The rationally unfathomable, reckless, intensely dangerous, new "Presidential"? Trump:
By
Ben Rich from RawStory, Posted in Commentary
The United States' unilateral missile strikes against a Syrian airforce base are a dramatic escalation of its participation in that country's civil war. The US government has attacked a Syrian government asset for the first time.
The attack also marks Donald Trump's first major foreign policy test as US president. It represents a 180-degree shift from his previous position of opposing intervention in Syria. And the sudden about-face sends a worrying signal for how his administration may handle future crises in international relations.
On Thursday, the US unilaterally launched strikes against the al-Shayrat airforce base in Homs. This base primarily houses Mig-23 and SU-22 strike craft and Mig-25 interceptors.
The attack consisted of 59 sea-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles, which targeted airframes and supporting infrastructure. It reportedly led to casualties among Syrian military personnel.
Trump sought no international legal sanction for the strike.
The attack has been billed as a 'punitive response' to the Syrian military's (completely implausible and emphatically unlikely use of sarin chemical nerve agents) in Idlib province.
What's concerning is how the strikes have been rationalised. Trump has described the strikes as aimed at protecting a "vital national security interest". However, this appears to contradict one of the fundamental themes that buoyed Trump's rise to power.
Throughout the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump explicitly and repeatedly indicated that, as president, he would adopt a non-interventionist position in Syria. However, the strikes clearly contradict this position. Trump now claims intervention was a matter of "vital national security interest".
Given the Assad regime's use of chemical weapons threatened no US citizens - nor allies - one is left to conclude that preventing further use of chemical weapons against Syrian civilians is now seen as vital to US national security.
A point of obvious grave concern for some has been Trump's inability to fully grasp the consequences of his actions and his general reflexiveness to the conditions he confronts. As with many of his domestic policy promises on the campaign trail, Trump's Syria stance appears to be a flip-flop.
Shifts in domestic and foreign policy are generally to be expected and afforded some latitude as a candidate transitions to the presidency. But the degree and speed of Trump's foreign policy switches are of serious concern.
Unpredictability in international relations has particularly high stakes. It can lead to rapid escalations, collapse of long-term relationships and partnerships, and even war.
This is of particular concern in Syria, given the close proximity of Russian forces actively fighting to defend the Assad regime.
====
By Ben Rich, Lecturer in International Relations and Security Studies, Curtin University
(article edited for accuracy and length)