Trump's hawkish stance might lead to unintended consequences.

The cruise missile attack launched by U.S. destroyers on April 7 against an air base in western Syria in response to the use of chemical weapons was widely described in the U.S. media as the first major use of military force by Donald Trump since assuming the presidency. The attack, involving 59 Tomahawk missiles, certainly represented a significant use of force, causing extensive damage to the Syrian base.

More accurately, it should be viewed as the second such action by Trump, following an ill-fated raid by U.S. Special Forces in Yemen on Jan. 29. More importantly, it should be viewed as the prelude to further exercises of military might, each likely to prove more risky and ferocious than the one before.

Trump has already signaled his intent to employ force more aggressively, deploying an aircraft carrier battle group to waters off Korea and approving the use of America’s most powerful non-nuclear weapon – dubbed the “mother of all bombs” – in an attack on ISIS strongholds in Afghanistan.

In the few months since he has occupied the White House, Trump has demonstrated increasing comfort with the use of force, giving his top military officials – “my generals” – greater leeway to plan and conduct military actions in active war zones, including Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen.

This was first evident in late January, when Trump approved a night raid on a compound in Yemen thought to house militants of Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula. Although planning for the raid had begun during the final weeks of the Obama administration, it was Trump who gave the go-ahead for this mission. The raid ended in disaster, with a U.S. Navy Seal, Chief Petty Officer William Owens, and about a dozen civilians killed.

Despite this fiasco, Trump has stepped up the delegation of decision-making authority to senior military officers, making it easier for them to initiate combat operations in a half-dozen countries. In the weeks following the botched raid in which Owens was killed, the U.S. launched over 70 drone attacks on Yemen, more than the total authorized by Obama in all of 2016.

Trump has also designated parts of Somalia as an “area of active hostilities,” giving officers increased leeway to conduct raids and drone strikes.

It is essential that the missile attack on Syria be viewed in the context of other military action taken by the Trump administration as a reflection of the president’s growing preference for the use of force in promoting U.S. objectives abroad. Until now, these actions have taken place in countries where America’s adversaries lack the capacity to retaliate or, in the case of Syria, have chosen to shrug off the U.S. attack without (so far) launching any countermoves.

But Washington will not always have it this easy: Sooner or later, targets will strike back.

MICHAEL T. KLARE is professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College in Amherst, Massachusetts.