Another scenario: What has changed for Russia after the shelling of Syria?
On the night of April 13-14, the armed forces of the United States, Britain and France launched rocket fire on Syrian military and civilian targets. This event had a wide resonance in Russian society. Different opinions were expressed, sometimes diametrically opposed. Let's try to figure out what significance the attack on Syria has for Russia and what changes it has caused or will cause in the future.
How was the shelling of Syria?
A missile attack by NATO forces in Syria was not unexpected. In the West they talked about its necessity. In turn, Russia warned the United States and its allies that our military would respond to the attack. Despite the warning from Russia, the shelling was carried out, but Russia did not respond.
This fact made some Russian cheer patriots rally with the most inveterate Russophobes. In a single rush, they rushed to condemn the Russian leadership in all mortal sins, ranging from cowardice and betrayal of the ally and ending with the inability to confront the West.
But is there any reason to assert that Russia is behaving incorrectly and is not fulfilling its obligations?
Let's recall what the head of the Russian General Staff Valery Gerasimov specifically said about Russia's reaction to the possible attacks by the Americans and their allies in Syria:
Trump promised to strike, and he struck it. But he did it so neatly and delicately that not a single hair from the head of the Russian military fell and could not fall. Not a single Syrian facility that could participate in the fight against terrorists and radicals has been harmed. Trump announced a stunning victory, Assad breathed a sigh of relief, and Russia had no reason to retaliate.
Another important point was that of the 103 missiles launched, 71 were intercepted by the Syrians. The Russian military did not have to rush to the rescue of Syria, it itself did an excellent job. What we could do to protect Syria, we have already done: we have supplied the government forces with the necessary machinery and well trained staff.
Moreover, Russian equipment was minimally involved, for the most part costing Soviet. The old Soviet systems perfectly coped with the task, shooting down American missiles worth up to $ 1,5 million.
Is Russia doing the right thing?
Not only is Syria itself coping well with repulsing attacks, helping Syrian government forces against Western aggression was not initially part of the Russian contingent. Our troops came to the aid of Syria at the invitation of the leadership of this country to help in the fight against ISIS (prohibited in the Russian Federation) and other Islamist armed groups. And Russia successfully coped with this task.
The goals of the Russian military in Syria have now changed. Now, firstly, we need to maintain our presence in the Mediterranean region and the Middle East. And secondly, you cannot allow yourself to be drawn into one of the conflicts taking place on Syrian soil. This is the eternal Arab-Israeli confrontation, and the differences between Shiites and Sunnis, and the dispute over influence in the Middle East between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and the confrontation between Kurds and Turkey, and many other insoluble contradictions.
At the moment, Russia is successfully coping with the tasks that it faces and is acting in accordance with its own interests.
How was the shelling of Syria?
A missile attack by NATO forces in Syria was not unexpected. In the West they talked about its necessity. In turn, Russia warned the United States and its allies that our military would respond to the attack. Despite the warning from Russia, the shelling was carried out, but Russia did not respond.
This fact made some Russian cheer patriots rally with the most inveterate Russophobes. In a single rush, they rushed to condemn the Russian leadership in all mortal sins, ranging from cowardice and betrayal of the ally and ending with the inability to confront the West.
But is there any reason to assert that Russia is behaving incorrectly and is not fulfilling its obligations?
Let's recall what the head of the Russian General Staff Valery Gerasimov specifically said about Russia's reaction to the possible attacks by the Americans and their allies in Syria:
If there will be strikes at objects where Russian citizens are located, then we will shoot down these missiles and will strike at the carriers of these missiles
Trump promised to strike, and he struck it. But he did it so neatly and delicately that not a single hair from the head of the Russian military fell and could not fall. Not a single Syrian facility that could participate in the fight against terrorists and radicals has been harmed. Trump announced a stunning victory, Assad breathed a sigh of relief, and Russia had no reason to retaliate.
Another important point was that of the 103 missiles launched, 71 were intercepted by the Syrians. The Russian military did not have to rush to the rescue of Syria, it itself did an excellent job. What we could do to protect Syria, we have already done: we have supplied the government forces with the necessary machinery and well trained staff.
Moreover, Russian equipment was minimally involved, for the most part costing Soviet. The old Soviet systems perfectly coped with the task, shooting down American missiles worth up to $ 1,5 million.
Is Russia doing the right thing?
Not only is Syria itself coping well with repulsing attacks, helping Syrian government forces against Western aggression was not initially part of the Russian contingent. Our troops came to the aid of Syria at the invitation of the leadership of this country to help in the fight against ISIS (prohibited in the Russian Federation) and other Islamist armed groups. And Russia successfully coped with this task.
The goals of the Russian military in Syria have now changed. Now, firstly, we need to maintain our presence in the Mediterranean region and the Middle East. And secondly, you cannot allow yourself to be drawn into one of the conflicts taking place on Syrian soil. This is the eternal Arab-Israeli confrontation, and the differences between Shiites and Sunnis, and the dispute over influence in the Middle East between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and the confrontation between Kurds and Turkey, and many other insoluble contradictions.
At the moment, Russia is successfully coping with the tasks that it faces and is acting in accordance with its own interests.
Information