Whether Trump opts for single retaliatory act or wider response, Assad will think he is winning

Donald Trump’s Twitter warning that a big, albeit unspecified, price will be paid for Bashar al-Assad’s alleged use of chemical weapons on innocent civilians in Douma points to some form of punitive military strike being launched by western forces.

The tweet is all the more remarkable for containing some of Trump’s first direct criticism of Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, and his role in protecting Assad.

But it leaves open the question of whether the US president will opt for a discrete punishment or a more ambitious and co-ordinated attempt both to wipe out Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile and end Assad’s impunity.

‘Most of them were going to die’: Syria aid workers tell of apocalyptic scenes Read more

The advantage of a single retaliatory punishment, such as an attack on Dumayr, where the Syrian Mi-8 helicopters are based, is simplicity. That would suit the instincts of a president who only last week said he intended to take all remaining US troops out of Syria.

But there are powerful forces urging a broader sustained programme of action, including France, Israel and the UK, as well as some in the Pentagon. With a new secretary of state and national security adviser appointed, and now apparently a chemical weapons outrage, UK officials hope a window has opened up to persuade Trump to rethink a premature plan to withdraw US troops, one of the few negotiating levers the west still has in Syria.

The same sources also point out isolated acts of punishment have been shown not to work.

On 7 April last year Trump authorised the use of 59 US Tomahawk cruise missiles to hit Syria’s Sharyat airbase in Homs, after planes from the base were adjudged to be responsible for a deadly sarin attack on Khan Sheikhun three days earlier. Khan Sheikhun was the largest chemical weapon attack since the Syrian government signed up to the Chemical Weapons Convention in October 2013.

Play Video 1:05 Aftermath of suspected chemical attack in rebel-held Douma in Syria - video

The cruise missiles destroyed or damaged a dozen hangars, 20 Syrian airforce aircraft, a fuel depot and an air defence base.

The US retaliation – an entirely unilateral action without recourse to the United Nations security council – contrasted sharply with Barack Obama’s prevarication in 2013. Russia complained, but made no military response.

Some saw Trump’s actions as a turning point, a moment when the US would take a leadership role in the Middle East and ensure much discussed red lines about the use of chemical weapons were going to be enforced both in Syria and at the UN.

But that did not happen. Instead over the past year the situation has deteriorated. Russia and Iran became ever more clearly the decision shapers in Syria, marginalising the UN special envoy, Staffan de Mistura. The key plank of the whole UN system designed to enforce the outlawing of chemical weapons also collapsed.

After extensive inquiries, the UN’s joint investigative mechanism (JIM) had confirmed on 26 October that the Syrian government was responsible for the Khan Sheikhun attack. Russia refused to accept the findings, pointing to holes in the inquiry’s methodology, including the refusal of the inquiry team to visit the site itself for security reasons.

Still worse, on 16 November Russia deployed its 10th veto at the UN on Syria to prevent the continuation of the JIM altogether, criticising the way it worked. Impunity was institutionalised since Russia has already vetoed sending Syria’s crimes to the international criminal court.

According to Human Rights Watch, since the JIM ceased to exist the Syrian government is thought to have used chemical weapons five times, not including this weekend’s attack.

Don’t expect the west to act on Syria’s latest horror | Matthew d’Ancona Read more

In total HRW identified 85 chemical weapons attacks during the war, the vast majority by Assad’s forces. A taboo was becoming the new normal. What was once met with revulsion was starting to be met with a weary shrug of the shoulders. Red lines were blurring into invisibility.

In something close to desperation at the impasse, the French president, Emmanuel Macron, gathered nearly 30 countries to form an international partnership against impunity for the use of chemical weapons at the end of January. But the laudable reaffirmation of principle contained no new sanctions, just a commitment that transgressors would be punished.

The first test will be over how Russia responds to calls to cooperate with an inquiry, or requests for samples to be handed to Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemcial Weapons. Initial signs are not propitious. A UN security council discussion of the issue last week made little progress on re-establishing the JIM and Russia has already hotly denied chemical weapons were used in Douma.

Syria for its part will brace itself for US retribution and, even if it is deadly, regard it as a price worth paying. Assad will feel the alleged use of the chemical weapons served their purpose in destroying the rebel’s last resistance.

Following the attack the rebel group Jaish al-Islam accepted a previously rejected Russian deal to leave Douma. Trump may punish Assad, but in the absence of a new approach from the west, Assad will think his gruesome methods are winning the war.