War & Conflict |Report

Syria strike labelled ‘crime’ or ‘precise and effective’

Talk (1)

MI

Michael Ivanov

"Not only Russia/Syria/Iran say that i..."

Global reaction to the April 14 missile strikes on Syria ranged from strong support to labelling the action a “crime.”

Russia called an emergency session of the United Nations Security Council to condemn the attacks as “aggression”, but this was defeated, with only three members of the 15-seat council voting for it. President Vladimir Putin said: “Russia condemns the attack on Syria, where Russian servicemen are helping the legitimate government in the fight against terrorism, in the most serious terms.” (Financial Times)

Moscow previously claimed that many of the 100 missiles failed to hit their targets or were intercepted by Russian air defences. But the U.S. said it had evaded air defences “to strike every target at the heart of Syria’s chemical weapons program.”

U.S. President Donald J. Trump said the action was “perfectly executed.” He echoed his predecessor George W. Bush, then speaking of the Iraq war, by describing events as “Mission Accomplished.”

Pentagon spokesman Lieut-Gen Kenneth Mackenzie said the strikes were “precise and effective” (NPR). In the American media, of 16 columns written just before the bombing, 10 openly supported the attack while two from the Washington Post opposed the strikes.

These contradicting accounts can be explained by Putin’s desire to present his fellow Russians with an image of Russia as a major actor on the international stage and a crucial power broker in the Syrian conflict, according to Andrea Taylor, an expert on Syria at the Atlantic Council’s Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East, a think tank.

“If we were to ever get to a resolution in Syria, it would have to be reached in a way that Russia … can act like they played an important role in getting to that point,” she told WikiTribune. “Because their reputation and that pride, I think, is very important to Putin himself, largely because of domestic politics and needing to maintain a positive image for his people.”

The fundamental question, according to senior research fellow Ewan Lawson at security think tank Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), is: was the purpose of these strikes to protect civilians in Syria or to punish the Assad regime in order to gain political capital back home?

“What was the strategy here?” he told WikiTribune. “Evidence would suggest these strikes will not deter the regime from using chemical weapons.”

Know a fact to enhance this story? You can edit it

Edit

According to the Kremlin, Putin and his Iranian counterpart, Hassan Rouhani, agreed that the Western strikes had damaged the chances of achieving a political resolution in the seven-year Syria conflict.

“Vladimir Putin, in particular, stressed that if such actions committed in violation of the UN Charter continue, then it will inevitably lead to chaos in international relations,” the Kremlin statement said.

The European Union supported the action, in which two of its members took part. EU High Representative for Foreign Policy, Federica Mogherina, said the union “is supportive of all efforts aimed at the prevention of the use of chemical weapons.” The EU has condemned “the repeated use of chemical weapons” by the Syrian regime.

The German Federal President, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, said in an interview for “Bild am Sonntag” (short preview) that the air strikes were meant as a retaliation for repeated chemical attacks which violated international law. In considering a path to peace for Syria, however, it is necessary “to think beyond today and beyond the next air strike.” Appealing to the greater responsibility of the major powers, Steinmeier called on the U.S. and Russia to make another attempt at a Syrian peace initiative. “Nothing will be achieved without the neighbors in the region, but nothing will begin without the United States and Russia.”

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, described the military action as a crime.

“I clearly declare that the president of the United States, the president of France and the British prime minister are criminals,” Khamenei said, quoted on his Twitter account.

Long-time ally Australia did not take part in the action but its prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, voiced support for any action against the use of chemical weapons. Turnbull said the use of Storm Shadow cruise missiles (CNN) would send a strong message to Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian leader.

“Good souls will not be humiliated,” Assad tweeted after the strikes.

See earlier WikiTribune coverage of Syria

History for stories "Syria strike labelled ‘crime’ or ‘precise and effective’"

Select two items to compare revisions

16 April 2018

13:23:10, 16 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → copy smoothing)
13:11:45, 16 Apr 2018 . .‎ George Engels (Updated → added experts remarks)

15 April 2018

21:43:59, 15 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → style U.S.)
21:25:33, 15 Apr 2018 . .‎ Charles Anderson (Updated → update)
21:24:36, 15 Apr 2018 . .‎ Charles Anderson (Updated → update with kremlin)
17:32:03, 15 Apr 2018 . .‎ Peter Bale (Updated → Accepted)
17:13:51, 15 Apr 2018 . .‎ Ingrid Strauch (Updated → German President's appeal to USA and Russia)
15:00:46, 15 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → bold first par)
14:00:52, 15 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → result of UN Sec Council vote)
13:56:46, 15 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → tweaking description of supportive columns)
12:00:30, 15 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → 10 editorials)
08:32:19, 15 Apr 2018 . .‎ Robin Boardman-Pattison (Updated → Wanted to add American press opinion to their praise of the strikes (and some against))

14 April 2018

18:47:29, 14 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → adding Mackenzie name)
16:40:29, 14 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → NPR link)
16:36:20, 14 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → adding invitation button)
16:32:33, 14 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → summary not appearing)
16:29:09, 14 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → pubbing)
16:28:07, 14 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → link to other)
16:26:42, 14 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → assad link)
16:22:56, 14 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → category again)
16:21:59, 14 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → thumnbail etc)
16:19:40, 14 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → missiles link)
16:14:49, 14 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → Bush link)
16:12:49, 14 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → Mission accomplished)
16:09:50, 14 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → NY Times link)
16:06:07, 14 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → precise and effective)
16:00:18, 14 Apr 2018 . .‎ Angela Long (Updated → first save)

Talk for Story "Syria strike labelled ‘crime’ or ‘precise and effective’"

Talk about this Story

  1. Rewrite

    Not only Russia/Syria/Iran say that is illegal, such voices are in the UK as well:
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/16/labour-releases-advice-casting-doubt-on-legitimacy-of-syria-strikes
    And if we were to analyze the arguments provided by the UK government, there is no alternative conclusion except for the action being illegal (it can be proven by international law and logic, not opinions).
    Nice analysis here:
    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/04/the-british-governments-legal-justification-for-bombing-is-entirely-false-and-without-merit/
    So, instead of saying ‘there are different thoughts’, we could have made a clearer message that UK’s justification does not meet the norms of international law, even though that’s an inconvenient truth these days.

Subscribe to our newsletter to receive news, alerts and updates

Support Us

Why this is important and why you should care about facts, journalism and democracy

WikiTribune Open menu Close Search Like Previous page Next page Back Next Open menu Close menu Play video RSS Feed Share on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Instagram Follow us on Youtube Connect with us on Linkedin Email us Message us on Facebook Messenger Save for Later