Secretary of State John Kerry speaks next to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Geneva on Sept. 12, 2013.(Photo: Larry Downing, AP)

Story Highlights

  • Putin op-ed infuriates U.S. politicians
  • Russians suggest Syrian president may not have been responsible for chemical weapons attack

SHARE 679 CONNECTEMAILMORE

As Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart began talks Thursday on a Russian proposal to secure Syria's chemical weapons stockpile, the long-simmering mistrust between President Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin was on full display.

The latest jousting was triggered by an opinion piece published in Thursday's edition of TheNew York Times, in which Putin challenged the Obama administration's claim that Bashar Assad's regime was responsible for deploying chemical weapons. Putin also took umbrage with Obama for pointing to American exceptionalism in a nationally televised address earlier this week as a reason the United States should support a military strike if diplomatic efforts fail.

White House press secretary Jay Carney responded by calling Putin's claim that rebels were responsible for deploying chemical weapons "wholly unsubstantiated" and said the Russians are "isolated and alone" in blaming the opposition for the Aug. 21 chemical attack that left more than 1,400 civilians dead.

"We are not surprised by President Putin's words, but the fact is that Russia offers a stark contrast that demonstrates why America is exceptional," Carney added. "Unlike Russia, the United States stands up for democratic values and human rights in our own country and around the world. We believe our global security is advanced when children cannot be gassed to death by a dictator."

Obama and Putin have long had a strained relationship, marked most recently by disputes over differences on Syria and the Russians' decision to offer asylum to Edward Snowden, the National Security Agency contractor who leaked details of U.S. surveillance programs.

The sharp exchange comes as Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov began two days of meetings in the neutral setting of Geneva to discuss a Russian proposal to establish international monitoring of Syria's chemical stockpile.

Kerry said that American patience with the proposal, aimed at heading off U.S. military action, is limited. Kerry, Lavrov and a group of technical experts will meet again on Friday to discuss the Russian plan.

"Expectations are high," Kerry said in a joint appearance with Lavrov. "They are high for the United States, and perhaps even more so for the Russians, to deliver on the promise of this moment. This is not a game, and I said this to my friend Sergey, when we talked about this initially."

Kerry also rejected Assad's suggestion — which the Syrian president made in a television interview that aired Thursday — that he would begin submitting data on his chemical weapons arsenal one month after signing an international chemical weapons ban. Assad claimed that the 30-day lead time would be standard. The Syrians also formally informed the United Nations on Thursday that they wished to join an international chemical weapons ban treaty.

"There is nothing standard about this process," Kerry said. "The words of the Syrian regime in our judgment are simply not enough."

Kerry reiterated that Obama could still order a U.S. military strike if the Russian proposal is unsuccessful and Assad doesn't dismantle his chemical weapons arsenal.

"There ought to be consequences if it doesn't take place," he said.

Lavrov, who spoke briefly before Kerry, appeared surprised by the length, and perhaps, the substance of Kerry's remarks.

"I'm not prepared with an extended political statement," Lavrov said after Kerry's remarks. "Diplomacy likes silence."

Meanwhile, Obama told reporters ahead of a meeting with his Cabinet at the White House on Thursday that he was "hopeful" the talks would be fruitful, but he then quickly turned his attention to domestic matters.

"Even as we have been spending a lot of time on the Syria issue and making sure that international attention is focused on the horrible tragedy that occurred there, it is still important to recognize that we've got a lot more stuff to do here in this government," said Obama, who noted looming deadlines to pass a budget, raise the debt ceiling and implement his signature health care legislation. "We got a lot of stuff to do."

The president's desire to keep expectations low for the talks is understandable. After the Russians this week floated the idea of taking a role in securing Syria's chemical weapons, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle were highly skeptical, noting that Russia and Iran are the Syrians' chief patrons.

Putin's commentary in TheNew York Times did nothing to help the situation. U.S. lawmakers on both sides of the aisle said they were angered by Putin's commentary. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., called Putin's writing "an insult to the intelligence of every American."

The Russians are insistent that the U.S. and other United Nations Security Council members agree to end any threat of a U.S. military strike — something that Obama is unlikely to agree to.

But the two sides may look to get around their differences by building an ambiguously worded resolution that would leave plenty of room for interpretation, said Jim Walsh, a research associate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's security studies program.

"It will be vague," Walsh said. "It will be watered down in the areas where both sides agree to disagree and leave it to interpretation. But the U.S. is not going to (formally) forfeit the option to strike."

SHARE 679 CONNECTEMAILMORE