Kerry: "No Soldiers Put At Risk" in Attacking Syria

    The New York Times reported on September 5 that the United States is widening plans for proposed strikes on Syria to punish the Assad government for its alleged chemical weapons attacks.  The plans now reportedly include the use of aircraft in addition to cruise missiles:

For the first time, the administration is talking about using American and French aircraft to conduct strikes on specific targets, in addition to ship-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles. There is a renewed push to get other NATO forces involved.

    However, remarks by Secretary of State John Kerry on Saturday at a press conference in Paris with French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius seem to contradict that assertion.  In a very long response to a question from Andrea Mitchell of NBC News about the trouble the administration is having building support for its plans, Kerry repeated his "no boots on the ground" pledge, but went further with an assertion that there would be "no soldiers put at risk" [emphasis added]:

But it’s clear to me as I talk to friends of mine in the Congress that there’s a quick and automatic reaction by people in America – and I understand it – and people here and elsewhere. They hear: Oh my gosh, the President is thinking of a military action against an Arab – a country in the Arab world; here we go again, here’s Iraq, here’s Afghanistan, here we are.
But no, there will be no boots on the ground, no soldiers put at risk, no lengthy action, no long term – this is not Iraq, it is not Afghanistan, it’s not Libya, it’s not Kosovo. It’s nothing remotely like that.

    To argue that no soldiers would be at risk with aircraft flying bombing runs over Syria would be optimistic at best and more likely outright disingenuous.  Kerry's assurance also appears to discount any possible retaliation from Syria.
    Kerry also used some colorful language to describe what underlies the resistance to President Obama's plans to respond to Syria:

And people have an automatic sense of disconnect because it is, as Laurent said, far away and all the reasons. I’m not going to rebuild that. But there is an Iraq hangover. There is just a huge doubt in people’s minds, which I completely understand, because we all got burned by that and we’re still paying the price.

    The president and Secretary Kerry will be conducting a full court press this week, with press interviews, Congressional briefings, a Google hangout, and a presidential address to the nation.


Note: A version of this article first appeared the The Weekly Standard.

WH on American Soldier Kidnapped By Taliban: He's 'Been Away from Us for Four Years'

    On Tuesday, National Security Council Spokesperson Caitlin Hayden moderated a conference call with two unnamed senior administration officials to provide background for reporters on today's transition in Afghanistan handing over the lead on security in the country to the Afghan National Security Forces.  One reporter inquired about how the recently reported peace talks with the Taliban came about, and what conditions were met or will need to be met in order for those talk to move ahead. While following up, the reporter asked about Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl, the only U.S. soldier held captive by the Taliban.  In the course of answering the question, one of the unnamed administration officials characterized Bergdahl's time in Taliban captivity as having been "away from us for four years":

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I would just add to that, as my colleague mentioned earlier, that we obviously have an interest in the safe return of Sergeant Bergdahl who’s been [now] away from us for four years. 

    Sergeant Bergdahl has been held by the Taliban since 2009 and has been the subject of prisoner exchange negotiations that so far have not borne fruit.  Over the years, the Taliban have released at least five videos of Bergdahl and have demanded $1 million ransom in exchange for his freedom.


Note: This article first appeared at The Weekly Standard.