Новини

European foreign ministers and France’s parliament meet Monday to discuss their response to the joint U.S., French and British strikes on Syria. The military action has sparked sharp divisions, even though French President Emmanuel Macron insisted Sunday night they carried international legitimacy.

EU foreign ministers in Luxembourg and France’s parliament in Paris are expected to question, but not seriously test, the decision by French and British leaders to join Washington in striking suspected chemical weapons facilities in Syria. Some EU leaders, like Germany’s Angela Merkel, have called the military action necessary — and the bigger debate may be on figuring out Europe’s response to Syria’s ally, Russia.

In France, several leading opposition politicians have sharply criticized French involvement in the strikes. But Monday’s parliamentary session on Syria will be limited to a debate only — and French President Emmanuel Macron’s La Republique En Marche party dominates the National Assembly.

During a televised interview Sunday night, Macron said the coalition had “full international legitimacy to intervene” in striking Syria for humanitarian reasons. He called the action a retaliation, not an act of war, and said France had proof chemical weapons had been used by the Syrian government during a recent attack on the rebel-held town of Douma. He also said France has “not declared war on the regime of Bashar al-Assad.”

Macron said he had convinced President Donald Trump to keep U.S. forces in Syria — a version later disputed by the White House — and to carry out only limited strikes.

While Washington and its European allies are united over the strikes, they may be divided over how to proceed.

Macron called Russia “complicit” in the alleged chemical attacks, by using diplomatic means to render the international community incapable of responding to them. But he also said it was important to work together with Russia, Turkey and Iran in finding a solution to the Syrian crisis. Macron and President Trump are due to hold talks in Washington next week.
…

Russia will not delay adopting legislation in response to new U.S. sanctions, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said on Monday, RIA news agency reported.

Senior members of the lower house of parliament have said they are considering legislation to give the Kremlin powers to ban or restrict a list of U.S. imports.

Ryabkov said Moscow was discussing what he called Washington’s abuse of the dollar’s status as the global reserve currency.
…

Prime Minister Theresa May is set to face British lawmakers to explain her decision to launch airstrikes against Syria without a vote in Parliament.

Britain, the United States and France hit targets in Syria Saturday in response to a reported chemical attack in Douma.

Parliament returns Monday after a spring break, and was not consulted about the action. The government is not legally bound to seek Parliament’s approval for military strikes, though it is customary to do so.

May plans to tell lawmakers that the airstrikes were “in Britain’s national interest,” were carried out to stop further suffering from chemical weapons attacks and had broad international support. 

The government says it will seek an emergency parliamentary debate on the airstrikes Monday, though that is unlikely to satisfy angry opposition lawmakers.
…

Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has promised to diversify his nation’s economy and address the needs of its increasingly young population. Mike O’Sullivan reports on the heir-apparent to the Saudi throne’s multination charm offensive in Europe and the United States, which recently wrapped up in Spain.
…

Hundreds of thousands of Catalan separatists rallied in downtown Barcelona on Sunday to demand the release of high-profile secessionist leaders being held in pre-trial detention.

Protesters waved Catalan separatist flags behind a huge banner that read “for rights and liberties, for democracy and unity, we want them back home!”

The demonstration was organized by two pro-independence grassroots groups, the National Catalan Assembly and Omnium, whose presidents are among the nine separatists in prison awaiting trial for their roles in last year’s failed breakaway bid by the northeastern Spanish region.

The regional chapters of Spain’s two leading labor unions, along with other civil society groups, supported the protest despite the complaints from some members who don’t want secession for Catalonia. Barcelona police said 315,000 people participated in the protest.

“The majority of Catalans, regardless of their political position, agree that pre-trial jail is not justified,” said regional UGT union leader Camil Ros. “What we as labor unions are asking for now is dialogue.”

The secession movement in the wealthy region has plunged Spain into its deepest institutional crisis in decades.

Separatist lawmakers defied court orders and held an ad-hoc referendum on independence in October. Their subsequent declaration of independence for the region led to a crackdown by Spanish authorities acting to defend the Spanish Constitution, which declares the nation “indivisible.”

Pro-independence parties retained a slim majority in Catalonia’s parliament after an election in December, but courts have blocked their attempts to elect as regional chief any lawmaker who is either behind bars or has fled the country.

The latest opinion poll published by the Catalan government in February said that support for independence had decreased to 40 percent from near 49 percent in October. The poll surveyed 1,200 people and had a margin of error of 2.8 percent.
…

France is urging Russia to join in renewed peace efforts after Western missile strikes on Syria aimed at punishing Bashar Assad for an alleged chemical attack, while the Syrian leader was said to have appeared unfazed Sunday in a meeting with Russian politicians.

The U.S., France and Britain launched dozens of airstrikes early Saturday at sites they said were linked to a chemical weapons program. Assad and his close ally, Russia, have denied government forces ever used such weapons.

Russian politicians who met with Assad on Sunday said he was in high spirits, while Assad was quoted in state media as saying the Western strikes were based on “lies and misinformation” at the U.N. Security Council.

Dmitry Sablin, a member of the lower house of the Russian parliament who was part of the delegation that met with Assad Monday, said the Syrian leader appeared upbeat and believed the airstrikes would unify the country.

Syrian opposition activists and first responders say a chemical attack on the town of Douma, near the capital, killed more than 40 people on April 7. A week later, the government regained full control of the town following a surrender deal with the rebels there, and on Sunday it deployed another 5,000 security forces in Douma.

Douma was the last rebel holdout in the eastern Ghouta suburbs, the target of a massive government offensive in February and March that killed hundreds of people and displaced tens of thousands.

Syrian officials and state media have boasted that the Western strikes failed, saying that Syrian air defenses intercepted most of the missiles. The front-page headline of the government daily Tishrin reads: “Our heroic army shoots down the missiles of aggression.”

The Pentagon says none of the missiles were shot down.

In an interview published Sunday in the Journal du Dimanche newspaper, French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian reached out to Russia, saying “we should join our efforts to promote a political process in Syria that would allow a way out of the crisis.” French President Emmanuel Macron was expected to strike a similar tone in a televised interview later Sunday.

France has continued to talk regularly with Russia even as East-West tensions have grown. Macron spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday, hours before the Western missile strikes.

British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson told the BBC he hopes there is no need for additional strikes against Syria, but that Britain and its allies will consider further action if Assad uses chemical weapons in the future.

Johnson told the BBC the airstrikes were proportionate and showed “the world has said enough is enough.”

“So far, thank heavens, the Assad regime has not been so foolish to launch another chemical weapons attack,” he said, adding that Britain and its allies “would study what the options were” in the event of another attack.

U.S. President Donald Trump meanwhile defended his use of the phrase “mission accomplished” to refer to the U.S.-led strikes in Syria.

Trump tweeted on Sunday that the mission was “so perfectly carried out, with such precision, that the only way the Fake News Media could demean was by my use of the term ‘Mission Accomplished.'”

“I knew they would seize on this but felt it is such a great Military term, it should be brought back. Use often!” he wrote.

Trump’s use of the phrase Saturday had evoked comparisons with President George W. Bush, who in 2003 stood under a banner that read “Mission Accomplished” as he declared that major combat operations had ended in Iraq six weeks after the invasion. The war dragged on for years.

 
…

Estonia’s largest political party has chosen a new leader, its third one in four years, as it seeks to restore popularity and mend its tarnished image among voters ahead of a parliamentary election next year. 

Delegates for the center-right Reform Party voted Saturday to elect Kaja Kallas. The 40-year-old lawyer and lawmaker at the European Parliament will be the first female leader of a major political party in the Baltic country.

Previous Chairman Hanno Pevkur said in December that he would step down after less than a year in the post.

Kallas is the daughter of former Prime Minister Siim Kallas, who was one of the founders of the Reform Party in the 1990s.

The Reform Party was the top vote-getter in the 2015 election and part of every Estonian government between 1999 and 2016. It held the prime minister’s post between 2005 and 2016 but it saw its popularity wane because of several political scandals. It went into the opposition following a government crisis in late 2016.

Estonia will hold its next election in March 2019. 
…

Thousands of Hungarians protested Saturday in Budapest against what organizers said was an unfair election system that gave Prime Minister Viktor

Orban another landslide victory at the polls after a “hate campaign” against immigrants.

Orban won a third straight term in the April 8 elections after his anti-immigration campaign message secured a strong majority for his ruling Fidesz party in parliament, granting him two-thirds of seats based on preliminary results.

In a Facebook post before the rally, organizers called for a recount, a free media, a new election law, and more efficient co-operation among opposition parties instead of the bickering seen in the run-up to the vote.

Fidesz received 49 percent of national party list votes and its candidates won 91 of 106 single-member constituencies, most of them in rural areas, while leftist opposition candidates carried two-thirds of the voting districts in Budapest.

There was a similar split between ages, with support for Orban’s Fidesz at 37 percent among voters below 30, rising gradually to 46 percent among those older than 50, according to a survey by think tank Median published earlier this week.

In their Facebook post, the rally’s organizers said: “Fidesz’s election system and the government’s hate campaign have pushed the majority into a one-third [parliamentary] minority.”

Protesters gathering outside the Opera House, a 19th-century Neo-Renaissance palace on a majestic downtown avenue, were waving Hungary’s tricolor flag and the European Union flag, accompanied by whistles and horns blaring.

The demonstrators marched toward parliament, chanting: “We are the majority.”

In contrast to Orban’s closing rally in his native Szekesfehervar last week, where the overwhelming majority of supporters were middle-aged and elderly people, the Budapest protest attracted many people from younger generations.

“We are disappointed and I think lots of us are disappointed with the election results, which, I think, were not clean,” said Palma, 26, who declined to give her surname.

Palma, who came to the protest with a friend, said she believed the Hungarian election system had given an unfair advantage to Orban’s Fidesz party. However, she was also displeased with opposition parties.

“They are pathetic,” she said. “It is terrible that they are so weak, unable to reach a compromise, and they kill each other instead of joining forces for us.”

The nationalist Jobbik party and the Socialists, which have the biggest opposition groups in parliament, have said they would join the protest, which was to march to Parliament near the Danube River.

Criticism

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe said the election did not offer opposition parties a level playing field amid a host of problems marring a vote that nonetheless generally respected fundamental rights.

Orban, who has transformed himself from a liberal anti-communist hero into a nationalist icon admired by the far-right across Europe, brushed aside the criticism, telling the OSCE,  “Thanks for the contribution.”

A major opposition newspaper has closed since the election, marking another milestone in the gradual decline of media pluralism in Hungary.

The prime minister projected himself as a savior of Hungary’s Christian culture against Muslim migration into Europe, an image that resonated with millions of voters, especially in rural areas.

But the opposition’s poor showing was at least partly of its own making as rival candidates split the anti-government vote in five districts in Budapest, where preliminary results showed a slim Fidesz victory.

“Zero, zero, zero,” Dia Szenasi, 29, said about the opposition, adding that all leftist parties should have joined forces to have a better chance of ousting Orban.
…

U.S. President Donald Trump spoke by phone to the leaders of Britain and France about the joint air strikes the three nations launched on Syria Saturday morning. 

The White House said Trump spoke with British Prime Minister Theresa May and French President Emmanuel Macron in separate phone calls. The three world leaders each affirmed that that the air strikes were “successful and necessary” to deter Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from further use of chemical weapons on the Syrian people.

Earlier, U.S. President Trump commended Britain and France for the joint air strikes with a tweet that said, “A perfectly executed strike last night. Thank you to France and the United Kingdom for their wisdom and the power of their fine Military. Could not have had a better result. Mission Accomplished!”

The U.S. Department of Defense said the strikes targeted three sites believed to be linked to the production of chemical and biological weapons. The attacks were retaliation for suspected chemical attacks near Damascus last weekend that killed more than 40 people.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley said at an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security Council Saturday that Trump informed her “the United States is locked and loaded” if Syria uses chemical weapons again.

International reaction to the air strikes ranged from support to intense criticism. 

Syria’s Foreign Ministry said it “condemns in the strongest terms the brutal American-British-French aggression against Syria, which constitutes a flagrant violation of international law.”

Hundreds of Syrians gathered around the capital, Damascus, on Saturday, honking car horns, flashing victory signs and waving Syrian flags in defiance of the joint military strikes. Some shouted, “We are your men, Bashar,” references to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Russian President Vladimir Putin described the attacks as an “act of aggression against a sovereign government” and accused the U.S. of exacerbating the humanitarian crisis in war-torn Syria. 

Russia’s foreign ministry said the air strikes were a failure, maintaining the majority of the rockets fired were intercepted by the Syrian government’s air defense systems. 

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said the attacks constitute a criminal act and that U.S., France and Britain will not benefit from them.

“This morning’s attack on Syria is a crime,” Khamenei said on Twitter. “I firmly declare that the Presidents of U.S. and France and British PM committed a major crime. They will gain no benefit; just as they did not while in Iraq, Syria & Afghanistan, over the past years, committing the same criminal acts.”

China’s foreign ministry called Saturday for an independent investigation into the suspected chemical attacks and said a political solution is the only way to resolve the issue. Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said China has consistently opposed the use of force in international relations and that any military action that circumvented the U.N. Security Council violated the basic norms of international law. 

But Britain’s Prime Minister May said there was “no practicable alternative to the use of force” against Syria.

“I judge this action to be in Britain’s national interest,” May said. “We cannot allow the use of chemical weapons to be normalized within Syria, on the streets of the U.K., or anywhere else in the world. We would have preferred an alternative path but, on this occasion, there is none.”

In France, reaction has been mixed. French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said Saturday the joint military action was justified, limited, proportionate and successful. 

But far left and far right lawmakers sharply criticized France’s decision to join the United States in the strikes. 

Conservative National Front leader Marine Le Pen, who lost the 2017 presidential race to Macron, warned via Twitter France risked its status as an “independent power” and said the strikes could lead to “unforeseen and potentially dramatic consequences.” 

Far left politician Jean-Luc Melenchon also denounced France’s participation on Twitter, calling the strikes an “irresponsible escalation” that did not have European or French parliament support.

Germany, Canada, Australia and Japan expressed support for the air strikes. European Council President Donald Tusk said the bloc “will stand with our allies on the side of justice.”

Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lauded the attacks by the U.S., Britain and France on Twitter as proof “their commitment to combat chemical weapons is not limited to declarations alone.”

Netanyahu wrote the air strikes should remind Assad that “his irresponsible efforts to acquire and use weapons of mass destruction, his blatant disregard for international law and his willingness to allow Iran and its affiliates to establish military bases in Syria endanger Syria.”

In Turkey, the air strikes were also well received. 

“We welcome this operation which has eased humanity’s conscience in the face of the attack in Douma, largely suspected to have been carried out by the regime,” Turkey’s Foreign Ministry said. The ministry added that Syria “has a proven track record of crimes against humanity and war crimes.”

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said those who use chemical weapons “must be held accountable.” 

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned all sides must comply with international law and not dismiss Moscow’s warning that air strikes on its ally could lead to war. 

“I urge all member states to show restraint in these dangerous circumstances and to avoid any acts that could escalate the situation and worsen the suffering of the Syrian people,” Guterres said in a statement.
…

Moments after President Donald Trump concluded his seven-minute broadcast Friday announcing the start of precision airstrikes on Syrian government facilities associated with the development of chemical weapons, loud explosions shook Damascus.

Among the sites struck in a coordinated operation by U.S., French and British forces shortly before dawn prayers was a scientific research center on the outskirts of the Syrian capital, a chemical weapons storage facility near Homs and a nearby command post, the Pentagon said.

There were also reports by political activists that the Syrian Army’s 4th Armored Division, an elite formation commanded by President Bashar al-Assad’s brother, Maher al-Assad, as well as the Republican Guard, were also hit in the strikes. But it remains unclear if they were struck by French and British manned aircraft and cruise missiles rather than by the U.S. military.

From the point of view of those on the receiving end of the one-night operation, the military retaliation by the Western powers may have seemed anything but restrained.

​Restrained strike

The strike, intended to show Western resolve in the face of what Trump called persistent violations of international law by Assad, was larger than last year’s, when the United States fired 58 cruise missiles at Syria in retaliation for a purported chemical weapons attack by government forces on a rebel-held town in the north of the country.

This time about twice the number of cruise missiles were launched by the United States in response to last Saturday’s alleged chemical attack by Assad on the town of Douma just outside of Damascus, in which at least 40 people died and hundreds were sickened.

But the coordinated strike, which included missiles fired from fixed-wing aircraft as well as from warships, has left some analysts puzzled, questioning the limited nature of the punitive raid.

“To many people’s surprise this was somewhat limited. We were expecting at least more airfields, ground force and naval bases to come under attack,” said Arash Aramesh, a national security and foreign policy analyst.

WATCH: U.S. Defense Secretary Mattis Briefs Reporters in Syria Strikes

Speaking in Washington as the operation was close to concluding, U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis appeared somewhat at pains to explain what the objective had been, saying it focused on degrading the Syrian government’s chemical weapons program only.

“We confined it to the chemical weapons-type targets. We were not out to expand this, we were very precise and proportionate, but at the same time it was a heavy strike,” he said.

In London, Britain’s Theresa May also emphasized that the retaliation was focused on Assad’s chemical weapons and ensuring a stop to the “erosion of the international norm that prevents the use of these weapons.” In a television broadcast, May said: “This is not about intervening in the civil war. This is not about regime change.”

She added: “It is about a limited and targeted strike that does not further escalate tensions in the region and that does everything possible to prevent civilian casualties.”

WATCH: President Trump Announces Strikes Against Syria

Too limited to deter?

Some critics question whether the scale of the reprisal may have been too limited to act as a deterrent. Asked whether he could guarantee Assad wouldn’t use deadly poisons again, Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon, “nothing is certain in these kind of matters.”

U.S. officials later highlighted Trump’s statement that the three Western allies were willing “to sustain this response until the Syrian regime stops its use of prohibited chemical agents.”

For Steven Bucci, a former senior Pentagon official and a visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a Washington-based think tank, the U.S. president was “sending a message that this isn’t just firing and forgetting and everyone drives home. Clearly, he’s prepared to continue this for some length of time.”

Bucci believes the retaliation has the potential to force Assad to forgo the use of chemical weapons.

“It appears from very initial reports that we’re hitting some very specific targets and facilities that seem to be connected to the production, development, and usage of chemical weapons,” he said. “What may change Assad’s behavior is removing the tools with which he’s been using these horrible things. That’s kind of what you have to do — you can’t just stomp your feet and wag your finger. You have to force him to stop.”

PHOTOS: US, France and Britain Hit Syrian Chemical Facilities

Republican Senator John McCain also highlighted the promise of sustainability. He said: “the United States and our allies have the will and capability to continue imposing those costs, and that Iran and Russia will ultimately be unsuccessful in protecting Assad from our punitive response.”

There were concerns before the punitive strike of a Russian military response. Earlier this week Russian officials warned their forces in Syria would shoot down Western missiles and may even target the planes and ships launching them. On Thursday, a senior Russian official started to walk back that threat, saying the Kremlin would protect Russian personnel on the ground.

That message appeared to have been heard in Washington. 

Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman, General Joseph Dunford, who took part in the briefing about the raids alongside Mattis, said the targets had been chosen to “mitigate the risk of Russian forces being involved.” Dunford said “normal deconfliction channel was used to deconflict airspace” with Moscow, but that the United States did not share with Russia what sites would be targeted.

Neither Washington nor Moscow want to see an escalation of the overall long-running conflict in Syria, say analysts. Trump has already indicated he would like to withdraw the estimated 2,000 U.S. ground troops in northern Syria, where they’ve been assisting Syrian Kurds to defeat Islamic State militants. 

“We’ll be coming out of Syria very soon. Let the other people take of it now,” the U.S. leader said earlier this month.

On a cost-benefit analysis the Kremlin has more to lose from any escalation — or a prolonging of the 7-year-old, multisided Syria conflict now that their longtime ally Assad, thanks to Russian and Iranian military assistance, has swung the battlefield decidedly in his favor and has all but won the civil war. Any major escalation risks reversing the military dynamic, say analysts.

William Gallo contributed to this article.
…

Western warplanes and naval vessels fired a barrage of missiles at three Syrian chemical weapons sites, the opening salvo in what could be a sustained campaign against the government of President Bashar al-Assad and his supporters.

U.S. military officials said the bombardment, a coordinated effort involving both Britain and France, began at 9 p.m. EDT Friday and rained down more than 100 cruise missiles on Syrian facilities in the capital, Damascus, and the city of Homs.

“Right now, this is a one-time shot,” U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told Pentagon reporters late Friday, cautioning more strikes could be in the works.

“That will depend on Mr. Assad, should he decide to use more chemical weapons in the future,” Mattis said.

WATCH: U.S. Defense Secretary Mattis Briefs Reporters in Syria Strikes

The decision to strike, made after consultations between Washington, London and Paris, came after military and intelligence officials concluded the Assad government was indeed responsible for a chemical weapons attack on the town of Douma last Saturday that killed more than 40 people, including women and children, and sickened hundreds more.

​Use of chemical weapons

U.S., British and French officials have expressed a high degree of confidence the attack on Douma by pro-Assad forces used chlorine gas, and that it also likely used another chemical agent, possibly sarin.

Syrian officials have continually denied their forces used chemical weapons. And Russia, which has backed President Assad since before the start of the conflict in Syria, alleged early Friday that the attack was staged by Britain, a charge rejected by both Britain and the United States.

Still, following the strikes, Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. Anatoly Antonov warned the United States, Britain and France would face consequences.

“Our warnings have been left unheard,” Antonov said in a statement posted on Twitter.

“A predesigned scenario is being implemented,” he said. “Insulting the president of Russia is unacceptable and inadmissible.”

WATCH: President Trump Announces Strikes Against Syria

Addressing the American public after ordering the strikes, President Donald Trump said he was compelled to act after witnessing what he described as “the crimes of a monster” in Douma.

“The purpose of our actions tonight is to establish a strong deterrent against the production, spread and use of chemical weapons … a vital national security interest,” Trump said.

“We are prepared to sustain this response until the Syrian regime stops its use of prohibited chemical agents,” he added.

​Russian support for Assad

Despite such confidence, other U.S. officials remained wary, warning before the strikes that while Syria’s use of chemical weapons cannot be tolerated, much more is at stake given the backing the Syrian government gets from Moscow.

“This is a chess game and the Russians are ratcheting up the pressure,” a U.S. official told VOA on the condition of anonymity given the sensitivity of the situation.

“They’re playing dirty,” the official added. “We need to think two or three steps ahead.”

Complicating any U.S. response is the presence of Russian and Iranian forces on the ground in Syria, one official saying it has “grown and matured” since the United States carried out airstrikes again the Syrian government last April after a sarin gas attack on the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun.

​Trump: Russia responsible

In his remarks, Trump said he holds Russia directly responsible for the attack on Douma, saying Moscow failed to live up to its 2013 promise to guarantee Syria eliminated its arsenal of chemical weapons.

“No nation can succeed in the long run by promoting rogue states, brutal tyrants and murderous dictators,” the U.S. president said. “Russia must decide if it will continue down this dark path or if it will join with civilized nations.”

British Prime Minister Theresa May also blamed Russia for thwarting diplomatic efforts to put an end to the use of chemical weapons in Syria.

“There is no practicable alternative to the use of force to degrade and deter the use of chemical weapons,” May said in a statement. “We cannot allow the erosion of the international norm that prevents the use of these weapons.”

Long-term impact of strikes?

While military officials are still assessing the effectiveness of the strikes, there are growing questions about the long-term impact.

“Strategy hasn’t been this administration’s strong suit — Assad and Putin aren’t going to flinch fast and will easily endure military strikes,” Brett Bruen, a former director of global engagement at the White House, told VOA.

“This only works if they can keep up strong diplomatic pressure on Syria, Russia,” he said. “Otherwise, they will worsen our position and the situation on the ground.”

Brian Katulis at the Center for American Progress, is more hopeful.

“This is a very focused strike for one purpose to make sure that countries around the world will not use weapons of mass destruction on a regular basis,” he said. “I think that’s what the president is trying to do and I think he did the right thing.”

U.S. defense officials said Friday they did not consult their Russian counterparts about the strikes, or notify them in advance, though they did use existing lines of communication to de-conflict the airspace to prevent any accidental incidents between U.S. and Russian planes.

​Targeted strikes

Defense officials said the U.S.-led strikes did encounter some initial resistance from Syrian air defense systems, but that it appears Russian defense systems did not engage.

The first target, they said, was a research center involved in the development and production of chemical and biological weapons.

The two other targets, to the west of Homs, Syria, included storage facilities for sarin gas, other chemical weapon precursors and equipment, as well as a key command post.

“We selected these specific targets both based on the significance to the [Syrian] chemical weapons program as well as the location and the layout,” said U.S. Gen. Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “We did not select those that had a high risk of collateral damage and specifically a high risk of civilian casualties.”

Steve Herman at the White House; Katherine Gypson and Aru Pande in Washington.

 
…

The United States, Britain and France, launched military airstrikes in Syria that targeted a scientific research center, a chemical weapons storage facility and another storage facility that also included an important command post.

U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis said the “decisive” efforts were intended to send a “clear message” to the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for its suspected chemical attack against civilians last week and to deter him from doing it again.

Mattis said at a briefing at the Pentagon late Friday that the targets were selected to inflict “long-term degradation” and “maximum damage” to Syria’s stockpile of chemical weapons.

WATCH: U.S. Defense Secretary Mattis Briefs Reporters in Syria Strikes

The defense secretary said he is confident that chlorine was used in the chemical attack in the city of Douma last week that killed at least 40 people and sickened hundreds. He said he was also “not ruling out” the possibility that sarin was also used.

Mattis said the poison gas Assad said he had gotten rid of “still exists.”

The Syrian government has repeatedly denied any use of banned weapons.

General Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said more details about the strikes will be available Saturday morning.

Associated Press reporters saw smoke rising from east Damascus and a huge fire could be seen from a distance to the east. Syrian television said the attacks targeted a scientific research center in Barzeh, near Damascus, and an army depot near Homs.

Syrian media reported that air defenses had hit 13 incoming rockets south of Damascus.

WATCH: President Trump Announces Strikes Against Syria

US to sustain pressure

Earlier Friday, U.S. President Donald Trump said the United States was prepared to sustain pressure on Assad until he ended what the president called a criminal pattern of killing his own people with internationally banned chemical weapons.

Trump singled out Syria’s biggest international supporters, Russia and Iran, for failing to stop the Syrian regime’s use of banned chemical weapons.

“Assad’s recent attack and today’s response is a direct result of Russia’s failure to respond,” Trump said.

Congressional support

Congressional leaders are supporting the president’s decision to launch airstrikes in retaliation for an apparent chemical attack against civilians — although there are some reservations.

House Speaker Paul Ryan is praising Trump’s “decisive action in coordination with our allies,” adding, “We are united in our resolve.”

Senate Armed Service Committee Chairman John McCain is applauding the airstrikes but said “they alone will not achieve U.S. objectives in the Middle East.”

Top Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer is calling the airstrikes appropriate, but said “the administration has to be careful about not getting us into a greater and more involved war in Syria.”

And House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said, “One night of airstrikes is not a substitute for a clear, comprehensive Syria strategy.”

​Not about regime change

British Prime Minister Theresa May said in her country Saturday, according to Reuters, that the attack was “not about intervening in a civil war. It is not about regime change. It is about a limited and targeted strike that does not further escalate tensions in the region and that does everything possible to prevent civilian casualties.”

“We have to remember this is not an attack to institute regime change,” said Brian Katulis of the Center for American Progress. “Bombs from the sky is very different than boots on the ground. … This is a very focused strike for one purpose: to make sure that countries around the world will not use weapons of mass destruction on a regular basis. I think that’s what the president is trying to do and I think he did the right thing.”

Steven P. Bucci, a retired Army Special Forces officer and former top Pentagon official who is a visiting fellow at The Heritage Foundation’s Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, said the strikes may put a dent in Assad’s ability to use chemical weapons against Syrians.

“What may change Assad’s behavior is removing the tools which he’s been using,” Bucci said. “That’s kind of what you have to do. You can’t just stomp your feet and wag your finger. You have to force him to stop.”

Lawrence Corb with the Center for American Progress told VOA that the participation of Britain and France in the strikes may cause Russia to have some “second thoughts” because “the last thing the Russians want is to provide an excuse for the United States and its NATO allies to get involved (in Syria) because (Russia’s) objective is to keep Assad in power.”

Katulis said he does not expect Russia to react to the strikes “as long as Russian soldiers are not harmed in any way” and the attacks are not “close to Russian assets.” He said he thought the U.S. and its allies stopped the strikes “just to make sure” that the U.S. “deconflicted with the Russians, that we communicate our intent very clearly and we didn’t start World War III by accident.”
…

The United States and its European allies on Thursday discussed ways to effectively stop Syria’s government from using chemical weapons to kill rebels and civilians opposed to President Bashar al-Assad. VOA’s Zlatica Hoke has more.
…