Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey
You're Hired: Tracking the Trump Administration Transition - April 10, 2017
Trump Administration (first term)  Vice President Mike Pence Cabinet • White House staff • Transition team • Trump's second term |
Domestic affairs: Abortion • Crime and justice • Education • Energy and the environment • Federal courts • Firearms policy • First Amendment • Healthcare • Immigration • Infrastructure • LGBTQ issues • Marijuana • Puerto Rico • Social welfare programs • Veterans • Voting issues Economic affairs and regulations: Agriculture and food policy • Budget • Financial regulation • Jobs • Social Security • Taxes • Trade Foreign affairs and national security: Afghanistan • Arab states of the Persian Gulf • China • Cuba • Iran • Iran nuclear deal • Islamic State and terrorism • Israel and Palestine • Latin America • Military • NATO • North Korea • Puerto Rico • Russia • Syria • Syrian refugees • Technology, privacy, and cybersecurity |
| Polling indexes: Opinion polling during the Trump administration |
This is the April 10, 2017, edition of an email sent from November 2016 to September 2017 that covered Donald Trump's presidential transition, cabinet appointees, and the different policy positions of those individuals who may have had an effect on the new administration. Previous editions of "You're Hired" can be found here.
Last Thursday night, in response to a chemical attack on Syrian civilians believed to have been perpetrated by the Assad regime, the Trump administration launched 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles against a Syrian airfield. We discussed this strike and how the United States became involved in the Syrian conflict in Friday’s edition.
Today, we will look at the aftermath of the strike. Did it do any damage to Syrian military operations? Has it changed American relations with Russia, an ally of the Assad regime? And what happened during Trump’s overshadowed first meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping?
Syria
The tactical outcome of the strike
Capt. Jeff Davis, a spokesman for the Pentagon, said, "Initial indications are that this strike has severely damaged or destroyed Syrian aircraft and support infrastructure and equipment.” He added that the strike “targeted aircraft, hardened aircraft shelters, petroleum and logistical storage, ammunition supply bunkers, air defense systems, and radars.”
CNN reported on Saturday that although 20 planes were destroyed at the airfield, Syrian flight operations had resumed there.
In a statement released on Monday, Secretary of Defense James Mattis said that “the strike resulted in the damage or destruction of fuel and ammunition sites, air defense capabilities, and 20 percent of Syria's operational aircraft. The Syrian government has lost the ability to refuel or rearm aircraft at Shayrat airfield and at this point, use of the runway is of idle military interest."
Mattis concluded, “The Syrian government would be ill-advised ever again to use chemical weapons."
Read more about federal policy on Syria.
McMaster on the Assad regime
H.R. McMaster, who succeeded Michael Flynn as national security adviser after he resigned, said on Sunday that the objective of the strike was not to prevent the Syrians from being able to use the airfield.
McMaster said, “[W]hat's significant about the strike is not that it was meant to take out the Syrian regime's capacity or ability to commit mass murder of its own people, but it was to be a very strong signal to Assad and his sponsors that the United States cannot stand idly by as he is murdering innocent civilians—what was a redline in 2013.”
Haley on the Assad regime
Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said on Sunday that President Donald Trump would take more action against Syria if necessary. “If he needs to do more, he will do more. So, really, now what happens depends on how everyone responds to what happened in Syria, and make sure that we start moving towards a political solution, and we start finding peace in that area.”
Haley added that the Trump administration did not see a future for Assad as the leader of Syria. “Well, regime change is something that we think is going to happen, because all of the parties are going to see that Assad is not the leader that needs to be taking place for Syria. So, what I think you're seeing is, this isn't about policy or not. This is about thoughts. And so, when you look at the thoughts, there is no political solution that any of us can see with Assad at the lead,” she said.
Tillerson on the Assad regime
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson indicated that defeating the Islamic State was the Trump administration’s top priority over regime change. “And once the ISIS threat has been reduced or eliminated, I think we can turn our attention directly to stabilizing the situation in Syria. We’re hopeful that we can prevent a continuation of the civil war and that we can bring the parties to the table to begin the process of political discussions,” he said in an interview on Sunday with CBS’ John Dickerson.
What comes next
After being briefed by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), a member of the Committee on Armed Services, said on Friday that the strike was an isolated incident. “I just want to remind everyone that this was a one-time attack on the assets that were used in a chemical weapons attack against the people of Syria. So it was in response to a very specific attack. It's not an ongoing operation,” Ernst said.
If Trump decides to take additional military action, then he could face some pushback from Congress. Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.), for example, asserted that Trump should have sought congressional approval for last week’s strike.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, however, said that he does not believe Trump needs to request an authorization to use military force from Congress. “We passed one back in 2001 and 2002, I believe, and the previous president thought that it authorized what we were doing in that part of the world, and I expect this president thinks the same,” McConnell said.
Russia
On Tuesday, Tillerson will travel to Moscow to meet with his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov. Their discussion is expected to cover Russia’s role in managing the Assad regime and its use of chemical weapons.
Read more about federal policy on Russia.
Tillerson on Russia in Syria
Tillerson criticized Russia’s oversight of the Assad regime in an interview on Sunday with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. “I think the real failure here has been Russia’s failure to live up to its commitments under the chemical weapons agreements that were entered into in 2013 both by the Syrian Government and by Russia as the guarantor to play the role in Syria of securing chemical weapons, destroying the chemical weapons, and continuing to monitor that situation,” he said.
He added, “I hope that Russia is thinking carefully about its continued alliance with Bashar al-Assad, because every time one of these horrific attacks occurs, it draws Russia closer in to some level of responsibility.”
Haley on Russia in Syria
In her interview on Sunday, Haley questioned why Russia disputed that the Assad regime had launched the chemical attack on Khan Shaykhun. She said, “And the first reaction from Russia wasn't, how horrible. It wasn't, how could they do this? It wasn't, how did this happen? It was, Assad didn't do it. Assad didn't do it. Why was that the reaction?”
Like Tillerson, Haley also discussed how much Russia knew about the Assad regime’s chemical weapons. She suggested both knowledge and ignorance of the chemical weapons were problematic. “And don't forget that Russia was the one that took the charge and said they were going to make sure there were no chemical weapons and that no chemical weapons would be used. So, they now have to answer for this. How can they with a straight face cover for Assad, because, if they're covering for Assad, then what are they really saying? They're saying by covering for Assad that they knew that it was there, or they were incompetent by having chemical weapons there in the first place.”
What comes next
While Tillerson’s predecessor, former Secretary of State John Kerry, often met directly with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Reuters reported on Monday that Putin would not receive Tillerson.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov was critical of reports that Tillerson would push Russia to reconsider its support for the Assad regime. “Returning to pseudo-attempts to resolve the crisis by repeating mantras that Assad must step down cannot help sort things out,” Peskov said.
The joint command operation center of Syrian allies, which includes Russia and Iran, also released a statement on Sunday condemning the U.S. strike. “The United States crossed red lines by attacking Syria, from now on we will respond to anyone, including America if it attacks Syria and crosses the red lines. America knows very well our ability and capabilities to respond well to them, [and] we will respond without taking into consideration any reaction and consequences,” they said.
The statement did not include specifics on what would prompt a response from the Syrian allies or what such a response would entail.
China
Amid the fallout of the Trump administration’s first military strike, Chinese President Xi Jinping met with Trump at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida where they discussed the terms of future trade deals between the U.S. and China.
Read more about federal policy on China.
Financial Times reported, “While a comprehensive Sino-US investment treaty remains a distant prospect, both sides are hoping to achieve a number of smaller trade deals in the coming three months.”
China is expected to allow majority foreign ownership of securities and insurance companies in the country and end a 14-year-old ban on the import of the U.S. beef. Trump has not yet commented on these terms. He tweeted on Saturday that “goodwill and friendship was formed, but only time will tell on trade.”
What comes next
In an interview on Sunday, Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross indicated that the Trump administration could leave China off its agenda if progress was not made soon on a deal. “If we don't get some tangible results within the first 100 days, I think we'll have to examine whether it's worthwhile continuing them,” he said.
Ross also expressed disapproval of how slowly Congress was moving on the issue. “We need Congress’ permission to enter the formal 90-day letter into the records so that we can begin the formal negotiations. We were trying to get that done before the Easter recess. We were not able to do it. We hope to get it done as soon as possible after. Bad trade deals shouldn’t be allowed to sit. The longer they sit there, the more they are to our disadvantage. So it’s quite unfortunate that the way Congress has been working has been to slow-walk these activities,” Ross said.
See also
- You're Hired: Tracking the Trump Administration Transition
- Donald Trump presidential transition team
| |||||||||||||||||||
