The anti-terrorist coalition in Syria led by the US must be prepared for direct military confrontation with the superpower Russia, if we take up arms against the government forces of Bashar al-Assad.
Such a signal was filed by Russia after the failure of negotiations with the US on war in Syria.
The Russian defense Ministry in strong language warned Western “bullies” and “Amateurs” that they can’t get away from Russian anti-aircraft fire.
“Any missile or air strikes on the territory controlled by the Syrian government represent a clear threat to the Russian military,” — said the representative of the Ministry major General Igor Konashenkov in a press release.
This message made public last Thursday evening, the case for Denmark. Two Danish F-16 was among the aircraft of the coalition, participated in several operations on 17 September, which destroyed, according Russia, at least 60 Syrian soldiers. USA, Denmark and Australia expressed regret and explained that the pilots hoped to destroy the positions of the “Islamic state” (ISIL, a terrorist organization banned in Russia — approx. TRANS.).
Military logic
But a recent warning has shown that regret is not enough, says expert in foreign policy, Fyodor Lukyanov, Chairman of the Russian Council on defense and foreign policy.
“In essence, the Russian side wants to say that an attack on Syrian troops will be treated as an attack on Russian forces,” — said Lukyanov for Berlingske.
According to him, the warning applies to “all countries operating in the region, if they have the idea to attack the Syrian army. Russia will respond to this with rockets.”
Lukyanov believes that strict application of the reaction to the stalled situation in Syria and the response to the message the American newspaper Washington Post, which, citing sources in the CIA and the Pentagon wrote that to ponder the possibility of limited attacks on government troops to halt bombing of Aleppo.
“Because diplomatic options have been exhausted, the case entered a different logic. Military logic,” says Fyodor Lukyanov.
But the warning from the mouth of the Russian major-General is not the only hostile statement in Moscow in the last days. While Western countries have condemned the Syrian-Russian airstrike, the war in Aleppo occupied a secondary place in the Russian media. Instead, they discussed the words of the American diplomat, who, in the opinion of the Russian government indirectly threatened terrorist attacks against Russian cities.
On this basis, the Ministry of defence concluded that the US lead “terrorist international”.
The toughening of rhetoric
Another sinister move was made on Monday when Russian President Vladimir Putin came out of the Russian-American agreement on the disposal of weapons-grade plutonium in the framework of the disarmament process. According to the Kremlin, the US does not comply with the terms of the contract. So he again entered into force, Russia is demanding the removal of NATO troops from Eastern European countries, the lifting of sanctions and compensation.
These requirements are so far from political reality that themselves act as a special signal, I’m sure Samuel green (Samuel Greene), head of the Institute of Russian studies at the Royal College in London.
“They want to show that at present the Kremlin is not interested in dialogue with the West.”
In recent months, the tone of Russian diplomacy has become much tougher. The press Secretary of the foreign Ministry Maria Zakharova regularly describes the actions of Western governments as “fascist”. While a verbal slap in the face to the West are often designed for an internal audience, says Samuel Greene.
“When it is necessary to give a signal to their own people, used rhetoric, demonstrating the power of the country.”
Mutual problem
Fyodor Lukyanov is also concerned about the harshness of the Russian rhetoric, however, he believes that it is a mutual problem, and recalls that and the West accuses Russia of war crimes in Aleppo.
“It’s frightening rhetoric. But it can be considered a fait accompli. We need to understand the seriousness of the situation and act as discreet as possible”.
Lukyanov and Samuel Greene agree that the entry into direct confrontation with the Western coalition forces would have catastrophic consequences.
In recent months, Russian military experts complain about the incompetence of Assad’s forces. Moscow, with its limited military involvement in the conflict and does not expect that it is in Syria will have the last word, says Samuel Greene.
“The presence in Syria is important, but it is not too large. Confrontation with the US is completely beyond the capabilities of Russia. There is a risk of failure that will trigger something nobody wants. That’s why I think it’s just words. Signal to the Russian population that they have a strong President who can challenge the Americans.”
