OVERSEAS CONCERN FOLLOWS OBAMA’S NEW APPROACH TO SYRIA

[In the conservative Telegraph newspaper in Britain, one columnist, Tim Stanley, said Mr. Obama gave a “remarkable performance” in his Saturday speech detailing his new approach on Syria. But he said that Britain deserved credit for serving as a model for Mr. Obama’s approach, citing how Parliament’s vote against military action led the prime minister, David Cameron, to rule out military participation in any strike on Syria.]

By Gerry Mullany

President Obama’s decision to seek Congressional approval on military action in Syria raised questions overseas about whether the United States had diminished its leadership role in foreign affairs, with commentators in Israel fearing a weakening of American resolve in confronting hostile powers.

The Israel newspaper Haaretz carried an analysis on Sunday by Amos Harel, a military analyst, saying that President Obama’s postponement of a military strike against Syria suggests that he would be less likely to confront Iran on its nuclear program going forward, and that in the Arab world he would now be “seen as weak, hesitant and vacillating.”

“The Obama administration’s conduct gives us insight into the strategic challenge posed by Iran’s nuclear program,” the analysis said. “From an Israeli point of view, the conclusion is far from encouraging. The theory that the U.S. will come to Israel’s aid at the last minute, and attack Iran to lift the nuclear threat, seems less and less likely.

“It’s no wonder that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is becoming increasingly persuaded that no one will come to his aid if Iran suddenly announces that it is beginning to enrich uranium to 90 percent,” it said.

In the conservative Telegraph newspaper in Britain, one columnist, Tim Stanley, said Mr. Obama gave a “remarkable performance” in his Saturday speech detailing his new approach on Syria. But he said that Britain deserved credit for serving as a model for Mr. Obama’s approach, citing how Parliament’s vote against military action led the prime minister, David Cameron, to rule out military participation in any strike on Syria.

“So we basically taught Obama to respect his own constitution,” Mr. Stanley, a historian, wrote. “No need to thank us, America.”

Mr. Obama’s announcement that he would seek Congressional approval came after thousands of people held demonstrations in several cities against an American military strike, with an estimated 1,000 people rallying in Trafalgar Square in London and 700 people turning out to protest in Frankfurt.

Official reaction from other nations to Mr. Obama’s new approach was scarce on Sunday. On Tuesday, the president heads to St. Petersburg, Russia, for a gathering of world leaders at the G-20 summit. There, he is expected to try to lobby his counterparts for military action against Syria.

But one leader he will probably not be lobbying is President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, the host of the event, who has been a strong opponent of any outside military action. Mr. Putin said it would have been “utter nonsense” for Syria to use chemical weapons, and he challenged the United States to provide evidence of such behavior by Russia’s longtime ally.

Mr. Obama’s original plans to meet with Mr. Putin at the summit were shelved last month because of American anger over Russia’s decision to grant temporary asylum to Edward J. Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor who disclosed secret American surveillance programs.

Without support from Russia for a military strike, the United States was unable to secure backing in the United Nations Security Council for a British-proposed resolution to authorize the use of military force against Syria. On Saturday, United Nations inspectors left Syria after a four-day visit to investigate the reports of the chemical attack, and the team is now analyzing what it found on the ground.

China, another Security Council member, was similarly wary of any military strike on Syria, with the state news media warning Thursday that any armed intervention “would have dire consequences for regional security and violate the norms governing international relations.” Beijing supported the deployment of U.N. chemical weapons inspectors and has said that the United States should await the results of their work before acting.

A Chinese expert on the Middle East, Yin Gang, said Sunday that Mr. Obama’s decision to seek approval from Congress for military action made the president appear weak.

“He doesn’t want to fight, he doesn’t know the outcome,” said Mr. Yin of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. “He’s afraid, very afraid.”

All along, China has counseled a political solution, and Mr. Yin said the meeting of the G-20 in St. Petersburg this week could lead to momentum for talks about how to handle Syrian behavior.

“All the leaders will talk on this topic at the summit, and maybe it can lead to a new direction, to a political solution,” he said.

And one Chinese specialist on Syria, Guo Xian’gang, said President Obama would face opposition from Russia, China and other non-Western countries at the G-20 summit for any military action.

“They will suggest to President Obama that if he wants to take action there should be clear evidence that Syria used chemical weapons,” said Mr. Guo of the Chinese Institute of International Relations. “They will also say that Obama must get the permission of the United Nations.”

Jane Perlez contributed reporting from Beijing.

@ The New York Times