If Syrians want to stop Assad's chemical weapons, they must do it themselves

If Trump does stick to his policy of leaving Assad in place, then the only other power that might intervene would be the UN. But this isn’t a comforting notion, since the UN is frequently ineffectual during international and human rights crises. This is due in no small part to the fact that China and Russia are permanent members on the UN Security Council.

Take, for example, when Assad was indiscriminately bombing civilians in eastern Aleppo in December. Russia and China both vetoed a UN Security Council resolution that called for a ceasefire. The UN’s hands were tied. The only thing the international body seems capable of agreeing on is condemning Israel. In fact, in 2016, the UN General Assembly adopted a total of 24 resolutions. Of these, 20 had to do with Israel.

But stopping an authoritarian leader from massacring innocent civilians is the one thing the UN should be doing. It is their primary purpose. If they can’t or won’t take substantive action when something like persistent use of chemical weapons against civilians occurs, then what is the point of the organization?

Assad is acting with impunity because he knows the international community won’t do a thing to stop him. The United States and UN have proven that. He’s also banking on the Trump administration doing little more than adopting some anemic sanctions reminiscent of the Obama years.