Russia, Iran, Turkey back new Syria constitution body but fail to agree makeup

[TU Curmudgeon]

From Reuters

Russia, Iran, Turkey back new Syria constitution body but fail to agree makeup
​

GENEVA (Reuters) - Russia, Iran and Turkey, supporters of the main sides in Syria’s complex civil war, on Tuesday failed to agree on the makeup of a U.N.-sponsored Syrian Constitutional Committee but called for it to convene early next year to kick off a viable peace process.

In a joint statement read out by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov after the trio met U.N. Syria peace envoy Staffan de Mistura in Geneva, they said the new initiative should be guided “by a sense of compromise and constructive engagement”.

The foreign ministers of the three nations had hoped to seal their joint proposal on a committee - which could usher in elections - and win U.N. blessing for it.

But the statement by the three made no mention of the composition of the panel, pointing to lingering disagreement over lists of candidates submitted by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his rebel adversaries.

COMMENT:-

So far the White House has not released any details of the position that the US members of the negotiating group has taken.

Do you know why?
​

 

[EnigmaO01]

Because the president thinks he has more important things on his plate like defending against numerous criminal investigations? And of course this admin is a bunch of amateur flunkies when it comes to diplomacy and national strategic interests. Even if he had good people on his staff the president wouldn't listen to them.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Because the president thinks he has more important things on his plate like defending against numerous criminal investigations? And of course this admin is a bunch of amateur flunkies when it comes to diplomacy and national strategic interests. Even if he had good people on his staff the president wouldn't listen to them.

Not even close.

Please re-read the actual question asked which was

So far the White House has not released any details of the position that the US members of the negotiating group has taken. Do you know why?
(re-posted without emphasis as a test of reading comprehension)
​

 

[EnigmaO01]

Not even close.

Please re-read the actual question asked which was

So far the White House has not released any details of the position that the US members of the negotiating group has taken. Do you know why?
(re-posted without emphasis as a test of reading comprehension)
​

O.K. I'll try again but a little more succinctly: Because they don't have a position as it's not a priority with this president right now, and he doesn't have people with good expertise. If you haven't noticed this president isn't interested in being informed and only cares about his own little orbit.
(re-posted without emphasis as a test of reading comprehension)

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

O.K. I'll try again but a little more succinctly: Because they don't have a position as it's not a priority with this president right now, and he doesn't have people with good expertise. If you haven't noticed this president isn't interested in being informed and only cares about his own little orbit.
(re-posted without emphasis as a test of reading comprehension)

I really hate to see people flailing, so I will tell you the real reason why the White House has not released any details of the position that the US members of the negotiating group has taken.

That reason is - the US members of the negotiating group has taken ABSOLUTELY NO POSITION, because the US government is NOT involved in the negotiations which are likely to lead to a resolution in Syria.

In fact

Syria conflict: US 'planning to withdraw troops'

the US government would like nothing better than to be able to simply pick up its marbles and go home because it realizes that the REAL "players" in Syria consider the United States of America to be irrelevant.

This, of course, is in line with the US government position in Afghanistan,

Taliban say talks focus on US withdrawal from Afghanistan

but that's a separate country.

 

[EnigmaO01]

There must be an echo in here. You said:

That reason is - the US members of the negotiating group has taken ABSOLUTELY NO POSITION because the US government is NOT involved in the negotiations which are likely to lead to a resolution in Syria.

And I said:

Because they don't have a position as it's not a priority with this president right now.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

There must be an echo in here. You said:



And I said:

I guess that "Because I was too busy to go." is one way of deflecting from the fact that the US simply wasn't invited to the dance.

 

[EnigmaO01]

I guess that "Because I was too busy to go." is one way of deflecting from the fact that the US simply wasn't invited to the dance.

O.K. I see your point now.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

O.K. I see your point now.

Of the main parties involved in Syria (listed alphabetically):

1. the Iranian government;
2. the Kurds;
3. the Russian government;
4. the Syrian government;
5. the Syrian "opposition";
6. the Turkish government; and
7. the US government;

only the Kurds and the Syrian "opposition" have declared that the United States of America is NOT irrelevant to the situation. When the vote is 2 to 5, the "5" generally wins (especially when the "2" have no clout whatsoever).

"MISHUN AKOMPLISHD"