British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson was scheduled to visit Moscow this week. His trip has now been cancelled, partly because he wishes to intensify diplomatic pressure on Russia, but also because he is keen to persuade the new US administration about the virtues of foreign and security policy coordination.
It is tempting to draw immediate conclusions about the US response to the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime in Syria. However, the question is whether the launching of 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at a Syrian air base constitutes Trump’s doctrine for interventions and foreign policy. This is somewhat hard to determine.
The deal to implement a ceasefire across Syria brokered by the US and Russia is a major development in the course of that country’s brutal conflict. It presents a faint glimmer of hope – the first in years – that an end may be in sight to what to date remains this century’s bloodiest conflict.
Putin’s surprise withdrawal is not only to leverage Assad into constructive peace talks. It is also about creating more options for Russia to influence the direction of the military conflict and political transition as things change both in Russia and on the ground.
By claiming to have deployed a sophisticated air-defence system, Russia may be attempting to force the international coalition to think twice before undertaking air strikes in Syria without consultations with Moscow
In his appeal to the House of Commons to extend UK anti-Daesh operations to Syria, the prime minister cited unique RAF capabilities, in particular the Brimstone anti-armour missile and MQ-9 Reaper. What contributions can the RAF bring to the campaign in Syria?
Russia’s direct intervention in the Syrian crisis has attracted a great deal of attention. A detailed analysis of the actual scope of the Russian military deployment in Syria indicates Moscow’s level...