Experts ask for Trump’s Strategy on Syria

Recent US air strikes in Syria attacking an airbase from where poisonous chemical gas was leaked causing many deaths begs the question about Trump’s strategy on Syria.

Washington D.C: The recent US airstrikes in Syria in retaliation to the chemical attacks that killed more than 100 civilians, raises the question of what’s next in Syria. How serious is Trump in engaging in that country and how far he can go?

No sooner the US attacked an airbase in Syria than the place is back to its regular operation — just within a day. Not just that, there is even a chemical attack on Saturday, April 8, that killed at least one Syrian. These provoking events, ensuing the US attack in Syria, precipitated the need for a long-term strategy in Syria from the US President Donald Trump.

Trump has said that he could shift his position on anything anytime. He can be unpredictable. When it comes to Syria, his administration’s first reaction to the chemical attack was that the Syrians would be deciding their leader. But that stand soon changed leading to the intervention. Now, another chemical attack in Syria, most likely by Assad Government, is testing Trump’s seriousness in his engagement in Syria.

This is not the first chemical attack in Syria. The Assad Government has killed thousands of its own civilians since the revolution that had taken inspiration from the revolt in Tunisia. Assad had crushed the revolution to a greater extent, and in doing so he used chemical weapons against the upsurge, showing Syrians his strength and the price for going against him.

Obama administration had warned Assad and drew redline cautioning him that America would interfere if he crossed the line. Assad crossed it by attacking his people with poisonous gas in 2013. The moderates who were fighting against the Assad regime wanted the US to interfere, but the US didn’t act to their disappointment.

From Obama’s perspective, interference meant boots on grounds and committing to fight till Assad regime fell, which made little sense keeping in view the American interests in the region. As per reports, Obama studied the case of interference and decided against it, as it could make the situation in Syria even worse.

Obama critics argue that America’s restraint at the time provided opportunity for Russia in the region. Russia was successful to an extent to make him give up chemicals used for attacks. Later, Russia supported Assad Government and apposed ISIS, which by then had occupied multiple cities in Syria and had expanded to Iraq. Iran and China also have accepted Assad as the legitimate leader.

The US has been fighting ISIS in Iraq. The US interference in Syria with a long-term strategy would strengthen ISIS in Syria, as Assad becomes weak. Trump has announced that his fight against terrorism would continue in the Middle East.

At the same time, the airstrike in Syria also distanced Russia and Iran from the US. The recent attack after the US airstrike in Syria can be seen as an act of provocation to test Trump. Now, the experts ask for Trump’s strategy on Syria.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.