Trump throwing

On Sunday on the morning of April 9, two days after the shocks of Tomagaki on Syrian air base and two days before departure to Moscow, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson appeared live two talk shows live. He assured the viewers that the United States had no plans for a “violent change of regime” in Syria, and to the question of Russia's involvement in a chemical attack in Khan Sheikhun replied that he did not see evidence, but “it is clear that the Russians were incompetent, and perhaps the Syrians simply outwitted them.” These statements of the Secretary of State contrasted sharply with his previous statements: Russia is either an accomplice in Himatia or is simply not able to fulfill its part of the 2013 agreement on the destruction of Syrian chemical arsenals

The next day, on April 10, having arrived in Italy to a meeting of foreign ministers of the Big Seven countries, Tillerson laid a wreath to the monument to the victims of Nazism in the village of Sant'anna di Staszem. There, in August 1944, the SS men, retreating from Tuscany, killed 560 civilians, including 130 children. The application made after the ceremony contained a transparent association: the Secretary of State promised to call for the response of those who “commit crimes against innocent people”, and “everywhere in the world”. Until now, such promises from officials of the administration Donald Trump had not been heard.

Finally, on April 11, Tillerson stated at a press conference in Lucca that Russia should think about whether the Alliance with the Assad, Iran and Hezbollah regime correspond to its long-term interests and whether it is worth starting to “re-build” relations with the West and its allies in the Middle East.

Mysterious provocateurs

Meanwhile, in Moscow, US Actions in Syria twice commented on Vladimir Putin. On April 11, at a press conference, following a meeting with Italy President Sergio Mattarella, he called a chemical attack in the province of Idlib with a provocation and said that, according to him, “such provocations are prepared in other regions of Syria <...>, where they are going to throw some substance again and accuse the Syrian official authorities of applying.” Those who have committed this provocation and prepares new ones, the President of Russia did not specify, but from his reasoning it followed that Donald Trump pushed some “political opponents” to the retaliation, which “did not disappear and, if something happens, everything would be dumped”.

Later on the same day, Vladimir Putin recorded an interview with Mir TV channel. The correspondent tried to clarify whether the president believes that ISIS is behind the provocation*. “In my opinion, I did not say that it was a provocation from ISIS*, I said that it was a provocation, but I did not say who it was organized. Different options are possible, ”Putin answered mysteriously.

Communicating with journalists on this day, he both times recalled the notorious test tube with a poisonous substance, which was shown in 2003 at a meeting of the UN Security Council, then US Secretary of State Colin Powell, accusing Iraq of hiding chemical arsenals. This can be regarded as a hint that in the case of Syria the CIA acted as a provocateur, especially since Trump himself is convinced: he has many enemies in intelligence.

In Putin’s statements, it is not difficult to see a retreat from the initial statements of Moscow about the American missile blow. In the Foreign Ministry’s statement, for example, the US operation was called an “obvious act of aggression against sovereign Syria”. And according to the President of the Russian Federation, Trump is not so much an aggressor as a victim of a provocation.

Apparently, the Kremlin agitprop received the installation of an event in this way - in any case, the thesis of the “internal enemies”, from which it is necessary to “save” the American president, is found in several servile comments of Russian politicians. For example, Senator Alexei Pushkov expressed himself in the current show of Vladimir Solovyov on the channel “Russia 1”: “Trump's enemies want to make an aggressive president of Obama. And it is very difficult for him to break out of these ticks. ”

External effect

On April 12, events on the Global Syrian Front were unfolded at once on several flanks. By the way, Rex Tillerson was negotiating in Moscow with Lavrov and Putin, the states recorded on the eve of the interview of Donald Trump Fox television, in New York at a meeting of the UN Council of Security Council, once again blocked the draft resolution on Syrian chemical weapons, and in the White House Trump was accepted by the General Secretary of Trump Stoltenberg.

It is not easy to single out the dry residue from Trump's statements that day. The main thing is concluded in the phrase "We do not go to Syria, because, you know, there are some questions." In other words, there will be no expansion of the American military presence in the Arab Republic. However, there will be new impacts of retaliation if Assad does not change his mind. If the previous American President Barack Obama fulfilled his threat in September 2013, after the first use of chemical weapons against the civilian population of Syria, today the situation in this country would be “much better”, Trump believes. “I don’t know what happened, but he did not do this,” said the 45th president about the 44th.

Three and a half years ago, recall, Obama really did not want to get involved in a new conflict. He decided to turn to Congress for the sanction, although according to the law on the military powers of the president he could not do this. It turned out that there is no need to count on the support of the Capitol. The refusal of the sanction of the Congress would become a major defeat of Obama, but Vladimir Putin helped it out: Moscow proposed a plan for the transfer of Syrian poisonous substances under the control of the organization to prohibit chemical weapons (OPCHO) with subsequent destruction. Moscow became the guarantor of the agreement with Damascus. Tillerson now accuses Russia of non -fulfilling this function. The most interesting thing is that in 2013 Donald Trump, then a simple American businessman, but the same active Twitter user, was a categorical and persistent opponent of a missile strike on Syria.

In an interview with Fox, President Trump again spoke with great feeling about “lovely babies tortured by Assad” and that his “fantastic” team was engaged in national security. Putano and vaguely spoke about Russia and Putin: they say, they support evil, and this is very bad for Russia itself, humanity and the whole world. Instead of supporting the bloody regime, Trump believes, Moscow should establish peace in Syria. But what exactly needs to be done for this, the US president clearly does not know.

The most striking place in this interview is the story of how he gave the Start command during lunch with the chairman of China Xi Jinepine. On the outer effect, a volley of “tomahawks” was calculated. According to Trump, the chairman of the SI, who was enjoying the chocolate cake, took a pause for 10 seconds, then asked the translator to repeat the president’s words and finally said: “This is O'Kay.”

General line

From the illusory Russian hoping to save Trump from internal and external enemies, little came out. Tillerson, his mission, also failed. I must admit that the Secretary of State was poorly prepared for negotiations on the Syrian problem. His settlement plan - first the destruction of ISIS*, then the truce and launch of the “political process”, which will allow the people of Syria to determine the fate of Assad and maintain the integrity of the country - looks amateurish. The activity of the head of the State Department is explained by completely different causes of a purely hardware nature.

The touching story of how the first daughter of the country of Ivanka Trump convinced his father to take revenge on the innocently killed Syrian babies is probably true. However, the US President still discussed possible options not with relatives, but with officials responsible for the country's security

After Trump's adviser, General Herbert McMaster, achieved from the Committee of Senior Officials of the National Security Council (SNB) of the “gray cardinal” of the administration of Stephen Bannon (for more details, see NT No. 12 of April 10, 2017), he returned or introduced to the SNB the chairman of the United Committee of General Joseph Danford, the Minister. The internal security of General John Kelly, Minister of Energy of Rick Perry, US ambassador to the UN Nickei Haley, as well as Director of National Intelligence Dan Cows and CIA Director Mike Pompeo. The regiment of the generals arrived in the SNB - now there are four of them there, including Makmaster himself and the Minister of Defense James Mattis. And although the headquarters are still more, judging by the words of McMaster himself, they practically did not participate in the decision on the missile strike on the base of the Syrian Air Force.

The touching story of how the first daughter of the country of Ivanka Trump convinced his father to take revenge on the innocently killed Syrian babies, showing him a shocking video (the British ambassador to Washington Sir Kim Darrok told him about this in his dispatch, and then the eldest son of President Eric confirmed the information), probably truthful. However, the US president discussed possible options for actions not with relatives, but with officials responsible for the country's security.

The “small group” of members of the SNB participated in this discussion, Makmaster said, appearing in front of journalists along with Tillerson immediately after the strike on the Syrian airfield. And then he made a reservation that these were “almost all” members. However, in the very essence of the issue, it is clear that the military owned primarily information and operational plans.

It is characteristic that with all the sympathy of President Trump to the Syrians to him - and no one else from his entourage - it never occurred to the ban on the entry of refugees from Syria to the USA. General McMaster unequivocally stated that this issue was not addressed "at any stage of discussions."

As for Nikki Haley, she, apparently, plays the role of the Ruperation of the General Group in the SNB. Unlike Tillerson, she really likes Sofita lights. Thanks to a series of vivid performances, Haley became a TV star, eclipsing his boss: the Ambassador to the UN is traditionally considered a second person in the US foreign policy hierarchy, but in this case she went to the forefront as a primadon. Haley’s statement was especially loud resonance about changing the position on the Syrian question: the USA, she said, “does not see” the future Syria if Assad remains in power.

Rex Tillerson sensed that he was pushed to the second roles, and forced to leave the shadow. It was then that he stated that the priorities remain the same.

According to Trump, journalists cling to each word of his subordinates and inflate a sensation out of this, but in fact these “small discrepancies” are insignificant. But this, of course, is not a trifle. The fate of Assad is the main stumbling block in Russian-American relations and the main obstacle to an effective war with ISIS*.

It turns out that while the isolationists and globalists surrounded by the American president were engaged in tug of the rope, the military received the exclusive influence on Donald Trump. There is little good in this: the important principle of American democracy is violated - civil control over the armed forces. And for a reason in the presidential draft federal budget, the Pentagon is the only department whose financing is increasing, but the State Department is waiting for the Dragon budget reduction.

And, as you can see, President Trump got a taste: encouraged by the reaction of society and, most importantly, his political opponents, he dropped the Tsar-Bomb to Afghanistan **.

Photo: IVAN Sekretarev/AP/East News

* “Islamic State” (IGIL, ISIS, Daish) - an organization banned in Russia as terrorist.

** On April 13, American aviation during the bombing of IG* positions in Afghanistan used the largest non-core bomb GBU-43 in its arsenal.