Within the span of one week, two successive events in Syria generated worldwide news and brought the Syrian armed conflict back to the front page of newspapers after months of relative silence.
What seemed like another regular day in Syria’s conflict-ridden landscape, abruptly changed in the early morning of April 4 in Khan Sheikhun, Idlib, as reports came in that the Syrian village had become the subject of an attack with chemical substances. Images of men, women and children suffering from the gruesome effects of a nerve agent – in many cases leaving its victims unconscious, paralysed, with extensive foam on their mouths – swarmed the social media causing worldwide consternation.
As it is widely believed to be caused by an air attack conducted by the Syrian Arab Air force, Russia and the Syrian government strongly denied all accusations, claiming one of their warplanes hit chemical weapon storage inside the village. Their statements soon fed theories of the attack being a ‘false flag’ operation set up by Islamist rebel groups, attempting to lure foreign backers into strengthening their support to the latter again.
It was not much later that US president Donald Trump issued a statement, declaring that the incident was “reprehensible and cannot be ignored by the civilised world”, acknowledging Assad had crossed “many, many lines”, warning of repercussions. Despite the president’s strong words, the general expectation was the aftermath of the attack would gradually fizzle out, only resulting in strict condemnations by a fair share of countries and organisations, marooning in an almost traditional vetoed UN meeting. Few expected that something almost entirely opposite would happen.
Only a few days later, in the early morning of April 7, about 60 Tomahawk missiles were fired from a US navy ship stationed in the eastern Mediterranean, hitting Syria’s Shayrat airbase. Shayrat airbase is considered one of the most active bases of the Russian and Syrian Arab air force which regularly serves as a launching pad for air strikes on IS and rebel factions’ positions in Homs countryside.
First reports described the airbase to be dramatic scenery of destroyed buildings and burning aircraft, however, later that day it quickly became clear the damage was overstated. Footage of the inside of the military airport showed the airstrip to be intact. It seemed the US military didn’t launch its cruise missiles randomly to the airbase as some parts of the military terrain remained untouched. In addition to that, later reports suggested Russia was warned beforehand in order to be able to move away its military gear from the airbase in order to avoid damage.
The final bill of the day ended up with reportedly 7 dead and 25 wounded a number that is pretty low considering the number of missiles that were launched. Any other roundup of material damage is hard to estimate, as no figures are given by Syrian government. Estimates vary from 6 to 9 jets being destroyed or damaged, besides several depots and shelters. Altogether, the amount of damage inflicted could be called significant, hurting Assad’s air force to a certain level. However, it did not cripple it in a way as to prevent it from functioning properly.
The US attack was promptly followed by the statements of several Russian officials. Moscow stated it would call for an urgent UN Security Council meeting, warning that the US strike could provoke negative consequences and undermine efforts to fight terrorism in Syria. Syrian government officials reacted by stating a red line was crossed by the US (voluntarily or involuntarily referring to the red line of the Obama administration and the chemical attack on East Ghouta in 2013).
Pretty straightforward, really
The US attack and the Russian response do highlight certain tendencies that can become clearer in the near future.
First, the missile attack pushed Russia into an uncomfortable position, feeling the need to reaffirm its commitment to the Syrian government, thereby indirectly taking responsibility for the actions of the latter.
Second, President Trump took a drastic shift in his stance on the Syrian conflict, putting the opposition of the US administration to Assad back on the foreground.
Finally, the question of whether both the Khan Sheikhun massacre and the following US missile attack on Shayrat airbase mean an escalation for US and Russia remains – though that probably won’t be the case. Trump’s reaction to the Khan Sheikhun chemical attack was merely a show of force, bringing the US president more in line with the policy of its army and intelligence services. It was definitely not meant to either harm the Syrian government or Russia in a significant way. Neither did Russia interpret it as a declaration of war. For now, it only resulted in strong friction between the two, something which is not uncommon between the two countries.
The US reaction to the Khan Sheikhun massacre can be considered a straightforward move on Syria’s chessboard. It is very unlikely it will evolve into a brutal play with kings and queens. For now, it seems US and Russia will continue putting their pawns back and forth in a conflict that is set to drag on for a long time.
