The coordinated and precise attack on chemical weapons facilities in Syria brought by the United States and its allies last week was entirely appropriate and brilliantly carried out. Now, the world will watch and wait to see what the next act will bring.

President Donald Trump deserves praise for enlisting French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Theresa May’s support in the coalition against the evil dictatorship of Syrian President Bashar Assad, who had unleashed yet another chemical weapons attack on a neighborhood in the city of Douma a week earlier.

As was the case last year, the world was once again horrified by the video evidence of civilians, including children, unable to breathe.

Lethal chemical and biological weapons were outlawed by conventions after World War I, yet Assad has continued to use such weapons, at least 50 times.  In 2013, President Barack Obama said that if Syria continued to use the banned weapons, it would be “crossing a red line.” Yet he failed to strike at the rogue nation. 

Last year, after Assad again used such weapons, Trump ordered a strike against a single site from which the missiles were launched.  In last Friday’s mission, three sites were destroyed, including a factory where such weapons were made and a storage facility.

In his brief remarks from the White House, where he announced the strike, Trump warned Russia and Iran that “nations are judged by the company they keep” and asked what kind of a nation needs to be associated with such a monstrous regime.

Russia, which has large numbers of troops in Syria, did not come to Syria’s assistance last Friday, and its foreign ministry lamely tried to accuse Great Britain of “faking” the attack in Douma.  After Russia introduced a resolution at the United Nations Security Council to condemn the U.S.-led attack, it received only three votes.

Nikki Haley, the talented and principled U.S. ambassador to the U.N., vetoed the resolution and warned Syria, Russia and Iran that the United States was “locked and loaded” to launch future strikes if Assad should again use chemical weapons.

It was both symbolically and practically significant that America was joined by its longtime allies Great Britain and France in striking a blow against the Assad regime. The three nations made it clear that their operation’s goal was not a change of government in Syria. But for the mission to be fully accomplished, Assad must be forced from power as a result of the negotiations in Geneva aimed at setting the stage for new Syrian leadership.  

Now, the United States and its allies need to walk the careful but vital line between establishing a long-term presence in Syria and urgently redoubling their efforts to pave the way for a peaceful transition without Assad. Only then will the boast of “Mission Accomplished” be justified.