 Hello and welcome to NewsClick. US, UK and France launched airstrikes in Syria on the 13th of April, targeting what they called Sites of Chemical Weapons Manufacturing. About 100 or so missiles were launched and these strikes have been supported by NATO as well. So to discuss the situation in Syria and the international escalating tensions we have with us today, Prabhi Purkayasa, the editor-in-chief of NewsClick. So Prabhi, the first question is that what really, you know, what is the situation we are heading to today, heading to after these strikes, are we getting closer to a war? Well, you know, this is the difficult question today because obviously airstrikes in Syria against which Russians have already given warnings that they will take action, they will respond, means that we are getting into uncharted territory. This is probably shall we say the most fraught confrontation between two major nuclear powers, United States and Russia in the world, probably after the Cuban blockade which is where the earlier nuclear standoff had taken place. This is the most dangerous point in human history because if it escalates into war between NATO and US, NATO and Russia, China and Iran, NATO on one side, the US on that side and Russia, China and Iran, we are obviously close to a global shall we say end of civilization. So I think we are into a very, very difficult situation as of now. Important part of it is that it does appear that back channel discussions did take place to limit the number of strikes, to limit the areas to be struck and therefore not targeting areas where the Russian forces could be there and Russian soldiers installations could be hit. I think that is one thing that seemed to have negotiated. The second is it is also a very limited strike. We had about 59 missiles hit one of the targets about six or eight months back. This time it is about 100. That seems to be the number that we are seeing and they have also hit limited targets. There are two strikes in homes which is one of the places where they have been arguing there are chemical facilities again completely unproven and the second is near Damascus where again they have argued that the Ghouta strike could have originated from there. So these are the three sites which seem to have been hit. The missile seemed to have come from Mediterranean where the US NATO forces are there. It seems from two ships over there also from Al-Tanaf which is as you know within Syria and it is under US troops occupation NATO occupation. And in fact that is also the other illegal part of it that Syria has not invited them to be there. The US troops are there and why they are there and what authority they are there is open to question. So I think we are seeing a very dangerous escalation but at the moment held back by the fear that it could turn into a general war and therefore both sides at least are limiting the aggression that they are showing. Other part of it I think which is important is that what was not attacked. The Russian air base and Hameem was not attacked the Tartus naval base was not attacked and these are protected with the S 300, S 400 missile intercepted interception systems. So that also seems to have given the NATO forces post that they should not go beyond the point. Then the ones that have been launched a number of them according to Russian sources have been intercepted and this is really using relatively older S 125, S 200 air defense installations that Syrian air force has. So there how many have got through what has been the damage how many people have died are all open to question. Is this just some saber rattling is it sort of trying to make Trump look good for a domestic audience is it something which is to distract attention from the crisis that for instance Netanyahu has in Israel, Trump has in the United States, there is a may be having over there. These are all open questions what's the purpose of the strikes when obviously there is not much of a military purpose as we can see now. Will they escalate further will there be more strikes we don't know at the moment. So I think it's still a wait and watch kind of scenario. What we do see is I think two major escalations which have taken place one is no attempt to get to the base of what the issue was was there really a chemical weapons attack in Guta. Is it true that it was there was an incident chemical weapons incident or release of chemical shall we say gases chlorine sarin all of this are being claimed in Guta or was it a complete manufactured incident A. B if some attack did take place or some release of toxic gases did take place was it because there are also chlorine factories toxic gases factories within the rebels had levels in this case Al Qaeda against whom the United States itself has released advisory saying that for instance in Lib rebels are known to have chemical weapons the US citizens must take precautions shouldn't go to these places shouldn't go to Syria they have also admitted that rebels have been Aleppo for instance use chemical weapons. So having said that why would they decide that they this is entirely a Syrian government operation is not clear OPCW has not investigated this. So there again those kind of issues are there in fact inspectors are supposed to be in Guta just about to be there. So why was this preemptive strike as it were done. So international opinion or international sanction United Nations has not taken a decision. So this is an illegal act of war by what is declared as what is a legal act what is an illegal act. So this is illegal act of war if you look at the domestic laws the US general deposing in front of the congressional committee claimed it was to protect US forces in Syria. Now US forces in Syria are there illegally anyway. So how is that a justification is not clear. The second is what Theresa May did not do Theresa May did not go to parliament and seek approval. So this is again a unilateral decision by the governments without consulting the Congress in the United States or the parliament in the UK of UK. So these are I think violations of domestic laws violation of international laws because this is obviously an act of war by any reckoning the fact it is not spiraled into a bigger confrontation right now is something that that's just as I said does not change the basic illegality of the act. Can it be contained. We have to see. What has been the response of the global community to these strikes now NATO as a whole has not participated in the strike it is really three countries which has participated in the strike. The fact is the global opinion given the fact this is a it's not a bilateral issue it's not an issue between five countries it's or six countries it is really something that confronts the entire globe. The nuclear exchange means the end of human civilization compared to that we seem to be extremely passive the global community all the countries the global media they're all passively reporting this is what the US says Russia does not agree this is what they are going to say and the complete shall be say silence or the consequences of this. So this is I think an unusual situation where the global community as nations seem to be extremely passive and all of us seven billion of humanity who face extinction if a nuclear exchange takes place are also quiet this is very unlike for instance what happened before the Iraq war but there was a massive protest all across the globe about the war in Iraq and said hands of Iraq of course it did go down completely after the invasion took place but nevertheless there was a protest we are entering into a situation where any propaganda by the West is taken as de facto as the truth there is no attempt to investigate that no contrary views are entertained and you have a complete resonance within the global big players in the media that whatever the United States the UK or the NATO powers say is the truth and no evidence needs to be produced. Yeah everyone seems to have accepted that there were chemical attacks in Syria and so the reasoning of these attacks is correct. That it needs to be checked this is true and the second that we shouldn't so cavalierly marching into a situation which can lead to global war this is completely unthinkable and as you can see even countries like India are actually keeping quiet as if it is something it doesn't concern them. So this is the to me the irony of the situation that something that should concern all of us we are so shall be say passive about it so quiescent about it completely complicit with our silence as it were and that I think is something deeply worrying to all of us who at least think that the global community should be much more active in preventing wars. So thank you for joining us in this discussion thank you for watching this click.