Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
POSTPONED TODAY'S NATIONAL
SECURITY COUNCIL MEETING, IS
THIS DEAL A REALITY?
LET'S BRING IN DEMOCRATIC
SENATOR CHRIS MURPHY OF
CONNECTICUT.
HE VOTED AGAINST LAST WEEK'S
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MILITARY
ACTION IN SYRIA IN THE SENATE
FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE.
SENATOR, THANKS FOR BEING HERE.
YOU'VE CALLED THIS THIRD WAY,
THIS RUSSIAN PROPOSAL, THIS
KERRY FLOAT, A POSITIVE
DEVELOPMENT, BUT I WONDER HOW
CONFIDENT YOU ARE THAT IT CAN
WORK GIVEN THE HISTORY OF RUSSIA
AND THE COMPLEXITY IN LOCATING
CHEMICAL WEAPONS AND HOW MUCH
YOU CAN TRUST BASHAR AL ASSAD.
DO YOU THINK THIS THING IS REAL?
>> I ABSOLUTELY THINK IT'S REAL
AND I THINK IT CAN WORK.
I DON'T THINK THE RUSSIANS WOULD
HAVE FLOATED IT, I DON'T THINK
THE UNITED STATES AND RUSSIA
WOULD HAVE DISCUSSED IT OVER THE
LAST FEW DAYS IF IT COULDN'T
ULTIMATELY WORK.
WE FRANKLY HAVE A PRETTY GOOD
BEAT ON WHERE A LOT OF THESE
CHEMICAL WEAPONS STOCKPILES ARE.
FRANKLY, IF WE DIDN'T, WE
WOULDN'T CONSIDER STRIKING THE
COUNTRY BECAUSE YOU CAN'T MAKE A
MISTAKE AND STRIKE ONE OF THESE
STOCKPILES OR THAT WOULD KILL A
LOT MORE PEOPLE.
SO THIS ULTIMATELY CAN WORK.
I THINK THE FACT THAT KERRY IS
GOING TO BE TRAVELING TO MEET
WITH THE RUSSIAN FOREIGN
SECRETARY IS VERY GOOD NEWS.
AND I THINK IT MAKES SENSE FOR
THE SENATE TO PULL BACK RIGHT
NOW, TO GIVE THE PRESIDENT THE
TIME AND THE SPACE TO TRY TO
WORK THIS OUT.
A LOT OF US THAT OPPOSE THE
RESOLUTION IN THE FIRST PLACE
DID SO BECAUSE WE WANTED THERE
TO BE A MORE ROBUST
INTERNATIONAL EFFORT, AND THIS
SPEAKS TO SO MANY OF US WHO WERE
A LITTLE RELUCTANT TO COMMIT THE
UNITED STATES TO MILITARY ACTION
WITHOUT THE SUPPORT OF SOME OF
OUR PARTNERS AROUND THE WORLD.
>> SENATOR, YOU KNOW PRESIDENT
OBAMA AND OTHERS SAY THAT THE
ONLY REASON THE RUSSIANS AND
SYRIANS ARE EVEN AT THE
PROVERBIAL NEGOTIATING TABLE IS
BECAUSE OF THE THREAT OF FORCE
AND IN FACT, SENATOR CORKER
SAID, AND I BELIEVE PRESIDENT
OBAMA HAS SUGGESTED, THAT IT'S
BECAUSE OF THE SENATE FOREIGN
RELATIONS COMMITTEE VOTING TO
AUTHORIZE FORCE IN A WAY, WERE
YOU NOT GETTING IN THE WAY OF
THAT DIPLOMATIC EFFORT BY VOTING
AGAINST THE AUTHORIZATION?
>> WELL, THE RUSSIANS HAVE A LOT
OF REASONS TO TRY TO BE PART OF
AN INTERNATIONAL SOLUTION HERE,
SEPARATE AND ASIDE FROM THE FACT
THAT THE UNITED STATES MAY BE
CONTEMPLATING A BOMBING
CAMPAIGN.
THE RUSSIANS WANT TO BE PART OF
THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY AND
ULTIMATELY IT'S NOT IN THEIR
LONG TERM INTEREST TO SIDE WITH
A MADMAN IN SYRIA WHO IS GASSING
HIS OWN PEOPLE.
SO THE RUSSIANS, YOU KNOW,
LISTEN, MAYBE THEY ARE SLIGHTLY
MOVED BY THE FACT THAT THERE
COULD BE BOMBING COMING FROM THE
UNITED STATES, BUT ULTIMATELY,
THEY HAVE VERY DIFFERENT
INTERESTS THAT WOULD LEAD THEM
TO TRY TO BE PART OF THIS
SOLUTION.
I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE TO HAVE
THE THREAT OF MILITARY ACTION IN
ORDER TO GET AN INTERNATIONAL
SOLUTION HERE.
>> LET'S GAME THIS OUT FOR A
SECOND, SENATOR.
LET'S ASSUME THE U.N. CAN
APPROVE A RESOLUTION.
I'M GOING TO GIVE THIS VERY
OPTIMISTIC VIEW OF WHAT MIGHT
HAPPEN.
AND THEN THE PLAN WORKS
ACCORDING TO SOME SORT OF
CONVERGENCE OF WHAT THE RUSSIANS
WANT AND WHAT THE U.S. WANTS AND
THE FRENCH AND THE UK.
ULTIMATELY, OTHER THAN TAKING
AWAY THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS
STOCKPILE, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE
THERE WOULD BE ANY REAL
PUNISHMENT FOR ASSAD.
WOULDN'T IT BE JUST LIKE
SOMEBODY IS A SHOOTER, COMMITS A
CRIME WITH A GUN AND THE
PUNISHMENT IS YOU TAKE HIS GUN
AWAY?
SHOULDN'T THERE BE MORE OF A
STAND AGAINST WHAT HE ALLEGEDLY
DID IF THE U.S. IS SO CONFIDENT
THAT HE WAS BEHIND THESE
CHEMICAL WEAPONS?
>> YEAH, LISTEN, I THINK THAT'S
A VERY COMPELLING ARGUMENT.
AND I'M SOMEONE WHO SAID RIGHT
OFF THE BAT THAT I THINK WHAT HE
DID IS A MORAL ATROCITY AND IF
WE COULD PUNISH HIM WITHOUT
HAVING RECIPROCAL CONSEQUENCES
IN THE REGION OR A SPILL-OFF
EFFECT THAT ULTIMATELY
COMPROMISES U.S. NATIONAL
SECURITY, I WOULD BE FOR IT.
I JUST THINK IN THIS CASE, YOU
HAVE TO WEIGH WHAT ARE THE
POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES TO THE
UNITED STATES BY GETTING
INVOLVED IN A CIVIL WAR THAT
COULD COST US BILLIONS IN TERMS
OF DOLLARS AND A LOT MORE IN
TERMS OF REPUTATION.
ULTIMATELY, I WOULD LOVE TO BE
ABLE TO GO IN AND PUNISH THIS
GUY FOR WHAT HE DID.
BUT IF ULTIMATELY THAT ENDS UP
GETTING THE U.S. EMBROILED IN
REGIONAL CONFLICT THAT HURTS OUR
NATIONAL SECURITY AND CAUSES
ASSAD TO TAKE RECIPROCAL ACTIONS
AGAINST HIS OWN PEOPLE OR
AGAINST OUR INTERESTS IN THE
REGION, IT'S NOT WORTH IT.
AND THAT'S THE CALCULATION THAT
SO MANY OF US HAVE MADE.
WE DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT HE'S
DONE THIS.
WE THINK IT'S AN ABSOLUTE
ATROCITY.
WE WOULD LOVE TO GO IN AND
PUNISH HIM BUT IF THE RESULT OF
THAT IS THAT IT ACTUALLY HURTS
THE U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY
INTERESTS IN THE LONG RUN, WE
CAN'T BE FOR IT.
>> LAST QUESTION AND A QUICK
ANSWER, IF YOU WOULD, SENATOR.
WE'RE ALL HAPPY ABOUT A
POTENTIAL PATH TO PEACE, BUT DO
YOU BUY THE FACT THAT THIS WAS
ALL KIND OF PLANNED BY THE
ADMINISTRATION AND FLOATED ON
PURPOSE, OR DO YOU THINK WE KIND
OF JUST BUMBLED INTO A HAPPY
POSSIBILITY?
>> YEAH, I BELIEVE IN
SERENDIPITY TO A POINT.
I DO BELIEVE THAT THE PRESIDENT
HAS BEEN TALKING TO THE RUSSIANS
ABOUT THIS FOR A NUMBER OF DAYS,
AT LEAST, AND ULTIMATELY, THERE
ARE SOME PRETTY SMART GUYS IN
THIS ADMINISTRATION WHO I KNOW
HAVE BEEN THINKING LONG AND HARD
ABOUT EVERY POSSIBLE WAY AROUND
WAR, AND THAT'S WHAT THE
PRESIDENT TOLD US TODAY IN OUR
CAUCUS MEETING WITH THE
DEMOCRATS, IS THAT HE HAS NO
INTEREST IN GOING TO WAR.
HE HAS NO INTEREST IN MILITARY
STRIKES IF HE CAN FIND A WAY OUT
OF IT.
I THINK THAT THE OBAMA
ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN THINKING