Diplomacy 1, Bombing 0
by digby
So it appears that we have at least the hope of a diplomatic solution on Syrian chemical weapons and won’t be entering their civil war any time soon.
I’m hearing some kvetching by liberals that this means there is also no hope for the Syrian people and that’s daft. Their horrifying situation isn’t made better but at least we’re not making it worse by bombing them. And that’s something. Having the UN involved with the Russians on board makes it far more likely they’ll be able to work this problem and try to get a cease fire.
It’s also obvious that the talking points require we believe that it was the threat of force that brought Assad to the table. Again, I have to point out that if that’s so, Assad and the Russians weren’t paying attention because it looked very much like the US Congress was going to deny the president the authority to use force as the British parliament had done earlier. They had good reason to hold out at that moment and not give in. In fact, one can just as easily make the case that it was the threat to withhold authorization that made the US realize it had to be more creative and they jumped at the chance when it presented itself (which is truly admirable.) I’m going to guess that everyone knew the situation was escalating dangerously out of control, were seeking a non-violent way out and found it. That shows some welcome rationality. And you can’t always count on that.
Not that it really matters. The history of this won’t be written by people like me and frankly, I don’t care at this moment. If they found a way for everyone to save face then it’s a good thing. What matters now is that there are no bombs falling on Syria adding to the misery of its poor people. And perhaps because of the global attention, the possibilities of dialog between all the parties (including Iran and Israel) will turn out to have opened up a path to peace. It’s one good day. We should take them when we get them.
.