The Obama administration is proceeding with the implementation of the Syria cease fire agreement, even though the promised flow of humanitarian assistance to civilians and U.S.-backed groups hasn’t yet begun.
“From what we’ve seen thus far, it’s worth continuing,” State Department spokesman Mark Toner said of the agreement. He said that even though he agreed that the U.S. has “yet to see a marked increase in humanitarian deliveries.”
Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov spoke Wednesday and agreed that the cease fire agreement had produced a reduction in violence, and so they will extend the cease fire another two days. Under the terms of the deal, if there are seven days of peace and an increase in the flow of humanitarian assistance to groups attacked by Syrian President Bashar Assad, then the Russians and the United States will establish a Joint Implementation Center to coordinate military attacks on the Islamic State and other jihadists in the country.
But while Toner admitted there is no boost in humanitarian aid yet, he refused to say that the deal isn’t being fulfilled so far, and wouldn’t say how many days so far have qualified toward the seven-day goal of peace and more aid.
“I don’t want to hold up that marker in terms of full, complete humanitarian access,” Toner said. “It’s not necessarily a clean process of judging this.”
Earlier, Kerry made it sound like the humanitarian aid and the reduction in violence were two equally-important preconditions for the military cooperation to take place. The humanitarian aid is supposed to flow to areas attacked by Assad, including U.S. backed rebels in Aleppo, a major Syrian city.
“We provided a provision that as long as there is a sustained period of reduced violence – reduced violence and increased humanitarian access, and by that we mean seven consecutive days – the United States and Russia will set up a Joint Implementation Center to facilitate coordinated military action,” Kerry said on Monday.
Toner insisted that the U.S. can give Russia and Assad an incentive to comply with the humanitarian aspect of the deal, despite apparently “mov[ing] the goalposts” on the agreement.
“We always anticipated that there’d be an uneven start to this,” Toner said. “In terms of what incentive there is for the other side, if you will, to keep up with this? We have always said that at a certain point we are going to walk away from this if we don’t feel that it is in our interest. And we’re not there yet.”
