Russia and the United States clash in Syria

It seems that all masks are off since last night, and the illusions, if someone still had them, have finally disappeared. If we assume that Russian hackers influenced the course of election campaign in the US, then they chose the wrong guy. Americans attacked Syria in response to a recent chemical attack in Idlib province, which, according to the US President, was committed by Syrian government troops. 

It remains completely unclear who is responsible for this monstrous war crime: Assad's soldiers, militants of the opposition, Daesh, or, which also can't be ruled out, a third party (or parties). It's difficult to judge what happened, and it's likely that we'll never find out the truth. But it's hard to believe that Assad, inspired by recent softening of the US position on his political future, decided to destroy this provinces.

Moreover, considering the fact that US President Donald Trump has repeatedly and extremely harshly criticized his predecessor Barack Obama for not reacting at the time when Syrian troops "crossed the red line" on August 21, 2013, in Guta. Chemical weapons were also used then, but the government of Syria denies its involvement in that attack. Does Bashar Assad need to wave a "red rag in front of the bull" and irritate Donald Trump, when his military status is much better than in 2013? What is the point of giving American President, who often fails in domestic politics, a convenient chance to recover using the foreign policy? After all, on March 30, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said that only Syrian people should decide whether Assad should leave or not. But on April 7 the head of US diplomacy announced preparatory work that the US is carrying out to form a coalition to make Assad leave his post. It's hard to believe that over the past eight days Syrian people managed to decide on the fate of their president and secretly notified the US State Department about their decision. Chemical attack in Khan Shaykhun village became one of the turning points of Syrian drama. 

Apparently, Russia and the United States are not destined to become friends, who fight against the Daesh terrorists together and reach compromise over international conflicts. The tale of "friendly Trump", in which many people in Russia wanted to believe, has come to an end. Republicans traditionally have a stricter foreign policy than democrats, and Trump is no exception.

What new escalation in Syria may bring to Russia? If the attack on military airfield in Syria doesn't become a one-off symbolic act of retribution and intimidation, then we must look at things realistically - Russia may face many problems. The continuation of pinpoint attacks by the United States can severely limit the capabilities of Syrian military aviation, which will automatically put an additional burden on the Russian Aerospace Forces and increase the cost of military campaign. Obviously, Kremlin doesn't rule out such scenario, and Russia's intention to strengthen the Syrian army's air defense capabilities clearly shows it. Russia's decision to suspend flight safety memorandum is a clear signal to the Americans. This way, Moscow made it clear that from now on, it hypothetically thinks about direct Russian-American clash.

The US allies in NATO supported Donald Trump's actions. Turkey, France and the United Kingdom expressed their unconditional support. It's noteworthy that even cautious Germany, which refused to participate in the American intervention in Iraq at one time, also openly sided with the US. For Western European countries, it's extremely important to demonstrate their support in the Syrian issue to the US and Trump personally - after Trump criticized the European partners in NATO (primarily Germany), Europeans understand that it would be better to show loyalty. 

Right now the entire world anticipates further actions of the Americans, led by their unpredictable president. Perhaps both allies and opponents of the United States are now asking the same question: "Does Trump have any plan at all?."