Barack Obama: Posturer-in-Chief?

President Obama’s recent comments on the Syrian government’s use of chemical weapons has solidified his reputation in the world as one who posturers rather than acts. 

He had, for several months, largely ignored the imperative for action seemingly mandated by the Assad regime’s breach of the red line on the use of chemical weapons.  About all he would concede was that its suspected use was cause for “grave concern”. 

Things changed last week with televised images of nerve gas victims in Damascus.  A semblance of action, provoked by political and perceived national security reasons, was seen by the White House as being essential.

Intelligence was released bolstering the argument against Syria and the case was made by administrative spokesmen that a strong response could be expected.  On Friday night, in fact, Secretary of State John Kerry uttered a fierce condemnation of Assad with an insistence that a forceful military reply was necessary for reasons of both morality and world order.  That, and the presence of cruise missile-equipped warships in the Eastern Mediterranean, left little doubt that military strikes were imminent.

 

Nothing happened.

The President announced on Saturday that he was ready to take action but since the Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, General Martin Dempsey, had advised that the decision was not “time sensitive”, the military could act “tomorrow, or next week or one month from now”.  But Obama expressed no urgency in giving the necessary orders with the announcement that he would first seek Congressional authority.  And Congress doesn’t return from the Labor Day recess until Sept. 9.

What’s going on?  I suggest the answer is simple.

The President never had any intention of backing up his “red line” threat.  [See last week’s Sensible Conservative post]   He postures and thinks that’s enough.

 

But the graphic images meant he had to sound as if there really would be consequences.  His advisors undoubtedly told him that his credibility was suffering both at home and abroad.  It was.

Certainly he tried.  Leaks of America’s intention were abundant as to the limited nature of the assaults to come.

But the President couldn’t follow through.  So he decided to buy more time.  Referring the matter to Congress had never been deemed necessary before by the Administration.  But this option became attractive given the box Obama occupied.  (He certainly couldn’t acknowledge that his “red line” comments had never been sincere.)

Given his record, it’s fair to assume that the President hopes and expects his bluff will not be called.  That may be probable.  After Iraq and Afghanistan, the American public does not want further involvement in the Middle East. 

So if he wins his gamble, Obama will be off the hook.  Congress will have vindicated his inclinations by “denying” him authority to act against Syria.  The sigh of relief emanating from the President’s quarters in the White House will be audible.