What Did America Gain from the Syria Strikes?

MEDITERRANEAN SEA (March 19, 2018) The Wasp-class amphibious assault ship USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7) transits the Mediterranean Sea, March 19, 2018. Iwo Jima, homeported in Mayport, Florida, is conducting naval operations in the U.S. 6th Fleet area of operations. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Daniel C. Coxwest/Released)

Daniel Larison, writing at The American Conservative says that the best outcome from this weekend’s missile strikes on the Syrian government could be that not enough damage was inflicted to prolong the civil war. The worst case scenario is that the U.S. ends up fighting a war against Syria’s patron states, Russia and Iran. Larison writes:

The illegal attack on Syria that the Trump administration has been threatening for the last week has started:

The U.S. and its allies have committed a flagrant violation of international law, and Trump has trampled on the Constitution once again.

The Saudis and their allies have used the weapons sold to them by the U.S. and other Western governments to slaughter innocent Yemeni civilians by the thousands, including cluster munitions that almost every nation on earth has outlawed.

The absurdity of Trump of all people lecturing other states about enabling war crimes is obvious.

Trump went to say, “No nation can succeed in the long run by promoting rogue states, brutal tyrants and murderous dictators.

Attacking the Syrian government doesn’t make anyone safer, and it is completely detached from any broader strategy for bringing the conflict in Syria to an end. The best-case scenario is that the punitive strikes inflict some damage on the Syrian government without doing too much to prolong the civil war, and the worst case is that it needlessly triggers a major war between the U.S. and Syria’s patrons. There is no outcome that justifies the risks and law-breaking that this attack involves.