Syria: U.S. aircraft downs drone operated by “pro-regime forces” in al-Tanf

RSS Feed

Syria: U.S. aircraft downs drone operated by “pro-regime forces” in al-Tanf

June 9th, 2017

Awake Goy

Christof Lehmann (nsnbc) : A U.S. aircraft reportedly shot down an armed unmanned aerial vehicle after it fired on “coalition forces” in al-Tanf, in southern Syria, in the Iraq – Jordan – Syria tri-border region on June 8. The U.S. Defense Department considers the area with undefined parameters as a deconfliction zone, not to be confused with the de-escalation zones established after Russian, Turkish, Iranian and “opposition” talks in Astana.

The “coalition” stated that the air strike was conducted to protect Syrian rebels and coalition forces against Syrian Arab Army and allied forces. A statement was released, saying “The pro-regime UAV, similar in size to a U.S. MQ-1 Predator, was shot down by a U.S. aircraft after it dropped one of several weapons it was carrying near a position occupied by Coalition personnel who are training and advising partner ground forces in the fight against ISIS.”

The engagement follows incidents on May 18 and on June 6. On May 18, according to USCENTCOM, the coalition carried out air strikes against an “Iranian controlled unit” that was “threatening coalition forces” in Al-Tanf, Syria. On June 6, at 17:40 a similar incident occurred, and USCENTCOM claimed again the right to “self-defense”.

The “coalition” claims it merely wants to combat ISIS and that “The Coalition does not seek to fight Syrian regime, Russian or pro-regime forces partnered with them. The demonstrated hostile intent and actions of pro-regime forces near Coalition and partner forces in southern Syria, however, continue to concern us and the Coalition will take appropriate measures to protect our forces. … As long as pro-regime forces are oriented toward Coalition and partnered forces the potential for conflict is escalated. Coalition forces are oriented on ISIS in the Euphrates River Valley. The Coalition calls on all parties to focus their efforts in the same direction to defeat ISIS, which is our common enemy and the greatest threat to regional and worldwide peace and security.”

Asked by nsnbc about the so-called deconfliction zone and the legal status of U.S. forces operating in Al-Tang and southern Syria, U.S. Defense Department spokesman Eric Pahon explained:

“A deconfliction zone is not a line in the sand, and it is not the same concept as the de-escalation zones that have been in the news. Syrian troops can operate anywhere in their country they want. Our actions in al-Tanf are about defending ourselves against an assessed threat which really has little to do with any kind of zone, although the word was mentioned quite a bit, mostly as a convenient unit measure.”

Asked about the legal basis for establishing such a “deconfliction zone”, such as a relevant UN Security Council resolution or other legal frameworks, Pahon invoked a Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Russia instead, saying:

“There is a memorandum of understanting between the U.S. and Russian militaries with the intent to help ensure safety of flight and deconflict air operations to avoid mishaps. Operation Inherent Resolve is a complex, dynamic environment for air and ground operations, with multiple groups fighting in close proximity. As we focus on destroying ISIS, we remain ever-cognizant of the need for constant, regular communication to avoid an action that could result in a strategic miscalculation by any of the actors operating in the battles space”.

Pertaining the concept of self-defense and the legal basis for the presence of U.S. troops in Syria and thereby their presumed right to “defend themselves”, Pahon said:

“U.S. military commanders always retain the inherent right and obligation to exercise the customary international law of right of self-defense in response to a hostile act or demonstrated hostile intent.

Neither Col Joseph Scrocca’s nor Defense Department spokesman Pahon’s statements clarify the legal basis for the presence of U.S. troops in Syria. A legal basis for their presence would, for example, be an authorization issued by the Syrian government, a UN security Council resolution that has been adopted with the concurrent vote of all five permanent UNSC members. nsnbc hopes the Defense Department will clarify questions about the legality of U.S. troops in Syria, and we will be asking the Russian Ministry of Defense for an opinion about the deconfliction zone and the incidents on May 18, June 6, and June 8 in Al-Tanf.

CH/L – nsnbc 09.06.2017