Big Pile of Dynamite

Is Obama’s surprising decision to provide military assistance to Syrian rebels a good move or a bad one? It is a hard question to answer, and the reactions in Germany and Moscow show how controversial the president’s about-face is.

The federal government is doing well to hold back in this instance — one of the pressing problems here would be distinguishing between “good” and “bad” rebels, and making sure no weapons fall into the hands of radical Islamists.

But after drawing a verbal red line in the sand — the use of poison gas by the Assad regime — Obama was left with no other choice if he wanted to retain trust on the international stage. The price he is paying is major irritation in Moscow and several other ally countries, from which the White House now expects active support.

The form Washington’s support for the insurgents will take has yet to be decided. The imposition of a no-fly zone would create a big pile of political dynamite, because in that case, Moscow could arm their allies in Damascus more heavily than ever. And the Russian air raid defense system is so modern that it could pose a serious threat to U.S. jets.

It’s unthinkable that Obama would choose this option. An agreement from the U.N. Security Council would also be unrealistic because of the foreseeable veto from Russia, in case the White House wants to use that as a basis for a no-fly zone.

However, this new development might not necessarily push a political solution to the conflict off the table: U.S. engagement could at least help balance power between Assad’s military and the rebels and force the president to negotiate a settlement, which before seemed out of the question.