海角大神

Since at least August 2013, a variety of senior administration officials have expressed opposition to President Obama鈥檚 hands-off approach to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

So when a group of 51 mostly mid-level State Department diplomats this week called for a more aggressive approach, it raised the question, why now?

According to some Syria diplomats and regional experts with close ties to diplomatic circles, their motivations include: a last-ditch effort to sway policy in the waning months of the Obama administration; a desire to air objections to a diplomatic approach the dissenters assert is only serving America鈥檚 adversaries in the conflict; and hopes of prompting debate on Syria policy in the presidential campaign.

Perhaps more than anything else, the memo is based on what the signatories view as the clear evidence of the past five years: that Mr. Assad will only flout a policy that is all diplomacy and no teeth.

鈥淯nder the current approach Assad has become more rigid than ever, and that is not what the US wanted,鈥� says Andrew Tabler, an expert in Syria and US policy at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Mr. Tabler, who has close contacts inside the State Department鈥檚 Middle East circles, says the memo should be seen as a sign of rising alarm over a crumbling diplomatic effort in Geneva. Instead of curbing Assad and Syria鈥檚 violence, it has enabled the regime to pursue the opposition and recover from a point of near-collapse. 聽

鈥淚f we鈥檙e seeing this dissent now it鈥檚 because the negotiations in Geneva are not going well and have ended up providing Assad with the space to pursue his aims,鈥� Tabler says. 鈥淓very day provides more proof that rather than any cease-fire, all we鈥檝e got is a slowing down of the war that has allowed the Assad regime to step up its violations of the cessation of hostilities.鈥�

Indeed, some say Assad鈥檚 recent show of bravado and contempt for his adversaries (including the US) was a 鈥渓ast straw鈥� that prompted the diplomats to launch their call for adding military muscle to the pressure on Assad to negotiate. Last week he vowed to return 鈥渆very inch鈥� of Syrian territory to his control.

The Assad regime has established a pattern of relenting after weeks of pressure to allow humanitarian aid into besieged areas 鈥� only to 鈥渟tart barrel-bombing the places that just got aid,鈥� says Tabler.

鈥淭hat鈥檚 the kind of thing,鈥� he adds, 鈥渢hat has caused this outrage.鈥澛犅�

The dissent channel

The 51 diplomats submitted their criticism via the State Department鈥檚 鈥渄issent channel.鈥� The avenue for diplomats to convey their opposition to US policy was established during the Nixon administration, when many diplomats had objections to US policy in Southeast Asia, particularly to the Vietnam War.

One of the issues that first prompted use of the channel was the Bangladesh War of Independence to break away from Pakistan. Diplomats both in the field and in Washington used the channel to convey their objections to an official policy that in their view favored Pakistan at the expense of human rights and the right to self-determination.

In their memo, the diplomats call for a reenergized Syria policy that would include military strikes on Assad regime targets. The strikes would be launched from 鈥渟tand-off鈥� weaponry like bombers and naval vessels but would not entail the deployment of US troops. The threat of force is a necessary component of a policy meant to pressure a leader who has demonstrated time and again that he responds to little else, the diplomats said.

White House officials counter that the current approach has indeed worked. The four-month-old cessation of hostilities has reduced the level of violence in Syria, they say. US officials also warn that any shift in American policy to military involvement would antagonize Russia and run the risk of spawning a confrontation between the two powers 鈥� a point raised by some diplomats who have dismissed the memo as na茂ve and too little, too late.

The dissent memo鈥檚 signers appeared to anticipate this objection, saying their intention was not to encourage a 鈥渟lippery slope that ends in a military confrontation with Russia鈥� but rather to rein in Assad.

But other former officials have come out in support of 聽the dissenters' initiative, saying it underscores widespread dissatisfaction with Obama's hands-off approach and signals to Syrians in聽particular that America has not forgotten them.

"Anyone in the White House聽tempted to question the motives of these decent American officials should first pause and reflect on what these dissenters have done to restore and uphold American credibility and honor," said Frederic Hof, the State Department's former special adviser for transition in Syria.

Ambassador Hof, who is now at the Atlantic Council in Washington, said in a statement that he viewed the memo as聽"one last attempt to convince the President that 'Never Again' is indeed applicable to Syria, and that peace negotiations are utterly futile as long as Assad is perfectly free to do his absolute worst to civilians."

Nearly 300,000 people have been killed in the four-year conflict, which has contributed to the largest refugee crisis since World War II.

The red line

The memo is certainly not the first show of internal administration opposition to Obama鈥檚 Syria policy.

Robert Ford, the US diplomat who was ambassador to Syria during the Arab Spring and as the Syrian opposition erupted, resigned from the Foreign Service in 2014 over his opposition to the president鈥檚 approach to the deepening war.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former Defense Secretary Robert Gates have both said they lobbied unsuccessfully for more robust action against Assad, with Secretary Gates calling Obama鈥檚 decision not to act on his 鈥渞ed line鈥� over Assad鈥檚 use of chemical weapons a 鈥渟erious mistake鈥� that damaged US credibility in the region and beyond.

The Washington Institute鈥檚 Tabler says his hunch is that the memo was not just about airing long-held objections to Syria policy but was aimed at influencing the direction of Syria policy in the future. With one administration drawing to a close, he says the memo鈥檚 signers are looking to foster debate and trigger a change in direction from the next administration.

鈥淭hese are people who were willing to stick their necks out,鈥� Tabler says, 鈥渁nd these are people who will be working on Syria policy no matter who wins the presidency.鈥�