Russia to U.S.: We are ‘One Step From War’

Ask those who supported Mr. Trump during his campaign what caused them to support him, and you’ll hear things like his position on immigration or his non-interventionist, America-first positions as well as his denunciation of international organizations such as the United Nations and Nato. It’s a message that resonated well with his base.

With the attack on a Syrian airbase by the US in response to the use of nerve gas to kill at least 70 Syrians including 20 children, allegedly by the Assad regime, tensions have just been ratcheted up considerably.

The Kremlin has responded angrily:

The Kremlin has warned the US it is ‘one step from war’ over Syria – but the Trump administration hit back by saying it would be prepared to carry out airstrikes again.

In the first direct American raid on Bashar al Assad’s forces, President Trump authorised the firing of 59 cruise missiles at a military airfield.

Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev denounced the US for attacking ‘the legitimate government of Syria’ and for allegedly breaking international law without the approval of the UN.

Mr Medvedev said: ‘This military action is a clear indication of the US president’s extreme dependency on the views of the Washington establishment, the one that the new president strongly criticised in his inauguration speech.’

‘Soon after his victory, I noted that everything would depend on how soon Trump’s election promises would be broken by the existing power machine. It took only two and a half months.

’The last remaining election fog has lifted. Instead of an overworked statement about a joint fight against the biggest enemy, ISIS, the Trump administration proved that it will fiercely fight the legitimate Syrian government’.

None of that is much of a surprise, as Russia is a consistently strong support of the Bashar al Assad regime. With President Trump threatening to attack again if there are more never gas attacks, it’s unlikely that tensions will be reduced anytime soon.

US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, addressed the Security Council in a session that had been called to address this action.

Officials said it was retaliation for Assad’s use of chemical weapons and would ‘deter’ further atrocities. The US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, said that her country had taken ‘a very measured step’.

She added: ‘We are prepared to do more but we hope that will not be necessary.’

She continued by pointing a finger of accusation at the Russian government.

Mrs Haley said the Russian government held ‘considerable responsibility’ for Assad’s use of chemical weapons.

‘Every time Assad has crossed the line of human decency, Russia has stood beside him,’ she said.

He had terrorised his country and shocked the conscience of the world, Mrs Haley added.

‘He murdered hundreds of thousands and displaced millions’.

On Tuesday Assad launched ‘yet another chemical attack, murdering men women and children in the most gruesome way’, Mrs Haley said.

‘Assad did this because he thought he could get away with it. He thought he knew Russia would have his back.’

Mrs Haley said that changed with the American strike: ‘When the international community fails in its duty to act collectively there are times when states are compelled to take their own action.’

The use of chemical weapons against civilians is ‘one of those times’, she said, adding: ‘The moral stain of the Assad regime could no longer go unanswered.

For his part, President Putin expressed his outrage both verbally and in taking military action.

Vladimir Putin yesterday also denounced the US missile strikes as an illegal act of aggression against a sovereign nation.

The furious Russian president responded to the attack against his ally by diverting warship the Admiral Grigorovich to protect the Syrian coast and vowing to bolster Assad’s missile defences against further bombing raids.

He also suspended a military hotline known as the ‘deconfliction line’ which is designed to avoid mid-air collisions and confrontations between Russian and US fighter jets over the war-torn country.

Is the world headed to a renewal of the cold war? Or has it just moved closer to the beginning of World War III? How much of this talk is posturing, and how much represents genuine intentions to escalating hostilities?

And what of President Trump’s non-interventionist policy?

These are all excellent questions, and ones on which the fate of untold numbers of people might be held in the balance.

Source: Daily Mail