NOVANEWS
Leaders fail to reach agreement over military action as UN called on to fulfil its obligations while Russia maintains position.
G20 leaders attend a summit dinner in Peterhof, near St Petersburg. Photograph: Ria Novosti/Reuters
G20 leaders have failed to agree on any punitive action against the Assad regime in Syria, or even that it had been responsible for the chemical weapons attack east of Damascus in August.
The majority of leaders at a summit dinner on Thursday evening in Peterhof, near Saint Petersburg, were not in favour of any punitive action unless it was agreed by the UN security council, although strong calls for the UN to live up to its responsibilities were made by the Americans, the Turkish, Canadians, French and British.
The UK prime minister, David Cameron, described the debate at the four-hour dinner as passionate, but said the summit was never going to reach agreement on Syria due to the depth of divisions.
He expressed his frustration with the insistence by Russia‘s president,Vladimir Putin, that the chemical attack that may have claimed more than 1,000 lives was undertaken by rebel forces rather than the government. He said Putin “was miles away from what I think the truth is and miles away from what many of us believe”.
Cameron expressed scepticism that Putin could be persuaded by any evidence that the chemical attack was launched by the government’s forces. Cameron reported Putin “said to me he would like to see further evidence of regime culpability and we will go on providing him evidence, but I think it will take a lot to change his mind, let me put it that way”.
During the dinner, Putin told Barack Obama and François Hollande that the chances of reviving peace talks soon after a punitive bombing strike would be minimal.
The Russian leader won the support of the Chinese, a long-term ally of Putin on Syria, but backing also came from the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, Argentina, Brazil and several European leaders, including Angela Merkel. One German diplomat said “Putin did not need to toughen his tone at the dinner. There were enough sceptics.”
Desperate efforts by the French delegation to establish at the least a common European position appear to have failed, with French fury aimed at the EU president of the council, Herman Van Rompuy, for criticising an attack without first consulting EU foreign ministers on his position.
The Italian prime minister, Enrico Letta, said the working dinner had only confirmed there were splits. The lack of consensus will be a blow to Obama as he struggles to raise a majority for military action from a sceptical US Congress.
According to French sources, Putin refused to say whether he believed the chemical attack had been committed by the Syrian government or by rebel forces, but did accept that chemical weapons should not be used and breached international law.
The tension at the dinner was raised by reports of US intercepts from Iran suggesting Tehran would authorise attacks on American interests in the event of an attack on Syria.
Samantha Power, the US ambassador to the UN, told a news conference in New York: “Even in the wake of the flagrant shattering of the international norm against chemical weapons use, Russia continues to hold the council hostage and shirk its international responsibilities.
“What we have learned, what the Syrian people have learned, is that the security council the world needs to deal with this crisis is not the security council we have.”
Cameron, giving his account of the dinner, said: “The argument that did flare up at the dinner last night is a disagreement again about whether it is possible to have legal military engagements outside a UN security council resolution. Our strong legal advice is that there is a responsibility to protect – the case for humanitarian intervention because you are preventing a humanitarian catastrophe.
“There was an argument from some that unless it is self defence or unless there is a security council resolution there is no legal basis for taking action. I don’t think that is the case. I think it is a very dangerous doctrine. If you accept that, you could have a country massacring half its people, a blockage at the UN security council, and no one could act.”
“It was brought home to me last night that quite aside from the Syrian problems we need to make that argument with countries like South Africa, Brazil, India, others. One of the frustrations of last night is you have countries including security council permanent members saying this must all be decided by the UN security council yet they are the very countries that are blocking any action and have been blocking resolutions for the last two-and-a-half years”.
Cameron earlier tweeted that he had met with the Russian president after the dinner at 2am. He wrote: “2am meeting with President Putin. A candid conversation on #Syria. I also raised concerns about gay rights.”
The Kremlin said Russia was boosting its naval presence in the Mediterranean Sea, moving in warships “primarily” for a possible evacuation of Russians from Syria.
The majority of leaders at a summit dinner on Thursday evening in Peterhof, near Saint Petersburg, were not in favour of any punitive action unless it was agreed by the UN security council, although strong calls for the UN to live up to its responsibilities were made by the Americans, the Turkish, Canadians, French and British.
The UK prime minister, David Cameron, described the debate at the four-hour dinner as passionate, but said the summit was never going to reach agreement on Syria due to the depth of divisions.
He expressed his frustration with the insistence by Russia‘s president,Vladimir Putin, that the chemical attack that may have claimed more than 1,000 lives was undertaken by rebel forces rather than the government. He said Putin “was miles away from what I think the truth is and miles away from what many of us believe”.
Cameron expressed scepticism that Putin could be persuaded by any evidence that the chemical attack was launched by the government’s forces. Cameron reported Putin “said to me he would like to see further evidence of regime culpability and we will go on providing him evidence, but I think it will take a lot to change his mind, let me put it that way”.
During the dinner, Putin told Barack Obama and François Hollande that the chances of reviving peace talks soon after a punitive bombing strike would be minimal.
The Russian leader won the support of the Chinese, a long-term ally of Putin on Syria, but backing also came from the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, Argentina, Brazil and several European leaders, including Angela Merkel. One German diplomat said “Putin did not need to toughen his tone at the dinner. There were enough sceptics.”
Desperate efforts by the French delegation to establish at the least a common European position appear to have failed, with French fury aimed at the EU president of the council, Herman Van Rompuy, for criticising an attack without first consulting EU foreign ministers on his position.
The Italian prime minister, Enrico Letta, said the working dinner had only confirmed there were splits. The lack of consensus will be a blow to Obama as he struggles to raise a majority for military action from a sceptical US Congress.
According to French sources, Putin refused to say whether he believed the chemical attack had been committed by the Syrian government or by rebel forces, but did accept that chemical weapons should not be used and breached international law.
The tension at the dinner was raised by reports of US intercepts from Iran suggesting Tehran would authorise attacks on American interests in the event of an attack on Syria.
Samantha Power, the US ambassador to the UN, told a news conference in New York: “Even in the wake of the flagrant shattering of the international norm against chemical weapons use, Russia continues to hold the council hostage and shirk its international responsibilities.
“What we have learned, what the Syrian people have learned, is that the security council the world needs to deal with this crisis is not the security council we have.”
Cameron, giving his account of the dinner, said: “The argument that did flare up at the dinner last night is a disagreement again about whether it is possible to have legal military engagements outside a UN security council resolution. Our strong legal advice is that there is a responsibility to protect – the case for humanitarian intervention because you are preventing a humanitarian catastrophe.
“There was an argument from some that unless it is self defence or unless there is a security council resolution there is no legal basis for taking action. I don’t think that is the case. I think it is a very dangerous doctrine. If you accept that, you could have a country massacring half its people, a blockage at the UN security council, and no one could act.”
“It was brought home to me last night that quite aside from the Syrian problems we need to make that argument with countries like South Africa, Brazil, India, others. One of the frustrations of last night is you have countries including security council permanent members saying this must all be decided by the UN security council yet they are the very countries that are blocking any action and have been blocking resolutions for the last two-and-a-half years”.
Cameron earlier tweeted that he had met with the Russian president after the dinner at 2am. He wrote: “2am meeting with President Putin. A candid conversation on #Syria. I also raised concerns about gay rights.”
The Kremlin said Russia was boosting its naval presence in the Mediterranean Sea, moving in warships “primarily” for a possible evacuation of Russians from Syria.
