Later, the US Central Command acknowledged responsibility for the attack but claimed that the attack was an accident, with the intended target being Daesh militants.
"This mistake could be very costly. Now it is important to find out whether it was intentionally or accidentally," Deputy Speaker of the Russian Senate Ilyas Umakhanov told RIA Novosti.
According to the lawmaker, if it was a mistake it means that the US military lacks professionalism, control and accuracy.
"Or it may have been a deliberate move, in a bid to prevent further advances by the Syrian Army and, what is more, to undermine the Lavrov-Kerry agreement," he underscored.
The senator said that Russia has always insisted and called for support for Syria’s legitimate government in fighting terrorism.
"Now, that the US is making critical mistakes we should have more guarantees," Umakhanov added.
According to the political analyst, Russia should respond to the accident by continuing its policy in the region because "the actions of its allies cannot be justified."
According to analyst Alexander Nesmiyan, the attack was a warning.
"It was a clear warning from the Americans. They’re sending a signal that both the Syrian Army and Daesh are their enemies," Nesmiyan assumed.
"It is also a signal to Russia from Washington. The Russian Defense Ministry has accused the US of not observing the closed provisions of the agreement. The US wants to show that if Russia accepted an agreement with closed provisions Washington will not make excuses for breaching them," he said.
In an interview with RT, political analyst Anton Khashchenko suggested that the attack may be a provocation.
"Some in the US and NATO are not interested in cooperation between Moscow and Washington on Syria. They’re trying to undermine the agreement," he said.
