New Delhi/Washington:
Changing the global discourse on a possible strike against Syria are the visuals emerging from the country which show rows of children allegedly killed in a chemical weapons attack.
After the reports of the chemical attack surfaced, many world powers condemned the Syrian government in unison; US President Barack Obama went to the extent of saying that he has decided that America should take military action against Syria.
"Here is my question to every member of Congress and every member of the global community: What message will we send if a dictator can gas hundreds of children to death in plain sight and pay no price?" the US President said in his address on Saturday.
Though Obama announced his resolve to strike Syria, he postponed the decision to seek authorisation from the US Congress which reconvenes on September 9.
Foreign policy experts say that the decision to delay the military strike is influenced by the events in the UK, a usually reliable partner of the US in such international operations.
British Prime Minister David Cameron was supportive of a strike and shortly after Obama's statement, he tweeted, "I understand and support Barack Obama's position." But the UK Parliament has already voted against it.
And then there were domestic pressures as well. Surveys show that 70 per cent of Americans are against the strike and it's only fair that a President who questioned George Bush's Iraq War, seeks an approval from the representatives of the people of America for a strike. He believes he has enough evidence to conduct such strike.
Obama plans a limited strike, with no boots on the ground. But would it be possible for the US to build a coalition this time?
France is waiting for the decision of the vote in the US, foreign ministers from the Arab League are to discuss Syria at a meeting in Cairo, amid deep splits on the issue and the report of the UN inspectors is still not out. The testing of the samples collected by them could take upto three weeks.
But Obama seem to be determined to go ahead with the strike without the UN Security Council's approval.
The Syrian government, meanwhile, denies the charge of using chemical weapons and instead blames the rebel forces for carrying out those attacks.
Syrian ambassador to India, Dr Raid Kamel Abbas asks, "How has the US come to this conclusion that Syrian government used chemical weapons on its own people... how?"
As Obama calls for a strike on Syria, an Iranian political delegation has reached Syria's capital Damascus. Russia and China have called any such strike by the US unacceptable and demanded solid evidence that proves the Syrian government did use chemical weapons against its own people.
In the middle of those who support the strike and those who don't, India is quietly ascertaining facts. Sources in the Ministry of External Affairs told NDTV that India fears the use of chemical weapons, whether by the state or in the hands of the rebels.
Indian government has not yet prepared a formal response on the situation in Syria, but speaking to NDTV, Foreign Minister Salman Khursheed said, "I Would ask both sides - the government and the rebels - to return to sanity and not give excuse for interference which will further escalate violence. India is also concerned about the six million strong Indian community in the Gulf region. We are watching the situation carefully."
India's other concern is the impact on its economy. With the current crisis, any increase in the prices of oil that India imports from the Gulf would further strain the Indian finances.
According to the US, 1,429 people were killed in chemical attacks by the Syrian army on August 21. Obama had earlier said that such attacks would be a red line, prompting US intervention in Syria. Many against Syrian president Bashar al-Assad fear if not carried out, these statements will be treated as empty threats by Assad and embolden him.
After the reports of the chemical attack surfaced, many world powers condemned the Syrian government in unison; US President Barack Obama went to the extent of saying that he has decided that America should take military action against Syria.
"Here is my question to every member of Congress and every member of the global community: What message will we send if a dictator can gas hundreds of children to death in plain sight and pay no price?" the US President said in his address on Saturday.
Though Obama announced his resolve to strike Syria, he postponed the decision to seek authorisation from the US Congress which reconvenes on September 9.
Foreign policy experts say that the decision to delay the military strike is influenced by the events in the UK, a usually reliable partner of the US in such international operations.
British Prime Minister David Cameron was supportive of a strike and shortly after Obama's statement, he tweeted, "I understand and support Barack Obama's position." But the UK Parliament has already voted against it.
And then there were domestic pressures as well. Surveys show that 70 per cent of Americans are against the strike and it's only fair that a President who questioned George Bush's Iraq War, seeks an approval from the representatives of the people of America for a strike. He believes he has enough evidence to conduct such strike.
Obama plans a limited strike, with no boots on the ground. But would it be possible for the US to build a coalition this time?
France is waiting for the decision of the vote in the US, foreign ministers from the Arab League are to discuss Syria at a meeting in Cairo, amid deep splits on the issue and the report of the UN inspectors is still not out. The testing of the samples collected by them could take upto three weeks.
But Obama seem to be determined to go ahead with the strike without the UN Security Council's approval.
The Syrian government, meanwhile, denies the charge of using chemical weapons and instead blames the rebel forces for carrying out those attacks.
Syrian ambassador to India, Dr Raid Kamel Abbas asks, "How has the US come to this conclusion that Syrian government used chemical weapons on its own people... how?"
As Obama calls for a strike on Syria, an Iranian political delegation has reached Syria's capital Damascus. Russia and China have called any such strike by the US unacceptable and demanded solid evidence that proves the Syrian government did use chemical weapons against its own people.
In the middle of those who support the strike and those who don't, India is quietly ascertaining facts. Sources in the Ministry of External Affairs told NDTV that India fears the use of chemical weapons, whether by the state or in the hands of the rebels.
Indian government has not yet prepared a formal response on the situation in Syria, but speaking to NDTV, Foreign Minister Salman Khursheed said, "I Would ask both sides - the government and the rebels - to return to sanity and not give excuse for interference which will further escalate violence. India is also concerned about the six million strong Indian community in the Gulf region. We are watching the situation carefully."
India's other concern is the impact on its economy. With the current crisis, any increase in the prices of oil that India imports from the Gulf would further strain the Indian finances.
According to the US, 1,429 people were killed in chemical attacks by the Syrian army on August 21. Obama had earlier said that such attacks would be a red line, prompting US intervention in Syria. Many against Syrian president Bashar al-Assad fear if not carried out, these statements will be treated as empty threats by Assad and embolden him.
Track Latest News Live on NDTV.com and get news updates from India and around the world
