پایگاه خبری تحلیلی شرق سایت خبری تحلیلی شرق Related Articles
Donald Trump’s decision to order air strikes against the Syrian government is a
sudden departure for a US President who opposed interventionist policies.
Press Association — President Trump’s sudden decision to order air strikes against
the Syrian government was an overnight evolution for a president who long warned
against deeper American involvement in one of the world’s most stubbornly violent conflicts
As he soberly announced the assault, Mr Trump argued that the
move was still within the framework of his ‘America First’ foreign policy agenda.
The US, he said, has a “vital national security interest” in stopping
the proliferation of the kinds of chemical weapons the Syrian
government used against its citizens earlier this week.
Yet Mr Trump’s actions left no doubt that – at least in this
instance – his view of America’s role in the world has been altered.
Mr Trump is hardly the first president to reconsider his views
after assuming the responsibility of controlling the world’s most
powerful military. But with a major shift coming just 77 days into
his presidency, his may be one of the fastest transformations in recent memory.
After spending years warning US leaders that Syria was a dangerous
quagmire, Mr Trump is said to have been moved by the gripping
images of young Syrian children’s listless bodies that were beamed
across the world following the chemical attack.
He mourned the “beautiful babies” among the dozens killed by the
deadly gases and accused Syrian President Bashar Assad of having
“choked” his own citizens. His sentiment – the US’s “responsibility
to protect” – echoed those often used by some of Mr Trump’s most ardent detractors.
The doctrine, espoused most notably by President Barack Obama’s
former ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power, holds
that world powers have an obligation to defend civilians from
conflict, particularly from their own governments.
Mr Trump campaigned on a wholly different vision for the nation’s
foreign policy, one that bordered on isolationism and centred on recalibrating
trade deals with international partners. He has specifically said the Middle
East is one region of the world he hoped to avoid. Yet in the short
term, Mr Trump’s decision to plunge the US deeper into the Syria conflict
won him plaudits from his own party. Even some Democrats were muted
in their response, a signal of how frustration with US inaction in Syria has permeated both parties.
“The question now is what the consequences and reactions will
be, and what are the president’s strategic and long-range goals and
plans with respect to US involvement in Syria,” said Senator
Jack Reed, the leading Democrat on the Armed Services Committee.
Mr Trump’s decision was all the more remarkable for his strident public
opposition to launching a strike on Syria when the decision weighed
on his predecessor. President Obama nearly ordered strikes, but ultimately
pulled back. He called for a vote in Congress that never came, then rallied
behind a Russian-backed plan to remove Syria’s chemical weapons
stockpiles – an agreement that appeared to have failed, given this most recent attack.
Though Mr Trump castigated Mr Obama for appearing weak and
indecisive, he maintained as a candidate that Syria was a morass
the US should avoid. As recently as a week ago, his top diplomats,
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and UN ambassador Nikki Haley,
both indicated the US might take a hands-off approach to a civil
war that has killed hundreds of thousands of people and forced
millions more from their homes.
The long-term implications of Mr Trump’s sudden policy shift are
uncertain. But his supporters seemed willing to accept his decision.
“President Trump has tonight more than earned a second or third
look from a lot of doubters – both at home and abroad,” said Kevin Kellems, a Republican strategist.