Morgan Pfau Professor Pamela Edwards-Ham Political Science 130! 05 15 March 2017
President Obama & the Syrian Crisis
President Obama had to make some tough choices during his presidency. One of those choices he had to make was how to deal with the Syrian crisis. The Syrian crisis began at the Arab Spring uprising over the Authoritarian Regimes in the Middle East. To suppress the uprisings in Syria Bashar al-Assad used military force to attack the protesters. Obama spoke out about al-Assad’s treatment of the citizens and wanted change, however he didn’t believe that it was his responsibility to get involved. Assad then increased the use of military force, inflicting even more harm on the people of Syria. This caused president Obama to step …show more content…
This was when Obama finally took a stance publicly on the Syrian crisis. On August 20, 2012 president Obama spoke out at a press conference saying “We have been very clear to the Assad regime that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized.” In a response to a question regarding his stance on the Syrian civil war. By saying this Obama was proposing to use dominance to suppress Syria’s use of chemical weapons and insinuating that he was going to use military force to do it. This was when his stance switched from liberalism to realism. However he doesn’t hold this stance for long. Assad started using chemical weapons more heavily testing Obama’s stance. In an attempt to help Obama started arming the rebels, however his actions had a lackluster effect on Assad’s regime. The next plan of action Obama was going to take was to ready his own troops to send out into Syria. When Obama searched for allies to back him in his decision and found no one wanting to help. He quickly delayed the plan, suggesting that he should look …show more content…
As conditions worsened for the protesters Obama wanted to help them out in some way however was unable to because of foreign policy. Obama was using a liberalist approach here as well because he was still trying to support peace, however, he was using realist ideas as well because he knew that it was not in America’s self-interest to break foreign policy. When Assad started using chemical weapons Obama threatened the use of military power, but Assad did not back down. In doing so, Obama used a realist approach to the situation because of his threat to military power, but with minimal cooperation from allies the threat was short lived. He then switched back to a liberalist standpoint after Russia convinced Assad to remove the chemical weapons, avoiding war and promoting peace. The real cause of him avoiding war is rather that it is not in America’s interest to go to war and so Obama made it look like he was supporting liberalism views but the root of his decisions were based on realism. Finally once ISIS attacked the U.S. directly President Obama took the path of complete realism using military power to protect his country and to suppress the radical groups showing that Obama based
President Obama & the Syrian Crisis
President Obama had to make some tough choices during his presidency. One of those choices he had to make was how to deal with the Syrian crisis. The Syrian crisis began at the Arab Spring uprising over the Authoritarian Regimes in the Middle East. To suppress the uprisings in Syria Bashar al-Assad used military force to attack the protesters. Obama spoke out about al-Assad’s treatment of the citizens and wanted change, however he didn’t believe that it was his responsibility to get involved. Assad then increased the use of military force, inflicting even more harm on the people of Syria. This caused president Obama to step …show more content…
This was when Obama finally took a stance publicly on the Syrian crisis. On August 20, 2012 president Obama spoke out at a press conference saying “We have been very clear to the Assad regime that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized.” In a response to a question regarding his stance on the Syrian civil war. By saying this Obama was proposing to use dominance to suppress Syria’s use of chemical weapons and insinuating that he was going to use military force to do it. This was when his stance switched from liberalism to realism. However he doesn’t hold this stance for long. Assad started using chemical weapons more heavily testing Obama’s stance. In an attempt to help Obama started arming the rebels, however his actions had a lackluster effect on Assad’s regime. The next plan of action Obama was going to take was to ready his own troops to send out into Syria. When Obama searched for allies to back him in his decision and found no one wanting to help. He quickly delayed the plan, suggesting that he should look …show more content…
As conditions worsened for the protesters Obama wanted to help them out in some way however was unable to because of foreign policy. Obama was using a liberalist approach here as well because he was still trying to support peace, however, he was using realist ideas as well because he knew that it was not in America’s self-interest to break foreign policy. When Assad started using chemical weapons Obama threatened the use of military power, but Assad did not back down. In doing so, Obama used a realist approach to the situation because of his threat to military power, but with minimal cooperation from allies the threat was short lived. He then switched back to a liberalist standpoint after Russia convinced Assad to remove the chemical weapons, avoiding war and promoting peace. The real cause of him avoiding war is rather that it is not in America’s interest to go to war and so Obama made it look like he was supporting liberalism views but the root of his decisions were based on realism. Finally once ISIS attacked the U.S. directly President Obama took the path of complete realism using military power to protect his country and to suppress the radical groups showing that Obama based