(Washington Institute for Near East Policy) Michael Eisenstadt - If the U.S. opts to act militarily in response to the latest use of chemical weapons (CW) by the Assad regime, its policy should be guided by several considerations. First, Washington should seek to divide Assad's coalition with Iran and Russia. Any U.S. strikes should focus on regime assets while avoiding targets with higher risk of Russian casualties. Second, this problem will not end with a single set of strikes. Deterrence has a limited shelf life, and Assad will likely continue defying the international community. Additional strikes may be necessary. Third, while U.S. strikes should target CW infrastructure when collateral damage can be minimized, they should focus primarily on the regime's conventional military capabilities. It should hit assets that the regime truly values. This would hinder the regime's war effort much more than strikes focusing solely on CW capabilities. The writer is director of the Military and Security Studies Program at the Washington Institute.
2018-04-11 00:00:00Full ArticleBACK Visit the Daily Alert Archive