Unnecessary Military Action Is the Real 'Weakness'

Bombing another country simply to enforce a stupid threat that should never have been made is one of the worst possible reasons to use force.

Gideon Rachman dusts off a hoary hawkish talking point:

Obama’s first mistake was the failure to enforce his own red line over Syria’s use of chemical weapons. Promising to take military action and then retreating in the face of congressional opposition — and his own personal misgivings — looked weak. The decision could be easily rationalised. But it still resonated around the world.

Obama was foolish to threaten taking some unspecified action in response to Syrian chemical weapons use, but it would have been worse if he had followed through on the threat. Unnecessary military action is the real weakness. Backing up irresponsible threats is not strength.

By the administration’s own admission, Obama’s proposed military action would have made little or no difference to the course of the war. John Kerry tried to sell the action to Congress by emphasizing that it would be “unbelievably small.” Like Trump’s later attacks on Syrian government targets, it would have been useless and illegal. Bombing another country simply to enforce a stupid threat that should never have been made is one of the worst possible reasons to use force. So naturally the decision not to bomb has been mythologized into the original sin of the last decade.