Syria and President Obama’s “Don’t Do Stupid Stuff” Foreign Policy

President Obama (or one of his aides) famously said that his main foreign policy doctrine is “Don’t do stupid stuff.”¹  Part of this, I believe, is a way of distinguishing himself and his policy(ies) from George W. Bush’s policy in Iraq.  We certainly know the stupid stuff of George W. Bush’s policies in Iraq: invading without a plan for what to do next; the 3½ years it took to figure out things weren’t going well; etc.  I would argue, however (actually, I have already argued), that what happened in Iraq since we left in 2011 can’t be blamed on George W. Bush.  He wasn’t in charge then.  It is entirely possible that, if we had had a president with a different point of view and different priorities than President Obama, things in Iraq could be a lot different today.²

Which brings me to the point of this post: President Obama’s policy in Syria.  In an effort to “don’t do stupid stuff,” his policy in Syria has pretty much been to not do anything at all.  And when he has done something, it has usually been late and half-hearted.  It is almost as if he is so concerned about doing something stupid, that he is afraid to do anything. 

I understand that the situation Syria and the Middle East is incredibly complicated.  So many different groups are fighting each other.  Groups we might normally ally with are fighting other groups we would ally with.  Groups we dislike are fighting other groups we dislike even more.  It is impossible to know for sure how anything might turn out.  It seems it is this complexity that has frozen President Obama into doing nothing because he is so afraid whatever he does might turn out to be “stupid stuff.”  The question, however, is whether the nothing he is doing is actually “stupid stuff” itself because its results are worse than the results of doing something.

Consider what has happened in Syria over the last five years:  Over four hundred thousand people are believed dead (we really don’t know because it’s so dangerous that they had to stop counting a year and a half ago).  Millions of people are refugees.  Hundreds of thousands of them flocking to Europe, potentially threatening to break apart the European Union.  Iran has become a dominant regional power.  Vladimir Putin has established Russia’s power in the Middle East and increased his own credibility around the world.  And the U.S. looks weak and ineffectual.³

Obviously, we don’t know if doing something would have been better.  But the current policy of doing as little as possible and as late as possible has been pretty stupid stuff, for Syria, for the Middle East, for Europe, and the U.S.’s reputation around the world. 

It’s too late for President Obama, but hopefully our next president will understand that doing too little can result in as much “stupid stuff,” if not more, than doing too much.  And that he or she will know enough to figure out which is which.
-----------
¹ I realize it wasn’t “stuff,” but let’s pretend it was; this is a family blog.

² In addition, before you complain too much about the stupid stuff of George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq, remember that we don’t know what would have happened if we had not invaded.  While you can assume it would be better than it is now, you can’t be sure.  The one thing that Iraq would not be today is the way it was in late 2002.  Things would have changed.  Would they be better – or would they be worse?  We don’t know.  We know they would have changed.  We just don’t know how.

³ For a German perspective on, among other things, the effect of President Obama failure to act in Syria, see this article from Spiegel Online.