Updated Apr 10, 2018

Strategic costs of U.S. inaction in Syria outweigh risks

President Trump with senior military leadership in the White House on April 9, 2018. Trump said he would decide his response to the Syrian chemical attacks by April 11. Photo: Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Since the alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria, on April 7, President Donald Trump has reiterated that he will not tolerate the use of chemical weapons.

The international response to these latest attacks will likely influence how Syrian President Bashar al-Assad eliminates remaining rebel strongholds in Syria. The regime would likely take a non-military response as license to end the civil war through any means necessary. In this regard, Trump was correct when he told Cabinet members that the issue “is about humanity.”

The big picture: The U.S. reputation is also at stake. When the president says there will be a “big price to pay” for the chemical attack, he must be true to his word — or risk acquiring a reputation for strong rhetoric followed by inaction.

Although a more abstract concern than Syrian lives, the United States' reputation for keeping its word can deter other nations from breaking international law in the first place.

Like Assad, Russian President Vladimir Putin has also taken U.S. inaction as license for acts of aggression, including interference in U.S. elections, disinformation campaigns in the Baltic states and alleged chemical weapon use on U.K. soil. Beyond Russia, the U.S.'s reputation might affect whether North Korea denuclearizes, Iran exacerbates sectarian tensions in Iraq or China continues to steal U.S. technology.

The bottom line: To be sure, a U.S. military response would risk unsettling both Assad and his backers, Russia and Iran. But the Trump administration has made clear it has no appetite for expanding military action in Syria, and previous U.S. strikes have not led to escalation. Once the U.S. issues a hard warning, it must maintain a reputation for resolve.

Andrea Taylor is a nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Council's Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East.

Go deeper

Bernie's juggernaut

Sen. Bernie Sanders speaks in San Antonio last night with his wife, Jane. Photo: Eric Gay/AP

Sen. Bernie Sanders won so big in the Nevada caucuses that Democrats are hard-pressed to sketch a way he's not their nominee.

Driving the news: With 60% of precincts counted (slow, but better than Iowa!), Sanders is running away with 46% of delegates — crushing Joe Biden's 20%, Pete Buttigieg's 15%, Sen. Elizabeth Warren's 10% and Sen. Amy Klobuchar's 5%.

Go deeperArrowUpdated 2 hours ago - Politics & Policy

Buttigieg campaign claims Nevada caucuses were "plagued with errors"

Photo: Win McNamee/Getty Images

Pete Buttigieg's campaign wrote a letter on Sunday asking the Nevada State Democratic Party to release early vote and in-person vote totals by precinct and address certain caucus errors identified by campaigns, The Nevada Independent reports.

The big picture: The campaign alleges that the process of integrating early votes on caucus day was “plagued with errors and inconsistencies,” and says it received more than 200 incident reports from precincts around the state.

Go deeperArrowUpdated 2 hours ago - Politics & Policy

Coronavirus threat grows, threatening some drug supplies

Data: The Center for Systems Science and Engineering at Johns Hopkins, the CDC, and China's Health Ministry. Note: China numbers are for the mainland only and U.S. numbers include repatriated citizens.

As the novel coronavirus continues spreading globally and China grapples with a limited production capability, there's a growing risk to about 150 prescription drugs in the U.S., sources tell Axios.

The big picture: The coronavirus has spread to more countries, with both South Korea and Italy stepping up emergency measures amid rising case numbers on Sunday. COVID-19 has killed at least 2,467 people and infected almost 79,000 others, mostly in mainland China.

Go deeperArrowUpdated 3 hours ago - Health