Obama faces uphill task in bid for Syria action

Unlike the pro-Assad actors — Iran, Hezbollah, and Russia, the Obama administration has never had a clear-cut strategy on Syria. On more than one occasion, US senior officials articulated the endgame: Syria without Assad. And yet, this remained empty rhetoric. Contrary to that, pro-Assad actors have made good use of American hesitation and inaction and therefore continued supporting Assad at the political, economic, and military levels.
With the passage of time, the goal of ousting Assad has become increasingly difficult. Aware of the lack of preparedness of his country to get involved in another military venture in the Middle East, Obama drew a red line for Assad not to cross: Assad can bomb his people the way he sees fits but will be held accountable for using chemical weapons! Well, Assad crossed Obama’s red lines in April and again in August.
Obama now feels obliged to restore the American deterrence and status in the Middle East by a tailored and limited air strike against specific targets in Syria. If anything, Obama seeks to send a message to allies and opponents in the Middle East that America should not be written off.
Over the last two weeks, the Obama administration revealed details of the intended military operation.
Though Obama has no intentions of prolonging the campaign, the weary American public fears that such an operation could cause ripples of unintended consequences.
For this reason, Obama is seeking congressional endorsement. One of his oft-repeated lines is that his country is overcommitted in the Middle East and that time has come to give domestic priorities the deserved attention.
Not surprisingly, Obama is reluctant to turn his back on his cautious position in the Middle East without having the Congress onboard.
To be able to act on his red line, assure his allies in the Middle East, and deter his opponents in the region, Obama believes that the strike is a must. To be sure, he is also trying to rally the American people around his new position.
While understanding the predicament of the US president and the need for playing a constructive role worldwide, still the American people are not ready to stomach another military venture. Many Americans cannot accept the logic of a limited airstrike and argue instead that it may be a precursor for a regional war when American interests are not threatened.
On the other hand, many Americans argue that it is American position in the Middle East on the whole that is at stake. If Obama fails to keep good on his intention to attack Syria, then countries such as Iran and Russia would claim victory. Their strategic calculations will certainly be different and Iran would be encouraged to challenge American and cause instability.
These concerns were voiced in a hearing that recently took place in the Congress. Senators from both sides of the aisle did their best to raise thoughtful points.
Some of theme voiced skepticism based on sound analysis. Much of the debate is about what is in Syria for the Americans to take such a step and why now.
But the problem is that Obama has not been persuasive in his objectives. A limited strike seeks to reinforce the red line is hardly useful.
I am not saying that forcing Assad not to use chemical weapons is not good. But it appears that Assad will be able to withstand the strike and the Russians will step in and compensate him with perhaps more sophisticated weapon. Assad in this case will continue to ruthlessly killing his opponents in Syria.
Apart from these strategic calculations, the American public is not supportive of a limited strike that may well embroil their country in a war that does not interest them.
The American administration’s hesitation and the argument that Al-Qaeda is more dangerous for Americans than Assad, has further weakened the administration’s position. The American public is unlikely to support such an action or any other military intervention unless necessary.
For Obama it is an uphill task. But whatever his decision, it is far from certain that the United States will speak unanimously in case Obama decides to strike Syria.

Email: [email protected]