Specifically, my major concern is that we need to get chemical weapons out of Syria, period. I think there's international consensus on that and that this is the reason President Barack Obama, a man who has a very hard time using military power, threatened to use it. We saw how that played out.
There was an agreement to rid Syria of chemical weapons: 500 tonnes in the first shipment, which was due out at the end of last year, and another 700 tonnes due out by the beginning of February. Those were always ambitious targets, and al-Assad has until June 30 to meet them. The big problem we have is that Assad is revising his commitments to the OPCW.
The conflict that we have just described is not just staying in Syria; it has not only metastasized, but has also been spreading to neighbouring countries. The way this really becomes a major threat across the globe is if it is accented by and carried through the use of chemical weapons, whether by the Assad regime or through those that would fall into the hands of the rebels. That's the primary concern.
To be succinct, the use of these offset assets and drone strikes is part of a counterterrorism aspect, and I have advocated developing plans. Using those things in the long term is very issue specific. I don't advocate it loosely, and it would depend on what the situation is, but I think we're looking at a very dire situation going forward in which such assets might have to be used overtly or covertly.