Stephen Nulty 1:44 am on April 14, 2018
Tags: , , douma, emmanuel macron, james mattis,   

Saturday 14 April 2018 – US, UK and France launch air strikes on Syria in response to chemical attack

The first part of this post was uploaded at 3.50am GMT

3612

Following on from last weekend’s chemical attack in the Syrian town of Douma, the inevitable response by the United States – along with the UK and France – has begun with airstrikes against chemical weapons sites and other strategic targets inside Syria.  After a week of condemnation by the United States  and the West and the Twitter threats by Donald Trump that the regime of Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the chemical attack, the attacks came as no surprise.  Both Assad and its Russian allies have denied that they were involved in any chemical attack, going as far as to say it was staged by the West to justify just such airstrikes.  Despite some attempts to secure condemnation and meaningful investigation by the United Nations, the allies have had enough of waiting and the strikes have begun.


President Trump addressed the American people around 9pm local time in Washington last night (2am 14th April GMT).  Trump announced that the airstrikes were under way and that they were a combined effort between the United States, United Kingdom and France, saying that “the evil and despicable attack left mothers and fathers, women and children thrashing in pain,” adding: “they are crimes of a monster.”  President Trump questioned: “What kind of a nation wants to be associated with mass murder of innocent men, women and children?”   – a reference to Syria’s ally Russia.  The President noted: “America does not seek an indefinite presence in Syria. We look forward to  the day when we can bring our warriors home. The US will be a partner and a friend but the fate of the region lies in the hands of its own people.” President Trump spoke of the allies “righteous power” in acting in the region and urged Americans to say a prayer before adding: “We pray that God will bring comfort to the suffering and guide the whole region.” (watch video of address, or read transcript)


Moments after Donald Trump finished speaking, his lapdog Theresa May issued a statement.  The British Prime Minister, who had offered the United States Britain’s support without seeking approval from the British Parliament or British people, said: “I have authorised British armed forces to conduct co-ordinated and targeted strikes to degrade the Syrian regime’s chemical weapons capability and deter their use. We are acting together with our American and French allies. In Douma, last Saturday a chemical weapons attack killed up to 75 people, including young children, in circumstances of pure horror.”  She continued: “This persistent pattern of behaviour must be stopped – not just to protect innocent people in Syria from the horrific deaths and casualties caused by chemical weapons but also because we cannot allow the erosion of the international norm that prevents the use of these weapons. We have sought to use every possible diplomatic channel to achieve this.”  Mrs May continued that “while this action is specifically about deterring the Syrian regime, it will also send a clear signal to  anyone else who believes they can use chemical weapons with impunity.  […] There is no practicable alternative to the use of force to degrade and deter the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime.”  (read transcript)

3500

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) in the UK said that four British Tornado jets (above) flew from Cyprus and fired Storm Shadow missiles at a former missile base in Syria, near Homs.  The MoD said the strikes were  designed to “maximise the destruction of the stockpiled chemicals and to minimise any risks of contamination to the surrounding area.”  It said the site was “some distance” from any known civilians habitation and that initial signs were the attack was successful.  The Americans are, according to a CNN and a US official speaking to Reuters, using both ships and jets based in the region and are firing Tomahawk cruise missiles.


France’s President Emmanuel Macron has issued a statement in which he said: “We cannot tolerate the recurring use of chemical weapons, which is an immediate danger for the Syrian people and our collective society.”  He also said that the attacks would be limited to chemical weapons facilities.  Like Theresa May, President Macron too decided to take military action without first seeking the approval of his Parliament or people.

may_macron_wxdbvb

Photo: French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Theresa May


Within minutes of Trump’s statement the news agency Reuters were reporting explosions and smoke on the east side of the Syrian capital Damascus, seemingly but not confirmed as evidence of the first airstrikes.  This was quickly followed by reports that the Barzah district of Damascus has been targeted, which is the location of a Syrian scientific research centre.  The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) says several military bases have been hit in the first wave of airstrikes as has the Republican Guard headquarters and the army’s 4th division.  CNN were quoting a US administration source as saying “this isn’t over” and that this was the beginning of a “multi-wave” attack. Despite this probably being a sustained attack by the United States and its poodles, the Democratic leader in the US, Nancy Pelosi rebuked the President saying: “One night of airstrikes is not a substitute for a clear, comprehensive Syria strategy.”  She said that Trump must come to Congress to secure authorisation for military action and added that the US must hold “Putin accountable for his enabling of the Assad regime’s atrocities against the Syrian people.”

_100850365_syria_strikes_map_to_edit_v1_640_english-nc

Syrian state TV have confirmed that attacks are taking place but say that Syrian anti-aircraft weapons are engaging the allied planes.  Speaking in Washington, the US Defence Secretary James Mattis said the airstrikes were “decisive action” against Assad’s chemical weapons infrastructure and that “clearly the Assad regime did not get the message” and that the allies were sending a clear message to desist from the use of chemical weapons.  He added that the allies had “gone to great length to avoid civil and foreign casualties” and that the attacks were aimed at the Syrian regime.  This is perhaps also a message that it is desperately trying to avoid any casualties among Russian troops in Syria, which would seriously risk escalating the situation. James Mattis said that there were no indication of allied casualties, adding: “Right now, this is a one-time shot, and I believe it has sent a very strong message,’ perhaps contradicting his President’s comment earlier when he said: “We are prepared to sustain this response until Syrian regime stops its use of prohibited chemical agents.”    General Joseph Dunford, the US Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, speaking after Mr Mattis, said that three initial targets were  a science research facility in Damascus, a storage facility west of Homs and an “important command post” also thought to be a chemical storage. 


It seems that this first-wave of airstrikes are now over and it appears that there will not be anymore immediately.

UPDATE: 1.45pm GMT

afsfsafa

Photo: A cruise missile being launched from a French naval ship


President Trump was quick today to declare “Mission Accomplished” with the airstrikes yesterday evening Washington time – early hours GMT.  He Tweeted: “A perfectly executed strike last night. Thank you to France and the United Kingdom for their wisdom and the power of their fine Military. Could not have had a better result. Mission Accomplished!”  How the President could know that the mission has been accomplished is a mystery to me as the mission was to deter Bashar al-Assad using chemical weapons anymore.  Based on past behaviour, even after airstrikes by Trump’s administration in April 2017, Assad has demonstrated he has no intention of stopping using them on his own people.  It seems to me that all President Trump has achieved is to give his image in military circles, and possibly with his base, a boost – at the cost of antagonising and alienating the Russian government of Vladimir Putin more than it already is with the West.  Mr Trump has also taken the opportunity to wave the banner of jingoistic nationalism, saying he was “so proud of our great military,” and that with more funding it would be “the finest our country has ever had.”  This is the same man, we must never forget, who was so proud of America’s military during the Vietnam war that he wangled his way out of being enlisted several times with suspicious medical conditions.  This is the man who attacks the mothers of dead American Muslim soldiers and attacked Senator John McCain – a Vietnam US Air Force veteran who spent several years as a prisoner of war.


The airstrikes were said to be double those of last April and are the most significant attack on Assad’s regime by Western powers in the seven-year civil war.  Assad responded to the attacks today by saying: “This aggression will only make Syria and its people more determined to keep fighting and crushing terrorism in every inch of the country.”  The official Syrian news agency Saria also added that the airstrikes were “a flagrant violation of international law. The American, French and British aggression against Syria will fail.” President Putin of Russia denounced the airstrikes as “an act of aggression,”  but hopefully with no losses among Russian troops in Syria and the limiting of the airstrikes to chemical weapons sites, the Russian government may find it difficult to retaliate, or it has certainly been significantly reduced. 


There has been wide support for the airstrikes in the West, especially as they were – as German Chancellor Angela Merkel described them – “necessary and appropriate”, including from  Germany and Canada.  There has also been support in Trump’s own party, the Republicans, including from Senator John McCain.  However, others, such as Senator Dick Black haven’t been so generous.  Senator Black Tweeted: “As a Purple Heart Vietnam veteran, I put my life on the line for this country. Sad to hear @realDonaldTrump has chosen to bomb #Syria. America is on the brink of WWIII, have no clear agenda and put our military personnel lives at risk. #Damascus #PeaceForSyria.”  Many others believe that Trump needs to come before Congress to receive authorisation for the use of military force.  Although he is said to have informed  senior Congressional leaders, he did not seek the approval of Congress.  This was also the case with British Prime Minister Theresa May and French President Emmanuel Macron – neither of whom sought the authority to strike from their respective parliaments or citizens.


Conflicting numbers and targets have emerged in relation to the airstrikes with differing accounts from the US, Russia and Syria.  As I wrote earlier in this post the US named three specific locations that were hit by airstrikes.  They were  a science research facility in Damascus and two chemical weapons storage sites near Homs, one of which was also described as an important command post.  The Russian defence ministry were more detailed, though the accuracy of the details are uncertain.  They said in a briefing that “a number of Syrian military airfields, industrial and research facilities” were hit and they had monitored the airstrikes by both the US and UK but not those from France.  They listed some details:

  • 103 cruise missiles were launched, including Tomahawk naval-based missiles as well as GBU-38 guided air bombs fired from B-1B. F-15 and F-16 aircraft launched air-to-surface missiles;
  • Syrian defence systems intercepted 71 of the cruise missiles;
  • Other targets were Damascus International Airport; the al-Dumayr airdrome; the Blai airdrome; the Shayrat air base; and the unmanned Mazzeh airdrome. Only the latter was hit, the ministry said;

  • Alleged chemical weapons facilities near Barzah and Jaramana were “partially destroyed” as 23 of 30 missiles hit the targets.


The figure of 71 cruise missiles may refer to attempts to shoot down missiles as the Syrian regime claim 13 were actually shot down.  Also, these figures have not been confirmed by the United States.  Despite initial reports that three civilians had been killed in Homs by the airstrikes, it seems that there were no casualties on either side – if the Russian defence ministry is to be believed.  It said that “preliminary information” said that no Syrian civilians or military personnel were killed.  This, of course, may change but the Russian defence ministry has no reason to lie about casualties among their ally for the more killed and injured by Western airstrikes the more they would bolster Russia’s anger at the airstrikes happening.  US Defence Secretary said that there had been no losses among allied forces during the airstrikes.


The seeming limited scope of these airstrikes has certainly gone against the rhetoric that Donald Trump has been spouting on Twitter and elsewhere in the last few days.  The President may very well have accepted that increasing the scope of the attacks would do more harm than good – if good is the right word – and may have been taking serious care that his military avoided Russian casualties.  Trump’s administration, however, has demonstrated twice now its willingness to attack the Assad regime if it resorts to chemical weapons use.  The comment in his address to the American people last night Washington time, in which he said “we are prepared to sustain this response until the Syrian regime stops its use of prohibited chemical agents” was perhaps a little ambiguous.  Many misinterpreted it as meaning the airstrikes would begin today and carry on until the regime stops using chemical weapons.  However, others pointed out that until the airstrikes actually stop it is impossible to give Assad a chance to demonstrate he has stopped using them.  As the strikes were limited today to sites connected to Assad’s chemical weapons infrastructure Assad has another chance comply and stop using them.  As I said earlier, however, he has shown no sign of wanting to do that so far in the civil war but this time he will have to accept that the Trump administration has shown it is prepared to attack him more than once.  That may give him pause for thought.

Sources & Further Reading: