Post available to Premium Members only. Please upgrade your account in order to apply.
The West has defended their action with the fact that dozens of civilians were killed in chemical weapons attack on Douma. With at least 25 people killed and more then 500 injured, it led the US and its allies to start bombing, targeting chemical weapon facilities.
Theresa May's decision to launch the Syrian airstrikes before consulting parliament was criticized because it made the action legally questionable. She explained that “This was not about interfering in a civil war and it was not about regime change. It was a limited, targeted and effected strike with clear boundaries that fought to avoid escalation and did everything possible to avoid civilian casualties. This collective action sends a clear message that the international community will not stand by and tolerate the use of chemical weapons."
This incident caused Russian President Vladimir Putin to threaten the US and warn them of consequences over bombing raids. Although, they did not shoot at the US airplanes. Putin added that the strike had a "destructive influence on the entire system of international relations." On Saturday morning, UN Security Council had a meeting to discuss the previous event. Russia’s ambassador to the UN Vasily Nebenzya said that the bombing “makes an already catastrophic humanitarian situation in Syria even worse.” Some think that the bombing legitimizes the continuation of the conflict. They say that it was a violation of international law and that by interfering they jeopardized sovereignty and national integrity of Syria.
For now, it looks like it was a "one-time shot" as Secretary of Defense Mattis said. But things that still remain unclear are: Was the bombing necessary and was there any other way to prevent further usage of chemical weapons?