Staff Reports
In a spectacular display of delusion, President Joe Biden recently referred to the stunning collapse of Bashar Assad’s Syrian regime as a “fundamental act of justice.” One can’t help but wonder if this is the same “justice” that took decades to materialize and completely blindsided the administration, even as Republicans are circling like hawks, eagerly ready to swoop in. With the Syrian government crumbling, Biden admitted that the U.S. is uncertain of Assad’s whereabouts, but that reports suggest he may be seeking a cozy hideout in Moscow. The irony of this scenario is palpable: a dictator fleeing to the arms of another dictator while a self-proclaimed leader of “the free world” keeps checking his watch.
Biden’s lofty rhetoric credits himself and allies for “weakening” Assad’s backers—namely Russia, Iran, and forces like Hezbollah. But given the state of affairs, one has to squint a little harder at those claims. Apparently, basic logic has gone on vacation. The Middle East is not exactly a place known for stability, yet Biden’s take implies that the power shift is a cause for celebration. The reality is that this “shift” could send shockwaves that ripple far beyond the Syrian borders—as if anyone needed another reason to be concerned about what chaos lies ahead.
Assad’s fall in Syria is a ‘fundamental act of justice,’ but also ‘a moment of risk,’ Biden says https://t.co/pMsvpiCYWG
— New York Daily News (@NYDailyNews) December 9, 2024
Enter Donald Trump, who seems to have had background intel on Assad’s flight while Biden was still fumbling over the news. Speaking from the digital ether, Trump declared that Assad was left hanging by his longtime ally, Vladimir Putin. This sends a clear message: when even your best buddy doesn’t want to hold your hand anymore, it’s time to take the next flight out. Trump’s post also reinforced the notion that the U.S. should not get involved in Syria’s mess—an observation that seems decidedly smarter in hindsight.
While Trump sits back and dissects the situation, the Biden administration is left spinning like a top, declaring they’ll keep their troops in the region, primarily to combat ISIS. However, this raises a question: if everything is “under control,” why is there a need to maintain American military presence? Biden’s team has seemingly drawn a hard line—don’t worry about the complexities of Middle Eastern politics, and just keep an eye out for ISIS while simultaneously pretending this convoluted mess isn’t spilling all over the geopolitical floor.
As for the Sierra-league of insurgents ganging up against Assad, they are mostly linked to Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, designated as terrorists by the Biden administration itself. Yet, the administration doesn’t seem shaken up about the moral implications of arming or even aligning with those labeled as terrorists—strange bedfellows to say the least. Vice President-elect JD Vance, a battle-tested veteran, voiced his skepticism about this “rebel” faction, hinting that they might be nothing more than an upgraded version of ISIS. With friends like these, who needs enemies?
Amidst all this political slapstick, Trump points out that the Syrian turmoil has a direct connection to Russia’s war in Ukraine—a revelation that will make any political strategist smirk. Perhaps this “fundamental act of justice” is Biden’s way of avoiding a slow clap of irony coming from the other side as he tries to make sense of an ever-tangled web. In the grand tradition of political theater, the Middle East turns into a stage where the only thing missing is popcorn, while America waits anxiously to see who will trip next.
