Former United Nations ambassador John Bolton told Fox News Friday that the U.N. Security Council resolution demanding Syria eliminate its chemical weapons arsenal was nothing but a continuation of the Russian-brokered agreement from last week, calling it another victory for the Assad regime and its Russian allies.
The Security Council voted unanimously in its decision, warning of consequences but not authorizing the automatic use of force if Syria was found to be in violation, as previously sought by the Obama administration.
"I don't think that Syria will declare or destroy all of its chemical weapons. It will destroy some of them," Bolton said. "But the rest, I think, have been hidden or moved out of the country. I think the real victory is with Assad and the Russians."
GRETA VAN SUSTEREN: Tell me, this resolution by the U.N. Security Council, good or bad?
JOHN BOLTON: Well, it's simply a continuation of the agreement that was reached in Geneva last weekend and doesn't really add or detract from that one way or the other. I think the underlying agreement is flawed. I don't think that Syria will declare or destroy all of its chemical weapons. It will destroy some of them. But the rest, I think, have been hidden or moved out of the country. I think the real victory is with Assad and the Russians. It gives the Assad regime time to strengthen its position, so I don't think the security council resolution really adds or detracts from that original analysis.
VAN SUSTEREN: Tell me if i'm wrong, but since it has no punitive or military enforcement, they have to go back for that approval for military action, in the event the United States decided to go it alone, we'd either have to go back and get sort of an agreement or not, and I assume the president didn't seem like he was going to be too patient with the U.N. Is that he would go it alone without the U.N., and then am I wrong that that would create some sort of issue?
BOLTON: Are you suggesting that President Obama would ignore the U.N. Security Council? I'm just shocked to hear that. You know, he was prepared to ignore it before. This resolution doesn't change that calculus very much either. And I think in that sense it represents a victory —
VAN SUSTEREN: Except now that they've spoken, and now they've specifically not included the approval of military action.
BOLTON: Well, but that was never going to happen anyway, because the Russians were not going to permit it, so in that sense the Russians have prevailed yet again. As I say, I don't think that changes the underlying reality that existed from the time of the Geneva agreement.