Perhaps they are just anxious to affirm international law on this matter:
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/01/20280931-arab-states-call-for-international-action-against-syrian-regime?lite
At an Arab League meeting in Cairo on Sunday, foreign ministers passed a resolution pressing the United Nations and the global community to “take the deterrent and necessary measures against the culprits of this crime that the Syrian regime bears responsibility for,” according to Reuters.
The ministers also concluded that those responsible for the lethal chemical weapons attack should face trial just like other “war criminals.”
This is also very good for us and all those who care about international law. President Obama's decision to seek approval from Congress is shunting the pressure back on the UN, and if in the end the evidence is such that we have to act alone or with only a few partners, having this basis for the action along with the refusal of the UN to authorize action places us in a very different and much better situation militarily and diplomatically.
Whoever is responsible for the use of chemical weapons (and yes it probably is the Assad regime) committed an atrocity, and it's best for everyone and for the global future to have a multiplicity of countries repudiating it in the strongest terms.
Having the US just act without exhausting the international forums makes us look like military adventurers. Going through the process both makes the UN have to cope with the issue and then makes us the agent to carry out an international justice of a sort, even if Russia never lets a resolution through the Security Council.
I think there is no doubt that Congress will eventually pass some sort of resolution for action, even if it isn't open-ended. And giving the Obama administration time to talk to these countries and other countries in the UN, and for the entire world to evaluate the evidence, will almost certainly create a much better outcome. After all, if we want to deter other dictators from this sort of action, there should be strong international pressure and a precedent. Building that precedent is important.
Plus, it's just impressive to have the Congress of a democratically-based country debating the issue and evaluating the evidence. Perhaps more than anything else, this lays the foundation for a more successful intervention.
= new reply since forum marked as read
