Obama on the Red Line

Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad met the Arab Spring with brutal violence: soldiers against unarmed demonstrators, and later, artillery, air attacks and cluster bombs against civilians. The initially peaceful revolt has given way to a proper civil war. In total, over 70,000 people have been killed.

Barack Obama has demanded al-Assad’s resignation but gone no further than the imposition of sanctions — and for good reason. U.S. popularity among Muslim nations is limited. Meanwhile, Iraq and Afghanistan have led to widespread battle fatigue at home.

However, as of last August, Obama had already said that the line Syria should not cross was bringing chemical weapons into operation or distribution. He has repeated this since. In March, he stated unequivocally, “We will not tolerate the use of chemical weapons against the Syrian people.”

Syria has one of the largest stockpiles of weaponized gases. Last week, the U.K., France and Israel asserted that these have been used on several occasions. The U.S. downplayed the accusations until last Thursday evening, when Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel confirmed that U.S. intelligence services had determined that al-Assad’s regime had made use of chemical weapons “on a small scale.” The evidence consisted of soil samples and blood tests on the injured.

The U.N. Security Council seems unable to act. Even Russia has warned al-Assad against chemical attacks, but has blocked all resolutions on Syria with its veto until now. The demand for a U.N. investigation, with which the U.S. has aligned itself, is feeble. Any investigation would not find more than the CIA has, but most importantly, the Syrian government has rejected all inspections that are not focused on the rebels.

Obama learned two important lessons from Iraq: first, that reports of weapons of mass destruction can be incorrect; second, that military interventions are dangerous escapades. His instinct has been to keep a distance from Syria, despite heavyweight advisers who hold the opposite opinion. The president can refer to semantics. The ultimatum has had its subclauses; he has not promised that a certain event will lead to a specific consequence. It may be possible to claim that a few minor attacks are not the same thing as 20 massive ones. However, most people have understood it to mean that Obama really established a boundary, and key members of Congress from both major parties say that it has now been crossed.

If Obama does not act against Syria, how credible will the military threat be against the suspected Iranian nuclear program? The U.S. says it will not accept Iran acquiring a nuclear bomb, but the question comes up: What will Obama do if this event arises? Conversely, an operation against al-Assad may force the ayatollahs in Tehran to think twice. We can carry this reasoning further to speculate about how both allies and enemies perceive the superpower’s involvement in the world.

However, the objections to the various military options in Syria also remain. Securing the chemical weapons stores requires tens of thousands of soldiers; bombing them would expose civilians to great danger. The U.S. certainly has the capacity to wipe out the Syrian air force and air defense — although it would be a major effort — or to punish al-Assad with missiles from warships in the Mediterranean. However, it would not be very effective against nerve gas.

The debate concerning the arming and training of rebel forces has gone on a long time. Obama has resisted, partly because Islamic extremists have become increasingly influential. In the European Union, the British and French are in favor, the Germans against. Libya and Afghanistan have shown that the supply of arms to rebels readily gives rise to forces that are opposed to both the West and democracy.

All military interventions have consequences that are hard to predict and are often undesirable. Neither Obama nor those who are most vocal about the need to act have any persuasive plan for Syria. The president has a difficult dilemma; the risk is great, no matter what he does.