The Star Online: World Updates
The Star Online: World Updates |
- China's head of state assets regulator under probe for 'discipline violation' - Xinhua
- Obama's Syria decision: a walk, a debate, and a new approach
- Obama asks Congress to approve military strike against Syria
| China's head of state assets regulator under probe for 'discipline violation' - Xinhua Posted: BEIJING (Reuters) - China is investigating Jiang Jiemin, head of the national assets regulator, for "serious discipline violation", state news agency Xinhua reported on Sunday, in what would appear to be another step in Beijing's widening anti-graft campaign. Jiang, who became head of the state-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission (SASAC) in March, was previously chairman of top energy group China National Petroleum Company, or CNPC. (Reporting by Chen Aizhu and Jenny Su; Editing by Paul Tait) |
| Obama's Syria decision: a walk, a debate, and a new approach Posted: WASHINGTON (Reuters) - At the end of the day on Friday, after laying out a strong public case for U.S. military action in Syria, President Barack Obama took a 45-minute walk around the South Lawn of the White House with his chief of staff, Denis McDonough. They discussed Obama's options for using force. Despite saying for days that he had not yet made a decision, the president had been leaning toward military intervention since initial reports from his advisers that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad had used chemical weapons to kill innocent civilians near Damascus, senior officials said on Saturday. But after a week of laying the groundwork for a targeted attack, Obama had begun to waver about immediate action. Britain, Washington's closest ally, had opted out of an international coalition after its parliament said "no," a decision that weighed on the president. Republican leaders in Congress, who control the fate of large parts of Obama's domestic policy agenda, had complained loudly about a lack of consultation from the White House ahead of a potential new war. And polls showed war-weary Americans remained opposed to U.S. involvement in Syria, despite the devastating photos of dead children and their gassed parents. So the president decided to wait. Rather than ordering a military strike, he would announce his decision that force was necessary while seeking congressional approval to authorize it. "After careful deliberation, I have decided that the United States should take military action against Syrian regime targets," he said on Saturday in the White House Rose Garden, Vice President Joe Biden standing at his side. "I'm also mindful that I'm the president of the world's oldest constitutional democracy ... and that's why I've made a second decision: I will seek authorization for the use of force from the American people's representatives in Congress." The decision surprised his own advisers, who had not proposed voluntarily seeking lawmaker approval and had concluded Obama had the legal authority to take action on his own. But Obama felt it would be more consistent with his desire, stated earlier this year, to take America off of a "perpetual wartime footing" by getting the backing of Congress and the citizens it represents. After his walk with McDonough, the president called National Security Adviser Susan Rice, her deputy Tony Blinken, senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer, and others into the Oval Office to announce his approach. They had a vigorous debate that lasted two hours, senior administration officials said. The biggest risk to Obama's new plan: Congress, like the British parliament, would vote no. That would cast serious doubts on Obama's ability to lead in the Middle East where he is already under fire for what critics call a muddled response to the Egyptian military coup. The benefits outweighed that risk for Obama, who believed lawmakers would be compelled to vote for a measure that would protect U.S. allies Israel and Jordan. Adding further weight to the idea of a delay, his military advisers said that waiting on a strike would not make it less effective. Assad, the administration believed, was unlikely to conduct another chemical weapons attack while a U.S. threat loomed. A 'yes' vote would give Obama more legitimacy to attack Syrian forces. And Congress now would share in the responsibility of a decision that could prove unpopular for Obama either way. RISKS AND CRITICS Still, it was a risk. Analysts say Assad could use the time to move weapons to more populated areas of Syria. And a difficult debate in Congress could worsen already bad relations between the White House and Capitol Hill. "The decision to get Congress on board when he hasn't had a huge amount of success working with Congress strikes me as a gamble," said Jon Alterman, director of the Middle East Program at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies. A failed vote, he said, "could shadow the rest of the administration." Colin Kahl, a Georgetown University professor and former Defence official, said the passage in the Democrat-controlled Senate was assured, while the Republican-controlled House of Representatives was likely as well. "There are some sceptics both on the left and the right in the Congress, but I think the administration has a pretty strong case that we need to do this," he said. "If they start to think through some of the credibility implications of not authorizing this, especially as it relates to Iran, then it will pass in the House." After making his statement at the White House, Obama and Biden went out for a round of golf. Lawmakers from both political parties who support action said the president had failed to react as quickly as necessary. "I support the president's decision. But as far as I'm concerned, we should strike in Syria today," said Bill Nelson, a Democratic senator from Florida who is a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. "Leadership is about reacting to a crisis, and quickly making the hard and tough decisions," said Senator Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, the top Republican on the Senate intelligence committee. He said Obama should have demanded that lawmakers, who are on recess until September 9, return to Washington immediately. (Additional reporting by Tabassum Zakaria, Paul Eckert, and Patricia Zengerle; Editing by Philip Barbara) |
| Obama asks Congress to approve military strike against Syria Posted: WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama stepped back from the brink on Saturday and delayed an imminent military strike against Syria to seek approval from the U.S. Congress in a gamble that will test his ability to project American strength abroad and deploy his own power at home. Before Obama put on the brakes, the path had been cleared for a U.S. assault. Navy ships were in place and awaiting orders to launch missiles, and U.N. inspectors had left Syria after gathering evidence of a chemical weapons attack that U.S. officials say killed 1,429 people. But Obama decided to seek the backing of U.S. lawmakers before attacking, as polls showed strong opposition from Americans already weary of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Approval will take at least 10 days, if it comes at all. "Today I'm asking Congress to send a message to the world that we are ready to move as one nation," Obama said in a dramatic shift he announced in the White House Rose Garden. Obama, whose credibility has been called into question for not punishing the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for earlier poison gas attacks, warned lawmakers they must consider the cost of doing nothing in Syria. "Here's my question for every member of Congress and every member of the global community: What message will we send if a dictator can gas hundreds of children to death in plain sight and pay no price?" he said. Obama's approach, which he debated with top aides on Friday night, has left in doubt whether the United States will carry through with the military steps that the president has already approved. Backing from Congress is by no means assured, with many Democrats and Republicans uneasy about intervening in a distant civil war in which 100,000 people have been killed over the past 2-1/2 years. Obama's decision to consult with Congress is in line with an argument he has often made for a more collaborative approach to foreign policy in Washington than there was under his predecessor, President George. W. Bush. But another reason to bring lawmakers into the process is that Obama might be able to share some of the responsibility with Congress if it votes for strikes on Syria that turn badly for Washington. Lawmakers for the most part welcomed Obama's decision but looked in no hurry to come back to Washington early from their summer recess, which lasts until September 9. "In consultation with the president, we expect the House to consider a measure the week of September 9," said John Boehner, the top U.S. Republican and speaker of the House of Representatives. "This provides the president time to make his case to Congress and the American people." House members are to receive a classified briefing on Sunday from administration officials to hear the case against Syria. Officials briefed senators on Saturday. British Prime Minister David Cameron, who was unable to persuade the British parliament to back action earlier in the week, welcomed Obama's decision, as did the government of French President Francois Hollande, with whom Obama spoke on Saturday. In rebel-held areas of Syria, there was a sense of frustration and disappointment. "God curse everything," said an activist in the rebel-held territory of Idlib, Ahmad Kaddour. "We've become just a game to people. I think this is going to make the situation worse for those of us living here." A Reuters reporter visited a group of fighters and activists sitting in a home in Aleppo city. They had not watched Obama's speech, and when told of the president's decision, they all agreed it meant there would be no U.S. strike. "This is the same old hesitancy that the United States have tortured us with since the beginning of the revolution," one said. DECISION MADE FRIDAY NIGHT At the White House, Obama's decision surprised senior aides when he informed them of it on Friday night after they had concluded the president already had the legal authority to act on his own. Officials said he laid out the idea of going to Congress during a 45-minute walk on the White House south grounds with chief of staff Denis McDonough, then debated the risks with others in his inner circle, some of whom argued against his logic. Senior administration officials who briefed reporters after Obama spoke said they believed Congress will vote in favor of a U.S. military strike because of the threat chemical weapons pose to the security of U.S. ally Israel and other friends in the region. Jon Alterman, a former State Department official who is a Middle East expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said failure by Obama to get his way "could be something that not only dominates September and October, but could shadow the rest of the administration." Obama sent draft legislation to Congress on Saturday formally asking for approval to use military force in Syria to "deter, disrupt, prevent and degrade" the potential for further chemical attacks. The August 21 attack was the deadliest single incident of the Syrian civil war and the world's worst use of chemical arms since Iraq's Saddam Hussein gassed thousands of Kurds in 1988. The team of U.N. experts arrived in the Netherlands on Saturday carrying evidence and samples relating to the attack. They had flown from Beirut after crossing the border into Lebanon by road earlier in the day. The 20-member team had arrived in Damascus three days before the attack to investigate earlier accusations of chemical weapons use. After days holed up in a hotel, they visited the sites several times, taking blood and tissue samples from victims and from soldiers at a government hospital. War weariness cost Washington the support of its closest ally: Britain has voiced backing for action but was forced to drop any plans for a military strike after Cameron unexpectedly lost a vote over it in parliament on Thursday, straining London's "special relationship" with Washington. Syria and its main ally, Russia, say rebels carried out the gas attack as a provocation. Moscow has repeatedly used its U.N. Security Council veto to block action against Syria and says any attack would be illegal and only inflame the civil war there. "I am convinced that (the chemical attack) is nothing more than a provocation by those who want to drag other countries into the Syrian conflict," Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Saturday. Syria's Foreign Ministry repeated its denial that the government had used chemical weapons against its own people. Washington says the Syrian denials are not credible and that the rebels would not have been able to launch such an attack. Syria's neighbour Turkey backs the use of force. The Arab League has said Syria is to blame for the chemical attack but so far stopped short of explicitly endorsing Western military strikes. Arab League foreign ministers are due to meet in Cairo on Sunday. Iran, Assad's main ally in the region, has condemned plans for strikes and warned of wider war. (Additional reporting by Tabassum Zakaria, Patricia Zengerle, Douwe Miedema and Paul Eckert in Washington; Denis Dyomkin in Vladivostok, and Khaled Yacoub Oweis in Amman; Writing by Steve Holland; Editing by Alistair Bell and Mohammad Zargham) |
| You are subscribed to email updates from World To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan