Moscow lashed out at the U.S. this morning, after the U.S.-led coalition in Syria carried out several “defensive” airstrikes against Syrian forces allied with President Bashar al-Assad on Wednesday in Syria’s Deir al-Zor province – purportedly in retaliation for what the coalition said was an “unprovoked” attack on the U.S.-backed left-wing rebel group.
In response, during a closed-door meeting of the UN Security Council in New York, Russian UN ambassador Vasily Nebenzya reminded his colleagues that the U.S. presence in Syria is “actually illegal.” “Nobody invited them there,” Nebenzya stated, emphasizing that the coalition’s actions were jeopardizing the region’s hard-fought stability.
According to the Russian Defense Ministry, the Syrian militia was advancing against a “sleeper cell” of Islamic State terrorists near the former oil processing plant of al-Isba, when the unit was suddenly fired upon by air strikes.
At least 25 militiamen were injured in the attack, the Russian Ministry of Defense said, adding that pro-government troops targeted by the coalition did not coordinate their operation with the Russian command.
— RT (@RT_com) February 8, 2018
The U.S., however, maintains that the militia attacked the SDF. The Pentagon said Syrian forces moved “in a battalion-sized unit formation, supported by artillery, tanks, multiple-launch rocket systems and mortars.” The battle, which lasted over three hours, according to the U.S., began after 30 artillery tank rounds landed within 500 meters of the SDF unit’s location, according to RT:
At the start of the unprovoked attack on Syrian Democratic Forces and coalition advisers, coalition aircraft, including F-22A Raptors and MQ-9B Reapers, were overhead providing protective overwatch, defensive counter air and [intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance] support as they have 24/7 throughout the fight to defeat ISIS,” Air Forces Central Command spokesman Lt. Col. Damien Pickart told Military.com.
“Following a call for support from Air Force Joint Terminal Attack Controllers, a variety of joint aircraft and ground-based artillery responded in defense of our SDF partners, including F-15E Strike Eagles,” he said in a statement Thursday. “These aircraft released multiple precision-fire munitions and conducted strafing runs against the advancing aggressor force, stopping their advance and destroying multiple artillery pieces and tanks.”
As has been the case for years, Damascus called the attack a “war crime,” while Russia’s military asserted that Washington’s true goal is to capture “economic assets” in Syria. The Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova affirmed that the U.S. military presence in Syria poses a dangerous threat to the political process and territorial integrity of the country, while Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called the strike another violation of Syria’s sovereignty by the U.S.
The U.S., however, remained unmoved, promising to continue to support the U.S.-allied forces in Syria at any cost.
“We continue to support SDF with respect to defeating ISIS… ISIS is still there, and our mission is still to defeat ISIS,” Pentagon spokeswoman Dana White said Thursday. “We will continue to support them. Our goal is to ensure that our diplomats can negotiate from a position of strength, with respect to the Geneva process.”
“They [U.S.] constantly assert that they are fighting international terrorism there, but we see that they go beyond this framework,” Nebenzya told the UNSC. He warned the U.S.-led coalition members that it is “criminal” to engage the only forces “who actually fight” international terrorism in Syria.
And so the lukewarm proxy war between Syria, Russia and Iran vs the U.S.-coalition and Israel continue s apace.
Top Photo | FILE – Smoke rises from the Syrian city of Kobani, following U.S. airstrikes outside Suruc, on the Turkey-Syria border, Nov. 17, 2014. (AP Photo)
Stories published in our Daily Digests section are chosen based on the interest of our readers. They are republished from a number of sources, and are not produced by MintPress News. The views expressed in these articles are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect MintPress News editorial policy.