“I do not pull out my sword where my whip is enough. And I do not pull out my whip where my tongue is enough.” — Muawiyah Ibn Abu Sufyan When US President Barack Obama said that the Syrian regime's use of chemical weapons, or even the transfer of chemical weapons, would represent an unacceptable violation of red lines, he did not explain what his next move would be if Bashar Al-Assad actually trespassed those red lines. What Obama failed to realize back then is that by making such a general warning, he placed himself in a cage that he does not know how to get out of without gravely embarrassing his credibility or America's reputation. According to the New York Times, consultations among the president's top aides did not at all address the concept of “red lines.” According to the daily, the president's statement was a personal and random one that reflected his own personal views. However, what attracts attention is that Obama — unlike his predecessor George Bush — is extremely cautious and rarely allows himself to stumble as a result of a slip of the tongue. Ever since the White House was forced to reveal information on the Assad regime's limited use of chemical weapons via a hesitant message to Congress, Obama has made an effort to explain that preliminary evidence is only preliminary and not conclusive. His spokesperson clarified that when the president made his warning about red lines, he did not say that trespassing them would trigger a certain response. Obama is also exploiting the legitimate worry that Americans have about the danger of rushing into judgments and absolute intelligence evaluations, especially as their experience with claims of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was catastrophic. But what has a deeper meaning than Iraq (an experience Obama undoubtedly learned from), is that Obama strongly resisted and still resists the idea of military involvement in any dispute across the world. Obama's problem is that he has not learned from the wit of Italian historian Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli or the prudence of Muawiyah Ibn Abu Sufyan, who established the Umayyad Dynasty of the caliphate and was appointed Governor of Syria in 639. Implied or hinted threats are a lot better than announced or blunt threats. A leader who makes threats, like Obama, must confirm to his rivals that he is prepared to force them to pay a huge price if they trespass red lines. Muawiyah in dealing with his rivals began with making statements, either to persuade, commend or flatter. After making such statements, Muawiyah emphasized and hinted that he was willing to use the whip to intimidate. Muawiyah's principle is based on the importance of making his rivals aware that if they ignored his words and did not fear his whip, then the sword, his last option, would be awaiting them. — Hisham Melhem is the Washington bureau chief of Al Arabiya. Follow him on Twitter @Hisham_Melhem
