Is Trump’s attack on Syrian airport tokenism?
The piece (Opinion, Saturday) about Trump making a “bold” response has, as we now know, happened with the despatching of Tomahawk cruise missiles to the Syrian airbase where we are informed the criminal thug Assad launched another reprehensible chemical weapons attack, again primarily on defenceless people of all ages.
There are some who believe that Trump is damned if he does something, and damned if he doesn’t. This, by virtue of his obvious volte face when it comes to his prior policy on Syria, and with “Collusiongate” and symbolically flat-lining opinion polls now conveniently relegated to the back pages, as it were.
In mitigation, I do agree that a far more muscular approach to Assad’s catalogue of war crimes and cynical oppression was way overdue, and that in an ideal world he would be hauled off to The Hague to answer for his disgusting prosecution of a war that has taken the better part of half a million innocent lives. Fat chance of that happening.
Now the civil conflict in Syria has become rather more complex, and the inclusion of another major world power creates a dangerous mix of possible confrontation, given Russia’s meddling in support of Assad and a change in the rules of engagement vis-a-vis Moscow and Washington’s activities in the country.
It remains to be seen whether Trump intends to take US action in Syria beyond mere tokenism, although it would seem that he has discovered some humanity judging by his words regarding the atrocities in Idlib province on Tuesday.
Let’s hope that his one-trick “deal” making abilities extend beyond acquiring property and golf courses.
Dr Frank
