My thoughts on the Syrian airstrike #3

After America "emptied its pocket," it's time for Russia's response to find out what the political effectiveness of US actions is. American actions and reaction to them make us wonder about the political feasibility of a missile strike. American actions and reaction to them make us wonder about the political feasibility of a missile strike of The US: Will the United States be able to restore the broken balance of power in Syria or did they open the door to a new confrontation?

America does not have strong alliances on the Middle East, especially after its conflict with Turkey, as well as involvement in conflicts between allies in the region, or the so-called crisis in the Persian Gulf and the consequences of the "Arab spring". Russia, on the contrary, has achieved a powerful presence in Syria along with its ally Iran and develops relations with Turkey against the backdrop of tensions between the latter and the United States.
America made great efforts to calculate the military consequences of its attack on Syria, but political forecasts were not so accurate and convincing. The US political and military leadership was in a difficult situation, but did not provide any strategic solutions that could prevent the US from reducing its influence in Syria and the region as a whole, while Russia became a significant figure in the US military and political calculations.
As for possible actions by Washington after the missile strike, they are very limited. Either the United States will continue to follow this policy, which will cause even greater confrontation, test the American allies and test the military capabilities of America, and deprive it of most of its advantages, or it will stop and retreat. In any case, America will be considered the main loser, especially if the Syrian regime again casts doubt on the American theory of deterrence.
The political effectiveness of the American strike seems to be zero, and the only result of it was that it narrowed the possibilities of the US because of the confusion in the decision-making process and the weakness of the political maneuver that preceded the strike.

source: Hazem Ayad, As Sabeel