Is dismantling Syria's chemical weapons stores realistic?

[cali]

Dismantling Syria chemical weapons arsenal would be tough task

Any deal with Syria to hand over its chemical weapons in the middle of a chaotic civil war would be difficult for inspectors to enforce and destroying them would likely take years, U.S. officials and experts caution.

<snip>

The proposal was welcomed by Syria and seized upon by the secretary-general of the United Nations. U.S. President Barack Obama said the offer was a potential breakthrough but had to be handled with skepticism.

<snip>

Accounting for Syria's chemical arms cache - believed to be spread over dozens of locations - would be difficult, as would be shielding arms inspectors from violence.

"This is a nice idea but tough to achieve," said one U.S. official speaking on condition of anonymity.

"You're in the middle of a brutal civil war where the Syrian regime is massacring its own people. Does anyone think they're going to suddenly stop the killing to allow inspectors to secure and destroy all the chemical weapons?" the official said.

<snip>

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/dismantling-syria-chemical-weapons-arsenal-tough-task-012629276.html

[VanillaRhapsody]

1. Well 98% of the world is getting rid of theirs...

already 78% is gone....I think they can figure it out.

[cthulu2016]

2. With a cooperative Syria, sequestering them would be a trivial task

And without a cooperative Syria there is nothing to talk about.

And unless you have become a bombing advocate (Iassume not), who cares if it would be a daunting task?

Is there a better alternative?

[cali]

3. how would that be accomplished?

[cthulu2016]

8. (I don't know you if you replied before or after the edit)

The scenario presumes a cooperative Syrian regime, so the question is the same as, "How would Assad move all his Sarin supplies to some location?"

As the joke goes, "Very carefully"

But seriously, it is just the Syrian army moving material, which they do every day. This stuff has been moved before and will be again, same as any other military supply. If Syria wanted to decommission it's Sarin capability it would just move all the stuff to a location somewhere away from heavy fighting, and tell the UN to worry about it. We would fly it off somewhere or another.

The worries about how it could be done with a war on are not sensible. How does the regime do anything with a war on? How did they do the gas attack in the first place if the rebels are able to interdict everything they do?

The rebels don't control the skies and they don't control areas where these chemicals are located. (If they do, then we need to get the rebels to turn them over, etc.)

No inspectors are even needed in a cooperative Syria scenario. Assad knows where stuff is.

And if Syria is not cooperative and eager to disarm then there's nothing to talk about.

That's why I say logistics are literally the last thing to be worried about.

[TwilightGardener]

4. Syria would have to guarantee safety and allow access. Might put a crimp in their war.

It's worth trying, though--otherwise the stockpiles and components will possibly outlast Assad, intervention or not, and who knows what will happen with it.

[David__77]

5. Preliminarily, I don't think it's realistic.

Not with a war going. If they even exist in the quantities many think, than they are probably distributed across many locations. Even consolidating them in a few locations might take a lot of time and effort given the fact that an insurgency is on. It would involve a reasonably large foreign presence that would presumably be targeted by insurgents. The Syrian state would not be able to guarantee their safety (because they cannot even guarantee their own safety!).

This is not a one month or one year proposition, but something that would take years.

[bigtree]

6. haven't you heard? Peace has broken out

. . . out of a declaration to war.

When those negotiations bog down or collapse, the WH wants that military authorization they're seeking to provide them cover for a more direct coercion.

war is peace.

[FarCenter]

7. Charlie Rose didn't see any chaos in Damascus

He was able to fly in, interview Asad, and fly out without incident. The parts of Damascus that he traveled through looked normal.

Don't believe everything that you see in the media. The cameramen are very good at making a small incident looking like a big deal.

[cali]

11. yes, parts of Damascus are firmly under the control of Assad forces

but surely you're not contesting the fact that the country is in the midst of a violent civil war that's killed over a hundred thousand and resulted in over 2 million refugees?

do you call that a "small incident"?

[FarCenter]

12. That is around 137 / day or about 3 or 4 times the rate in Iraq.

[Jesus Malverde]

13. Flew into Lebanon, transited by car to damascus.

The rebels control nothing...

[B2G]

9. Well not according to Kerry himself... nt

[KurtNYC]

10. I just get this mental image of a goal post mounted to the bed of a pick up truck

Not just movable -- constantly moving.

What does the US look like if we back away from this deal or make excuses ?

[KoKo]

14. UN Peacekeeping Troops as the Boots on the Ground to Guard and

allow the Inspection Teams time to locate and determine best way to dispose of the weapons.

It could work. Better UN Boots on Ground than US..

At least that's what I've heard the plan could be. That could change though.

[Celefin]

15. I think Russia might sweeten the deal for Assad and offer some protection

...under a UN mandate of course which they can't not get for this.

This way they'd legitimize their arms provision to Assad and might even be allowed to protect the operation on the ground with Russian personnel, making an US strike virtually impossible. An they could also, just like the US keeps doing, provide weapon handling training to the military, especially air defenses.

This scenario would be a total win-win for Russia and not all that impossible to imagine. Vetoing a UN resolution that would legalize a military operation inside Syria to remove the chemical weapons is really not an option.

UN peacekeepers really aren't an option as they are not meant to be placed in the middle of a raging war but only come into play after a ceasefire. Something extremely unlikely to be accepted by the rebels...

But who knows, there might be more positive surprises.
One can hope.