Six Consequences Of US Strike On Syria

Donate

Six Consequences Of US Strike On Syria

A Syrian soldier films the damage of the Syrian Scientific Research Center which was attacked by U.S., British and French military strikes, April 14, 2018. Hassan Ammar | AP

Written by Dmitri Evstafiev; Originally appeared at Eurasia.expert, translated by AlexD exclusively for SouthFront

The strike by the US and its satellites on Syria in the morning of April 14, 2018 became the most acute foreign policy event of recent times. The main political conclusion from this is that the foreign policy of the major powers of the world, that is, the United States, Great Britain, France, Germany and a number of others, in the medium term will be determined not so much by foreign policy logic and classical rules of diplomacy, but by the domestic political context. To a large extent, respect for classical diplomatic decency and the hope of using diplomatic tools and mechanisms as a means of containing destructive tendencies are superfluous.

We will highlight the main political aspects that emerged during the preparation and implementation of the US strike on Syria. They will remain relevant for a long time, and not only in relation to Russia.

First, the situation around Syria demonstrated the limits of American military capabilities. The available forces and means, concentrated in one of the three key regions of the world for America’s interests, have proved sufficient only for a one-time strike of average strength and intensity. The United States conserve resources for a second strike of a slightly smaller impact, but are unable to carry out a military campaign in 7-14 days, in sufficient time for a significant weakening of the enemy, which has developed and qualitatively balanced armed forces. It will take a relatively long time to concentrate forces, where the enemy will have to behave relatively passively and not try to carry out preventive measures of a military-security nature.

It seems that the modern American armed forces are not capable of operations in the format of a “major regional conflict”, which formally remains the basis of US military planning. The American armed forces de facto restructured to operate as a show of force and intimidation.

For this reason, Donald Trump’s announcement of the restructuring of the armed forces and the restoration of American military power can be much deeper and difficult than it looks now.

Second, regardless of the growing internal elite pressure, Donald Trump is creating a system for important political decision making in Washington, built on the concentration of power in his hands. Not only all personally disloyal, but also “doubtful” persons are excluded from the decision-making process. The mechanism of political decision-making, which is close to the individual, that is, built on the dominance of personal relations and sympathies as opposed to institutional influence, is fundamentally contrary not only to the power system that was formed in Washington in the period after 2000, but also to historically established principles.

Note that conditionally Trump’s “sole” decision was still fulfilled, and the number and quality of leaks regarding the decision was moderate, that is, did not go beyond the usual for US policy. Attempts to challenge the decision, both from a political and from a legal point of view, were made after the strike, and have hardly any impact. So far the sole decision-making concern only foreign policy issues, which is probably an element of Trump’s strategic compromise. It is the coalition of decision-making on domestic economic issues (in line with its social stabilisation programme, to which even some members of the Democratic party have joined) in exchange for a free hand in foreign policy.

The very fact of breaking the system of institutional bureaucratic collegiality in formulating decisions is important. This will have significant strategic implications including in terms of building US relations with Russia and other Eurasian countries. These relations are becoming much more unpredictable than ever in history.

Third, the United States were not able to truly draw the support of any Middle Eastern countries for its operations. Even the anti-Assad countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar (from the base where the strategic bombers B1 took off), Jordan or Egypt showed exemplary political restraint even after the fact.

The only major player who publically supported the American action turned out to be R. Erdogan, whose enmity towards B. Assad is deeply personal. For Erdogan such a public statement was a good way to at least partially mitigate the negative relations with the United States. This indicates doubts about the American ability to be an effective stabilising force in the region, but more importantly, explicitly demonstrates the unwillingness of the majority of Arab regimes to play in the region “for escalation”.

If the political dialogue in Syria has any results, conditions will be created for the beginning (initially among the Arab elites) of a broad political dialogue with the participation of extra-regional mediators (Russia, China, India, and possibly some EU countries) on new principles of relations between the countries of the region.

This dialogue can bring the end of political and institutional destruction, linked with the so-called “Arab Spring”.

Fourth, note the apparent lack of economic motivation in the American actions around Syria, in contrast to the situation characteristic of the “zero” years.

The United States presently do not have an economic “agenda” in Syria at all, neither in the short term nor in the long terms. It is doubtful whether the United States have an economically motivated action plan and, in general in the Middle East, as Washington is beginning to speak openly.

The ability of the United States to manage economic processes around Syria and the Eastern Mediterranean Sea is now limited and the conduct of military-security actions did not strengthen them.

The policy pursued by the Donald Trump administration is sharply different from the previously used US models of behaviour in the region. The behaviour of the United States and the model that Trump preaches in foreign policy, and which is based on the priority of the economic component, do not correspond.

This may indicate that the United States is politically ready to play out a scenario of controlled chaos in the Middle East, aimed in the medium term against Iran, and the only factor that still holds Washington from drawing this scenario is the fear of rapprochement between Russia and Saudi Arabia.

Fifth, there is the creation of a “narrow NATO”, that is, a group of nations, which supports the US in everything or almost all issues. This group of nations consists of Great Britain, France, the Netherlands and Canada. This union is rather an informal military-political union, rather than based on an institutional framework, which implies, that in its framework, the United States did not assume any obligations towards its allies.

It is possible such reformation will happen in the Middle East. Donald Trump’s attempts could be called “pragmatic unilateralism”, in which American allies are losing the right to seriously influence Washington’s decisions, obtaining the right to receive dividends, actions in the channels of American politics that they can receive. But in none of the important European countries did the ruling elites have any alternative models of behaviour, except following (albeit with some reservations, as in Germany) in the channels of Washington’s policies.

“Political Atlanticism” is still unshakable, although it is becoming unprofitable economically. This reality should be taken into account. The “collective West” exists politically, that is, on the level of ideological constructs and declarations, but undergoes serious erosion from the operational point of view.

For Russia, this trend is favourable, although it is not necessary to strengthen the ideological consolidation of the “collective West” with excessive rigid propaganda.

Sixth, the situation around Syria has clearly demonstrated the dominance of propaganda motives in Washington’s foreign policy.

The US is confident is its ability to extract maximum image profits from any foreign policy situation. Moreover, it is assumed that no significant propaganda counter-attack on global information platforms can be imposed on them.

And that the US will be able to ensure the dominance of its versions of events, regardless of how it corresponds to reality. The US were able to test for its public opinion the technology of a constructed political reality that partially worked with respect to public opinion in EU countries.

This manifested itself in full in the global media’s coverage of the preparation for the attack on Syria and the attack itself. Regardless of the complete controversy, it was the American-British version of events that dominated. Including the completely detached from reality statements on the effectiveness of the use of missiles.

Attempts to impose on Americans a meaningful counter-narrative, using global communication formats or creating their own channels of such communications, resulted only in a partial impact.

And this applies to the efforts of both Russia and, for example, China.

Dmitri Evstafiev, professor NRU “Higher School of Economics”

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • François

    We are in front of a desperate attempt to reverse the ongoing energetic, and hegemonic decay of the Zionist/US Empire.

    • Rodger

      Take the Netherlands for example, we pay lip service to the US but in the meantime we are integrating our army with/into that of Germany. We will chose EU every time when it really matters.

  • Manuel Flores Escobar

    The fact is that with efficient air defense..USA and allies included Israel have to launch attacks with cruise missile from long distance away from Syrian air space…only in the case of Deir ezzor and east Homs they can do…but there are no air defense system deployed!…Russia should send S-300 to SAA to 2 deploy a ring that will be able to protect all Syrian air space even when it covers areas inside Israel, Jordan and Turkey!

    • You can call me Al

      I wait to see what happens in the next week or so remembering the US has 2-3,000 troops landing in Jordon (near AL-Tanf) …….!!. In Al-Tanf they have hundreds of trained vermin.

      Will the Saudis, Israel, the GCC Countries and these Yanks and terrorists join ?; personally as I have said on numerous occasions, Al-Tanf needs the Father of all bombs NOW.

      • Alberto Campos

        > Al-Tanf needs the Father of all bombs NOW
        And immediately afterwards an official statement: ’’Sorry, it was by mistake’’…

      • dinnedup

        “…trained vermin” indeed. how on the spot you are AI

  • observerBG

    What do you think about this, South Front?

    Putin bows to Trump, ready for deep Concessions

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-18/putin-reportedly-ready-deep-concessions-seeks-deal-trump

    • EoF

      Fake. News.

      • Daniel Castro

        I just realized it was fake news when I read zerohedge on the link… it is not worth clicking…

    • 1691

      I am skeptical when I read zero hedge, Russia insider and veterans today

      • observerBG

        It comes from Bloomberg, not Zerohedge.

    • 1691

      You posted the zero hedge web. Bloomberg … I don’t waste my time with any American “news”.

    • Philippe Bracq

      Zero hedge delirious state.

  • JustPassingThrough

    “Regardless of the complete controversy, it was the American-British
    version of events that dominated. Including the completely detached from
    reality statements on the effectiveness of the use of missiles.”

    Absolutely true. Europe is under the spell of the Ami-Brit version of things. Russohobia is even more rampant than antisemitism, anti-gypsy and anti-refugee rhetoric. And this goes for all of europe including the “famed” neutral democracies.

    • AlexanderAmproz

      “the “famed” neutral democracies”

      I will have said “FRAMED” by NATO neutral Democracies,

      and Populations cheated by MSM bogus informations !

  • Sergey Tokarev

    The most pleasant part of the article is the author. Evstafiev, professor HSU, and at the same time not a Libtard, not fifth-columinst.

  • Daniel Castro

    ” Regardless of the complete controversy, it was the American-British version of events that dominated. Including the completely detached from reality statements on the effectiveness of the use of missiles.”

    I disagree.

    Well, I agree only if this domination reflects the MSM and the elites in UK, French and USA, however I could see even neocon channels in youtube contesting Trump’s narrative. There is channel here called “Hoje no Mundo Militar” (“Today in Military World”), it touts our armed forces perspective of events, which has a huge bias towards USA, the interpretation this channel gave to the attacks is it was a last salvo of western powers in Syria to compensate the fact they’ve lost completely, and Putin was smart enough to not retaliate making the west look like fools. And this channel is so biased they don’t even call him Putin, they call hi The Putin, as if he is some sort of authority like in his own right, like Caesar, or an object.

  • Blucross

    America does hold the leading ‘Social Medias’ and these medias ‘control’ the mindset of many many people, and these many many people influence the leaders of their countries.

    • AlexanderAmproz

      It’s half true,
      maybe it’s time for Europe to remember “Mare Nostrum”, Egypt, Babylone, Iran,
      India, China, Central Asia, and The Silk Road.

      All of them are at the Eurasia development existence origines.
      Shouldn’t forget it’s remembered by every European Capitales Museum master pieces,
      nobody can’t forget !

      Ad on this the different food cultures found on every streets corners.
      Eurasia is very present in every European heart. !

      Europe in-between Gibraltar, Oural and Caucasus isn’t America Fox News and CNN…

      Operation Sarkozy : how the CIA placed one of its agents at the presidency of the French Republic
      http://www.voltairenet.org/article157821.html

      Seventy years of harassing political establishment and people of Europe
      http://www.voltairenet.org/article190171.html

      The NATO campaign against freedom of expression
      http://www.voltairenet.org/article194344.html

  • Marko

    ” The United States presently do not have an economic “agenda” in Syria at all, neither in the short term nor in the long terms….”

    Funny then , isn’t it , that the U.S. occupation in Syria is right where all the oil and gas is located ?

    Stealing other countries’ shit is ALWAYS part of the U.S. agenda.

    • Douglas Houck

      Those oil and gas fields will require $billions to repair and the US has no interest in fixing them, or Raqqa. They want SA to pay for it all.

      Since nobody except the Russian, is going to get equipment into to that area, and the Kurds couldn’t get any of that fuel to market, (like Turkey is going to help them?), those fields are of little value to anyone other than the Syrian government.

      • javier

        yea the neocons want to deprive iran and syria of income/resources

        • Douglas Houck

          Don’t forget the Russians who signed an exclusive contract with Syria’s to rebuild the infrastructure. The US is not going to be there for long.

    • Sinbad2

      The US agenda is controlling energy supplies to Europe, to hold Europe hostage.
      Syria is about stopping Iran from supplying gas to Europe, and Ukraine is about stopping Russia from supplying gas to Europe.

      The USA is not a country, it’s a corporation with a military.

    • Rex drabble

      Trump said,,,We should have TAKEN their oil and you better understand he meant it!!
      If any one thinks Trump is some good guy thats going to adhere to the law theyre dreaming.

  • Hisham Saber

    A lot written, but not much said, I’m afraid.

    The conflict in Syria is all about Israel. There will be a regional war. And when all is said and done, the U.S., U.K., France will be kicked out of the Middle East-Levant, Iraq. Israel will be in a terrible position as it will definitely spill over to them as well. In fact, when all is said and done, Israel’s very continued existence is highly questionable.

    • BMWA1

      Points 2 and 4 also very questionable. In first case Trump is merely conforming to standard US policy. Point 4 is contrary to fact regarding NG pipeline problems and undermining RU in the EU market.

      • pepa65

        I was going to say the same thing! This action illustrates the power of a supranational ‘deep state’ that doesn’t rely on formal international communications, nor on parliamentary/congressional involvement, but a number of nations that are deeply ‘invaded’ decide to work together on totally and obviously false grounds. This was not Trump’s decision per se, although he did go along and executed it.
        As to the fourth point, there is a very clear economic motive. The original plan was to supplant Assad, and that almost worked this time. The whole plan wasn’t executed, because Eastern Ghouta got surrounded just in time. The other economic motive is the sponsoring of a Kurdish state that controls significant oil assets, that will feed resources back into the USA’s pockets.

    • RichardD

      The regional war, instigated and directed by Israel and Jews and their collaborators has been going on perpetually in various forms for Israel’s entire existence of over 70 years. It’s the only way that they keep the Arabs and the rest of humanity from collective action against the Jew’s crimes. The Syria war is just one facet of it’s continuation.

      Only the faltering US veto at the UN is keeping more stringent diplomatic action against Israel from occurring. The rest of the world has turned against the Jew’s crimes. Israel first is being challenged by America First in the US. And Israel’s military actions are being challenged by the Syrian government coalition’s progressing victory over the Jew world order terrorists in Syria. Which will see a deeply ingrained superior conventional and nuclear military alliance in Syria for the foreseeable future that has a strong anti Israel bent to it.

  • John

    The article missed something huge; President Trump is in trouble. He is being relentlessly pursued at home, on a number of topics and I actually think it is effecting his sanity at this point. His strategy of applying force is taking on a circus atmosphere, hardly generating the fear or respect he wishes to create. Third, he is ignoring the explosion that could occur in the country, due to consequences of Russian blood being spilled. Americans do not like a loser and if some people get drilled in military defeat ( loss of personnel and material ), he could have hell to pay and no way out of what his mouth has created. They will be on him. In short, this administration, it’s leader and supporters, are fighting from within fortifications made of glass. My take on it, I wish well to all.

    • Sinbad2

      Trump is irrelevant, if they knocked him on the head tomorrow, Pence would jump in and absolutely nothing would change.

      • Rex drabble

        For sure and Pence wouldnt hesitate.Trump worries me,Pence really scares me and I really mean that!
        He is dangerous.

      • John

        Hello Sinbad. I get you on Trump. What makes a President relevant or irrelevant is not what they do but, how they do it. Mrs. Clinton, if elected, would have gone full bore aggressive, probably almost right from the get go. Mr. Trump is slowly getting into that mode, as he slides into madness ( that is another story, for another time ). Mr Pence, simply put, doesn’t have the persona to get away with it. His support for aggression would be below the minimum required politically. My take on it. I wish well to you.

    • RichardD

      For some reason your reply to me is missing. This is my response that wouldn’t post:

      Evangelicals in the south east still support Israel, that’s about it. Catholics and traditional denomination Protestants much less so. Even if they don’t understand the problems with the Talmud rabbinical ideology. They can see Israel’s endless crimes for what they are.

      The Jew problem in the US is more than money. It’s also numbers and positions. There are more here than anyplace else with the possible exception of Israel. Their culture is parasitical and control orientated. They gravitate to education and then use their higher densities of upper level educated to infiltrate control positions in society in government, finance, media and academia to take over the host society and exploit, vivisect and enslave it.

      They’re repeat offenders who’ve done this over and over again throughout history when given the opportunity. Which has frequently been denied them to miniseries the problems that they cause. Their an internal 5th column detrimental to the host populations.

      • John

        I understand all of that. It is just not enough to carry the day. The support they enjoy now, amongst a tiny section of the population and only at the very top of the economic food chain, will not sustain them. I have seen the change that has occurred, I lived in the midst of it.

        • RichardD

          How do you envision their demise?

          • John

            That is a big, complex question. I shall try to be succinct.

            Israel is under tremendous pressure now, probably more than at anytime in their history ( I know that is saying a lot ). The external pressure combined with weakening external support, is being geometrically amplified by the internal divisions from within, is burning their strength. Modern Israelis are as the elite Americans they strive to direct; they are casualty averse and led by the delusional/corrupt weak. Frankly, the bravado from Israeli leadership is tattle telling on them.

            Thank you for the conversation on this. I wish you well Richard.

  • RichardD

    The article’s author isn’t addressing public perception as part of his perception analysis. The lying Jew media’s echo chamber, amen chorus for the litany of lies being spewed by it’s political puppets is being extensively rejected by a substantial majority of the public.

    This attack has been a complete public relations disaster for the US, France and the UK. With the scammers running these governments repeating the mistakes of the past. And permanently damaging their reputations in the process. With the main target having repeatedly been certified clean by the inspectors, and not even waiting for an investigation of the alleged attack when they easily could of. And with after action inspections by specialists and the media that will and are failing to justify the strikes, and will expose the justification for the entire military operation as a complete fraud.

    There is almost no public support for what the NATO Jew 3 have done:

    This is a recent British poll on attacking Syria:

    “Even though most Britons believe a chemical attack has been perpetrated, only 22% of Britons would support a cruise missile attack against the Syrian military”

    – By two to one, the public oppose missile strikes on Syria –

    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2018/04/12/two-one-public-oppose-missile-strikes-syria/

    The last time a US president tried this, the public opposition coming into congressional offices was almost universally opposed. Nothing has changed, if anything they’re more against it now than they were before:

    “About 60 percent of Americans surveyed said the United States should not intervene in Syria’s civil war, while just 9 percent thought President Barack Obama should act.”

    – As Syria war escalates, Americans cool to U.S. intervention –

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-crisis-usa-poll/as-syria-war-escalates-americans-cool-to-u-

    The Afghan war also has close to zero support in the US. These Jew world order hegemony wars stem from the Jew stranglehold on the politics of the US, France and the UK. Which are 3 out of 5 of the most Jew infested nations on the planet.

    • RichardD
    • Philippe Bracq

      There is no civil war in Syria! This has to be clearly understood.
      There is a relentless terrorist war against the rightful government there, financed by Westen interests.
      Period.

    • John

      This is kind of tough to explain but, I will give it a go. Jewish political influence in the US is based on more or less two things; money and Christian support of Judaism. Israel, after WWII, had a lot of ground level support available . Jews had entered military service, fought, bled died and so forth. Many prison camp survivors entered the US with their families. There was a reconciliation in place between Catholicism and Judaism. There was a Christian recognition in general that did operate with respect toward Judaism. Although they did not embrace each other with blathering love, it was something that worked. In the back of the minds of common Americans, the bottom line is Jesus was Jewish. That gave tremendous underlying support in the direction of Israel.

      In come the morons:

      Starting probably in the 50’s but, more visible in the 60’s, Gigantic social changes began in the US. By now, circa 2018, that social/religious structure has been obliterated. The grass roots set of moral vistas and norms are almost completely gone at this point in time. Hence, the real support and concern for the welfare of Israel is pretty much out through the window. Even the Jews themselves are involved in an interregnum dispute over what constitutes being a Jew. With all due respect, you can’t get anymore blatantly stupid than that. So today, all they have left is money flowing through Congress. With money, the influence is just another sugar high. Without grass root support, the end is always near. The American in general of today, is not going to throw down for Israel. Israel is more on it’s own than it knows. My view of it, I wish well to all.

  • RichardD

    The Russians have found an effective pressure point against the anti Russian vilification and suppression that they’re being targeted with. Which is the Syrian war on Israel’s border, and their progressing victory in it. And with it a shift by regional governments from the Israel/NATO Jew 3 domination of the region. To a Russian led sphere of influence replacing it with a much saner and peaceful development path.

    • Sinbad2

      America would rather die than allow peace in the world, for without war they have no reason to exist.

      • RichardD

        America First, which Trump rode to victory, is all about ending the Jew world hegemony drive paid for with American blood and treasure. The solution is to get rid of Jews.

  • Davki

    There is no such thing as a “collective West”. Just as there is no “collective East”. Even the geographic concept here is erroneous. “The West” is just as diverse and multiple in opinions, actions etc. as “the East”, if not more so. The ad nauseam propagated dualistic rhetoric churned out by Russia, Arab media and their yes-men denizens as on this website is sad and destructive. It has nothing to do with honest criticism of major political decisions but aims to do the same things it supposedly criticises with the signs reversed. So let Russia be the hegemon with its vassals… or China… would we be better off? I don’t think so. We need a coming together of sensible people, not more division and occidentophobic demagogy. Just as we don’t need Islamophobia etc.

    IMO, commentators here are just way too eager for war. Way too eager. They have become what they seemingly criticise. To put it in Arabic:

    فَإِيّاكُمُ وَالْحَرْبَ لَا تَعْلَقَنَّكُمْ وَحَوْضًا وَخِيمَ الْمَاءِ مُرَّ الْمَشَارِبِ
    “Beware Ye of war, don’t let it cling to you. It is a pool of putrid water, bitter beverage”