A Perspective On The Possible Intentions Of The Strike
The US airstrike that occured recently targeting a Syrian airbase in response to the deadly Syrian chemical attacks, which included the deployment of 50 missiles, was laudable. It was probably the most ‘presidential’ moment for Trump, having made a ‘presidential’ decision, as regarded by many. However it is peculiar that a president who suggested the idea of ‘America First’ and has publicy claimed that America would cease participating in the Syrian conflicts, has opted to take part in the war that was void of America for more than half a decade.
The officially stated reason behing the airstrikes was to respond to Syria’s chemical attacks. It is quite unconvincing that these attacks were purely out of the moral incentive to avenge the deceased and prevent futher chemical attacks, since the diplomatic costs were just too high and ofcourse, it’s Donald Trump we’re talking about.
It is queer that Trump decided to undertake such military actions knowing the consequences, which particulary includes the potential hostile response from Russia. Trump was greatly critisized for his laudatory comments regarding Russian President Vladimir Putin during his presidential campaign, but the recent airstrikes suggest a story on the contrary.
Russia reprehended America’s airstrike, with the Russian deputy envoy stating that ‘the consequences of this for regional and international stability could be extremely serious’. Trump was certainly aware this was coming, and the incentive for him to override such threats and foster enemity with Russia, a country which he thought would be ‘great if we got along’, is certainly questionable.
Perhaps, the potential conflicts between Russia and America are exaggerated. While there will be rising tensions between the two regarding Syria, whether it will impact their economical prospects and the bromance between Putin and Trump is doubtful.
These airstrikes could be the result of Trump’s effort to make America look diplomatically moral and stable. The global picture of Trump has been erroneous and everything ‘immoral’ a person could possibly think of. It could be the realisation that diplomacy is vital for America’s economy, leading him to paint a ‘just America’ and a ‘just President’ for the rest of the globe.
On the other hand, Trump’s dissatisfactory perfomance could’ve played a major role in driving this decision. Is it the recognition of his deplorable early presidency days that has lead him to make a globally commendable decision? Was he under pressure to finally do something that marks him as rational and ‘moral’ and prevent further public notions of him being an incapable President? These questions can only solicit the answers of consiprasicts and the members of the Trump administration.
Donald Trump has been eyeing North Korea for a long time now. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had stated that ‘military options were on the table’ in dealing with North Korea’s notoriety. The recent attacks could be an indirect warning for N. Korea suggesting that America will not hesitate in deploying military measures, or even worse, to signify that it is ready for a full fledged war. The advancing of US warships towards the Korean Peninsula right after the airstrikes further supports the possible intentions that America wanted to signify that they were serious about military actions and will not return void like Trump’s predecessor, Barack Obama. Trump’s budget to increase military spending and President Xi’s visit during these times of America’s involvement in military actions signals a strategic order of decisions. As stated by Tillerson, China and the US will actively cooperate in fighting North Korea together. It is debatable whether these decisions will be benificial for the world, but one thig is certain, with North Korea ready to boldly oppose America, stating that ‘The US and North Korea are in the brink of war’, we could be heading into an era of escalating military activities. Brace yourselves.