Red Lines: Military Defense or Political Pressure?

by Zach Moore
President of BU College Republicans

Roughly one year ago our president, the commander and chief of the military, made a statement that solidified the position of the United States on the use of chemical weapons. Imaginary or not, President Obama stated that use of chemical weapons by Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, would cross “a red line for us,” and therefore we would respond with military action. By creating this red line without UN support, President Obama put the United States in not only a foolish position, but casted our fate in a solo mission against the deadly Assad Regime. 

After threats and intelligence of chemical weapons throughout the last year, the president refused to reinforce this imaginary red line he single handedly traced.  Now, Assad has committed a massacre against his own citizens, and the United States is forced to act due to the words of a political figure.

Through this situation the question arises, do red lines really protect the American people and prevent military action? Logically speaking, no they do the exact opposite. They expose us to dangerous and involuntary political actions due to political pressure. However, speaking emotionally as the left does, a red line is some sort universally supported monstrosity, built with metal spikes, electric fencing, and barbed wire protecting the American people and preventing a war. Sadly, a red line is nothing more than a failed president’s rhetoric, in order to make a train wreck of a foreign policy look like it has legitimacy. In reality, President Obama put the United States at major risk by making this statement, and now is forced to act on those words in order to save his already failed presidency. Most importantly, such red lines put far too much political pressure on our leaders. Now, we have a president who is attempting to build an image, rather than protect our citizens. In order to avert this, you can see the president trying to dump the load of pressure onto our legislatures for it to no longer be his fault if he breaks his promise of a red line induced military strike. Moreover, as of recently, the president even denied his comments about enacting a red line, by saying “I didn’t set a red line; the world set a red line”, another obvious attempt of our president shifting the blame of his attempted actions onto another body of legislature.

Since when do we as American people find this as acceptable? What happened to the president taking responsibility, standing up, and taking a clear and signified position on an issue? Even further, the president continued to contradict himself in his attempt to shift the blame around August 20, by saying, “We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.” Notice how the president states, “a red line for us,” “my calculus,” and even, “my equation.” By “my”, Mr. President, I would hope that you are referring to yourself, commander-in-chief of the military, and by “us” the United States of America. However, as I recently highlighted, the president said the world set the red line, not us. Once again, rhetoric with no logic.

Our president speaks strictly with emotion, and through that blinds himself and the rest of this country to the power of his words and what he says as a leader. As the citizens of the United States, we need to learn to hold leaders accountable for their words, so that a president does not have the ability to make emotionally backed statements such as Obama’s on an imaginary red line.