemical weapons under international control for destruction. Secretary of State John Kerry is meeting Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Geneva to work out details.

Meanwhile Mr Obama said he has ordered the military to remain prepared to carry out attacks if needed. Addressing criticism over his own promise of limited strikes, he said, “Even a limited strike will send a message to Assad that no other nation can deliver.”

Mr Obama said: “Our ideals and principles, as well as our national security, are at stake in Syria, along with our leadership of a world where we seek to ensure that the worst weapons will never be used.”

One problem is Russian President Vladimir Putin’s demand that the United States agree not to use military force in the future. Mr Obama said he would not do that. “If diplomacy now fails and the United States fails to act, the Assad regime will see no reason to stop using chemical weapons,” he said. Over time, he added, the weapons could threaten US troops and allies in the region.

“America is not the world’s policeman,” he said. “Terrible things happen across the globe, and it is beyond our means to right every wrong. But when, with modest effort and risk, we can stop children from being gassed to death and thereby make our own children safer over the long run, I believe we should act.”

At the same time, he said the United States and its allies would work with Russia and China to present a resolution to the United Nations Security Council requiring Assad to give up his chemical weapons and destroy them under international control.

Russia has blocked US attempts to rally the Security Council behind a military strike.

Syria has refused to reveal the size of its chemical weapons stockpile. France says it includes more than 1,000 tons of “chemical agents and precursor chemicals,” including sulphur mustard, VX and sarin gas.

Meanwhile, French president Francois Hollande was reported to have accused David Cameron of making a “schoolboy error” in putting UK involvement in military action against the Assad regime to a vote in the House of Commons, which he lost.

Mr Hollande – who made clear he is ready to commit French forces to a punitive strike on Assad – staged a debate in the French National Assembly, but did not put the issue to a vote.

According to the Paris-based magazine Le Canard Enchaine, in a private discussion on Mr Cameron’s defeat, the Socialist President said: “He overestimated his strength and didn’t find a way of convincing his (parliamentary) majority. Cameron comes out of this affair weakened. And it’s not good for Great Britain.”

Comment & Letters: Page 12; Hollande under fire: Page 13.