Did the Trump administration’s strike last month on a Syrian airfield reshape the world’s approach to the Syrian conflict? Does it reflect a significant change in White House strategy, and how has it influenced the policies of America’s allies, especially its European partners?
As American and European policymakers search for ways to end the conflict already stretching into its sixth year, a new report by Chatham House explains the need for a comprehensive solution combining political and military components: “The absence of a coherent strategic vision for Syria – or the political will to see it through – on the part of Western governments has contributed to the increasing strength and influence of ISIL and other extremist groups. These groups cannot be countered by military means alone, however. Without a political agreement to end the conflict, tactical measures for fighting extremism in Syria will fail, as they have elsewhere.”
The key question is: How do you get there? On May 11, Hudson Institute hosted a discussion examining both American and European perspectives on the war in Syria and Western policy. Hudson senior fellow Lee Smith moderated a conversation with European experts Lina Khatib and Neil Quilliam and their American counterparts Tony Badran and Andrew Tabler.
Join Senior Fellow Dr. Rebeccah Heinrichs and Senator Rick Scott (R-FL) for a fireside discussion on how Congress can guide American strategy, the need to modernize the defense industrial base, and the vital role of allies and partners in an unstable international environment.
Join Hudson Institute Senior Fellow Robert McDowell for a discussion of the book and communications law with the authors, Harold Furchtgott-Roth, Kirk Arner, and Arielle Roth.
Please join Congressman Jimmy Panetta (D-CA) and Senior Fellow Ken Moriyasu for a discussion on Central Asia’s economic and strategic significance and why updating US trade policy is key to unlocking the region’s potential in an era of renewed great power competition.
