Counter-propaganda on US strikes in Syria

Reactions from Tehran, Moscow and Damascus on the US missile strikes were as expected. They condemned the strikes that targeted Shayrat airbase near Homs, which came as a response to the mass killings by chemical weapons used by the Syrian regime. This was in the first half of Friday, when people woke up to the surprise of the new US position. Later that day, the tripartite propaganda of Russia, Iran and Syria had showered media and social networks with false news that questioned the fact that the Syrian regime threw poisonous materials on the people of Idlib.

They claimed the opposition had bombed the area, then they fabricated an account that Syrian aircraft had bombed areas of “armed terrorist opposition” but accidentally hit a terrorist storehouse containing chemicals similar to those used previously by Daesh in Iraq. This means the opposition is the perpetrator of the crime of possessing internationally banned chemical weapons. The fabricated story did not last long, except among supporters of Damascus. The propaganda changed the next day to face broad Arab reactions that welcomed the US position. This was a shift from Arab accusations that the administration of President Donald Trump was harassing Muslim refugees and travelers.

In response to the Arab welcome of the US strikes, false news claimed they were merely a play in agreement with Russia. False photos showing some of the planes burned inside concrete shelters yet not bombed were released in order to refute the story of the US strikes. There was also news that acknowledged the strikes but said they did nothing.

The strikes bear political messages directed at Damascus, Tehran and Moscow, but the messages directed at Syrian public opinion come second. The strikes destroyed a few aircraft and killed six regime soldiers, but they will shake the confidence of regime loyalists and give some hope to the opposition after recent political disappointments and military defeats.

But the bombing of Shayrat airbase will not stop the aggression of the military alliance loyal to Damascus, given that it resumed shelling civilians the same day. The strikes will not change the balance of power on the ground, and further US strikes are unlikely because statements by Washington’s ambassador to the UN confined the possibility of military intervention to the Syrian regime using chemical weapons again, which is currently unlikely.

The important thing is that it seems the Trump administration has changed its position and decided to be a party to the Syrian crisis, as it appears from its statements. In the past, the administration said it was only interested in fighting Daesh in Syria. Thus the victory declared by Damascus and its allies seems far away.

A week ago, most regional and international powers had agreed to a solution at Moscow’s will, to Syrian President Bashar Assad staying in power, and to the end of the armed opposition. The chemical attack, as well as other attacks on civilian areas and arrogant statements by Syrian regime officials against the countries of the region, came as a turning point that changed countries’ positions. Once again, the Assad regime has proved it cannot change its behavior.