How Would You Define Success in Syria?

Whether or not they are justified, U.S. air strikes would likely fail to achieve significant goals.

Syrian President Bashar Assad , left, meets with U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell in Damascus on Saturday May 3, 2003. Speaking to the media before the meeting , Powell  said that future relations hinge on whether Damascus takes steps to becoming a true middle east partner.
National Journal
Charlie Cook
Sept. 9, 2013, 4:51 p.m.

It takes a lot to over­shad­ow the loom­ing fisc­al battles in Wash­ing­ton, but Pres­id­ent Obama’s de­cision to seek con­gres­sion­al ap­prov­al for air strikes against the re­gime of Syr­i­an Pres­id­ent Bashar al-As­sad for us­ing chem­ic­al weapons against his own cit­izens has man­aged to do it.

There are eight le­gis­lat­ive days left to pass a con­tinu­ing res­ol­u­tion to avoid a gov­ern­ment shut­down, and then sev­en more to avoid de­fault­ing on Treas­ury bonds, so those is­sues would seem to trump any oth­er — ex­cept at­tack­ing a for­eign coun­try. Mem­bers of Con­gress are com­ing back from their dis­tricts re­port­ing that vari­ous con­stitu­ency groups that nev­er agree on any­thing are uni­fied in op­pos­i­tion to an at­tack. The groups may each op­pose the idea for slightly dif­fer­ent reas­ons — or reach the con­clu­sion through vari­ous paths — but they all ar­rive at the same place. New polling re­leased from CNN, ABC News/Wash­ing­ton Post, and for USA Today by the Pew Re­search Cen­ter show mount­ing op­pos­i­tion. In the Pew/USA Today poll, op­pos­i­tion to U.S. air strikes grew 15 points from 48 per­cent in the Aug. 29-Sept. 1 poll to 63 per­cent in the Sept. 4-8 sur­vey, while sup­port for the strikes re­mained es­sen­tially the same (29 per­cent in the former, 28 per­cent in the lat­ter), and the un­de­cided dropped from 23 per­cent to 9 per­cent. The new­er sur­vey in­dic­ated that 45 per­cent strongly op­posed air strikes, com­pared with just 16 per­cent who were strongly in fa­vor. A U.S. at­tack on Syr­ia at this point would seem to vi­ol­ate the “Pow­ell Doc­trine,” coined by former Gen. Colin Pow­ell, in con­sid­er­ing mil­it­ary con­flicts: First, does the United States have a vi­tal na­tion­al se­cur­ity in­terest that is threatened? Second, does the U.S. have a clear at­tain­able ob­ject­ive? Third, have all the risks and costs been fully and frankly ana­lyzed? Fourth, have all oth­er non­vi­ol­ent policy op­tions been fully ex­hausted? Fifth, does the U.S. have a plaus­ible exit strategy to avoid end­less en­tan­gle­ment? Sixth, have the con­sequences of our pro­posed ac­tion been fully con­sidered? Sev­enth, do the Amer­ic­an people sup­port the ac­tion? Eighth, and fi­nally, does the U.S. have genu­ine, broad in­ter­na­tion­al sup­port for the ac­tion?

Key­ing off of the Pow­ell Doc­trine, the CNN poll asked re­spond­ents if they thought that an at­tack would or would not achieve sig­ni­fic­ant goals for the U.S.; 26 per­cent said it would, 72 per­cent said it would not. When asked if it is in the na­tion­al in­terest of the U.S. to be in­volved in the con­flict, 29 per­cent said it is, 69 per­cent said it isn’t. If an at­tack on Syr­ia were to res­ult in — as prom­ised — a re­tali­at­ory at­tack on Is­rael or U.S. in­terests around the world, an es­cal­a­tion without strong pub­lic sup­port would bring back pretty hor­rible memor­ies of the Vi­et­nam con­flict.

One per­son well worth listen­ing to is the Rev. J. Bry­an Hehir, cur­rently on the fac­ulty of Har­vard’s Kennedy School and formerly on the fac­ulties of the Har­vard Di­vin­ity School and Geor­getown Uni­versity, who also is the former head of Cath­ol­ic Char­it­ies USA. Hehir is a renowned au­thor­ity on the sub­ject of the “just war,” which ex­am­ines when a war is mor­ally jus­ti­fied and when it is not. He has quite a fol­low­ing among mil­it­ary and in­tel­li­gence of­fi­cials for his abil­ity to ap­ply lo­gic and reas­on­ing to chal­len­ging ques­tions on the use of mil­it­ary ac­tion. While Hehir be­lieves that the ac­tions of As­sad clearly meet the cri­ter­ia for a just ac­tion against him, in a phone in­ter­view Monday af­ter­noon he was troubled when ap­ply­ing some of the oth­er tests he uses to as­cer­tain wheth­er an at­tack is ap­pro­pri­ate. Is an at­tack the last re­sort? Is the pro­posed at­tack pro­por­tion­al, or likely to do more good than harm? Is there a prob­ab­il­ity of suc­cess, and for that mat­ter, what is suc­cess? If the in­ten­tion is to dam­age, de­ter, and de­grade the Syr­i­an re­gime’s mil­it­ary cap­ab­il­it­ies, can a “lim­ited” at­tack — with lim­ited pretty much be­ing a eu­phem­ism for sym­bol­ic — be suc­cess­ful in ac­com­plish­ing that? Would two or three days of cruise-mis­sile at­tacks ef­fect­ively do that? Would stealth bombers need to be util­ized to have a real im­pact, and if so, is that still lim­ited?

Hehir is still work­ing through those prickly ques­tions, but he clearly seemed skep­tic­al that all of the tests could be met to qual­i­fy a re­sponse as a “just” re­ac­tion. He is ex­pec­ted to re­lease a thor­ough ex­am­in­a­tion of these is­sues mid­day Tues­day.

Of course, if the new Rus­si­an pro­pos­al that an in­ter­na­tion­al or­gan­iz­a­tion take con­trol of Syr­ia’s stock­pile of chem­ic­al weapons pans out, the whole situ­ation could be­come de­fused and shift Con­gress’s fo­cus back to fisc­al is­sues. We can only hope.

What We're Following See More »
TAKING A LONG VIEW TO SOUTHERN STATES
In Dropout Speech, Santorum Endorses Rubio
2 days ago
THE DETAILS

As expected after earlier reports on Wednesday, Rick Santorum ended his presidential bid. But less expected: he threw his support to Marco Rubio. After noting he spoke with Rubio the day before for an hour, he said, “Someone who has a real understanding of the threat of ISIS, real understanding of the threat of fundamentalist Islam, and has experience, one of the things I wanted was someone who has experience in this area, and that’s why we decided to support Marco Rubio.” It doesn’t figure to help Rubio much in New Hampshire, but the Santorum nod could pay dividends down the road in southern states.

Source:
‘PITTING PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER’
Rubio, Trump Question Obama’s Mosque Visit
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama’s decision to visit a mosque in Baltimore today was never going to be completely uncontroversial. And Donald Trump and Marco Rubio proved it. “Maybe he feels comfortable there,” Trump told interviewer Greta van Susteren on Fox News. “There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” And in New Hampshire, Rubio said of Obama, “Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims.”

Source:
THE TIME IS NOW, TED
Cruz Must Max Out on Evangelical Support through Early March
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

For Ted Cruz, a strong showing in New Hampshire would be nice, but not necessary. That’s because evangelical voters only make up 21% of the Granite State’s population. “But from the February 20 South Carolina primary through March 15, there are nine states (South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Carolina) with an estimated white-Evangelical percentage of the GOP electorate over 60 percent, and another four (Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri) that come in over 50 percent.” But after that, he better be in the catbird’s seat, because only four smaller states remain with evangelical voter majorities.

Source:
CHRISTIE, BUSH TRYING TO TAKE HIM DOWN
Rubio Now Winning the ‘Endorsement Primary’
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Since his strong third-place finish in Iowa, Marco Rubio has won endorsement by two sitting senators and two congressmen, putting him in the lead for the first time of FiveThirtyEight‘s Endorsement Tracker. “Some politicians had put early support behind Jeb Bush — he had led [their] list since August — but since January the only new endorsement he has received was from former presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham.” Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that fueled by resentment, “members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt … Rubio’s rise in the polls.”

Source:
ARE YOU THE GATEKEEPER?
Sanders: Obama Is a Progressive
1 days ago
THE LATEST

“Do I think President Obama is a progressive? Yeah, I do,” said Bernie Sanders, in response to a direct question in tonight’s debate. “I think they’ve done a great job.” But Hillary Clinton wasn’t content to sit out the latest chapter in the great debate over the definition of progressivism. “In your definition, with you being the gatekeeper of progressivism, I don’t think anyone else fits that definition,” she told Sanders.

×