Clearly, President Obama may now have a way out, avoiding military intervention in Syria, thanks to the diplomatic intervention by Russia and supported by China. On the other hand, I think that President Obama may have dug himself a new and bigger hole, with far larger strategic implications [see yesterday’s blog entitled “Israel fears being left alone to counter Iran nuclear programme – FT.com“].
The People’s Daily article concludes on the theme that this latest initiative may pave the way for a new sort of US foreign policy, putting more emphasis on diplomacy; no doubt this will worry the US defense industry and the lobbyists will be active.
Many will worry about President Obama’s procrastination and personal indecision, seeing it as a weakness in his leadership style. Some will argue that this will embolden those countries and individuals that want to weaken the US or her interests.
Even if Syria hands over her chemical weapons, there is still a civil war to solve, plus the strategic challenge of Iran‘s nuclear weapons program.
Let me turn this to an open question:
If Syria hands over her chemical weapons, what will be the wider implications for US foreign policy?