The Real Objective in Syria

The editors of the Wall Street Journal are more candid yet about their objectives in Syria:

Does the Trump Administration have a policy in Syria worth the name? If so it isn’t obvious, and its recent decisions suggest that the White House may be willing to accommodate the Russian and Iranian goal of propping up Bashar Assad for the long term.

Last week the Administration disclosed that it has stopped assisting the anti-Assad Sunni Arab fighters whom the CIA has trained, equipped and funded since 2013. U.S. Special Operations Command chief Gen. Raymond Thomas told the Aspen Security Forum Friday that the decision to pull the plug was “based on an assessment of the nature of the program and what we are trying to accomplish and the viability of it going forward.”

That might make sense if anyone knew what the U.S. is trying to accomplish beyond ousting Islamic State from Raqqa in northern Syria. In that fight the Pentagon has resisted Russia and Iran by arming the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces and shooting down the Syria aircraft threatening them. Mr. Trump also launched cruise missiles to punish Mr. Assad after the strongman used chemical weapons.

The muddle is what the U.S. wants in Syria after the looming defeat of Islamic State. On that score the Trump Administration seems to want to find some agreement with Russia to stabilize Syria even if that means entrenching Mr. Assad and the Russian and Iranian military presence.

The president does not have the authority to remove the Assad regime as its primary objective in Syria. That is true under President Trump and it was true under President Obama. It is well beyond the enormous scope of the ill-considered Authorization to Use Military Force. It is in direct contradiction to treaties to which the U. S. is signatory. It does not fall under the rubric of exigent circumstances.

If President Obama wanted to pursue that objective, he should have sought approval from the Congress for it. No president, Republican or Democrat, is a despot with unlimited power, even in the sphere in which the president has the most power, the role of commander-in-chief.

0 comments… add one

Leave a Comment