If Syria wants to disarm it is able to do so.
re: The question of whether a "Russian Plan" Syrian disarmament is factually, logistically feasible.
Short answer, sure. Yes. The question would be what would satisfy us, but the actual disarmement is no great trick.
Analyzing whether it would be feasible to implement the Russian plan requires that we set aside preconceptions based on the Iraq inspection regime and look at what is literally being talked about.
Syria willingly turning over control of some materials Syria currently controls (located in areas Syria controls militarily) that combined would take up less space than a Home Depot.
All talk of inspectors and difficulty of finding things and such overlook the key word, willingly.
If Syria decides, for whatever reason, to render itself incapable of further use of Sarin it can do so, fairly easily.
If Syria is not willing and honest and does not decide to no longer have the ability to use Sarin, then forcing that reality upon them would require a war.
Syria can, easily and securely, deliver tons and tons of chemical weapons material to some border point or port for somebody else to take custody of them. Problem solved.
Would that satisfy us? Would we accept that was all of it? Aha! That is a different question that gets into all sorts of complexities.
But if we don't trust Syria then what's the point in even talking about something that we could not verify 100% without ocupying the country and stopping the war to then commence looking under matteresses for stray chemicals?
See the point? The whole thing is either predicated in some degre of trust, or on us being sensible and being glad that we decomissioned a shit-load of Sarin that won't kill anyone now, even if there is some remnant supply somewhere.
We would have to be satisfied with decomissioning a big bunch of chemical weapons, for its own sake.
We are talking about the Syrian regime deciding to do something, honestly and unilaterally, or we are talking about nothing.
It is distinctly possible that we are, in fact, talking about nothing. That may be the case.
Added complexities like how could Syria prove to us that they had done so are not the same as "could it be done." Adding a wrinkle of "could it be done to our satisfaction" is a whole new tangent.
(Recall that Saddam Hussein did, in fact, disarm... like a decade before we invaded. It was no major undertaking... just wrecking and burning and burying some stuff.)
If there is no logistically feasible way to satisfy us then that is a function of our expectations. But Syria disarming in terms of chemical weapons is a fairly easy thing for Syria to accomplish, as a logistical task.
= new reply since forum marked as read
