It is obvious that as far as the Western media is concerned the old Cold War continues. What a sceptical press poor Mr Putin receives. His support for the embattled Syrian government of Bashar Al-Assad is being blamed for the emergence of Isil, despite the same jihadist group surfacing also in Libya etc. Now that Russian planes are attacking anti-Syrian government forces there are accusations of missed targets, forecasts of big increases in Syrian refugees, and that the main casualties of the air strikes are civilians. This despite the well documented drone mishaps in Afghanistan etc, and just this past week a wedding party in Yemen wiped out by a Saudi air strike that went wrong.

A map appeared on TV the other day portending to show areas under Isil control in Syria, which raises the question that if such knowledge is out there, how come all the air strikes that preceded Russian intervention appear to have had such limited impact: At least, in favour of the Western media have been reports that Isil has expanded rather than contracted throughout the pre-Russian air force intervention.

Maybe this is due to a Western repetitive chorus about “the need to remove Assad”, which translates as regime-change.

There is another opinion regarding all this and it is that the role of world policeman, hitherto taken for granted as being the US (not that the UN has made such an appointment, nor was the post advertised), is now being openly challenged. If there is such a role surely it is one the UN is entitled to, and nobody else.

Ian Johnstone

Peterhead