Canada’s support in Syrian attacks likely to be political

OTTAWA — Canada’s immediate contribution to a U.S.-led attack on the Syrian government for its alleged use of chemical weapons is expected to be more political than military, particularly if strikes are launched without United Nations approval.

Yet Canada’s role could change if the attacks last longer than anticipated or prompt unforeseen consequences that spill over into the surrounding region.

Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird reiterated the need for a “firm response” and “appropriate consequences” for Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime Wednesday following accusations it killed hundreds of civilians with nerve gas last week.

That echoes similar statements from U.S., British and French leaders, who are ramping up their respective militaries for what are expected to be limited, pinpoint cruise missile and drone strikes against Syrian government fa- cilities and suspected chemical weapon depots.

Speaking to reporters in Montreal following a meeting with Syrian opposition leader George Sabra, Baird noted Canada does not have cruise missiles or armed drones, nor does it have much in the way of military assets in the region.

“We haven’t made the decision,” Baird added about a potential military contribution to U.S.-led strikes. “Nor do we know if we have the capacity to be part of any military engagement, which by all accounts will be limited in focus.”

All indications at this juncture are that Canada would be expected to remain on the sidelines cheering the U.S., Britain and France should they go ahead and launch cruise missile or drone attacks against the Syrian government.

This will be particularly important if the three allies decide to launch strikes without UN approval — as appears will be the case after a British-sponsored resolution failed to make it through the UN Security Council on Wednesday.