There are fears that emerging data on the use of Damascus chemical weapons by the regime in Idlib will entail the beginning of a new stage of the war in Syria.
These events occur when Turkey concluded its operation “Shield of the Euphrates” and is moved away from the hot conflict, which increases the probability of a new dangerous escalation of the war in Syria.
The events that occurred on Tuesday, April 4, appears to result in the change in the US position regarding the situation in Syria. Donald trump in connection with the incident noted that his opinion about the Damascus regime and Assad has changed, the use of chemical weapons is seen as crossing the “red line” conducted by the United States, and it can’t be answered.
Prior to this operation in raqqa gaining intensity, USA, concentrated all his attention on the fight against ISIS (an organization banned in Russia — approx. ed.), tried as soon as possible to achieve this goal, supporting the “Democratic forces of Syria,” from a technical, tactical and logistic points of view.
Against the background of military events on the battlefield, the United States became even less likely to act against Assad and to give signals of willingness to endure his presence in Syria. The use of chemical weapons at this moment can be seen as a tactical error of Assad. But why was she admitted?
Obviously, the Damascus regime has its plans and intentions in connection with the situation in Syria. It should be recognized that Assad himself wants to dominate in Syria and does not want to share power and sovereignty with anyone in any form. Therefore, when the situation allows, Assad is also trying to do different moves in accordance with his game plan.
The Assad regime wants to expand the territory, which he more or less keeps under its control in Western Syria. Idlib, a center of opposition forces, especially after the capture of al-Assad, Aleppo is among the priority goals of the Syrian regime. We can assume that by using chemical weapons Assad planned to spread fear among the population living in the city before in relation to Idlib to begin large-scale operation. This fear can lead to beginning of mass migration from the city.
The Assad regime uses chemical weapons in Syria is not the first time. It becomes clear that after the previous experience, the international community has not demonstrated the expected strong reactions because of the approach of the US and personally, Obama, Assad decided to again resort to this method and check how will react the new us administration.
The most this experiment is likely to be concerned about Russia. Although it helps Assad to expand controlled territory in Syria, through an intense and even disproportionate use of force, it will not approve the use of chemical weapons. Because in the eyes of the US and the international community this situation will weaken the legitimacy of the support that Russia is providing Assad.
In this case, it comes to mind is the possibility that the Assad regime might turn to chemical weapons in Idlib, bypassing Russia. This points to the fallacy of the beliefs that found wide acceptance in Turkey and the international community as a whole. Russia has such a vast influence on the Syrian regime, as expected.
The use of chemical weapons immediately mobilized France, UK and USA and these three countries have been submitted to the UN Security Council, the joint draft resolution to condemn the incident. But the project has encountered the veto of Russia. Russia defends the view that there is an uncontrollable situation, resulting in significant casualties in Idlib, and that could occur as a result of the error.
To anticipate the response to trump’s challenge. On the one hand, the fact that previously, Obama has not shown a strong enough reaction in response to the use of chemical weapons, gave Trump a new reason to criticize Obama. Not surprisingly, if trump will use this card primarily in the internal political purposes, and using Damascus will continue to criticize the Obama administration.
However, this criticism is unlikely to become any radical change of U.S. policy in Syria, for example, will initiate a military operation against the Damascus regime. Indeed, in this case, suffer antiepilepsy Union that occurs between the US and Russia. And this can adversely affect the reasonable and balanced policies that trump wants to build relations with Russia on a global level. Thus, although the “red lines have been crossed”, the reaction of trump must remain at a level that will not create such an imbalance in relations with Russia.
In any case, all these developments should be seen as a first phase of the implementation by Damascus of its objectives in respect of Idlib. The new humanitarian tragedy and the wave of migration on the background of the chaos in Idlib mostly affect Turkey. To prevent these events is necessary to step up diplomatic efforts and coordination with all players.
