Russia
To Send Advanced Anti-Aircraft Missiles To Syria, Warns Israel Of
"Catastrophic Consequences"
25 April, 2018
Israel
continues ratcheting up its rhetoric this week in response to
Russia's Defense Ministry signaling it will likely move forward in
arming Syria with the advanced S-300 missile defense system, bringing
both Israeli and Lebanese airspace to within targeting range of
Syrian missiles.
On
Tuesday Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman said in
unambiguous terms that his country would attack
such missile sites should Russia move forward on supplying them.
Liberman
told Israel's YNet,
"What's important to us is that the defensive weapons the
Russians are giving Syria won't be used against us,"
and threatened
further, "one
thing should be clear: If someone fires on our planes, we will
destroy them."
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has in the past years of war in Syria - of which Israel is a significant player, especially given its longtime support of al-Qaeda linked anti-Assad insurgents to the south of Damascus - made it clear that transfer of the S-300 would constitute a "red line" on which Israel would act.
In
2013, when Russian President Vladimir Putin reportedly first
considered the move, marking a major and exceptionally advanced
update to Syria's current Soviet-era deterrent systems,
Netanyahu warned, "We’ll
destroy your missiles if you deliver them to Assad." He
said that Israel
would hit them before the system came online.
Though
displaying an early reluctance to derail its delicate diplomatic
relationship with Israel, Russia changed its tune on the very
morning after the US-led coalition strike took place overnight on
April 13. Russia’s first deputy chief of staff, Sergei
Rudskoi, said at the time that Russia
would “reconsider” whether to supply the air defenses to Assad -
an issue previously
thought dead as
a result of prior Israeli-Russian summits in Sochi.
However,
multiple international reports now
indicate Russia is likely moving forward with transfer of the feared
system which has a range of up to 150-200 kilometers (or 120
miles max).
Reuters
reports while citing Russia's
main state operated news agency:
Russia plans to deliver new air defense systems to Syria in the near future, RIA news agency cited Russia’s Defence Ministry as saying on Wednesday.
The ministry added it plans to study a U.S. Tomahawk cruise missile captured by Syrian forces in a recent attack, in order to improve Russia’s own missiles, RIA reported.
And
crucially, as Haaretz notes, "With
Putin's S-300, Assad's army could even 'lock-on' IAF aircraft as they
take off from bases within Israel." And
as one Israeli defense analyst put
it, "Israel
should be worried."
But
what's really behind Israel's dire warnings to the world and longtime
threats of acting on "red lines"? It
is certainly not out of concern for acts of aggression coming from
either Syria or Russia, as neither country has attacked Israel in
recent history.
Instead,
we find the opposite: Israel
has attacked Russian allied Syria frequently and with impunity since
at least 2013, and it simply wishes to maintain aerial superiority
unimpeded (and
going back to 2007, when it struck a suspected Syrian nuclear reactor
near Deir Ezzor, as Israeli officials have
recently admitted).
Last
summer, the
head of Israel's air force for the first time openly
acknowledged nearly
one hundred IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) attacks on convoys and sites
inside Syria over the course of the past 5 years. Perhaps
a dozen more have occurred since then, with Syria only very recently
retaliating against Israeli incursions, shooting
down at least one Israeli F-16 jet near the Golan.
Israel also reportedly participated in the US-led missile strikes on
April 13 in the hope of weakening the Syrian Army's clear dominant
trajectory over the armed insurgency.
Indeed,
in spite of over
a hundred unprovoked Israeli attacks, Assad
has not taken the bait of an Israeli desire for escalation for years
now.
While pro-government Syrians have themselves at times complained
about Israel's seeming ability to strike inside sovereign Syrian
territory with impunity, Assad appears to be operating with
the long-game
in mind of "survival now, retaliation later".
It
was clear starting in 2013 that Israel's semi-frequent strikes on
largely non-strategic targets were more about provocation: should
Damascus lob missiles back in Israel's direction Netanyahu would
launch an all-out assault while Syria was at its weakest in the midst
of a grinding and externally funded al-Qaeda insurgency.
Concerning
Syria's current missile defense deterrent capabilities
- though contested
among analysts -
Syria's over 30-year old current deterrent system appears to have
performed well, likely stunning the West and neighboring Israel
(which itself played a part in the coalition attack) as
it reportedly shot
down 71 of the 103 cruise missiles, according
to official Russian and Syrian government sources (Russia
this week has offered
proof that its version is correct,
over and against Pentagon claims that not a single tomahawk was shot
down).
Israeli
military analysts are now themselves quite open about the end-goal
here: it
is all about Israel's aim of maintaining the capability to do
whatever it wants in Syria, without repercussions -
whether international censure or domestic push-back against the Likud
establishment.
One
can look no further than "the centrist" Jerusalem
Post,
whose Deputy Managing Editor Tovah Lazaroff is unusually
candid regarding Israeli aims while citing an Israeli general:
Israel fears the S-300 would hamper its ability to attack military sites in Syria that are dangerous to the Jewish State and would therefore allow Iran to strengthen its military foothold in that country.
"This is by far the most advanced weapons system in air defense in Syrian hands so far," said Brig. Gen. Assaf Orion (ret.), "so theoretically it is an entrenchment to the apparent freedom of action that the Israeli air force enjoys over Syria’s sky.”
Meanwhile,
Russian military sources were quoted
in Haaretz as saying that if
Israel tried to destroy the anti-aircraft batteries—as analysts
have indicated Israel likely would—it would leads to "catastrophic
consequences."
After
Trump's 'one-off' attack on Syria and Russia's non-engagement against
what was in the end a big American fireworks show, many around the
world breathed a collective sigh of relief that World War III had
been avoided... but are we only witnessing a mere prelude to the
final act?
RonPaulLibertyReport
Will Russia deliver a more modern air defense system to Syria after the US-led attack earlier this month? Will NATO be weakened by increased US support for the Kurds? Trump's bombing run over Syria has produced some unintended consequences and facts on the ground.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.