Brett Erickson
On May 22, the Trump administration imposed decisive sanctions against Sudan's military leaders, accusing them of using chemical weapons on the Sudanese Rapid Support Forces (RSF). It was certainly a morally and ethically justified action to take. However, the timing reveals a troubling paradox: while the U.S. swiftly punishes Sudan, Syria, another regime guilty of repeatedly using chemical weapons, is being quietly readmitted into the global community, effectively free from lasting consequences.
The message sent by this inconsistency isn't subtle. Sanctions are no longer seen as permanent tools of diplomacy or meaningful deterrents. They've become temporary inconveniences, political bargaining chips that regimes can simply outlast. And this is something that can't be allowed to take root.
Throughout the past decade, Bashar al-Assad's regime has employed chemical weapons, sarin and chlorine gas, in civilian areas, including well-documented attacks in Aleppo. Global outrage led to intense sanctions and diplomatic isolation. Initially, these measures worked, crippling the Syrian economy and limiting Assad's influence. But Assad held out, betting on geopolitical fatigue.
No comments:
Post a Comment