TEHRAN – U.S. columnist Stephen Lendman says that “Overnight U.S., UK and French aggression on Syria had nothing to do with the alleged Douma chemical weapons (CW) incident that didn’t happen – and has everything to do with America’s imperial project, along with punishing Syria and Russia for defeating its aims in the country.”

 “The attack flagrantly violated international, U.S. constitutional and its statute laws,” Lendman told the Tehran Times recently.
Following is the complete text of the interview with Stephen Lendman.

Q: What did the U.S., England and France strike Syria? Did the attack have any legal basis, or did the participating countries ignore the intentional law?

A: Overnight, U.S., UK and French aggression on Syria had nothing to do with the alleged Douma chemical weapons (CW) incident that didn’t happen -- everything to do with America’s imperial project, along with punishing Syria and Russia for defeating its aims in the country.

The attack flagrantly violated international, U.S. constitutional and its statute laws. But it doesn’t matter. Washington and its rogue allies do whatever they wish, rule of law principles discarded virtually always.

Q: The attack occurred before the inspection of Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. Why didn’t the U.S. wait for the result of the inspection before launching the strikes?

The U.S. and its allies don’t want anything revealed publicly exposing their illegal premise for attacking Syria.

Russia has indisputable evidence no CW attack occurred in Douma. There’s no evidence for the OPCW to find --no toxic traces, no one ill or hospitalized with CW symptoms, no one dead from CW exposure.

The OPCW largely supports Western interests, so it’s unclear precisely what it will report. Douma medical personnel reported treating no one for CW exposure. Russian toxic weapons experts in Douma found no traces of any toxins or anyone harmed by them.

The U.S. wanted to launch its strikes with allies before OPCW inspectors complete their analysis.

Q: The air attack on Syria was limited. Some argue the limitation was out of fear of the reaction of Russia and Iran. What do you think?

A: I expected a harsher attack, surprised it was limited, but more could come later, following another false flag CW attack, perhaps much tougher than overnight.
I’m extremely disappointed with Russia, leaving Syria on its own to contend with U.S.-led attacks. Russia’s S-400 missile defense systems could have downed all or nearly all the incoming missiles.

Putin let Assad down by not helping him defend his nation against aggression.

Q: Would the launch of airstrikes on Syria change the balance of power in Damascus?

A: The attack changed nothing on the ground. Russia’s intervention changed the dynamic with a small force, defeating Washington’s imperial agenda in Syria, a key reason for the overnight attack accomplishing nothing.

After his outrageous bluster, Trump had to do something. It could have been much worse.