The Real Deal

So, here's the real deal that no one is really talking about yet.  The thing to strike or not strike Syria over its use of chemical weapons is not really about Syria.  Sure, that was a really nasty thing to do and something that the nations of the world agreed to never do again.  I'm not really sure what those nations were prepared to do about it if someone did.  Apparently nothing.

But the real deal is about Iran.  Iran sits on Syria's border and is providing arms and soldiers to assist the Assad regime in remaining in power.  Iran doesn't want any kind of government on their border that could either compete with or against them.  In additon, Iran wants to develop nuclear power and the United States and its protectorate, Israel, don't want that to happen.  The US has spent the last ten years trying to use sanctions and diplomacy to persuade the Iranians to forgo development at the risk of attack to neutralize that threat.  If the United States and the rest of the world do not stop Syria here then why should Iran think they will be stopped either instantly rendering the sanctions and threats moot.

The President has followed a path I strongly endorse in his treatment of Iran and Syria.  His reluctance to provide arms to the Syrial rebels is motivated by what has happened when we provided arems to rebels in Libya and in Afghanistan when the Soviets were there.   They ended up using them against us.  It is far better to let the occupants of countries fight their own civil wars.

We could be far more effective in using the model we have used with the Chinese of engagement and cooperation in order to influence behavior.  Even though the Chinese are a formidable economic rival we are not contemplating hostilities.  Perhaps we should just try to use that model with other countries.

But now the whole metric is changed with the Syrians violating international law and the Iranians threatening to upset the balance of power in the Middle East.  Were it not for Israel our choices would be much simpler.

So you see, it is what is not happening that is what is important.  The President wisely threw the ball into the hands of Congress which never expected to have to do anything really important and have largely forgotten how.  The American people have had enough of war and just don't want to do it.  It is up to the President to make his case.  Tell the people the real deal.  Don't just show rows of dead children, it isn't going to work.  The American people want some attention paid to the problems at home and recognize that the past decade of war has not been kind.

There is a case to be made.  For example, in the late 1930s everyone who saw events internationally knew that the US had to enter the war, President Roosevelt knew it and even circumvented Congress with his lend/lease program.  Even the attacks on Britain and Poland didn't do it and it took a Japanese attack on US assets at Pearl Harbor to start the war frenzy.  This is pretty much where the people are now.  The President needs to make his case and state his goals to get the people to go.

I have been opposed not as a matter of thinking it doesn't concern us but as a matter of going it alone.  We have done much too much of that.  It is time for some others, notably the Arab League, to lead the charge.  We have the luxury of time and the Atlantic Ocean.  The European countries have almost eliminated their military budgets because they know we will do it.  If NATO decides to jump then I will go along with them, as a participant, not the one to carry the mail.

Someone needs to do the deed to keep the Iranians in check a while longer.  The new leadership seems to be not quite so antagonistic.  But, make no mistake, the US is not planning just a few cruise missiles and smart bombs.  We are looking to change the regime.