Why President Trump really should be the world's policeman
America's military dominance has, despite all its flaws, produced an era of unprecedented peace and prosperity. Like him or not, the president must continue that tradition.


A free daily digest of the biggest news stories of the day - and the best features from our website
Thank you for signing up to TheWeek. You will receive a verification email shortly.
There was a problem. Please refresh the page and try again.
Last week, President Trump decided to fire missiles at Syria over its use of chemical weapons in rebel-held areas. This was almost inarguably the right decision.
And yet, many people are arguing the contrary, like my colleagues Michael Brendan Dougherty and Damon Linker. While we are told, not wrongly, that there is a Washington policy consensus that wants to solve every problem with war, there is also a Washington commentariat consensus that military action in the Middle East is always bad.
This criticism comes from a good place. Many of America's adventures in the Arab world, especially Iraq and Libya, have been disasters with manifold unintended consequences that have made the world much worse and wreaked immense suffering. Indeed, I opposed both of those interventions. The problem is when the case against specific interventions is broadened into a heuristic that says that America should simply never intervene in the Middle East.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Here's the thing: Whether you like it or not, America is the world's lone superpower, and its military dominance over the rest of the world has, despite all its flaws, produced an era of unprecedented peace and prosperity. The phrase "world policeman" is usually taken as a pejorative, but it is actually extremely apt: A policeman should not be a nanny or a busybody, but, by god, if he sees a thug punching a grandmother, he should intervene. It is actually the antithesis of that other pejorative word, "empire." In political theory terms, a policeman enforces a minimal rule set — what you must not do — whereas an empire enforces a maximal rule set — what you must do. A world empire would be a disaster, but a world policeman is a wonderful thing. And since there are no other credible candidates, America — meaning President Trump — must be it.
Now, one of the rules that America has decided to enforce — and it is a very good rule — is that if you are a state and use weapons of mass destruction, you will be punished. The problem is that rules only stay rules if they are enforced.
The purpose of the Syria strike was not to effect regime change in Syria, or even to alter the balance of power on the ground, it was to enforce the rule after it was flouted by Syria, with the almost certain aid of Russia and, probably, Iran. In this case, the Trump administration was simply doing its job as a policeman. The fact that Barack Obama had previously refused to endorse the rule, thereby imperiling it, made this action all the more necessary and laudable.
Yet, you might ask, didn't the White House seem to state that its goal is now regime change in Syria? That is indeed true and it is indeed a very different animal. As many people have pointed out, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, while a mass murderer, is also an enemy of ISIS, and the most likely follow-up scenario to his ouster would be, if not ISIS control over Syria, then certainly an Islamist Syrian regime that would probably harbor terrorists. But it should also be pointed out that some form of anodyne endorsement of regime change has been part of the international community rhetoric on Syria since the beginning of the war. Trump is not proposing sending 200,000 troops to Damascus.
He's not proposing it because he doesn't have the political capital. But the fact remain that there is no good option left in Syria. Shoring up Assad, on top of being immoral, would also set a very bad precedent for dictators everywhere and have its own set of unintended consequences. Alternatives to Assad do indeed look worse.
Usually, Trump's problems are of his own making. His health reform plan and tax plan are collapsing because he is a chaotic individual who cannot run a coherent process. But here, Trump has the same problem as any other president would have, which is that every conceivable option, as far as anyone can tell, is bad. All that's left is lobbing a few Tomahawk missiles here and there to look like he's doing something, and then crossing fingers.
In this specific instance, the lobbing was well-advised. But the overall picture still looks as grim as ever.
Continue reading for free
We hope you're enjoying The Week's refreshingly open-minded journalism.
Subscribed to The Week? Register your account with the same email as your subscription.
Sign up to our 10 Things You Need to Know Today newsletter
A free daily digest of the biggest news stories of the day - and the best features from our website
Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry is a writer and fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. His writing has appeared at Forbes, The Atlantic, First Things, Commentary Magazine, The Daily Beast, The Federalist, Quartz, and other places. He lives in Paris with his beloved wife and daughter.
-
Sen. Bob Menendez charged with federal corruption, bribery
The longtime New Jersey Democrat finds himself in another round of legal peril
By Rafi Schwartz Published
-
Taking steps
Cartoons
By The Week Staff Published
-
Will the US keep aiding Ukraine?
Today's Big Question Republicans give Volodymyr Zelenskyy a 'cold shoulder' in D.C.
By Joel Mathis Published
-
Azerbaijan attacks disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region, breaking cease-fire
The 'local anti-terrorist' strikes in the ethnic Armenian enclave threaten to reignite a war with implications for Russia, Turkey and the West
By Peter Weber Published
-
Canada's Trudeau accuses India of role in assassination of Canadian Sikh leader
Canada expelled a senior Indian diplomat after going public with explosive 'credible allegations' that Indian agents helped kill a Canadian citizen
By Peter Weber Published
-
US-Iran prisoner swap: has Biden given in to blackmail?
Republicans condemn $6bn deal but it could help de-escalate rising tensions
By The Week Staff Published
-
Russia and Ukraine face off in The Hague over genocide case
Kyiv is hoping court will rule Russia's actions illegal but Moscow wants the case dismissed
By Rebekah Evans Published
-
Indigenous Voice referendum: is this Australia's 'Brexit moment'?
The referendum on Indigenous rights may be a moment of reckoning for the 'open wounds of nationhood'
By Rebekah Evans Published
-
Is Biden's whirlwind Vietnam trip a warning to China?
Today's Big Question Emphasizing 'growth and stability,' the president keeps an eye on Hanoi's neighbor to the north
By Rafi Schwartz Published
-
Is Elon Musk too powerful?
Today's Big Question When one tech billionaire can stop an entire army on the other side of the globe, the risks might outweigh the rewards
By Rafi Schwartz Published
-
Is Biden losing Black voters?
Talking Point The prospect has Democrats nervous about 2024
By Joel Mathis Published