Chemical Attack on Town of Khan Sheikhoun in Northern Syria
LAST Tuesday saw the latest escalation of the violence of the Syrian Civil War with the use of a deadly chemical nerve agent on Syrian rebel forces and civilians by the Syrian military. Residents told the New York Times that an aircraft “dropped a bomb on a one-story building”. The bomb sent out a mushroom cloud that stung and burned “like a winter fog”, according to 14-year-old eyewitness Mariam Abu Kahlil.
Hundreds suffered symptoms consistent with a nerve agent, expressing redness of eyes, foaming at the mouth, blue facial skin and lips, shortness of breath and asphyxiation. Opposition-tun health organization and rescue workers claim at least 89 died from exposure to the deadly gas, strongly suspected to be the nerve agent Sarin, including 33 children and 18 women. Another 541 were injured with many in critical condition.
An official statement from the Syrian military denied their use of chemical weapons at any point in history. Russian forces confirmed a Syrian air strike on Tuesday morning, but claimed the attack struck a “large terrorist ammunition depot” on the eastern outskirts of Khan Sheikhoun. However, both of these claims are certainly untrue. The attack the Russians describe would have incinerated Sarin, rendering it completely harmless, according to chemical experts at the British Armed Forces. Furthermore, the US military radar picked up Syrian aircraft signals at 6:37 and 6:46 on Tuesday, along with flashes on the ground, at approximately the same time as the gas cloud was reported by civilians.
United States Retribution: Airstrike on Shayrat Airbase
US President Trump ordered an American airstrike on the Syrian Shayrat Airbase three days after the chemical attack. Some 59 cruise missiles were fired at the base, which stored chemical weapons until 2013, when Assad made a deal with US President Obama to destroy Syria’s chemical arsenal after the Syrian military was accused of using Sarin against a rebel stronghold in Damascus, an attack which killed hundreds. The US military claimed to have severely damaged or destroyed Syrian aircraft and base equipment, greatly reducing the government’s ability to deliver more chemical weapons, taking extreme care to avoid civilian casualties. The Syrian government reported “huge material damage” but few personnel casualties/injuries, nevertheless, Russian forces describe the efficacy of the attack as “extremely low”, claiming that only 23 missiles reached Shayrat.
Impact on Civilians, United States and Russia/Syrian Government
Syrian Civilians: Reluctant to Hope
Civilians interviewed by the New York Times reported feeling reluctant, but hopeful, as the news of the American airstrike on the government poured in. One Syrian computer technician said that “watching a world power taking revenge for civilians against the Syrian regime gave [him] a surge of hope and made [him] a bit optimistic”. But the strike cannot bring back his dead family members, and the questionable motivates of the American president are still troubling. In his speech addressing the attack, President Trump said he launched the strike because he was so moved by images of women and children suffering from poison gas, citing the event as a “horrible, horrible thing” to reporters. “And I’ve been watching it and seeing it, and it doesn’t get any worse than that”, he continued, despite the fact that men, women and children of all ages have been dying in similarly horrible ways for years. Additionally, Trump has offered no long-term solution to the conflict or to significantly intervene with respect to the humanitarian crisis. In fact, Syrians have heard Trump’s fiery condemnations of Muslims and refugees as hotbeds of terrorism, and conclude that they still cannot put trust in help from the United States.
United States and US President Trump: Reversing Isolationism?
President Trump described the attack as a limited measure to deter any future use of chemical weapons by the Syrian military. The degree of this shift in the President’s position on Syria is incredible. Even prior to his campaign Trump had fiercely argued against American action in the war, even after Assad gassed some 1,400 civilians in 2013, and urged President Obama not to take military action on that occasion and many others. Now, Trump blames Obama for his inaction, and suggests that the United States should make a commitment to ending the conflict in Syria. In his words, Trump “[called] on all civilized nations to join us in seeking to end the slaughter and bloodshed in Syria and also to end terrorism of all kinds and types.”
Despite these grand words, Trump has not explicitly suggested a sustained American military intervention and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has downplayed questions about an American role in Syria. In pledging support to the Syrian rebels, Trump will frustrate security hawks within his party, many of which complained that Trump was elected because he had promised to save American soldiers and resources from war.
Russia, Assad, and Russo-American Relations: A Crumbling Detente
Putin rushed to defend Syria against chemical weapons accusations almost immediately after the attack, cementing Moscow more closely than ever to Assad. By championing the Syrian government, Putin appears to have buried the idea of cooperation with the Trump administration toward an end to the conflict, despite the fact that many political analysts suggest that Russia will ultimately suffer from the connection. The notorious autocrat seems to be pursuing a military victory at any cost, contrary to Russian promises of a negotiated settlement to end the war. Additionally, with the next Russian presidential campaign scheduled to begin before the end of the year, Putin will struggle to justify the increasing costs of the war he had originally advertised as quick, cheap and easy to the Russian people. Lastly, Russia has been desperate to rebuild connections with the rest of the world, and in particular as a strong broker in the middle east, ever since Western nations imposed heavy sanctions upon it for its 2014 annexation of Crimea and destabilization of Ukraine. It is for these reason analysts believe that Russia will avoid escalating conflict with the US. However, Putin’s commitment to a regime in the hands of Assad in particular means that the Russian position in Syria will be one of security for the foreseeable future, if not one of complete control.