Patriot Academy Alumnus, Frank Alegria
Last week, the free world watched in horror as chemical weapons were used in bombardment of the rebel-held town in the northern Idlib province of Syria. Over the span of two airstrikes by Syrian warplanes, more than a hundred people were killed and five hundred more injured by the poison gas Sarin. Almost immediately, the attack was condemned by a plethora of world leaders, including our president, Donald Trump.
In response to this most heinous act, American destroyers launched over fifty missiles on the Syrian facility Assad’s forces had carried out the chemical attack from. This response, very unlike that of our previous administration, destroyed aircraft, weapon defense systems, and many munitions, capturing the attention of nations around the world, including North Korea, Iran, and Russia.
Some legislators within Congress criticized the move, however. One faction stated that though the Syrian government’s continued use of chemical weapons was abominable, their doing so was not a clear threat to the national security interests of the United States. Furthermore, the president had acted militarily without congressional approval, meaning that the use of such force in response was unconstitutional.
Others, who have favored intervention for a time, supported the Trump response, stating the United States had the moral authority to enforce the 2013 accord. Human rights had been violated, and since Russia had not enforced the specifics of the Obama-era deal, the U.S. was obligated even now to ensure Syrian abstinence from biological warfare.
Differing reports by a variety of members of the Trump administration have confused many people as to what exactly is the United States’ long-term strategy pertaining to Syria. While Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has revealed there is an international plan to oust Assad as dictator, other prominent officials have stated that this was a decisive one-time answer to the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons.
Should the Secretary be right in that the U.S. seeks to topple Assad from power, it is most important that the president lay out the plan in its entirety beforehand to Congress and the American people. Foreign policy gurus know the disaster that resulted from the Obama administration’s lack of planning and leadership in Libya. If the U.S. is to be involved in the Syrian conflict, we must approach this with a deliberative step and wary eyes. For as my dad likes to say, “Fail to plan, plan to fail.”
