Buk-M2 (SA-17) anti-aircraft
missiles
Photo: Leonidl,
|
According to
foreign sources, about two weeks ago, Israel attacked targets in Syrian
territory. These sources say that a convoy of SA-17 anti-aircraft missiles was
attacked en route from Syria
to Lebanon .[1]
Assuming that a
weapons convoy en route from Syria to Lebanon was in fact attacked, what other types of
weapons could Syria move to
Lebanon , and what
ramifications does this have for Israel ? What are the possible reasons
for Syria choosing to move these weapons to Lebanon at this
time?
Background
In recent years,
Syria has been Hizbollah’s main arms
supplier. Hizbollah has received weapons purchased by Syria for its own military, as well as weapons
brought from Iran , with
Syria in this case acting only as a
pipeline. The weapons supplied in recent years have included various types of
rockets – 122 mm Grad rockets and the heavier Iranian-made Fajr-3 and Fajr-5.
Syrian-made 220 mm and 302 mm rockets have also been transferred to Hizbollah,
along with Zelzal rockets and the Iranian-made Fateh 110 (or its Syrian
equivalent, the M600). There have also been reports that Scud missile systems
(Scud B, C, or D) have been supplied to Hizbollah.
Anti-tank
missiles too have been provided, including Kornet missiles, which
Syria acquired directly from
Russia , and anti-ship missiles,
specifically, an Iranian version of a Chinese-made missile. In the realm of air
defense, Hizbollah has apparently equipped itself with shoulder-launched Strela
and Igla missiles. There have also been reports that mobile SA-8 missile systems
were supplied.
Other systems in
Syria ’s possession that would
be problematic for Israel
should they reach Lebanon are the Strelets and the
Pantsyr, both light, mobile air defense systems for point defense. The Strelets
is actually a set of 2-4 Igla or Igla-S shoulder launched missiles, which is
installed on a vehicle. The Pantsyr-S1 is another mobile system for point
defense, and is intended to replace the older Tunguska system. It includes a vehicle carrying a radar,
short range anti-aircraft missiles, and two 30 mm cannons.
Recent
Movement of Weapons
Hizbollah, along
with the Bashar Assad regime, has been involved in the conflict in
Syria since the outbreak of the
uprising. At the same time, it has regularly been reported that weapons were
transferred from Syria to Hizbollah. In particular,
fears have repeatedly surfaced about the possibility that Syrian chemical
weapons would reach Hizbollah.
If this
information is in fact correct, then questions arise regarding recent
developments. Why would Syria move weapons to Hizbollah
precisely when its army is in the midst of heavy fighting on Syrian territory?
Of course, it is possible that the Syrian army sees Hizbollah as an ally that
can aid it in its war and therefore is eager to arm it. Another possibility is
the fear of Israeli intervention in the fighting in Syria, and hence the need to
equip Hizbollah, especially with air defense systems to protect against Israel
Air Force operations over Lebanon and with missile and rocket systems for
deterrence.
A more likely
possibility is that the Syrian army is transferring to Hizbollah systems that it
does not immediately need for its fighting against the rebels, but which it is
interested in keeping on Lebanese territory, where it is safer from rebel
attacks. This could explain the transfer of Scud missiles, which are complicated
to operate and require a large force; it is difficult to imagine that Hizbollah
has the wherewithal to operate these systems. It could also explain the transfer
of air defense systems: since the rebels do not have an air force, there is no
point in jeopardizing the advanced air defense systems located in areas that
might be attacked by the rebels. The same rationale exists for the possible
transfer of chemical weapons from Syrian territory to Lebanon .
The question
remains regarding the usability of the systems in Hizbollah’s possession. Were
they given to Hizbollah so that it could use them, under Syrian orders or of its
own volition, or were they moved to Hizbollah for storage purposes only? The
answer apparently depends on the specific weapon systems. In terms of the
various air defense systems, Hizbollah has an operational need to limit IAF
capabilities over Lebanese territory. Bringing down an Israeli plane over
Lebanon would undoubtedly provide it
with a great propaganda achievement. However, it is not likely that Hizbollah
would be capable of using chemical weapons, and it is even less likely that it
would wish to use such weapons, which would be liable to cause it more serious
political damage than any tactical advantage it could gain from their
use.
Significance for Israel
Advanced air
defense systems in Lebanon
would undoubtedly constitute a serious problem for Israel . The IAF
operates relatively freely over Lebanon today, gathering intelligence about both
Lebanon and
Syria . Until now, Hizbollah has
apparently had very limited ability, if any, to interfere with this activity.
The appearance of air defense systems such as the SA-17 is undoubtedly a red
line for Israel , since their presence will
make it difficult for the IAF to carry out most of its
missions.
Another possible
danger is the appearance of Bastion anti-ship missiles in Lebanon , whether
they are used by Hizbollah or a Syrian team. If the system, if used from
Syria , endangers ships and
coastal installations approximately up to Netanya, it could certainly cover the
entire coast of Israel if
deployed from Lebanon . The fact that the Yakhont is
supersonic and flies at a low altitude would make it very difficult for the
defense systems of Israel navy ships to cope with it.
The entry of this system into Lebanese territory would also certainly constitute
a red line for the State of Israel.
Font: המכון למחקרי ביטחון לאומ[1] Syrian sources claimed that a scientific research facility in Jamraya was attacked, not a convoy of weapons. Syrian television showed photos of an industrial facility that was attacked, as well as photos of destroyed vehicles (which appear to be launch vehicles for SA-8 missiles).
No comments:
Post a Comment