Obama and Syria – Backfire and Strategic Differences – Part II – A. Hany Hassanain

In part I of this two parts article it was discussed that both Obama and Erdogan are stressed to decide and they may reach a stage of strategic paradox that deteriorates their situation more. For Turkey any further unrest in the Middle East will lead to the birth of a Kurdish State and for Obama it is difficult to find real partners to attack Syria after the British Parliament refused to participate in his war. For the full part I go to

/middle-east/2013/08/obama-and-syria-not-strategic-not-tactic-then-what-part-i-a-hany-hassanain-2453892.html

President Obama asked the congress for its approval for a limited attack. He did not define the word limited. Does he mean time or targets? If he means time then most probably he will consider massive attacks in two or three days. If he means limited targets then what are targets his military men choose? To choose targets then the aim of the war should be clear. In the congress the foreign and defense secretaries of state gave speeches that added nothing to the already not defined Obama’s limited option. Most probably the congress will find nothing positive in their talks to debate much.

If the congress refused Obama’s request to bomb Syria, the White House response may be obedience of the majority vote while resorting to other secret plans that make bombing Syria takes the form to a response to Syrian aggression like striking an American ship by a rocket to be fired by one of the terrorist allies of Obama from the Syrian shores. Of course the administration that neglected all evidences that the terrorists fried the chemical warhead and accused the Syrian army of committing this crime may just do the same. The response will be prompt by orders from the Naval Admiral of the sixth fleet in the Mediterranean as one of his destroyers is hit. This will leave no time for any third part to investigate who fired at the American ship. The other scenario is if Syria accepted to put its chemical weapons under international control the terrorists fire a chemical warhead at Israel and the US will accuse the Syrian army of hiding some chemical facilities and the response will be American-Israel against Syria and the war may extend to Iran.

Obama predicts the Syrian response to his limited attack will range from nothing to trivial response as the Syrian abilities are not enough to seriously threat his military. However, he does not deny that the Syrians have the ability to retaliate and attack Israel and Turkey. Moreover, his statements that the US is not willing to remove Asad or to affect the results of the civil war but just punishing the Syrian regime for using chemical weapons and sending a clear message to others about the redlines could be summarized in other clearer statements. The US will attack Syria and as Asad told that the Syrians will retaliate, the war will extend to wider area in the Middle East spreading chaos.

As the US is in strategic alliance with the EU one should not engage in wars without the approval of the other or even predicting the risks that may happen and its effect on the allies. With the first American missile targeting Syria the oil price will shoot up and the European will suffer much. Germany the savior of the economic losers in Europe will suffer most. To clear this point, I’d like to ask a simple question; could anyone remember a big German oil corporation. The allies of the WWII and especially the Americans kept Germany fuel thirst. Germany lost the WWII because of fuel shortage mainly. Germany is fuel thirst until now. It could be concluded that an American adventure in the Middle East especially if Iran went to the war and the Gulf oil did not reach the European market regularly will kill the Euro and the disintegration of Europe means the return of the Russian influence to the Eastern part with the Western part completely surrendering to the American will or all of a sudden the history would return to nineties of the last century in the favor of both Russia and the US.

This clears why the Germans declared decisively that they will not share in a strike against Syria. The French who lost the race against the German horse in Europe favored the nineties. The Euro and the German economic spread the German influence in Europe and even the language and gradually France takes the position of a second degree country in the international influence pyramid. France wanted to participate in the strike.

The united Europe with self defense abilities and high technology production is a threat to both the US and Russia. When the European knew that the Americans spy on the net some called for creation of a parallel European net. In Washington this is considered a threat to the national security. Let’s remember that in 1994 the American-Russian military maneuver that took place were about invading Germany after its union. It is the only serious military exercise that was about combat between the two countries.

For Britain the story is completely different. The government wanted to be with the American decision as the Anglo-Saxon empire that only moved its capital from London to Washington should start a war to solve its economic crisis and the unemployment.

However it is clear that Obama does not consider the strategic paradox or the backfire of his decisions upon his allies. That is why the US was isolated in its decision to attack Syria. Putin saved the American face when he gave them a way out but whether the Americans attacked Syria or not the US will pay for the wrong strategic decisions of Obama.