What happened to arming the Syrian opposition?
Am I right in saying that, after Barack Obama promised on 13 June to provide “direct military support” to the Syrian Supreme Military Council after evidence that Assad had used chemical weapons in the spring, no US weapons have been supplied to the opposition?
I can find a report of John Kerry, Secretary of State, repeating the President’s pledge; some reports that President Obama’s declaration encouraged other countries to supply weapons to the rebels; and that the latest use of chemical weapons has encouraged further shipments; but nothing that suggests any weapons arriving from the US.
Does this mean that the US has changed its mind about arming the rebels, or that it hasn’t got round to it yet and felt that the further use of chemical weapons required it to raise its response to the next level?
Photograph of President Obama on the phone to Stephen Harper, prime minister of Canada: White HouseTagged in: syria
Recent Posts on Eagle Eye
- Cameron and Modi bond as they woo some 60,000 overseas Indians at Wembley
- Modi tries to revamp his battered image as he flies to London
- Big defeat for India's Narendra Modi just before UK visit
- Mark Carney is compromising the Bank of England’s independence
- Do the latest GDP revisions vindicate Osborne's austerity?
Latest from Independent journalists on Twitter