As I put the finishing touches on this week’s blog, it’s Wednesday morning, and Secretary of State John Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel will be testifying before the House Foreign Affairs Committee at noon. I am a member of that committee, and therefore will be in attendance, and allowed to ask a few questions of these top Obama Administration cabinet officials. They both testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee yesterday. I assume you probably saw or heard at least parts of their testimony in the news coverage.
Here are my thoughts on Syria.
As the nightmare in Syria has unfolded, over 100,000 people, mostly civilians, have been killed. Many more have been wounded, had their homes destroyed, or fled the country. Now Syria’s brutal dictator, Bashar al-Assad, has once again used chemical weapons against his own civilian population, killing over 1,400; 426 of whom were innocent children.
There are various rival groups and factions battling to overthrow the Assad regime. Our intelligence sources on the ground have been monitoring these factions since the beginning of the war. Some are deemed to be potential allies of the United States; others are much more aligned with our enemies, Al-Qaeda in particular. My belief has been for quite some time, that the Obama Administration, by failing to adequately assist the U.S. – friendly groups, has allowed our enemies to strengthen the Al-Qaeda-connected faction to such extent, that even if the despicable Assad is ultimately overthrown, something even more despicable could end up controlling Syria and their chemical and biological stockpile (no nukes at this time, because Israel took out their nuclear program in an airstrike some years back, thank God.)
President Obama had somewhat cavalierly drawn a red line (chemical weapons), and warned Assad not to use them. Assad first used them on a relatively smaller scale, and Obama did virtually nothing. Then recently, Assad used them on a much broader scale, killing many more. After confirming that indeed chemical weapons had been used (sarin gas in particular) President Obama, according to all press reports and insiders in his Administration, had reached the decision to take military action against Assad. Then, shockingly, he changed his mind, and decided to first consult with Congress. That consultation has begun, with a vote anticipated in the near future.
I am reserving my judgment until I have had the opportunity to review all the available evidence, listen to the Administration, and listen to my constituents (you).
I have many concerns. Is the limited military action apparently being considered by the Obama Administration significant enough to do any real good? Or will it just stir up the proverbial hornets’ nest? Is it too little too late?
Our normally staunchest ally on international matters, Great Britain, has decided to take a pass on this one. With the possible exception of France, it appears that the Administration has been unable to rally a “coalition of the willing” to join in a serious effort against Assad, that would actually make a difference. That’s a problem.
And perhaps most importantly, the Administration has totally failed to keep the American people sufficiently in the loop, to convince the public that U.S. vital interests are at stake and military action is clearly warranted.
That being said, despite the fact that the Administration has, in my view, mismanaged Syria almost from the start, the use of chemical weapons, particularly against civilians, is a precedent which in a civilized (at least we’d like to think it is) world cannot be tolerated. Since World War I, as brutal as World War II, Korea, Vietnam, and innumerable other conflicts were over the years, the ban on chemical weapons has held (except for Saddam Hussein against his own people, and Saddam and the kindly mullahs of Iran against each other.)
Whether taking military action against Assad is in the best interests of the United States is the ultimate question. I will do everything within my power to come to the right decision.
