The United States launched a missile strike on Shayrat airbase, located southeast of Homs city, Syria, at dawn local time on Friday, April 7, 2017, in retaliation for a chemical attack on the town of Khan Sheikhun in northern Syria, on Tuesday morning. Tuesday's chemical attack, which prompted the US strike, killed dozens of civilians, including 33 children and 18 women, and sickened hundreds others, according to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. The US, along with several other international powers, was quick to accuse the Bashar Assad regime of carrying out Tuesday's chemical weapons attack.
The US strike, the first direct US military action against the government of Syrian President Bashar Assad since Syria’s civil war began in 2011, is an indication that Washington is bent on restructuring its position on the conflict in Syria. Apparently, the implications of the strike will force all parties involved in the conflict, Russia and Iran in particular, to re-assess their security and political calculations. In other words, the US strike possibly reflects a The US strike, the first direct US military action against the government of Syrian President Bashar Assad since Syria’s civil war began in 2011, is an indication that Washington is bent on restructuring its position on the conflict in Syria. Apparently, the implications of the strike will force all parties involved in the conflict, Russia and Iran in particular, to re-assess their security and political calculations. In other words, the US strike possibly reflects a significant shift in the trajectory of the conflict in Syria.
Precision Targeting
According to a statement from US Department of Defense, the strike was conducted using 59 precision-guided Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles, or TLAMs, launched from the destroyers USS Porter and USS Ross in the eastern Mediterranean Sea. According to several reports, Shayrat airfield in particular was on a list of four options presented by the US military to President Donald Trump. The list proposes other limited and focused strikes against Syrian military targets, including military forces and airports, grounding all Syrian aircraft, or imposing a no-fly zone.
The target was carefully chosen based on its strategic importance as a joint military base used by Russia, Iran and the Syrian regime. Moreover, it was the location from which the regime forces had launched the chemical weapons attack on the town of Khan Sheikhoun on Tuesday morning, and houses 25 per cent of the regime's air capability and the regime's largest formations in Syria's heartland: two squadrons of the regime's Su-22 ground attack aircraft, MIG-23 warplanes, two 3km-long (2 mile) runways, as well as 40 hangars and surface-to-air missile SA-6 SAM missile systems, all of which were destroyed, according to the United States. Moreover, choosing to launch the strike at dawn was aimed at inflicting maximum damage to the military infrastructure of the airbase while minimizing human loss.
It is likely that Washington prepared for the strike only hours after the chemical attack on Khan Sheikhoun. The missiles were launched from two Navy destroyers, the USS Ross and USS Porter, in the eastern Mediterranean. The Pentagon said the strike was deemed successful as it hit all its targets, which can explain why Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov alluded that Washington made the decision beforehand. He said, "I don't know when we will be able to find out how the U.S. made the decision to attack Syria."
Several reports revealed the damage caused by the strike: Syrian warplanes were completely paralyzed, nine aircraft and a number of radars were destroyed, and six people were killed. The toll is expected to rise. However, due to the the large number of missiles launched in the strike, it is likely that the strategic airbase east of Homs is now out of commission. It is also likely that the US strike carried out on Friday was developed in 2013 in the aftermath of the chemical attack on the eastern and Western Ghouta regions in rural Damascus. Former President Barack Obama shelved the plan at the last minute in 2013 after an initiative to dismantle the Syrian regime's chemical arsenal was proposed.
Potential Change
The United States has not used its Airforce, which means that the military assessment of the one-off strike against a single target does not reflect a full US military involvement in the Syrian conflict. Nevertheless, the strike is likely to bring about a change to military and political balances of power, as Washington appears to be using it to send across various messages to the powers involved in the conflict.
The prime target of these messages are the allies of the Assad regime, where the US sought to stress that it is bent on changing its strategy for the Syrian conflict. While Russia criticizes the US decision as too quick, Washington believes that Russia vetoes all international efforts against the Assad regime. This position is evidenced in statements by US officials who said that "the strike was “a proportional response to Assad's heinous act" and even called Russia "to reconsider its continued support for Assad."
Russia announced that it suspended the memorandum of understanding on flight safety in Syria with the United States amid the US missile strike on Syria's airbase. However, it will be hard for Moscow to continue this suspension in the long-term, due, in particular, to its limited available military capabilities in Syria.
Moreover, it appears that the US military intervention was taken out by Russia's calculations, which may possibly force Moscow to reconsider its policy towards the fresh security and political developments of the Syrian conflict.
In addition to the above, the US military strike show that that the US may pursue a new approach to the Assad regime. After it stated that "with respect to Assad, there is a political reality that we have to accept", the recent statements by the US officials indicate that the Assad regime will not have Syria's political future. President Trump described Bashar Assad as a dictator who "launched horrible chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians". However, other parties are expected to exert intense efforts towards a political solution because any large-scale military action by the Syrian regime and its allies will face a strong reaction.
As far as the regional powers supporting the Syrian opposition, Turkey is expected to upgrade its coordination and cooperation with the United States on the expense of the understandings it reached with Russia. This was evidenced in the fact that Turkey has, once again, revived principles it had given up during the talks held in Astana, Kazakhstan, between the Assad regime and the opposition, where it emphasized that the Assad regime will have no future in Syria and that a no-fly zone in northern Syria should be created. Turkey's call can possibly draw positive response in the coming period, especially if Moscow carried out threats to continue its suspension of military coordination and communication with Washington.
To summarize, it is possibly safe to say that the US military involvement in Syria does not appear to be determined. However, it is likely that that the recent US military strike will send straightforward warnings to the Assad regime and its allies, specifically Russia - which is the most important actor, alongside Iran and Hezbollah- that Washington can conduct similar military strikes in response to similar situations. However, there remains the likelihood that the targeted parties will understand the political messages that the strike delivered and reflect that by stepping up their efforts to reach a political settlement to the crisis in Syria.
