
© politistick.comThe faces of power. Who's war is it?
Secretary of State Kerry urged President Obama to launch secret missile attacks inside Syria without admitting the U.S. role, a plan that Obama rejected, according to a new report cited by Gareth Porter. Jeffrey Goldberg's newly published
book-length article on Barack Obama and the Middle East includes a
major revelation that brings Secretary of State John Kerry's Syrian diplomacy into sharper focus: it reports that Kerry has sought on several occasions without success over the past several months
to get Obama's approval for cruise missile strikes against the Syrian government.That revelation shows that
Kerry's strategy in promoting the Syrian peace negotiations in recent months was
based on much heavier pressure on the Assad regime to agree that President Bashar al-Assad must step down
than was apparent. It also completes a larger story of
Kerry as the primary advocate in the administration of war in Syria ever since he became Secretary of State in early 2013.
Goldberg reports that
"on several occasions" Kerry requested that Obama approve missile strikes at "specific regime targets," in order to "send a message" to Assad - and his international allies -
to "negotiate peace." Kerry suggested to Obama that the U.S.
wouldn't have to acknowledge the attacks publicly, according to Goldberg, because Assad "would surely know the missiles' return address."
Goldberg reports that Kerry had "recently" submitted a "written outline of new steps to bring more pressure on Assad." That is obviously a reference to what Kerry referred to in Senate testimony in February as "significant discussions" within the Obama administration on a
"Plan B" to support the opposition that would be more "confrontational." Kerry made no effort in his testimony to hide the fact that
he was the chief advocate of such a policy initiative.
Comment: Is Kerry a hard-nosed tool for AIPAC, a fanatic war hawk like McCain, a pathological liar like Hillary or really Obama's alter-ego? Maybe all of the above, but certainly not a diplomat. Real diplomacy and real negotiations can never come from a place of pointless provocations, unprovoked military force, deliberate destruction and reckless massacres. More of the same does not change anything - it creates war without end. But to some, it is perceived as an advantage.