Recent incident against Iranian civilian plane may reveal a new military strategy that violates international law
- Last Thursday, Ju ly 23, two American fighters carried out hostile maneuvers against an Iranian civil aircraft at an extremely short distance on the stretch between Beirut and Tehran, in Syrian airspace. Several people were injured. Much more than a mere “mistake”, the American attitude reveals a real military strategy.
The pilot of the Iranian aircraft – flight 1152 of the company Mahan Air – said that, while traveling through Syrian airspace, he had to perform sudden maneuvers to avoid collision with the fighters that approached violently, consequently injuring several passengers. The Iranian pilot claims to have then contacted the American pilots to warn them and ask to keep a safe distance. However, the fighter pilots only reported that they were American military personnel and ignored him, continuing with the maneuvers. The travelers reported that the American fighter was “literally glued” to the Iranian aircraft and the maneuver was so abrupt that they were “thrown” from their seats.
The case generated strong national indignation in Iran, acquiring great repercussion throughout the country. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Seyed Abbas Mousavi said the United States would be responsible for any incident with the plane. In addition, he said that Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations, Majid Takht-Ravanchi, informed the UN’s secretary general, Antonio Guterres, about what had happened. In the same vein, spokesman for the Guardians of the Iranian Constitution, Abbas Ali Kadkhodaei, classified the American action as terrorist and announced that the Iranian government will take appropriate action.
Bill Urban, a spokesman for the US Central Command, commented on the case, saying that American fighters only performed a standard visual inspection from a “safe distance”, which does not seem to match the incident data. The purpose of the inspection, according to Urban, is to ensure the safety of Americans in the coalition forces in the Al Tanf garrison, an American military base near Syria’s borders with Iraq and Jordan, whose aim, according to the Americans, is to train local anti-ISIS fights – however, some national security experts argue that the base is aimed at spying on Iran and avoiding Iranian influence on the region.
In fact, American aircrafts, especially the F-15E Strike Eagles (the same one involved in the incident), based in Jordan, routinely patrol the area for the strategic purpose of keeping away or fighting enemy foreign aircraft and require all planes, even commercials, identify themselves as they pass. What happened with the Iranian aircraft, however, does not correspond to a simple “visual inspection”, since at no time did American fighters contact the civil aircraft to request identification, on the contrary, the communication came from the Iranian aircraft itself, precisely because it was under violent interception.
Iran therefore dismissed the United States’ explanation and classified it as unjustified and unconvincing. “The harassment of a passenger plane on the territory of a third country is a clear violation of aviation security and freedom of civilian aircraft,” said Laya Joneydi, vice president of the Iranian government for legal affairs, according to Iranian media.
At no time the US government apologized or formally lamented the victims who were injured in the incident, showing that American forces in the Middle East must continue carrying out hostile maneuvers without any restrictions. We can relate this increase in aerial violence to the American naval military decay. Recently, maritime tensions between Americans and Iranians have been rising in the Persian Gulf, with an increased Iranian presence in the region through military incursions against American vessels.
Violence through the air can be understood as a strategic choice in view of the impossibility of facing Iran by sea or by land. However, it is not strategic for American interests to face Iranian forces head-on for aerial combat – instead, they invest in piracy tactics in conflict areas. The choice of the location for the maneuvers seems meticulously planned: an area where Washington will always claim “jurisdiction” because of its right to protect the military base. This will probably not be the only incident and soon new episodes will be reported.
Iran has acted correctly in submitting the case to the UN and international law must be applied promptly to punish the American attitude. The fact that American fighters did not contact the Iranian plane previously constitutes a serious violation of international aviation standards and international humanitarian law itself, since it has put the lives of innocent civilians at risk. As long as the UN response is not announced, it is up to Iran to strengthen a defense system against American air piracy, in order to avoid new incidents.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Duran.
And since when does the US give a hoot about any law – international or not, that doesn’t suit it???
The UN, blind in one eye and can’t see out of the other
Too allegorical. How about the UN and it’s US puppet Sec Gen doesn’t want to get expelled from it’s cozy digs in NYC? Sad to say that the UN is no longer relevant.
Pompeo will no doubt issue a communique accusing Iran’s civilian airliner of approaching their F-15s in a hostile and threatening manner.
Like all cowardly bullies, the only thing the Washington Terror Regime understands is a good hard kick in the balls and a healthy dose of its own medicine. This works wonders in improving its manners.
Complaining to the spineless and contemptible UN may be worthwhile for the comic value, but repaying the Exceptional And Indispensable Folk in their own coin tends to be somewhat more effective.
Thus the deliberate murder of 300 people on board the Iranian Airbus was answered shortly after in the explosion over Lockerbie involving a similar number of people.
Wrong wording here:
“the safety of Americans in the coalition forces in the Al Tanf garrison, an American military base near Syria’s borders with Iraq and Jordan”
There are no “coalition forces” in Syria, there are only US invaders (uninvited by the Government of Syria) and ISIS terrorists. Some say the US intruders also qualify as such.
PRESS TV:
Iranian Ambassador visits victims of US plane harassment in Beirut
https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2020/07/27/630521/Iran-plane-harassment-Beirut
Iran’s Foreign Affairs Minister Zarif got the wording right:
“US illegally occupies territory of another State and then harasses a scheduled civil airliner—endangering innocent civilian passengers ostensibly to protect its occupation forces,” the top Iranian diplomat said.
Brazil is a partner of Russia, China, India, South Africa in BRICS, which was set up to counteract western imperial domination of the rest of the world. Why does Brazilian author Lucas Leiroz use US-friendly wording when writing about the far-away countries of Syria and Iran? Who is sponsoring him? Does he get paid by the CIA? Another mole infiltrated into the media of BRICS! It is not worth reading this bullshit stuff that he writes. Phui!
Furthermore, Lucas Leiroz as a Brazilian knows or should know that Brazil lies in South America, while the USA are located in North America. Why does he constantly use the term “America” for the USA?
The American Bullies are in Al Tanf illegally , actually stealing oil from Syria and shifting their proxy soldiers ( Isis ) around to wherever they can stir up a battle so they can lie about what they are doing there . Maybe Mr Putin can get some proxy mercenary soldiers also , to rid Syria and surrounding countries of the plague of murderers , then everybody can get on with their lives .