Trump, Syria, and the rabbit's hole

So that was that. Insert question mark here. In an awesomely unshocking military strike that lasted all of "three to four minutes," the Trump administration took out some Syrian aircraft hangers, a couple gas tanks, perhaps a radar installation or two. The objective, said a U.S. military official in a bemusing flourish of the colossally self-evident, was "to send a signal to Mr. Assad about the United States’ intention to use military force if he continues to use chemical weapons."

That much, we get. What the U.S. official omitted was that our "signal" likely would have been unnecessary had not the Trump administration previously signaled that Assad was free to do as he chose. His political position, as our secretary of state had announced, would properly "be decided by the Syrian people." In the beginning, the U.S. signal was one of hands off. Thus did Assad do as he chose. Naturally, Trump blamed Assad's monstrous decision on President Obama.

Trump's four-minute military strike was, of course, the easy part. As every foreign policy analyst has asked in the last 12 hours: What of the strike's political objective? Did it possess or even envision one? Did it in any way further the cause of a Syrian civil war resolution? I've no way prove this beyond boundless empirical evidence of Trump's ruthless self-promotion, but I suspect his objective was mostly domestic; to prove himself a tough guy of action, and to stanch his hemorrhaging poll numbers (for a day or two; but hey, it's always one day at a time for incurable narcissists).

Fareed Zakaria acutely summarizes the ultimate futility of martial moments: "The United States’ problems in the Middle East have never come from military weakness, but rather from the fact that after tactical victories, the United States has been unable to achieve any kind of political settlement or stability." Those problems are tragically amplified by Trumpism, which harbors little to no belief in the arduous but eventually more effective tactics of diplomacy and soft power.

Those aren't sexy enough for this president, who also harbors absolutely no grounding in foreign affairs or understanding of global historical developments. For that matter, he has no grounding at all. Trump can swing from dedicated non-interventionist to fanatical neoconservative in a Fifth Avenue minute, for he is intellectually vacuous and fundamentally reactive.

From his Florida resort (where he was being fleeced by China's capable president), Trump "said his decision [to launch a missile strike] had been prompted in part by what he called the failures by the world community to respond effectively to the Syrian civil war." One groans in near incredulity. It was the Trump administration — the leader of the most powerful nation in "the world community" — that repeatedly "signaled" that America's Syrian policy was one of indifference.

What next? Who the hell knows. One thing, however, is clear as Waterford crystal. Because Trump is so intellectually and historically rootless, his foreign policy, as Zakaria adds, "seems to change with every meeting, event and crisis" — as well with whose voice he last heard, or whatever he last saw on television. This does not bode well. Our pretend-presidential rabbit may have just plunged his head into the hole's opening.

 

Comments

[Patty S.]

I couldn't help but wonder if Trump also saw a certain opportunity to demonstrate that he isn't beholden to Putin? A small military action that could "prove" that he's his own man where Putin is concerned? Of course Russia was notified prior to the attack to avert any Russians casualties but still-- a handy, self-serving message from Trump to his base and to his detractors, no?

But yes, what comes next? Who knows.

[Anne J]

So in yet another effort to prop up his ego, we may have entered into our worst foreign policy blunder since the Iraq war? He just went from clueless and indecisive bumbler to still clueless decider 2.0. There were never any easy answers, and now the the cluster fuck just got more clustered. And everybody will be fucked.

[Peter G]

A minor correction is in order, that would be onetime leader not leader. That was a position relinquished upon Trump's election. That our host is correct about Trump's motivation in this matter would be indicated by the complete disregard for the hundreds of civilians, including children, killed recently by American air strikes. Maybe it wasn't us they said, as if they did not know to the meter where ordinance was dropped.

When you look objectively at why Assad enjoys Russian support you quickly conclude that Syria is hardly a desirable client state from a monetary point of view. Supplying Assad costs Russia a lot and Russia is not a wealthy state. The answer seems pretty clear. It is Russia's intention to use Assad to flood the world, and particularly Europe, with refugees. That is the whole point of this mayhem. It helps Putin's fascist associates in Europe. It is unlikely that this little adventure will do much to alter this situation. Long term the only way to make this work is to organize a powerful coation to create safe areas in Syria and attach a cost, payment in kind, to Assad's regime. This is far beyond the capabilities of Trump.

But I am enjoying watching the heads blowing up in the alt-right community. Trump has betrayed all that is holy by attacking Putin's pal Assad.

[shsavage]

There is a fairly large town less than a kilometer from the eastern end of the base. So there could be potential for civilian casualties as well. Especially if there were civilian workers at the base. But my guess is that the Russians passed the word to the Syrians, and everybody got the hell out of Dodge before the sky fell in. But at least Chicken Little has something to crow about.

[Marc McKenzie]

Funny thing about that--many in Trump's base are pissed off at him for doing this.

Plus, according to reports, this was a "one-time thing". And of course, if Ol' Yellow Stain gave two shits about the "children" of Syria, he would have let more of them arrive in the US as refugees. Instead, he spent months decrying them, calling them hidden terrorists. The media may expect a pivot, but I do not.

And of course he HAS to blame the Black Guy...but of course, Twitter and the Internet keep all even when some want us to forget. Trump and the same GOP pieces of human waste who are now drooling over this were oh so reluctant to get involved when President Obama proposed air strikes and went to Congress for approval back in 2013. Congress told him to go pound sand.

And finally, there is a bit of glee in this for me--because it drives a stake through the heart of those far-Left idiots like Jill Stein and H.A. Goodman who constantly brayed that it was Hillary Clinton who was the real warmonger and threat--and that Trump was going to be the peacenik.

[Max]

Also in the news, related to PMCs post: Brian Williams really IS crazy after all:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/brian-williams-leonard-cohen-syria_us_58e76c44e4b058f0a02e12b1?5xc&

[John S]

There's all that and the Russian naval base in Syria which they intend to retain. It appears to be the only such facility they have in the Mediterranean. Personally, I would have favored a solution that let them keep their base as we have kept a base in Cuba and let the rest of Syria go its own way, but that is an idea six years past reality now, if it ever had any.

It seems clear that military planners presented humanitarian options to the President - apparently they often do - just not a Trumpian thing to do I'm sure.

[John S]

[Was so annoyed with news last night, I posted this in another spot, waiting for PM to write his take on Syria this morning - reposting in this more appropriate spot.]

There are two explanations for Trump's new found desire to conduct military operations against Syria:

1. He saw the carnage on cable news, which is the only way he understands anything and nothing exists until it's on cable (aside from there being nine prior chemical attacks so far in Syria during the Trump administration, every minute of every day an atrocity is committed somewhere in the world against women and children, often in the name of religion, but it doesn't count until it's on Fox); and

2. Military action could bring his approval rating up by 7% which would improve his chances to get legislation passed.

They're not mutually exclusive, though I had to watch cable news through dinner, a stint on the elliptical, and a martini before hearing either point made, the first one of which I already knew. Decisive Trump, ignorant Trump -- all dwelling in the same 70 year old bloated body, bloated ego.

And of course, bombing a Russian client state is a doubly useful distraction from Russia collusion, claiming the news cycle AND creating talking points for GOP apologists.

[Anne J]

Just when you thought it was safe to watch cable news again..... Nothing like the shiny object of bombing strikes to take them off the scent of investigative reporting.

[shsavage]

There's a long association between Syria and Russia/USSR that goes back to the old UAR days when Syria was briefly connected to Nasser's Egypt. Nasser was forced into the arms of the USSR when arms purchase agreements he was working on with the Eisenhower administration fell through following his nationalization of the Suez Canal. It's quite complicated. But the USSR was given port privileges at Latakia in the late 1950s, and has kept up the relationship with Syria in order to maintain the base. Russia's move into the Crimea, Putin's cozying up to Ergogan's Turkey, and his continual support of Assad have to be viewed as multiple fronts in a single strategy. It's the latest round of the old Great Power game, whose object was to deny Russia direct access to the Mediterranean via the Bosphorus. Putin thinks he'll get that accomplished, and therefore needs the naval base at Latakia more than ever. He's playing multi-dimensional chess, while President* Chicken Little plays Tiddly Winks.

[shsavage]

Another factor that contributed to Nassar's decision to invite the Soviets into the UAR was the U.S. opposition to Egypt's search for funding to build the Aswan High Dam.

[Anne J]

I'm not at all surprised that President Pussygrabber only believes what comes spewing out of the news network of lecherous old goats. And the rest of them aren't any better only showing concern for how this benefits him politically. It's depressing.

[John S]

Saw that live. I believe he also referred to that video as work of the Pentagon's (or DOD) "marketing" department -- which isn't so much crazy as inconvenient truth of what our government is selling and what the public is buying.

Apparently I'm too jaded to be upset by the overall description of the ships shuddering as the missiles leave or the launches as beautiful - large portions of the military and the electorate saw them as just that -- it's the landings on the other end that horrify, especially after the dust settles. Americans love to watch imagery of stuff getting blown up -- that's why DoD provides the pictures. Confusing that with enduring power, strategy or progress may be at the heart of our citizenry's difficulty processing foreign relations. Putin, Trump and too many Americans focus on military power as more meaningful than all other power. With Putin, that's all he's got, albeit with top flight cyberops. The only Russian product any of us own is possibly gasoline refined from Russian oil and malware on our computers -- an economy the size of Italy, who as least make some things the world wants.

[Peter G]

I suspect the utility of that base, aside from support for ships out of their Black Sea fleet, is exaggerated. If a shooting war involving the Russians ever got that far they'd be dangling in the middle of nowhere, on the wrong side of the Bosphorus and beyond all help. I agree, let them keep it.

But Clinton was right about this. If internationally organized intervention that includes safe havens doesn't happen then the refugee crisis will not end until Syria is depopulated. Then the Russians will move to the next opportunity for mayhem creation and refugee generation.

[Peter G]

All true but the situation is completely different now. Putin isn't a Soviet tiger playing old ideological geopolitics. they use to back leftees didn't they? No more.

He's basically a fascist and he's arming his fascist allies in Europe by flooding them with refugees. This is an old tactic as well. The goal here is to weaken the European alliance. As you say the chief vulnerability is Turkey. If Putin could bring Turkey into his camp, and Erdogan certainly shares Putin's authoritarianism instincts, that would be quite a coup.

Frankly, I just tuned up a VOX writer, Dylan Matthews for a particularly silly analysis. He wrote this: http://www.vox.com/2015/9/4/9258149/syria-refugee-humanitarian-intervention

I append my tune up:

And here's why you are completely wrong. The Russian strategy , which is costing their not very wealthy economy a lot, is to use Assad to drive, through shear mayhem, a flood of refugees into the world. Depopulating Syria through ethnic or religious cleansing is not a solution at all. It helps fuel essentially fascist movements in Europe that is making what you claim to want, aid for refugees, ever harder. That is the Russian aim. How is it possible not to know this? The correct solution, proposed by Hillary Clinton, is not to leave Syria a depopulated wasteland but to form a coalition that engages Assad, militarily as necessary, and create safe havens so Syrians do not have to flee their country. Only by doing this can conditions for a diplomatic solution leading to Assad's replacement or control be accomplished. The "solution" you propose virtually guarantees further monstrosities in Syria because it helps and not hinders Russian goals. If morality in foreign policy is about helping people you've hit on the best strategy for not doing that. If it is allowed to persist there will be another Syria. And another after that.

[Tony]

I think you are right on on this.

[Tony]

Shorter Brian Williams: Why, it's a baby shock and awe!

[Max]

Mark Rubio, 2013: Don't bomb Syria
Mark Rubio, 2016: Bombing Syria good!

Paul Ryan, 2013: Don't bomb Syria
Paul Ryan, 2016: Bombing Syria good!

Four legs good, two legs BETTER.

And in this corner, Marc, as to your last paragraph, yes, the far left are idiots.

[Max]

True on DoD. As to Williams, though, I was willing to give him something of another chance. No more. Enough.

[shsavage]

According to a Faux Newz (I know, it's Faux Newz) report, a cruise missile armed Russian frigate has passed through the Bosporus and is steaming toward the two US destroyers who fired the missiles on the air base. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/04/07/syria-missile-attack-satellite-photos-show-major-damage-to-airfields.html

[Peter G]

Just a question here. Are we reverting to type? Williams's use of beautiful notwithstanding this may be the first act Trump did with which I would agree. Mostly because it is exactly what Obama would have done congress permitting. Which they did not. I seriously doubt if Trump has the brains or fortitude to follow through but that was a good start. Assad bombs and gasses civilian population and his military forces get hammered. That suits me fine. If there is no price to paid for such atrocities they will not stop because the strategy works. Diplomacy can only work where the war alternative fails. And it sure isn't failing for Assad and Putin now.

The coalition building of a force that is prepared to use force in response to civilian assaults is beyond the ken of such as Trump. On the contrary, his need to appear manly, has led to exactly the same results in Iraq. There was a damned good reason the majority of air missions there returned without dropping ordinance before Trump. That was because ISIS troops were embedded in civilian populations. Avoiding civilian casualties was a priority. Now it is not and they are getting reckless.

[Tony]

"Williams's use of beautiful notwithstanding"

But he did use it, in the context of words from my favorite poet and songwriter, Leonard Cohen. Which was totally inappropriate, as democracy is NOT coming to either Syria (or the US) by virtue of this strike.

The strike, as you suggest, may have been justified, but I fear it will give Trump an intoxicating taste of what it is like to be a "war President". If so, there are plenty of Americans like Williams who will be enthused by that, just as there was a national celebration at the "shock and awe" unleashed at the start of W's *excellent* Iraq adventure.

[Max]

As Leonard himself pointed out,in the song itself, the narrator is insane. Does Williams even know that? Oh, wait - Williams is insane too. So it makes sense after all. Great song, probably my favorite Leonard album.

[Tony]

I didn't know that, either. Anyway, my favorite Leonard album is "I'm Your Man", and favorite song from that is "Everybody Knows"

Except maybe for his last album, "You Want it Darker". I guess I like some cathartic stuff, sometimes.

[Peter G]

I've no doubt that is true. But I doubt they would directly attack american ships. They might get close and launch some of their own missiles at some Syrian targets. Probably a nursery school full of ISIS four year olds. If there are any left.

[shsavage]

Here's what seems to have happened. Trump decides to bomb the airbase, and warns the Russians beforehand (http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/06/the-us-warned-the-russians-ahead-of-syria-missile-strikes-official.html). They tell the Syrians. All the planes and helicopters move to other airbases. The cruise missiles fell on empty hangers, and didn't crater the runways. This can be determined from post-attack satellite imagery and on-the-ground pictures that are already on the web, which I've spent the afternoon examining. Don't believe the Russian drone footage; it shows the airbase, but before that attack. After the attack was over, some pictures were taken; the planes and helicopters returned, and they are now already flying again. http://deadstate.org/syrian-airbase-hit-by-trumps-missiles-has-already-resumed-bombing-people/

So we just spent about 52 million dollars to punch some holes in empty hangers, in order to make the world think Trump has balls. Completely ineffective, and the Russians and alt-right are pissed off now. So much WINNING! Trump was right about one thing--I'm sick of it already.

[Max]

Yes, same album, 1988. My fave on that one is "Take This Waltz." (It's his son's very favorite song of his father's.)

[Tony]

Thanks for your research. I agree with all, except whether the Russians are pissed off is debatable. This has all the marks of a show put on for the purpose of distraction, and to get American media on board and in line.