Trump’s Strike on Syria

What’s the issue? Last week Bashar al-Assad, the president of Syria, used chemical weapons against his own people, killing dozens, including children. It was a terrible crime that was immediately condemned by people around the world. Trump, rightly, was horrified by the attack. “I will tell you that attack on children yesterday had a big impact on me — big impact. That was a horrible, horrible thing. And I’ve been watching it and seeing it, and it doesn’t get any worse than that” he said. Days later, Trump bombed a Syrian airbase, marking the first time the US has directly bombed Assad.

Why do I care? I’m glad that we can all be on the same page the using chemical weapons is a horrible atrocity. However, I’m not sure that immediately bombing the Assad regime was the right thing to do. Although there is some debate, it seems that Trump’s decision to authorize the missile strikes without Congressional approval was legal, or at least has a strong precedent. However, it was not legal under international law. Specifically, the United Nations Charter says the only two justifications for an attack of this nature are approval of the Security Council (which Trump didn’t have) or in self-defense.

Secondly, Trump doesn’t appear to have an ongoing strategy for what to do in Syria, and a one-off strike is unlikely to have much of an effect. Trump would need (and could probably get) Congressional approval for any further military action in Syria. However, intervening in Syria contradicts what Trump promised during his campaign. For example, he said that the US “end up in World War Three over Syria if we listen to Hillary Clinton.” Hillary Clinton argued that the US should bomb Syrian airfields as a response to using chemical weapons, exactly what Trump ended up doing. The attack also seems to go against Trump’s “America First” foreign policy. As recently as last week Trump said, “I’m not, and I don’t want to be, the president of the world.” However, ongoing engagement would be necessary to achieve any lasting impact. According to the New York Times, the one US missile strike so far, “inflicted only minor damage and [is] unlikely to change the dynamics of a complex conflict that rages on local, regional and global levels.” Even if Trump committed American troops on the ground to fight in Syria, sustained engagement would not necessarily end this complex conflict. Meanwhile, Trump has not signaled any willingness to change his stance on barring Syrians refugees from entering the United States. It’s hard to think that Trump seriously cares about Syria and its people with that kind of policy.

So, if the US takes action legally and has a sustained, well-thought out strategy, was the strike the right move? Honestly, I don’t know. There seems to be a good argument that the world cannot let Assad continue to get away with these heinous crimes and that the US is morally compelled to act. There is another good argument that things have not gone well for the United States when they have tried to intervene in the Middle East in the past (Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan), and there is no evidence that this time would be different.

With Trump as president, however, I doubt that he has the convictions, political adeptness, or patience to lead the United States on a military course of action that will end Syria’s six year civil war. Additionally, regardless of the final outcome I am wary of his motivations. This is an awfully good time for him to 1) get the media focused on something other than his terrible poll numbers, investigations into his staff, and his failure to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and 2) to divert claims that he and his staff cooperated with Russia to influence the election by doing something that is against Russia’s wishes. I am not convinced that Trump’s sudden change of heart will truly benefit the Syrian people, and additionally I believe there is a real danger his actions will end poorly for the United States.

What to do if you care too:

1. Write a letter to the editor if your local newspaper unequivocally supported Trump’s strike to raise a more nuanced point of view.
2. Check out my post on refugees and the travel ban for some ideas on how to help Syrian refugees.
3. As always, contact your Congresspeople to tell them if you oppose (or are in favor of) more military action in Syria. Also contact your Congresspeople to urge them to continue to focus on Trump’s and his administration’s ties to Russia.
4. Participate in the Day of Action for Syria this Thursday (April 13th).
5. Join Peace Action and sign up to receive their suggestions on how to oppose US involvement in Syria (and war in general).

Further reading:

1. This 6-minute video gives a brief history of the Syrian conflict.
2. This heart-wrenching op-ed describes what it was like for one man to survive a chemical weapons attack in Syria.
3. Paul Krugman’s article criticizing the media for their overly positive coverage of the missile attacks.

Featured image from Flickr.