Florida Senator Marco Rubio, my own Senator, penned an article for ForeignPolicy.com today titled “How America Must Respond to the Massacre in Syria,” yet does nothing to seriously answer the question. Before addressing the actual article, it’s important to note that the GOP’s tactics are to oppose this administration on every front regardless of what action is taken. If you have any doubt see the below quote by Rubio on Libya:
At an early point in the Libyan struggle, when a clear U.S. policy could have achieved significant successes at lower costs, the president failed to act.
So to paraphrase Rubio, now the GOP screed is that Obama didn’t intervene early enough and therefore was weak on Libya as well. Assuming that Obama took every word of advice that Rubio proffers in this short article, I have no doubt that the GOP would still criticize him for not acting quickly enough.
So, though it’s evident that this is the usual anti-administration barrage, does Rubio have any credible alternatives? Clearly not. Rubio offers the following advice:
Revoke the U.S. Ambassador to Syria.
Expand Sanctions to “include persons identified as authorizing, planning, or participating in deplorable human rights violations against unarmed civilians.”
Yet Rubio fails to explain how those actions will improve the situation in Syria or help further American interests. The reason that Rubio fails to give a credible solution is because the U.S. lacks any leverage over Syria. They’re already under heavy U.S. sanctions, as Rubio notes, and the threat of entering our 4th Middle East war is not politically viable, nor in our own security interests.
Toss aside the question of whether “America has an obligation to weigh in strongly about the situation in Syria,” as Rubio states in the article, and instead ask: What is America capable of doing in Syria? Until Rubio offer a credible alternative to the administration’s current course of action, his opinion is nothing but typical GOP anti-administration pulp.