President Obama Must Uphold His Red Line

What are the consequences of a military strike on Syria? 

By Joseph Sestak, former three-star admiral and U.S. Congressman; Omar N. Bradley Chair in Strategic Leadership

President Obama drew a red line that the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government against its people was unacceptable. Although not done artfully, it has left the President no choice but to act with chemical weapons having been used by the government. While the strike by tomahawk cruise missiles will have little or no impact on the operational situation within Syria, his action is necessary in dealing with nations such as Iran, North Korea and our allies, that when the U.S President speaks, his word will be backed up. Without that, our national-security interests in years to come confront greater challenges, as the President's words of warning may not be heeded, requiring military action that might have been avoided. For instance, we have drawn a red line with Iran that it will not have nuclear weapons; its leaders will watch what is done on this red line.

This makes it important to always keep in mind that internationally, unlike in the broken politics of Washington, when the President speaks to the world, he is watched and believed throughout that world. That credibility is important for national security and cannot be lost, or we may need to be forced to resort to military means, unnecessarily.

Read more Dickinson faculty perspectives on Syria. 

Listen to Professor Sestak discuss the situation in Syria on NPR affiliate station WITF. 

Published September 7, 2013