Negotiating on Syria

It is still too early to know whether President Obama’s aggressive talk about Syria will have the wished-for effects. But it is undeniable that it has forced diplomatic negotiations that did not previously exist.

The Russian proposal, which Syria accepted, of placing chemical weapons under international control, is an important step. It puts the Kremlin’s credibility at stake, at a time when President Vladimir Putin wants to position Russia as a main player in global geopolitics.

The upcoming meeting in Geneva of diplomatic heads from Russia and the United States to resolve a regional crisis brings to mind memories of the Cold War and spheres of influence. The only Russian military base outside the country is in Syria. Putin does not want to risk having a U.S. punitive strike upset the balance of a three-year civil war and lead to the ouster of Bashar al-Assad.

Make no mistake: Obama’s campaign to strike Syria is what revived negotiations with a Russian proposal. His punitive policy led to this situation and should remain firm during the talks.

It is true that dialogue can be a delaying tactic, especially given how challenging it is for an international group to identify and control a ton of chemical weapons—according to estimates—in the middle of a bloody civil war.

If that turns out to be the case, it could reinforce Obama’s tough stance, since he will be able to say that he explored all diplomatic options unsuccessfully before resorting to missiles.

This negotiation does not bring up expectations of peace in the civil war, but maybe it can prevent it from getting worse. That, for now, will be something positive.