A chemical weapons attack in Syria exposes Trumpâs Assad problem
Bashar al-Assad
Supporters of the Syrian regime rejected any link to a chemical weapons strike. They claimed the reports were fabricated by terrorist groups in Idlib and suggested the fatalities were the result of an explosion at a supposed al-Qaeda chemical weapons factory. Russian authorities  whose warplanes are flying in support of the regime  said they had not conducted a strike in the area around the town. But the broader international reaction was vehement â and put the blame squarely on  Syrian President Bashar al-Assad .
Such strikes are a regime tactic to further demoralize the flagging rebellion. " Assad  calculates  reasonably  that military dynamics play in  his  favor. By using chemical weapons and other weapons   he  is demonstrating the powerlessness of international actors " Emile Hokayem  a Middle East analyst at the International Institute for Strategic Studies  told The Washington Post.
"Today's chemical attack in Syria against innocent people  including women and children  is reprehensible and cannot be ignored by the civilized world " said White House press secretary Sean Spicer. "These heinous actions by the Bashar al-Assad regime are a consequence of the past administration's weakness and irresolution."
It's seemingly a bizarre line of attack for the Trump administration to choose. In 2013  the Obama administration contemplated a military response after a suspected regime chemical weapons attack on rebel-held districts in the suburbs of Damascus killed more than 1 000 people. The mounting international pressure at the time compelled  Assad  to agree to eliminate its chemical weapons program.
The fact that Obama chose to back off from confronting the  Assad  regime  which allegedly used chemical weapons numerous times in the years since  will forever haunt the former president's legacy. Much of the Washington foreign policy establishment has excoriated him for it. But Trump in 2013 â then a private citizen with the same itchy Twitter finger â was opposed to American intervention in Syria.
The irony is that Trump's position on the Syrian conflict isn't that far removed from Obama's â although it's more conspicuous in its indifference to the plight of Syrian refugees. The previous administration called for  Assad 's departure  but it did little to actually push for regime change  fearing that any deeper involvement in the Syrian conflict would risk the sort of blowback and chaos that rocked Iraq after the 2003 U.S. invasion. Trump  meanwhile  has insisted on multiple occasions that he is not interested in nation-building in the Middle East or dictating regime change. His lieutenants indicated as recently as last week that the White House does not prioritize removing  Assad  from power.
Supporters of the Syrian regime rejected any link to a chemical weapons strike. They claimed the reports were fabricated by terrorist groups in Idlib and suggested the fatalities were the result of an explosion at a supposed al-Qaeda chemical weapons factory. Russian authorities  whose warplanes are flying in support of the regime  said they had not conducted a strike in the area around the town. But the broader international reaction was vehement â and put the blame squarely on  [TGT]  .
Such strikes are a regime tactic to further demoralize the flagging rebellion. "  [TGT] calculates  reasonably  that military dynamics play in   [TGT]   favor. By using chemical weapons and other weapons   he  is demonstrating the powerlessness of international actors " Emile Hokayem  a Middle East analyst at the International Institute for Strategic Studies  told The Washington Post.
"Today's chemical attack in Syria against innocent people  including women and children  is reprehensible and cannot be ignored by the civilized world " said White House press secretary Sean Spicer. "These heinous actions by the Bashar al-Assad regime are a consequence of the past administration's weakness and irresolution."
It's seemingly a bizarre line of attack for the Trump administration to choose. In 2013  the Obama administration contemplated a military response after a suspected regime chemical weapons attack on rebel-held districts in the suburbs of Damascus killed more than 1 000 people. The mounting international pressure at the time compelled  Assad  to agree to eliminate its chemical weapons program.
The fact that Obama chose to back off from confronting the  Assad  regime  which allegedly used chemical weapons numerous times in the years since  will forever haunt the former president's legacy. Much of the Washington foreign policy establishment has excoriated him for it. But Trump in 2013 â then a private citizen with the same itchy Twitter finger â was opposed to American intervention in Syria.
The irony is that Trump's position on the Syrian conflict isn't that far removed from Obama's â although it's more conspicuous in its indifference to the plight of Syrian refugees. The previous administration called for  Assad 's departure  but it did little to actually push for regime change  fearing that any deeper involvement in the Syrian conflict would risk the sort of blowback and chaos that rocked Iraq after the 2003 U.S. invasion. Trump  meanwhile  has insisted on multiple occasions that he is not interested in nation-building in the Middle East or dictating regime change. His lieutenants indicated as recently as last week that the White House does not prioritize removing  Assad  from power.