Der Vorteil der Regimes in Damaskus, Moskau und Teheran: Sie verfolgen beharrlich und rücksichtslos eine kohärente, langfristige Strategie – das Assad-Regime soll um jeden Preis an der Macht bleiben. Bei Trump kann mit dem nächsten Tweet schon wieder alles anders sein.
Multiple news sources are reporting and editorializing versions of this same observation. As is not unusual I find myself musing about how my fellow countrymen view this state of affairs. In short order the US president announces the US is withdrawing from Syria, „Get ready Russia, because they [missiles] will be coming“, „Never said when an attack on Syria would take place. Could be very soon or not so soon at all!“, Assad is „an animal“ or „a monster“, and finally Mattis clarifies “Right now this is a one-time shot.”
Yesterday in an article on the possibility of a US attack on Syria Spiegel reported
Die Debatte, ob es hundertprozentige Beweise für die Chemiewaffenattacke der Syrer gebe, bezeichnete [ex-US Ambassador to Germany – there’s currently still no ambassador in the embassy] Kornblum als „eine sehr deutsche Frage“.
I found myself wondering, if the issue of 100% surety about who was behind a chemical weapons attack is „a very German question“, what would „a very American question“ be? „Do you want fries with that?“ What are American thoughts around the level of coherency to be expected from their senior statespeople?