A world defined by impulses
Friday 7 April 2017 14.18 EDT
The US missile strike on a Syrian airbase came days after the chemical attack that killed scores in Idlib but years after the evidence began piling up of brutality, torture, the deliberate targeting of civilians, medical facilities and aid and the repeated use of chlorine by forces fighting to defend Bashar al-Assad’s regime. Both those who have long called for his forcible removal and those who believe any military intervention to be wrong and dangerous may well ask what has changed. The uncertainty is supercharged by the fact that the attack was ordered by Donald Trump, a volatile narcissist without a coherent worldview, moral compass or significant attention span, who loudly urged Barack Obama not to take action after Mr Assad’s forces used sarin to kill more than 1,000 people at Ghouta in 2013 ...
Inevitably, the strike is being read in the light of Steve Bannon’s departure from the US national security council and the rise of national security adviser HR McMaster and defence secretary James Mattis (and, more broadly, Mr Bannon’s struggles with Jared Kushner for influence). It has thus been seen as a victory for “globalists” who want to reassert that America will uphold its values internationally and for experienced “grown-ups”, who have coordinated a clear but calibrated response. That seems premature ...
... look at the context ... A president facing historically low poll ratings will probably see a boost; military action is usually popular, in the short term at least. US allies were already concerned he might be looking for a fight, albeit probably with Kim Jong-un. A man who likes to boast of decisiveness, but with little to show for 11 weeks in office, ordered action that could not be blocked by Congress or the courts. A politician facing an unprecedented scandal over his campaign’s dealings with Russia and Moscow’s interference in the election has put distance between himself and the Kremlin. A poll bump could encourage him to take rash action elsewhere – perhaps Pyongyang. And .. it opens the door to further action in Syria ...
... There were reports of further bombing at the Idlib site today. It may deter the regime from using sarin again and from indulging in the most public excesses of viciousness. It may discourage others from employing such weapons. Those are important goals – however partial and imperfect. But Mr Trump’s inconsistency and amorality is epitomised by his attempts to bar Syrian refugees. Though an ignored red line has been partially redrawn, we are no closer to a solution to Syria’s tragedy; nor to the reassertion of a US vision of a rules-based order, however flawed. A world defined by Mr Trump’s impulses cannot be a safe one.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/apr/07/the-guardian-view-on-syria-airstrikes-a-world-defined-by-trumps-impulses
