Assessing the Case for Striking Syria
Testimony from National Security and Defense Program
Testimony from National Security and Defense Program

Assessing the Case for Striking Syria

September 2013

Testimony
Testimony by CFR fellows and experts before Congress.

More on:

Syria

Homeland Security

In his testimony before the House Committee on Homeland Security, Stephen Biddle acknowledges that neither the case for nor against using force in Syria is without serious costs and risks. He evaluates the five main goals an attack might be designed to achieve: deterring further CW use and upholding norms against the employment of such weapons; preserving U.S. credibility; enabling a negotiated settlement to the war; toppling Assad and his government; and ending the humanitarian crisis by saving civilian lives.

More on:

Syria

Homeland Security

Top Stories on CFR

Russia

Liana Fix, a fellow for Europe at CFR, and Thomas Graham, a distinguished fellow at CFR, sit down with James M. Lindsay to discuss the future of U.S. policy toward Russia and the risks posed by heightened tensions between two nuclear powers. This episode is the first in a special TPI series on the U.S. 2024 presidential election and is supported by the Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Terrorism and Counterterrorism

Violence around U.S. elections in 2024 could not only destabilize American democracy but also embolden autocrats across the world. Jacob Ware recommends that political leaders take steps to shore up civic trust and remove the opportunity for violence ahead of the 2024 election season.

China

Those seeking to profit from fentanyl and governments seeking to control its supply are locked in a never-ending competition, with each new countermeasure spurring further innovation to circumvent it.