CBS/AP/ December 6, 2012, 6:32 PM

No concrete Syria plan after U.S., Russia meet

Updated 6:32 p.m. ET

DUBLIN Diplomatic efforts to end Syria's civil war moved forward Thursday with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton joining Russia's foreign minister and the U.N. peace envoy to the Arab country for extraordinary three-way talks that suggested Washington and Moscow might finally unite behind a strategy as the Assad regime weakens.

Play Video

Syria showing signs of chemical weapon preparation

In Washington, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said intelligence reports raise fears that an increasingly desperate Syrian President Bashar Assad is considering using his chemical weapons arsenal -- which the U.S. and Russia agree is unacceptable. It was unclear whether he might target rebels within Syria or bordering countries, but growing concern over such a scenario was clearly adding urgency to discussions an ocean away in Ireland's capital.

On the sidelines of a human rights conference, Clinton gathered with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and mediator Lakhdar Brahimi for about 40 minutes to look for a strategy the international community could rally around to end Syria's 21-month civil war.

"We have talked a little bit about how we can work out hopefully a process that will get Syria back from the brink," Brahimi said after the meeting ended.

The experienced Algerian diplomat, representing the global body and the Arab League, said he would put together a peace process based on a political transition strategy the U.S. and Russia agreed on in Geneva in June. Then, the process quickly became bogged down over how the international community might enforce its conditions.

"We haven't taken any sensational decisions," Brahimi said. "But I think we have agreed that the situation is bad and we have agreed that we must continue to work together to see how we can find creative ways of bringing this problem under control and hopefully starting to solve it."

Officials familiar with the talks say the Russians believe Assad may not be able to survive the war and they want to make sure they have influence in Syria if his regime falls, CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan reports. Russia also wants to make sure it has influence if Assad loses control of the chemical weapons in his country. Brennan notes that U.S. officials are particularly concerned about those weapons falling into the hands of an al Qaeda affiliate.

While the talks are a start to a new round of diplomacy, Brennan says, it's far from a breakthrough. The Russian government is signaling it supports a political transition in Syria, but they have not officially abandoned Assad.

Secretary Clinton told Brennan in a Sept. 9 interview that the Russians were refusing to offer Assad political asylum.

"That was certainly an issue we discussed early on in this conflict," Clinton told CBS News, "and the Russians kept saying they didn't want him."

The former Cold War foes have fought bitterly over how to address the conflict, but Clinton stressed before the meeting that they shared a common goal.

"We have been trying hard to work with Russia to try to stop the bloodshed in Syria and start a political transition for a post-Assad Syrian future," Clinton told reporters in Dublin.

"Events on the ground in Syria are accelerating and we see that in many different ways," she said. "The pressure against the regime in and around Damascus seems to be increasing. We've made it very clear what our position is with respect to chemical weapons, and I think we will discuss that and many other aspects of what is needed to end the violence."

Earlier Thursday, Clinton and Lavrov met separately for about 25 minutes. They agreed to hear Brahimi out on a path forward, a senior U.S. official said. The two also discussed issues ranging from Egypt to North Korea, as well as new congressional action aimed at Russian officials accused of complicity in the death of lawyer Sergei Magnitsky.

Washington and Moscow have more often publicly chastised each other than cooperated on an international strategy for Syria. The U.S. has criticized Russia for shielding its Arab ally. The Russians have accused the U.S. of meddling by demanding Assad's downfall and ultimately seeking an armed intervention such as the one last year against the late Libyan strongman Muammar Qaddafi.

But the gathering of the three key international figures suggested possible compromise in the offing. At a minimum, it confirmed what officials described as an easing of some of the acrimony that has raged between Moscow and Washington over the future of Syria, an ethnically diverse nation whose stability is critical given its geographic position in between powder kegs Iraq, Lebanon and Israel.

Panetta said Thursday that the U.S. fears Syria is thinking of using its chemical weapons.

"The intelligence that we have raises serious concern that this is being considered," he told reporters. Other administration officials in recent days have spoken about Syrians preparing weapon components of sarin gas. The new activity, coupled with fears that rebel advances are making Assad more desperate, have led to the fear that he is deploying the weapons.

On Capitol Hill, some senators even suggested military action against Assad.

Sen. John McCain told reporters the U.S. should "be ready to do whatever is necessary to prevent" the use of chemical weapons, "including the option of military intervention."

Syria's Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad on Thursday accused the United States and Europe of using the issue of chemical weapons to justify a future military intervention against Syria. He warned that any such intervention would be "catastrophic."

Brahimi is hoping to resuscitate something akin to the plan crafted earlier this year by his predecessor as Syria peace envoy, former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Annan's plan never got off the ground, and he resigned his post in frustration.

Annan's plan demanded several steps by the Assad regime to de-escalate tensions and end the violence that activists say has killed more than 40,000 people since March 2011. It then required Syria's opposition and the regime to put forward candidates for a transitional government, with each side having the right to veto nominees proposed by the other.

If anything resembling that plan progresses, it would surely mean the end of more than four decades of an Assad family member at Syria's helm. The opposition has demanded Assad's departure and has rejected any talk of him staying in power. Yet it also would grant regime representatives the opportunity to block Sunni extremists and others in the opposition that they reject.

The United States blamed the collapse on Russia for vetoing a third resolution at the U.N. Security Council that would have applied world sanctions against Assad's government for failing to live by the deal's provisions.

Russia insisted that the Americans unfairly sought Assad's departure as a precondition and worried about opening the door to military action, even as Washington offered to include language in any U.N. resolution that would have expressly forbidden outside armed intervention.

The same pitfalls threaten Brahimi's process. The Obama administration is likely to insist anew that it be internationally enforceable - a step Moscow may still be reluctant to commit to.

But with the war turning against Assad, U.S. officials are hoping that Russia will be prepared to drop its support for him.

In Syria, government forces on Thursday shelled rebellious suburbs around Damascus and clashed with rebels in the capital itself and in Aleppo, Syria's largest city.

Robert Ford, the U.S. ambassador in Damascus until his recall earlier this year, pointed to the closure of Syria's main airport and the rebel capture of defense sites inside the Damascus beltway as key indicators of the conflict's direction. "The writing is on the wall," he said at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies forum in Washington.

Also Thursday, NATO advanced its plan to place Patriot missiles and troops along Syria's border with Turkey to protect against potential attacks. Assad's regime blasted the move as "psychological warfare," saying the new deployment would not deter it from seeking victory over rebels it views as terrorists.

© 2012 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
17 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Rick_Carter1 says:
Unfortunately, the Obama administration is not prepared to do what is probably called for, which is preemptive decapitation of the rogue Assad regime. Too bad! - RC
reply
Rick_Carter1 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
(We could have prevented WWII this way.) - RC
kbbpll replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Your knowledge of history is a bit deluded. The US was not a superpower in 1939 and we had to be dragged into WWII only after being attacked.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
quincytodd says:
It appears that Hilary Clinton is having a hard time trying to strong-arm the Russians. It's a good thing that some countries can still stand up to the right-wing fanatics in Washington!
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
john92021 says:
Hillary didn't have enough money to buy off the Russians like she did the Palestinians.
reply
quincytodd replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Thank you, John. How true that rings!
linkicon reporticon emailicon
friend2008 says:
For how long the United States will be able to take care of all the problems around the world, but American problems?

I believe the time has come to let Middle East take care of its own problems.
reply
kbbpll replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Do you like filling up your car with gasoline?
linkicon reporticon emailicon
silvereagle2718 says:
Well, let's look at things from Assad's perspective. Start by looking at what happened to Gaddafi. No consolation prize for going quietly. In Gaddafi's case, the revolution started shortly after the chemical weapons were gone. In Assad's case, it reportedly happened before. Perhaps a mistake, perhaps not.

Assad may be the protector of a few minorities destined to be designated victims if the rebels win, although I'm not claiming he's an angel. I really haven't studied the recent history of the Middle East. There are probably a few Christians that think they may have more problems under Morsi than under Mubarruk. Israel might have been a little more comfortable about 4 years ago.

Law abiding civilians don't overthrow national governments, at least not in the US. Anybody tried recently? And probably not in Russia. In Africa, maybe--Africa seems to be a little different that way. I'm not sure the Arabs want to be like the Africans.

To the credit of the Egyptians (especially Mubarruk), there was no bloodbath. At least not yet.

What makes chemical (and nuclear) weapons wrong? If they are wrong, how does this impact the military strategies of (most importantly) the US and Russia? For the last 65 years. And to a much lesser extent a few other countries. How does this influence relations with Iran and North Korea?

And the question that has been dogging the US for the last 12 years. "Exactly who is a civilian?" The Russians seem to have had a little trouble in Afghanistan also....
reply
Sandstorm2003 replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Chemical warfare is controlled by treaties governing first usage policy, they have long ago been found to be inhuman and are not to be used. Some years ago the destruction of chemical warfare stockplies also occurred. It seems to only be third world nation states that will use them.
GossamerWings replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
It is a hell hole. If you send troop they will have trouble with "Exactly who is a civilian?" Some groups are already there that would love to kill American. She really needs to get China and Russia to support. Russia had been easier to deal with.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Sandstorm2003 says:
It seems to me that the Whitewash of the Iraqi convoy movement into Syria back in 2003 just before the invasion has now backfired. It seems that is how Syria now has it's chemical weapons. So no WMD's in Iraq, but Syria has them....I find this very, very disturbing! I also think regardless of Assad's usage (which would be a crime against humanity) these NBC weapons should be taken from his nasty hands, also which stops any extremists from obtaining them. Media you are to blame as much as anyone for Whitewashing that convoy movment into Syria, and the blood of those innocent people who will possibly be so horribly killed is on your hands as well if that happens! Doesnt anyone have any morals, or value systems in place anymore.....NBC is no way to die!
reply
GossamerWings replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
So do I. The Iraq WAr made the world less safe and the only winner Exxon. The problem here is that China and Russia don't agree. She has to find a way to get them to approve. China is more resistant than Russia.
linkicon reporticon emailicon
tsigili says:
In other words.......let the killing continue.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
jnostromo says:
What a complete shock!....No solution really?...
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Jandman says:
and with all the destructive bombing and shelling going on over there those folks are going to need a lot of concrete. Sorry, couldn't help it. Russia would prefer to maintain Assad in power as part of the Shia crescent which counters US influence in the Mid-East. The US doesn't know whom to support, or what kind of assistance to provide. Certainly appears that Assad will fall, and the insurgents in leadership positions will be Islamists if not Shia.
reply
See all 17 Comments