Attack On Syria Was Largely Symbolic
07, 2017 "Information
- I have an important update: based on Russian
sources, including video footage and the reports
of one Russian journalist on the ground, Evgenii
Poddubnyi, it has become clear that the US
strike was largely symbolic. Here is the
The Russians were given a warning which
they, of course, passed on to the Syrians.
The Americans must have assumed that this
The Syrian airbase was lightly damaged: a
few number of aircraft were damaged or
destroyed, but many of these were in repairs
and could not fly. Fuel storage tanks were
destroyed. A number of aircraft bunkers
were damage or destroyed. A few barracks
were also destroyed.
There were 6 or 7 casualties, which is very
Crucially, the runways did not
here is the really intriguing thing: it appears
that only 23 out of a total of 59
US cruise missiles hit the base. The rest are
unaccounted for. This could be due to all sorts
of reasons, including Syrian and Russian air
defenses or Russian electronic warfare. I tend
to believe that the latter is the cause. But
then, this begs another question: why did the
Russians let 23 of the cruise missiles through?
Possibly to appease Trump and not force him to
re-strike. Other possibility, to make sure that
the political fallout from this stupid and
reckless attack still come back to hurt the
United States (had they destroyed all the cruise
missiles this would not happen).
the Russian political reaction, I find it rather
flaccid: Russia has condemned the attack and
suspended the Memorandum of Understanding on
Prevention of Flight Safety Incidents in the
course of operations in Syria signed with the
am rather unimpressed.
the full Russian MoFA statement:
United States conducted strikes against
Syrian government troops in the early hours
of April 7, using chemical weapons attacks
in Idlib Province as a pretext.
opted for a show of force, for military
action against a country fighting
international terrorism without taking the
trouble to get the facts straight.
not the first time that the US chooses an
irresponsible approach that aggravates
problems the world is facing, and threatens
international security. The very presence of
military personnel from the US and other
countries in Syria without consent from the
Syrian government or a UN Security Council
mandate is an egregious and obvious
violation of international law that cannot
be justified. While previous initiatives of
this kind were presented as efforts to
combat terrorism, now they are clearly an
act of aggression against a sovereign Syria.
Actions undertaken by the US today inflict
further damage to the Russia-US relations.
has expressed on numerous occasions that it
was ready to cooperate on resolving the most
urgent issues the world is facing today, and
that fighting international terrorism was a
top priority. However, we will never agree
to unsanctioned action against the
legitimate Syrian government that has been
waging an uncompromising war on
international terrorism for a long time.
Seeking to justify military action
Washington has totally distorted what had
happened in Idlib. The US could not have
failed to grasp the fact that the Syrian
government troops did not use chemical
weapons there. Damascus simply does not have
them, as confirmed a number of times by
qualified experts. This was the conclusion
reached by the Organisation for the
Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). Over
the recent years this organisation inspected
almost all the facilities linked or possibly
linked to Syria’s chemical weapons programme.
As for Idlib, the terrorists operating there
used to produce toxic land mines intended
for use in Syria and Iraq. These
manufacturing facilities were put out of
operation in a military operation carried
out by the Syrian air force.
pretends that it does not understand obvious
things, turning a blind eye to the use of
chemical weapons in Iraq, officially
confirmed by Baghdad. The US refuses to
believe the evidence provided by certified
documents confirming the use of chemical
weapons by terrorists in Aleppo. In doing
so, the US is abetting international
terrorism and making it stronger. New WMD
attacks can be expected.
is no doubt that the military action by the
US is an attempt to divert attention from
the situation in Mosul, where the campaign
carried out among others by US-led coalition
has resulted in hundreds of civilian
casualties and an escalating humanitarian
obvious that the cruise missile attack was
prepared in advance. Any expert understands
that Washington’s decision on air strikes
predates the Idlib events, which simply
served as a pretext for a show of force.
suspends the Memorandum of Understanding on
Prevention of Flight Safety Incidents in the
course of operations in Syria signed with
call on the UN Security Council to hold an
emergency meeting to discuss the latest
I am very underwhelmed to put it mildly.
that the outrage inside Russia will force Lavrov
to cancel his planned meeting with Tillerson.
The usually sleepy Duma seems to be
personal note, I will be gone all day and most
of the week-end I will be attending Church
services for the feasts of the Annunciation and
the Entry of our Lord into Jerusalem.
expect an analysis by Monday or Tuesday at the
PS: needless to say,
chemical weapons or chemical weapon storage
facilities were damaged: we know that since
NOBODY, including the Russian reporters, were
even carrying, nevermind wearing, any gas masks
or, even less so, full chemical protection
suits. This is hardly surprising since, of
course, they never existed in the first place.
PPS: just for the record,
attack was a direct and clear violation of
national law (Trump never got Congress to
authorize this attack)
International law (Trump is now a criminal
guilty of the crime of ‘aggression’)
other words, Trump is now a war criminal and the
USA a rogue state (again).
views expressed in this article are solely those
of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
opinions of Information Clearing House.