You have reached your limit of free articles this month.

Enjoy unlimited access to myAJC.com

Starting at just 99¢ for 8 weeks.

GREAT REASONS TO SUBSCRIBE TODAY!

  • IN-DEPTH REPORTING
  • INTERACTIVE STORYTELLING
  • NEW TOPICS & COVERAGE
  • ePAPER
X

You have read of premium articles.

Get unlimited access to all of our breaking news, in-depth coverage and bonus content- exclusively for subscribers. Starting at just 99¢ for 8 weeks

X

Welcome to myAJC.com

This subscriber-only site gives you exclusive access to breaking news, in-depth coverage, exclusive interactives and bonus content.

You can read free articles of your choice a month that are only available on myAJC.com.

Obama’s words, actions don’t make the case for war


John Kerry explained to senators Tuesday how the U.S. could end up with soldiers on the ground in Syria. He spent much of the rest of his testimony walking it back.

The secretary of state clarified: President Barack Obama “has no intention and will not and we do not want to put American troops on the ground to fight this or be involved in the fighting of the civil war.” Kerry called the earlier scenario he’d painted merely “a hypothetical question,” the result of “thinking out loud.”

There may be no better description of Obama’s strategy toward Syria and its dictator, Bashar al-Assad, than “thinking out loud.” That is one reason our best option is not to attack Syria.

Here’s what “thinking out loud” has gotten us so far:

Obama famously improvised his “red line” remark about Syria and chemical weapons in August 2012. Yet, he did not spend the ensuing months preparing for the possibility Assad would cross it. There was no broad international coalition waiting in the wings. Nor did Obama lay the necessary groundwork with Congress so that we might act suddenly and decisively.

Instead, Obama maintained he did not need Congress’ permission to strike. Then, last weekend, he said he would let Congress speak after all.

By Wednesday, Obama had declared the chemical-weapons “red line” and questions of credibility belonged not to him but to Congress and “the world.” He’s only right in the sense he shot his own credibility by issuing a threat that, we can see now, he hadn’t fully considered.

Our potential action, it has been reported, will be “just muscular enough not to get mocked.” Officials have been at pains to let everyone from here to Damascus know just how limited and symbolic our actions will be — to the point Kerry said it was not “going to war in a classic sense.” That such an action would discourage future use of chemical weapons, by Assad or another tyrant, is ludicrous.

None of this is to make the case for a larger intervention in Syria. It is unclear what that might accomplish, given uncertainties about the rebels we would be backing and the lack of an obvious U.S. interest at stake.

That said, it is dishonest and irresponsible for the Obama administration to talk as if a large intervention absolutely will not follow a smaller one.

Wars do not adhere to plans, as we know almost 12 years later in Afghanistan, more than a decade after the Iraq invasion, and nearly one year after our ambassador and three other Americans were killed in Libya — the last country where we intervened out of a “moral” sense of duty but with no follow-through.

The notion Assad will simply take whatever punishment we dole out to him is naive and reckless. The question is whether his inevitable response can be contained or, as in the scenario Kerry sketched out and hastily erased, will compel more involvement.

To that end, it would be helpful to know what we mean to achieve in Syria. Obama and Kerry have suggested Syria will not have peace as long as Assad is in power, but they insist we will not oust him ourselves. It seems we can countenance tens of thousands more dead Syrians as long as they die from bullets, not sarin gas.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Tuesday our goals are to “degrade” Assad’s capabilities and “deter” him from using chemical weapons again. These are not synonyms for “destroy” and “prevent.” If we fire some missiles in the name of accountability, only to watch Assad cross the red line again, who will have taught whom a lesson? And then what do we do?

Some people suggest the difference between the Iraq invasion and Syria is we no longer have a “cowboy” in the White House. This is to mistake Obama’s ad libbing for preparation, his bromides about responsibility for leadership, his “thinking out loud” for thoughtfulness. I say all this as someone who also opposed the Iraq invasion because it was sold as easier, safer, morally clearer and better-conceived than seemed possible.

This administration has not shown the preparation, competence or resolve to be trusted on this matter. It should not take us to war in Syria.


Reader Comments ...


Next Up in Opinion

Opinion: The unfinished symphony that’s Morehouse College
Opinion: The unfinished symphony that’s Morehouse College

In his book, “Strength to Love”, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote, “one of the most agonizing problems within our human experience is that few, if any, of us live to see our fondest hopes fulfilled. The hope of our childhood and the promises of our mature years are unfinished symphonies.” It is a rare privilege to serve as...
Opinion: A bluesy intro to the holiday weekend

[youtube=]   A great Chicago/Delta blues song, played by two masters of the genre. Enjoy your weekend, my fellow Americans (and anyone else.)
Opinion: Cost of war measured in sacrifice, what might have been

A tear welled up in Hal’s eye, a deep sadness etched across his face as he recalled the moment. Omaha Beach, the day after the D-Day invasion. Hal had been tasked by his company commander to go back down onto the beach and retrieve some equipment. A farm boy from Iowa now deep into his sixties, he shared this memory with me, his words below....
Opinion: Sacrifices forever worth our thanks
Opinion: Sacrifices forever worth our thanks

Another Memorial Day weekend is upon this nation. Our freedom to enjoy any manner of leisure pursuits this weekend, to move freely about this great land and otherwise observe — or not, if we’re so inclined — the hallowed nature of this holiday speaks to the awesome benefits of liberty that we too often take for granted. One by one...
Opinion: Remembering the highest price many paid for our freedom

Our nation and state will celebrate Memorial Day on Monday, May 29th. While you observe the holiday in your own unique way, I ask that you take a moment during the day to think about the freedoms we enjoy by living in this great nation. Those freedoms are the result of the sacrifices of those we honor on this special day. We have celebrated Memorial...
More Stories