Can’t anybody here play this game? An exasperated Casey Stengel famously asked that question of his hapless ’62 Mets as they limped to a 40-120 record, but it could just as easily be asked of America’s foreign policy team.
With Syria’s mass-murdering regime under attack from various Islamist rebel groups as well as Israeli air strikes aimed at the weapons Iran is shipping through that country to Hezbollah, and with Syria making veiled threats of escalation and Iran urging its neighbors to join in the fray, now is a good time to review the administration’s evolving relationship with these countries. It all began with proper respect for Syria and Iran, of course. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton went so far as to laud Syrian dictator Bashar Assad as a “reformer,” and President Barack Obama was so eager for that bound-to-be-constructive dialogue with Iran that he politely ignored a popular uprising that might have succeeded in toppling the troublesome theocracy with a bit of American encouragement. After years of being spurned the administration at last abandoned the courtship with both countries, and adopted a tougher tone in occasional statements which culminated in Obama’s now-infamous “red line” declaration.
“For the Syrian government to utilize chemical weapons against its people crosses a line that will change my calculus and how the United States approaches these issues,” Obama announced at a news conference, later adding with his best poker face that “I’ve meant what I said.”
Syrian translators probably had some difficulty figuring out what calculus had to do with it, but they had no trouble conveying to Assad the message that Obama had promised to take some sort of action or another if chemical weapons were used against the rebels. With evidence emerging that Assad went ahead and did it anyway, apparently figuring that Obama did not mean what he said, administration officials are now busy explaining why no action is going to be taken. They’re demanding an exceedingly high standard of proof that chemical weapons have been used, and it seems that nothing less than a full confession will suffice, but they’re also anonymously leaking to the press that the president’s remark was “unscripted” and accidentally left out the “nuance” that president was referring to chemical weapons attack that caused mass fatalities. Another aide offers a more fran assessment of administration attitudes, telling the New York Times “How can we attack another country unless it’s in self-defense and with no Security Council resolution. If he drops sarin on his own people, what’s that got to do with us?” Perhaps such nuances will have a deterrent effect on the likes of Assad, and be similarly frightening to any adversaries that might be tempted to cross declared lines on Taiwan, the Korean peninsula, the U.S. border and elsewhere, but it seems unlikely.
Even without a telepromptered script Obama must have known, as he promised some sort of action or another, that were no good options left in Syria. All of the rebel groups that remain in the fight are Islamist, and although the Obama administration has been happy to assist the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood in its takeover of formerly friendly Egypt it does not seem to be eager to replicate that success in still-hostile Syria. Allowing Assad to gas his way to victory is not a good option, either, but it is hard to imagine Obama rousing his himself to another Middle Eastern war, much less the nation or NATO, even with an unlikely Security Council resolution.
The Israelis might handle it, but reports indicate that they aren’t even telling the United States what they’re going to do until they’re doing it. While Syria and Iran were being treated with open-handed appeals for dialogue the Israelies were receiving finger-wagging lectures about housing policy, calls for negotiations starting at the suicidal ’67 borders, and snubs to their Prime Minister, so their reluctance to consult the administration is understandable. Conspiracy theorists will speculate about some covert cooperation, but the overting distancing that both countries are doing with one another sends a message that America cannot deter its friends any more than it can deter its enemies. Like drawing lines that are not intended to be enforced, and the continuing revelations of bungling and duplicity in Benghazi, it makes one wonder if anybody here can play this game.
— Bud Norman
The Central Standard Times 