From The Guardian:
In a minor diplomatic advance for Obama, 11 of the G20 nations signed a joint statement at the end of the two-day summit calling for "a strong international response to a grave violation of the world's rules" in response to last month's chemical weapons attack in Ghouta, east of the Syrian capital, Damascus.
The signatories, including the UK, the US and France, said evidence "points clearly to the Syrian government being responsible for the attack which is part of a pattern of chemical weapons use by the regime" and warned it would not be possible to achieve a UN consensus on action.
The signatories also "recognise that the UN security council remains paralysed, as it has been for two and a half years. The world cannot wait for endless failed processes that can only lead to suffering in Syria. We support efforts by the US and other countries to reinforce the prohibition on the use of chemical weapons."
The painfully constructed wording stops short of explicit support for a punitive, but limited, military strike by the US. Yet the statement represents more international sympathy than seemed likely at the summit's outset. Other signatories included Australia, Canada, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Spain and Turkey – a coalition that may sway some US congressmen weighing up whether to defy domestic America opinion and back military strikes. A Downing Street source claimed the statement "backs US efforts and the American president has clearly set out his intended military response".
The United States. the United Kingdom. France. Australia. Canada. Italy. Japan. South Korea. Saudi Arabia. Spain. Turkey.
As well as the Arab League. From Al Jazeera, earlier this week:
Arab League foreign ministers have urged the international community and the United Nations to take "deterrent" action against the Syrian regime over its alleged use of chemical weapons.http://www.aljazeera.com/...
"The United Nations and the international community are called upon to assume their responsibilities in line with the UN Charter and international law by taking the necessary deterrent measures", the ministers said in a statement on Sunday following a meeting in Cairo.
It said that the Syrian regime of President Bashar al-Assad was "responsible" for the August 21 attack.
The growing alliance is starting to look a lot like the one that toppled Gaddafi in Libya in 2011. That was the first time ever that the Arab League teamed up with NATO on ANYTHING. It was one of the largest military alliances in human history.
As far as Syria goes, NATO's Secretary-General supports a "firm response". From Al Arabiya:
NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said on Monday that a firm international response is needed to last month’s chemical weapons attack in Syria, adding that he is “personally convinced” of the Syrian regime’s usage of chemical weapons.http://english.alarabiya.net/...
“We believe that these unspeakable actions which claimed the lives of hundreds of men, women and children cannot be ignored,” Rasmussen told a news conference, according to Reuters.
“I think there is an agreement that we need a firm international response in order to avoid that chemical attacks take place in the future. It would send, I would say, a dangerous signal to dictators all over the world if we stand idly by and don’t react,” he said.
It's unlikely President Obama will move against Assad until it becomes obvious that the world is with him. This will make it hard for Republicans to use Syria to bash Obama. It's beyond nauseating that the GOP is trying so hard to sabotage this international crisis. In fact, it's probably as close as they've come to treason. Let's make sure voters remember it in 2014.
This post is not meant to advocate a military response in Syria. I am merely pointing out that the world is coming together in agreement on what to do, which takes some pressure off the President. If all the allied countries could craft some kind of new, more powerful sanctions, that would be great. Or maybe they can collectively convince China and Russia to impose sanctions. Dunno. Cheers.