Former Navy chief: 'We have answers to the Yakhont'
Every time I post about Iran smuggling weapons to Hezbullah via Syria, a weapons system that figures prominently in the post seems to be the
Yakhont land-to-sea missile, a missile for which Israel is presumed to have no answer. Except that former Israel Navy chief Eliezer Marom says that
Israel has defenses in place against the Yakhont.
Describing the Yakhont as the most advanced missile of its kind in the
world, Marom said the West does not know very much about the weapon,
which flies at low altitude “right over the sea,” reaching speeds of
between Mach 2 and Mach 3 (up to three times the speed of sound).
With
most other missiles in the Yakhont’s group achieving subsonic speed at
most, the Yakhont represents a new type of threat, giving the navy
between half and a third of the time to respond compared to other
threats, Marom said.
He warned that no defense is foolproof.
“Israel
has answers for these missiles, and these are being developed all of
the time,” Marom, who completed his term as navy chief in 2011, added.
“The more advanced the missile is, the less percentage of defenses
available. This is a big challenge to the navy.
Additionally, with a range of 300 kilometers, it can reach every location on the Israeli coast.”
Should
Hezbollah come to possess an operational arsenal of Yakhont missiles,
it would be able to target Israeli gas drilling rigs in the
Mediterranean, civilian shipping, and ports.
Err.... Those answers don't sound really definitive, do they?
Labels: Hezbullah, Iran, Israel Navy, Lebanon, Syria, weapons smuggling, Yakhont land to sea missile
Hezbullah upgrading missile capabilities in Lebanon by transfers from Syria
The Wall Street Journal reports that Hezbullah is continuing to upgrade its missile capabilities in Lebanon by
transferring sophisticated new missiles from Syria.
Some components of a powerful antiship missile system have already been moved to Lebanon, according to previously undisclosed intelligence, while other systems that could target Israeli aircraft, ships and bases are being stored in expanded weapons depots under Hezbollah control in Syria, say current and former U.S. officials.
Such guided weapons would be a major step up from the "dumb" rockets and missiles Hezbollah now has stockpiled, and could sharply increase the group's ability to deter Israel in any potential new battle, officials say.
The movements appear to serve two purposes.
Iran wants to upgrade Hezbollah's arsenal to deter future Israeli strikes—either on Lebanon or on Iran's nuclear program, U.S. and Israeli officials say. In addition, these officials said they believe the transfers were meant to induce Hezbollah to commit to protect Syrian President Bashar al-Assad as well as supply lines used by both his regime and Hezbollah.
Israel struck inside Syria at least five times in 2013, seeking to take out systems bound for Hezbollah without provoking a direct confrontation.
U.S. and Israeli officials say the airstrikes have stopped shipments of ground-to-air SA-17 antiaircraft weapons and ground-to-ground Fateh-110 rockets to Hezbollah locations in Lebanon. Some originated from Iran, others from Syria itself.
Nonetheless, as many as 12 antiship guided-missile systems may now be in Hezbollah's possession inside Syria, according to U.S. officials briefed on the intelligence. Israel targeted those Russian-made systems in July and again in October with mixed results, according to U.S. damage assessments.
The U.S. believes Hezbollah has smuggled at least some components from those systems into Lebanon within the past year, including supersonic Yakhont rockets, but that it doesn't yet have all the parts needed there. "To make it lethal, a system needs to be complete," said a senior defense official.
Israeli security analyst Ronen Bergman told the New York Times that Hezbullah has also been transferring
SCUD-D missiles that are capable of striking deep into Israel.
Hezbollah, which is also Lebanon’s strongest political party, has a
network of bases that were built inside Syria, near the border with
Lebanon, to give the group strategic depth and to store the missiles,
Mr. Bergman said. But with a nearly three-year insurgency threatening
President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, an ally of Hezbollah, keeping the
missiles in Syria is no longer as secure, Mr. Bergman said.
The missiles being moved, he said, include Scud D’s, shorter-range Scud
C’s, medium-range Fateh rockets that were made in Iran, Fajr rockets and
antiaircraft weapons that are fired from the shoulder.
Some of you may recall that the United States expected (and urged) Israel to
attack Syria in 2006. Of course, we didn't. That turns out to be an
even bigger mistake than we first thought.
Mr. Bergman said that on the first day of the war between Hezbollah and
Israel in 2006, the chief of the intelligence agency Mossad at the time,
Meir Dagan, advised the government not to start an attack on Hezbollah
in Lebanon without first hitting the militia’s bases in Syria, which
were built on the strategy that Israel would not dare to strike Syria.
The bases were believed to contain much of Hezbollah’s long-range
missile capability, Mr. Bergman said.
Mr. Bergman’s account corroborated one given by a Syrian military
officer in December 2012, at a time when rebels seemed to have momentum
in their advances on Damascus.
The officer, who spoke over Skype from Damascus, said he no longer
supported the government and wanted to defect but was waiting for the
right moment, in the meantime acting as an informant for the rebels. He
said government forces were dismantling strategic weapons and sending
them to two locations “for safekeeping”: the coastal province of Tartus
that the government holds and south Lebanon, where Hezbollah holds sway.
The weapons, he said, were being sent in tractor-trailers with special
coolers. The officer said his information came from another officer who
was loyal to the government and with whom he had close relations, and
from his own limited observations of the trucks being used to move the
weapons.
I wonder why we haven't heard any stories about the IDF sabotaging these weapons. Maybe they're hoping the Syrian rebels will do it for them.
Labels: Hezbullah, Lebanon, scud missiles, Syria, Yakhont land to sea missile
Targeting Israel
Israel is being targeted all over the world. Soccer Dad has a summary.
1) Targeting Israel in Syria
First the sequence:
a) Israeli Airstrike in Syria Targets Arms Convoy, U.S. Says by Isabel Kershner and Michael Gordon - January 30, 2013
Israeli warplanes carried out a strike deep inside Syrian territory on Wednesday, American officials reported,
saying they believed the target was a convoy carrying sophisticated
antiaircraft weaponry on the outskirts of Damascus that was intended for
the Hezbollah Shiite militia in Lebanon.
The American officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said
Israel had notified the United States about the attack, which the Syrian
government condemned as an act of “arrogance and aggression.” Israel’s
move demonstrated its determination to ensure that Hezbollah — its arch
foe in the north — is unable to take advantage of the chaos in Syria to
bolster its arsenal significantly.
b) Israel Bombs Syria as the U.S. Considers Its Own Military Options by Michael Gordon, Eric Schmitt and David Sanger - May 3, 2013
Israel aircraft bombed a target in Syria overnight Thursday, an Obama administration official said Friday night, as United States officials said they were considering military options, including carrying out their own airstrikes.
U.S. apologized for leaking details of Israel. US
officials told that they review the matter.The leak forced assad to
react harshly.
— chico menashe (@chicomenashe) May 19, 2013
c) Israel Airstrike Targeted Advanced Missiles That Russia Sold to Syria, U.S. Says by Michael Gordon - July 13, 2013
Israel carried out an air attack in Syria this month that
targeted advanced antiship cruise missiles sold to the Syria government
by Russia, American officials said Saturday.
The officials, who declined to be identified because they were discussing intelligence reports,
said the attack occurred July 5 near Latakia, Syria’s principal port
city. The target was a type of missile called the Yakhont, they said.
d) Some Syria Missiles Eluded Israeli Strike, Officials Say by Michael Gordon - July 31, 2013
American intelligence analysts have concluded that a recent
Israeli airstrike on a warehouse in Syria did not succeed in destroying
all of the Russian-made antiship cruise missiles that were its target, American officials said on Wednesday, and that further Israeli strikes are likely. ...
The officials who described the new assessment declined to be identified because they were discussing classified information.
On four separate occasions this year, administration officials talking
to Michael Gordon (and other reporters) of the New York Times revealed
information about Israeli striking Syria. In three of the cases it's
acknowledged explicitly that official speaking to the Gordon would not
identify him or her self. Yet only once did the United States apologize.
Still, in three separate instances the administration deprived Israel
of deniability about the strike. The most recent case, suggested that
Israel would strike Syria again. The suggestion hardly something that
helps Israel.
Last year in the wake of reports of the Stuxnet virus damaging Iran's
nuclear facilities, a report in the New York Times had the administration boasting of its efforts to create the virus. However there were some reported problems with the virus. Then the administration blamed Israel.
An error in the code, they said, had led it to spread to
an engineer’s computer when it was hooked up to the centrifuges. When
the engineer left Natanz and connected the computer to the Internet, the
American- and Israeli-made bug failed to recognize that its environment
had changed. It began replicating itself all around the world.
Suddenly, the code was exposed, though its intent would not be clear, at
least to ordinary computer users.
“We think there was a modification done by the Israelis,” one of the
briefers told the president, “and we don’t know if we were part of that
activity.”
Mr. Obama, according to officials in the room, asked a series of
questions, fearful that the code could do damage outside the plant. The
answers came back in hedged terms. Mr. Biden fumed. “It’s got to be the
Israelis,” he said. “They went too far.”
It's unclear who leaked this story to the New York Times, but recently the Justice Department has been investigating Gen. James Cartright
for leaking the information about Stuxnet. There is no reporting
suggesting that the leakers about the Israeli attacks on Syria are being
investigate. It's curious why Cartright and not others are being
investigated. It's also curious why administration leaks seem to make
Israel look bad.
2) Targeting Israel in Egypt
A few days ago the New York Times published a news analysis U.S. Balancing Act With Egypt Grows Trickier by Mark Landler.
For the Obama administration, the problem is not simply its
relationship with the Egyptian military but also with Israel, whose
security interests are weighing particularly heavily on administration
officials as they try to nurture a new round of peace negotiations
between Israel and the Palestinians.
Israel depends on Egyptian troops to root out Islamic extremists in the
Sinai Peninsula, and Israeli officials have publicly and privately urged
the United States not to cut off the aid, which underpins the 1979
peace treaty between Egypt and Israel.
Israeli concerns are presented as a reason holding the administration
back from doing the "right thing" in Egypt. Later on the article
emphasizes this point by hypothesizing what might happen if aid to Egypt
were cut off and Egypt then failed to take control of the Sinai.
Were that to happen, analysts said, Israel’s prime minister,
Benjamin Netanyahu, would face enormous domestic pressure not to make
any concessions to the Palestinians, especially on security issues. He
probably could not even continue talking to them.
If the theme that Israel prizes its security at the expense of Egypt's
freedom sounds familiar its because it was a common refrain in Thomas
Friedman's columns at the beginning of the "Arab Spring." In particular,
Friedman wrote in Postcard from Cairo II:
Rather than even listening to what the democracy youth in
Tahrir Square were saying and then trying to digest what it meant, this
Israeli government took two approaches during the last three weeks:
Frantically calling the White House and telling the president he must
not abandon Pharaoh – to the point where the White House was thoroughly
disgusted with its Israeli interlocutors – and using the opportunity to
score propaganda points: “Look at us! Look at us! We told you so! We are
the only stable country in the region, because we are the only
democracy.’’
I have no idea what the Israeli officials really said, only how Friedman
interpreted - and, if he is to be trusted, how certain administration
officials interpreted - their comments. Israeli was probably rightfully
guarded in its appraisal of the protests and it bother Friedman and
perhaps some in the administration, that Israel wasn't more
enthusiastic. The success of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt validated
the Israeli approach. (Friedman is arguing that Israel wasn't really
secure since it was depending on undependable strongmen for peace. Of
course 2003, that is precisely the advice Friedman gave Israel in
advocating that Arab peace initiative.)
Landler is the White House correspondent for the New York Times and from
what I've seen a cheerleader for the administration. It's possible that
he framed the analysis based on his own understandings and prejudices.
It's also possible that he was faithfully recording the message the
administration wanted to send.
3) Targeting Israel in the Peace Talks
David Ignatius wrote one of the more disturbing op-eds I could imagine, Kerry’s big-bang Mideast diplomacy:
What Kerry has done, in effect, is get the two sides to grab
hold of a stick of dynamite. If they can’t defuse it within nine months
through an agreement, it’s going to blow up: The moderate Palestinian
government in the West Bank would collapse; militant Palestinians would
take statehood to the United Nations, probably this time with broad
European support; an angry Arab League would withdraw its peace
initiative. It would be a big mess for everyone.
Tzipi Livni, the chief Israeli negotiator, recalled at a State
Department ceremony Tuesday that when she first talked with Kerry about a
new round of peace talks five months ago, he told her that “failure is
not an option.” By pushing the two sides into an actual negotiation,
Kerry has put some teeth into that bromide. If they fail this time, it
will cost the parties dearly, probably Israel most of all. That provides
harsh leverage for Washington.
Kerry’s second advantage is that he’s ready to be an active broker in
this deal rather than a passive listener or mediator. When the two sides
reach impasses or get bogged down on side issues, Kerry will seek to
break the logjam with U.S. proposals. By putting a nine-month fuse on
his dynamite stick, Kerry limits stalling tactics of the sort adopted in
the past by both sides.
What's important to remember about Ignatius is that he's very well
connected. If someone want to look good in Washington he becomes a
source for Ignatius who will write him or her up favorably. Presumably
Kerry or someone in the State Department went to Ignatius for this
op-ed. If Kerry (or a subordinate) was boasting of this agenda, then
Secretary of State is a poor job title for Kerry. Master of disaster
would be more appropriate.
In 2000, Prime Minister Barak cut made an end of conflict offer to
Yasser Arafat. Arafat refused it. And then he started the so-called
"Aqsa intifada."
What makes Ignatius or Kerry certain that Abbas won't refuse Netanyahu
as Arafat refused Barak or Abbas refused Olmert in 2008? It isn't the
negotiating that will bring peace, it has to be the sense that only
negotiations will help Abbas get what he says he needs. Abbas has
calculated that he will do much better bringing international pressure
to bear on than he will from bilateral negotiations. No one, not the
Kerry, not the EU, not the UN has told him otherwise.
But think about underlying premise of this approach apparently adopted
by Kerry and advocated by Ignatius. The United States is telling an
ally: give the other guy everything he wants or you will regret it.
Apparently someone in the State Department wants Israel to get this
message and got Ignatius to deliver it.
4) Will Hamas suck up to Iran to save itself?
In The New Republic, Ehud Yaari explains some of the reasons Hamas is in
trouble. Its Muslim Brotherhood patrons in Egypt fell from power after
it alienated Iran for stopping its support of Bashar Assad. These
changes have precipitated a leadership split in Hamas.
For example, in contrast to Mashal's Egypt focus, Gaza prime
minister Ismail Haniyeh has emphasized the need to defend Hamas control
over the strip. Although he accepted the position of deputy Executive
Committee chief after failing to win the top Hamas post in April, he no
longer heeds orders from Mashal.
Other leaders have urged speedy reconciliation with Iran, emphasizing
that Hamas cannot afford to divorce itself from the "resistance axis".
The most adamant proponent of this view is Imad al-Alami, the group's
former permanent envoy in Tehran and head of the "Intifada Committee,"
now returned from Damascus to Gaza. He is supported by military figures
such as Muhammad Deif and Marwan Issa, and by politicians such as
Mahmoud al-Zahar. In contrast, Mashal received heavy criticism for
attending a much-publicized May sermon in Qatar in which Qaradawi railed
against Iran and its partners. His response was that he did not have
prior knowledge of what Qaradawi would say.
In recent weeks, Hamas has sent delegations to Beirut and Tehran in
order to reach new understandings with Iran and Hezbollah. Although both
parties replied that they will keep their doors open to Hamas, they
also noted that they cannot normalize relations until the group modifies
its position on Syria's war and Iranian/Hezbollah involvement there.
Making matters worse for Hamas is that the new Egyptian government's
blockade of Gaza has severely limited Gaza's supply of fuel.
“There are very few cars on the road and people line up for
hours to get just a few liters of gas,” Omar Shaaban, an economist in
Gaza told The Media Line. “There is only about 25 percent of the
quantity that is needed.”
The shortage is also affecting municipal services such as sewage
treatment plants which also run on fuel. Municipal officials in Gaza say
they’ve began dumping untreated sewage into the Mediterranean Sea since
they don’t have fuel to run the generators.
Egypt is sealing off the tunnels as part of its campaign against gunmen
in the Sinai peninsula. Last August, insurgents in Sinai killed 16
Egyptian policemen. Egypt worries the Sinai gunmen could receive weapons
through the tunnels and could even escape to Gaza.
Although it is reported that Gazans are angry with Egypt over the
blockade, the gas shortage will likely hurt Hamas's popularity too.
While Iran may be open to restoring ties with Hamas, currently it is
working against the terrorist group that controls Gaza. The New York
Times reports that Iran is sending aid to Gaza through a different terrorist group, Palestinians Islamic Jihad.
The food boxes bore the logo of Islamic Jihad and the
Iranian flag alongside the Palestinian one. Islamic Jihad, an
Iranian-backed extremist militant group, often challenges the larger
Hamas.
Organizers at the packaging center said that the Imam Khomeini Relief
Foundation, a Beirut-based Iranian charity, was financing the $2 million
food aid project. Islamic Jihad has been granted the honors of
distributing the 40,000 parcels, giving it a boost at a delicate time
when Hamas is struggling to cope with a shifting regional landscape.
In recent months, Iran has suspended millions of dollars in monthly aid
to Hamas because the group did not stand by President Bashar al-Assad of
Syria, its former patron, in his struggle against rebel forces. Unlike
Hamas, Islamic Jihad did not leave its base in Damascus and has kept up
relations with the government of Mr. Assad, a longtime Iranian ally.
Labels: Abu Mazen, Binyamin Netanyahu, Egypt, Ehud Barak, Hamas, Hezbullah, IAF, Iran, John Kerry, Middle East Media Sampler, Middle East peace process, Soccer Dad, Syria, Yakhont land to sea missile, Yasser Arafat
Some 'American intelligence analysts' want Hezbullah to get sophisticated weapons
On Thursday, I
blogged a New York Times story about an
alleged Israeli strike on Russian Yakhont land-to-sea missiles possessed by Syria, which included the following.
While the warehouse was destroyed, American
intelligence analysts have now concluded that at least some of the
Yakhont missiles had been removed from their launchers and moved from
the warehouse before the attack.
The officials who described the new assessment declined to be identified
because they were discussing classified information.
I then skipped the American assessment that Israel would attack again (which seemed obvious in light of the two paragraphs above) and went on (eventually) to this:
The July 5 attack near Latakia was the fourth known Israeli airstrike in Syria this year.
Providing new details, American officials said that it had been carried
out by Israeli aircraft that flew over the eastern Mediterranean, fired
air-to-ground missiles and never entered Syrian airspace. The route of
the Israeli aircraft led to some erroneous reports that the attack had
been carried out by an Israeli submarine.
Israeli experts are once again
going ballistic over what the Times published.
“The mere fact that such leaks happen often indicates that the
Pentagon leadership does not have Israel’s interests at heart,” Prof.
Efraim Inbar, director of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies
at Bar-Ilan University, told The Jerusalem Post. “It is difficult to assess the motivation of such leaks.”
Inbar listed several possible motives, including the wish to prevent future Israeli action.
Other
possibilities include an attempt by Pentagon sources to embarrass US
President Barack Obama, by pointing out the “ease” with which Israel
allegedly operates in Syria at a time that the White House says US
intervention is too complex and risky.
Alternatively, the leaks might stem from an effort to deter Russia from transferring advanced weapons to Syria.
Other
possible motives include sending a signal to Saudi Arabia and Turkey
that a US ally is harming Assad, or maintaining a good relationship
between the Pentagon sources and the media, Inbar stated.
“What is
clear is that they do not come from elements friendly to Israel,
because Israel’s preferred modus operandi is low profile. [This is]
intended to allow Assad to refrain from reacting,” he added.
The most pro-Israel administration evah?
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, Hezbullah, Syria, Yakhont land to sea missile
Did the IAF hit missiles being hidden in Homs? (With video)
The New York Times reported on Thursday that at least some of the Russian Yakhont missiles that Syria was hiding in Latakia were
not in the warehouses when
Israel allegedly struck them on July 5. This is from the first link.
While the warehouse was destroyed, American
intelligence analysts have now concluded that at least some of the
Yakhont missiles had been removed from their launchers and moved from
the warehouse before the attack.
The officials who described the new assessment declined to be identified
because they were discussing classified information.
...
After the Israeli attack, the Assad government sought to hide the fact
that the missiles had been missed by setting fire to launchers and
vehicles at the site to create the impression of a devastating blow,
according to American intelligence reports.
The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment. Israel has a
longstanding policy of silence on pre-emptive military strikes.
Another factor that could lead to a military response by Israel is the
continuing flow of weapons to the Assad government, some of which Israel
fears may make its way to Hezbollah in neighboring Lebanon.
The Times also provided new information about the July 5 strike.
The July 5 attack near Latakia was the fourth known Israeli airstrike in Syria this year.
Providing new details, American officials said that it had been carried
out by Israeli aircraft that flew over the eastern Mediterranean, fired
air-to-ground missiles and never entered Syrian airspace. The route of
the Israeli aircraft led to some erroneous reports that the attack had
been carried out by an Israeli submarine.
About an hour and a half ago, there was a
huge explosion in Homs, in central Syria, which was much larger than usual explosions there. 40 people were killed and 160 wounded.
Activists said the explosion, which appeared to be significantly
larger than most bombs used daily by either side in the two-year-old
Syrian conflict, ripped through the southeastern neighborhood of
al-Nozha.
The neighborhood is majority Alawite, the same sect as
President Bashar Assad. Sunni Muslim insurgents have targeted Alawite
areas, especially military positions, around the country with bombs and
mortars.
Let's go to the videotape.
Note that there were two large explosions - the first looked like a mushroom cloud and happened before the video started, while the second one was smaller and off to the right around the 0:19 mark.
Typically, when weapons are hit, you see a lot of secondary explosions. I didn't see any here, but then the video seems to be shot from an upper story of a building and not from way overhead like the IAF shoots videos.
The distance from Latakia to Homs is 176.9 kilometers.
I don't think the IAF did it this time. But whoever did it had an awful lot of explosives or hit a huge weapons depot, which probably belonged to Assad loyalists.
Hmmm.
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, Free Syrian Army, Homs, IAF, Latakia, Nusra Front, Syria, Syrian army, Syrian uprising, Yakhont land to sea missile
Syrian rebels claim defecting army general provided intel on Latakia
A Syrian rebel web site is reporting that a general who defected from the Syrian army
provided Israel with intelligence information that led to the destruction of Syria's Yakhont land-to-sea missiles in Latakia.
According to the report on the
website Al-Hakika, which relies on Turkish sources, Malik al-Kurdi
served at the Syrian naval base in Latakia. Before he defected, Al-Kurdi
told the American navy attaché in Ankara, Turkey, that advanced
Russian-made Yakhont anti-ship missiles were delivered to the Syrian
army and that President Bashar Assad intended to transfer them to
Hezbollah.
In light of the information, which included
precise coordinates, the attack was set into motion. According to The
Sunday Times, the attack was carried out by Israeli Dolphin-class
submarines. The Lebanese television channel MTV reported that Israel
attacked the missile warehouses only after verifying that no Russian
military advisers were present.
Only the Israelis would have made sure that no Russians were present.
If this story is true, it shows that there is still intelligence cooperation between Israel and the US after all.
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, Free Syrian Army, Hezbullah, Latakia, Nusra Front, Syrian army, Syrian uprising, Yakhont land to sea missile
Davutoglu denies Turkey helped Israel take out Syria's missiles
And
here's the story behind the tweet.
Unconfirmed reports that Israel was behind a July 5 attack on a Syrian arms depot
in the port city of Latakia continued to emerge Monday, with Russia
Today quoting a source as saying that the IAF launched the attack from a
Turkish military base.
"Israeli planes left a military base
inside Turkey and approached Latakia from the sea to make sure that they
stayed out of Syrian airspace so that they cannot become a legitimate
target for the Syrian air force," RT quoted "a reliable source" as
saying.
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu denied the report, saying it
was "absolutely wrong," and accusing those spreading the story of an
"act of betrayal."
The Turkish foreign minister said that "Turkey
will neither be a part nor a partner of such ‘attacks.’ The ones who
claim this want to damage Turkey’s power and reputation.”
Someone pointed out last night that the US may need to evacuate its own citizens from Syria via Latakia, and would be fearful of those missiles being used on its own evacuees.
Hmmm.
Labels: Ahmet Davutoglu, Bashar al-Assad, IAF, Russia, Syria, Syrian uprising, Turkey, Turkish obsession with Israel, Yakhont land to sea missile
And again: Israelis unhappy Obama confirmed Syria strike
In 2007, Israel allegedly destroyed the Syrian nuclear reactor at al-Kibar. For months, bits and pieces leaked but no one in the Israeli government or in the US government ever confirmed them. To this day, Israel has never officially acknowledged destroying the reactor. That has given the Syrians space not to retaliate and inflame the entire region.
In 2009 and 2010, Israel and the NSA collaborated on Stuxnet, which attacked Iran's nuclear facilities. While the NSA's role may have just been disclosed by Edward Snowden last week, the fact that Israel and the United States developed Stuxnet together has long been known. The Obama administration confirmed it.
Earlier today, I reported that the Obama administration has done it again, confirming Israel's strike on Russian-supplied Yakhont missiles in Latakia last week. And
Israel is pretty ticked off about it.
"Israel can attack many
targets in Syria, but according to foreign reports it chooses quality
targets, such as the Fateh-110 missile, as well as the SA-17 and Yakhont
missiles, which can fall into the hands of extremist elements," former
National Security Council chief Giora Eiland
explained on Sunday.
...
Eiland said the "range
of the attacks is very measured, in a way that is not perceived as an
intervention in the civil war." He said the attacks in Syria
"are clean in that they do not leave fingerprints and are conducted in
a way that does not allow the Syrians to photograph the plane or ship
which attacked, and in a way that does not push (President Bashar) Assad
into a corner."
However, Maj.-Gen.
(res.) Eiland warned that "there can always be one Israeli attack too
many, and then Assad will respond and we will have to ask ourselves
difficult questions. The American leaks (regarding alleged Israeli
operations in Syria) are problematic and concerning, although Israeli
officials also do such things on occasion."
The former National Security Council head estimates that Assad may decide
to retaliate "in a limited manner" at any moment. "In Syria there are
hundreds of rockets and missiles that are pointed at Israel and are
controlled by the regime. Some of them can reach the Golan Heights,
while others are capable of hitting central Israel," he said.
"Assad can order his forces to launch two surface-to-surface
missiles with conventional warheads at northern Israel, and even if such
an attack causes zero damage, it will pose a problem because Israel
will have to ask itself how it wants to respond."
The most transparent administration evah has finally found a place to be transparent. What could go wrong?
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Bashar al-Assad, Giora Eiland, Syria, Syrian army, Yakhont land to sea missile
US confirms Israel targeted Yakhonts
American officials are now saying that
Israel carried out an attack on Latakia, Syria, overnight July 5-6, in which Russian supplied Yakhont land-to-sea missiles were destroyed.
The Russian-made weapon has been a particular worry for the Pentagon
because it expanded Syria’s ability to threaten Western ships that
could be used to transport supplies to the Syrian opposition, enforce a
shipping embargo or support a possible no-flight zone.
The missile also represented a threat to Israel’s naval forces and
raised concerns that it might be provided to Hezbollah, the Lebanese
militia that has joined the war on the side of the Syrian government.
The attack against the missiles came to light after Syrian rebels said
that they were not responsible for large explosions at Latakia on July
5, and that a missile warehouse had been hit.
American officials did not
provide details on the extent of the damage or the number of missiles
struck.
Israeli officials have said they would not take sides in the civil war
in Syria, but they have made it clear that Israel is prepared to carry
out airstrikes to prevent sophisticated weapons from being diverted to
Hezbollah.
The strike near Latakia, first reported by CNN, was the fourth known
Israeli air attack against targets in Syria this year.
And an Israeli reaction:
Anyone think Rabinovitch (a former Israeli ambassador to the US and former chief Israeli negotiator with Syria) is wrong? Consider this from the first link:
The Russian decision to deliver the Yakhont missile prompted objections
from the Pentagon. Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, warned in May that it would “embolden the regime.”
For Israel, it represented a serious danger as well. In July 2006, an
antiship missile fired by Hezbollah seriously damaged an Israeli ship
off the coast of Lebanon.
The Yakhont system is far more sophisticated than the one used in the
July 2006 attack, and in recent months there has been speculation that
the Yakhont cache in Syria would be Israel’s next target.
During a visit to an army base last week, Israel’s defense minister,
Moshe Yaalon, restated Israel’s approach to the Syrian conflict: that it
would not get involved except to stop weapons transfers. “We have
established red lines when it comes to our own interests, and we are
sticking to them,” he said.
Are we fighting a proxy war?
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, IAF, Russia, Syria, Syrian uprising, Yakhont land to sea missile
Israel targeted Yakhont missiles using submarines
What you see above is about as official a statement as you are likely to get from an Israeli government source on this.
But off the record, it's all-but-been confirmed that Israel
targeted Syria's Yakhont land-to-sea missiles in the wee hours of Friday, July 5, and probably did so using submarines as I first reported
here. This is from the first link.
Al-Arabiya reports Israel was behind the strike in Syria’s
Latakia last week, according to the U.S. sources who said the attack
was targeting a missile depot.
The sources, speaking on condition
of anonymity to the U.S. news network said the July 5 strike targeted
Russian-made Yakhont missiles in the Syrian coastal city, which
neighboring Israel believed pose a threat to its forces, says al-Arabiya.
The sources said the Israeli Air Force had carried out the strike.
Qassem Saadeddine, spokesman for the Free Syrian Army's Supreme Military Council, told Reuters last week, "it was not the FSA that targeted this; it is not an attack that was carried out by rebels.
"This attack was either by air raid or long-range missiles fired from boats in the Mediterranean," he said, adds al-Arabiya.
More
here.
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, Dolphin class submarines, Free Syrian Army, Latakia, Nusra Front, Syria, Syrian uprising, Yakhont land to sea missile
TWO IAF attacks on weapons depots in Syria took out S-300's and Yakhont missiles?
In an earlier post, I reported that an attack on a Syrian arms depot in Latakia had taken out
Russian-made S-300 missiles and launchers. The Syrian rebels had attributed to the attack to the IAF, while Syrian government media had blamed al-Qaeda.
Now, it turns out that there may have been two attacks on Syria. The Russian S-300's were destroyed at a storage facility in an army camp east of Homs in western Syria. The Latakia attack destroyed Russian
Yakhont land-to-sea anti-ship missiles like the one that took an Israeli submarine out of action during the Second Lebanon War.
In a Facebook post titled "The
new Israeli strike," the rebels alleged that "the brave Syrian regime
has conceded that a new Israeli strike targeted a warehouse containing
Russian S-300 missiles and launchers. The facility was located in the
al-Qassia camp, near the town of al-Hafa, east of Homs."
The post further insinuated that the attack was meant to stop the Free Syrian Army from seizing the advanced weapons system.
Another report, by Syria's al-Haqiqa news website, claimed that "a senior Israeli official" confirmed that the explosion
that destroyed an arms depot in the port city of Latakia last week was
not the work of al-Qaida, as the state-run Syrian media reported, but
yet another Israeli attack.
According to the report, the explosion
destroyed a Syrian navy weapons depository holding Russian-made Yakhont
anti-ship cruise missiles. The website quoted the official as allegedly
saying he could "neither confirm nor deny," whether the Israeli military
was responsible for the attack.
More on the Yakhont
here. If the story turns out to be true, it would not be surprising that Israel went after it.
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, Free Syrian Army, Hezbullah, Russia, S-300 missile defense system, Syrian army, Syrian uprising, Yakhont land to sea missile
Expect more Israeli air strikes on weapons transfers to Hezbullah
US officials told the Wall Street Journal on Thursday to
expect more Israeli air strikes against Syrian attempts to transfer weapons to Hezbullah.
U.S. officials told The Wall
Street Journal on Thursday that another round of Israeli airstrikes
could target a new Russian transfer of advanced anti-ship missiles in
the near future. Israeli and Western intelligence services believe the
Yakhont missiles, which have been sold by Russia to Syria in recent
years, could be transferred to Hezbollah within days, the newspaper
reported on its website Friday.
At the same time, The New York Times reported
Friday that the Yakhont missiles have already been delivered to Syria's
armed forces. Israel has repeatedly reinforced, with words and actions,
its stated red line: that it will not allow the transfer of
"game-changing" weaponry to Islamic terror groups such as Hezbollah.
Israel has also relayed messages that it is not seeking a confrontation
with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's forces, but will act against
transfers of weaponry through his territory.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's
last-minute trip to Russia on Tuesday apparently did not change the
Russians' intentions to also deliver the advanced S-300 anti-aircraft
missile system to Syria. According to the Journal, U.S. officials
believe that Russia is moving more quickly than previously thought to
deliver S-300 surface-to-air defense systems to Syria. U.S. officials
told the paper that the S-300 system, which is capable of shooting down
guided missiles and could make it more risky for any warplanes to enter
Syrian airspace, could leave Russia for Syrian port of Tartus by the end
of May.
Together, the S-300 anti-aircraft and
anti-missile system, and the Yakhont anti-ship system, would pose a
formidable threat to any outside intervention in Syria, based on the
international Libya model. The anti-ship missiles would be a serious
threat to the Israeli navy, as well as the facilities above Israel's
newfound underwater gas reserves. The S-300 could threaten Israeli
military and civilian aircraft flying Israeli airspace, and not just
over Lebanese and Syrian airspace.
...
In a sign of the growing
tension in the region, CIA Director John Brennan arrived in Israel
Thursday and met with the top officials in Israel's defense
establishment, with a central focus on the developments in Syria. It was
Brennan's first trip to Israel since assuming his position two months
ago. The CIA chief went straight into a meeting in Tel Aviv with Defense
Minister Moshe Ya'alon, a senior Israeli official told AFP.
Channel 10 TV said that Ya'alon reaffirmed
during the talks that Israel "will not permit the transfer of weapons"
from Syria to Hezbollah in Lebanon. According to local press reports,
Brennan's visit is aimed at coordinating U.S. and Israeli positions over
the escalating crisis in Syria, specifically as international
diplomatic momentum between the U.S. and Russia gathers for a peaceful
resolution to the crisis.
According to the reports, the U.S. is
concerned that Israel will act independently to strike any advanced arms
shipments in Syria it believes may be headed to Hezbollah, potentially
scuttling the international diplomatic maneuvering.
Just like with Iran, Obama's main focus on Syria is to keep Israel from attacking. What could go wrong?
Shabbat Shalom everyone.
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, Hezbullah, Nusra Front, Russia, S-300 missile defense system, Syria, Syrian uprising, Yakhont land to sea missile
Russia sends anti-ship missiles to Syria
According to a report in the New York Times, Russia has sent Yakhont anti-ship cruise missiles to Syria in order to enable the Assad government to
prevent the imposition of a no-fly zone.
Russia has previously provided a version of the missiles, called
Yakhonts, to Syria. But those delivered recently are outfitted with an
advanced radar that makes them more effective, according to American
officials who are familiar with classified intelligence reports and
would only discuss the shipment on the basis of anonymity.
Unlike Scud and other longer-range surface-to-surface missiles that the
Assad government has used against opposition forces, the Yakhont
antiship missile system provides the Syrian military a formidable weapon
to counter any effort by international forces to reinforce Syrian
opposition fighters by imposing a naval embargo, establishing a no-fly
zone or carrying out limited airstrikes.
“It enables the regime to deter foreign forces looking to supply the
opposition from the sea, or from undertaking a more active role if a
no-fly zone or shipping embargo were to be declared at some point,” said
Nick Brown, editor in chief of IHS Jane’s International Defense Review.
“It’s a real ship killer.”
Jeffrey White, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy
and a former senior American intelligence official, said Syria’s
strengthened arsenal would “tend to push Western or allied naval
activity further off the coast” and was also “a signal of the Russian
commitment to the Syrian government.”
I guess that Obama '
flexibility' with Russia in his second term is really yielding results....
Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that Russia has sent
more than a dozen warships to patrol the waters near its Syrian naval base in Tartus.
Russia has sent a dozen or more warships to patrol waters near its
naval base in Syria, a buildup that U.S. and European officials see as a
newly aggressive stance meant partly to warn the West and Israel not to
intervene in Syria's bloody civil war.
Russia's expanded presence in the
eastern Mediterranean, which began attracting U.S. officials' notice
three months ago, represents one of its largest sustained naval
deployments since the Cold War. While Western officials say they don't
fear an impending conflict with Russia's aged fleet, the presence adds a
new source of potential danger for miscalculation in an increasingly
combustible region.
"It is a show of force. It's muscle
flexing," a senior U.S. defense official said of the Russian
deployments. "It is about demonstrating their commitment to their
interests."
The buildup is seen as Moscow's way of
trying to strengthen its hand in any talks over Syria's future and
buttress its influence in the Middle East. It also provides options for
evacuating tens of thousands of Russians still in Syria.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Bashar al-Assad, Dmitry Medvedev, Russia, Syria, Tartus, Vladimir Putin, Yakhont land to sea missile
Yadlin: This won't be the last time we strike Syria
Former Chief of IDF intelligence and director of the Institute for National Security Studies Amos Yadlin told the Washington Post on Saturday that Israel's recent strike in Syria is
unlikely to be the last one.
Israel, he said, has defined four types of weapons whose transfer to
militant groups would not be tolerated: advanced air defense systems,
ballistic missiles, sophisticated shore-to-sea missiles and chemical
weapons.
In accordance with this policy, Yadlin said, “any time
Israel will have reliable intelligence that this is going to be
transferred from Syria to Lebanon, it will act,” although specific
decisions to strike would be subject to assessments of the military
value of the attack, the risk of escalation and the positions of foreign
powers.
“As the Syrian army becomes weaker and Hezbollah grows
more isolated because of the loss of its Syrian patron, it makes sense
that this will continue,” Yadlin said, adding that Israeli responses
would be weighed each time and “not happen automatically.”
The
real dilemma facing Israeli officials, Yadlin said, is not whether to
attack, but whether inaction would mean a greater threat later. “The
correct comparison is the risk of escalation now and the risk of having a
much more formidable enemy and many casualties in future hostilities,”
he said.
Analysts in Lebanon also predicted more Israeli strikes if advanced weapons transfers were attempted.
“Israel
is trying to create a sense of deterrence,” said Elias Hanna, a retired
general and a professor at the American University of Beirut. “The
other side tries to test and erode the system.”
...
With the Syrian army preoccupied with internal fighting and Hezbollah
wary of jeopardizing its position in Lebanon as its Syrian sponsor
weakens, neither is likely to risk wider conflict by retaliating against
Israel for the Jan. 30 strike, according to the Israeli official and
analysts.
“The Syrians are interested in keeping the civil war in
Syria, where they are militarily much stronger than the rebels,” Yadlin
said. “Against external forces, they would be inferior.”
“If
Hezbollah attacked [Israel], they would basically be admitting that the
air defense system was on its way to them, infuriating the Russians” who
supplied the weapons to Syria with the understanding that they would
not be moved to Hezbollah, he said.
Still, Yadlin cautioned, every additional Israeli strike would raise the risk of escalation.
If this analysis is correct, the strikes should all be on the Syrian side of the border. Since 2006, Israel has avoided striking in Lebanon, even though that policy permitted the massive buildup of some 60,000 rockets that Hezbullah has available to it today. There will be another war. The only question is when.
Labels: anti-aircraft missiles, chemical weapons, Hezbullah, intermediate range ballistic missiles, Lebanon, Syria, weapons smuggling, Yakhont land to sea missile
US urges its citizens to leave Syria 'immediately'
In what is likely a prelude to the imposition of a no-fly zone over Syria, the United States is urging all US citizens to leave Syria '
immediately' (Hat Tip:
Memeorandum).
The U.S. Embassy in Damascus urged its citizens in Syria to depart "immediately," and Turkey's foreign ministry urged Turkish pilgrims to opt for flights to return home from Saudi Arabia to avoid traveling through Syria.
"The U.S. Embassy continues to urge U.S. citizens in Syria to depart immediately while commercial transportation is available," said a statement issued to the American community in Syria Wednesday and posted on the Embassy's website. "The number of airlines serving Syria has decreased significantly since the summer, while many of those airlines remaining have reduced their number of flights."
The warning followed an announcement in Washington this week that Ambassador Robert Ford would not return to Syria this month as planned, indicating concerns over his safety.
The Obama administration quietly pulled Ford out of Syria last month, citing credible personal threats against him.
The Turkish foreign ministry on Wednesday urged Turkish pilgrims to opt for flights to return home from Saudi Arabia and avoid traveling through Syria for security reasons.
The warning came two days after Syrian soldiers opened fire on at least two buses carrying Turkish citizens, witnesses and officials said, apparent retaliation for Turkey's criticism of Assad. The Turks were returning from Saudi Arabia after performing the annual Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia.
Of course, this doesn't mean that the Russians and the Chinese are going to go along. In fact, as I reported on Monday, Russia has put
warships in place for a showdown with NATO and, as I reported on Wednesday, Russia has provided Syria with
Yakhont land-to-sea missiles.
Will NATO go to war against Russia? (You can bet that with Obama in charge, the US won't do anything alone). What could go wrong?
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, Syrian uprising, Yakhont land to sea missile
Russia provides Syria with Yakhont anti-ship missiles
Well, here's something those Russian ships might be doing
near the Syrian port of Tartus: They just might be
delivering Yakhont land-to-sea missiles.
Despite the growing civil war in Syria, Russia is honoring an order, earlier this year, for an unspecified number of SSN-26 Yakhont anti-ship missiles. The order was finally confirmed eight months ago, after four years of haggling and efforts by Israel and the United States to block the sale. Apparently the missiles have already been paid for, and Syrian has assured Russia that the missiles can safely be delivered by ship. Russia is happy for any sale, but seems particularly anxious for this missile to get some combat experience.
The Yakhont was under development throughout the 1990s, but was delayed by lack of funds. Now it's in production, and the Russians have been energetically seeking export sales. The Yakhont uses a liquid-fuel ramjet and travels 300 kilometers at speeds of over 2,000 kilometers an hour (using a high altitude cruise and a low-altitude approach; if it travels entirely at low altitude the range is cut to 120km). When the missile arrives in the area where the target is supposed to be, it turns on its radar and goes for the kill. Israel is the only one in the region the Yakhonts would be used against. However, because Iran is supplying (unofficially) the cash for the missiles, there is also the risk that some of the Yakhonts would end up in Iran for use against numerous targets in the Persian Gulf.
The ground based Yakhont can use truck mounted or fixed launchers, with up to 36 missiles supported by a land based search radar and helicopter mounted radars (to locate targets over the horizon). Once a target has been identified and located, one or two missiles are programmed with that location and launched. The Yakhont is a 8.9 meter (27.6 foot) long, three ton missile with a 300 kg (660 pound) warhead.
The sale of the Yakhont's to Syria has been described as a
potential game-changer, without even considering the fact that a new model, with
twice the speed, is apparently nearly ready. Until now, Israel has couched its opposition to the sale of these missiles to Syria in terms of fear that they would
end up in Hezbullah's hands. Now, I would bet on the Yakhont's being one of the first things we go after in the next war, just like
we went after Hezbullah's Zelzal long-range missiles right at the beginning of the Second Lebanon war.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Hezbullah, Russia, Syria, Yakhont land to sea missile, Zelzal missiles
Israel fears Russian cruise missiles could end up in Hezbullah's hands
Three months ago, I reported on the sale of
Yakhont land-to-sea cruise missiles from Russia to Syria and Israel's fear that they could end up in the hands of Hezbullah. Now, in light of the chaos throughout the Middle East, Israel and the United States are hoping that the Russians will
cancel the deal.
"The question of these missiles' delivery to Syria really has triggered a negative reaction in Israel," the Israeli ambassador to Moscow, Dorit Golender, told the Interfax news agency.
"And this is understandable since Hizbullah has repeatedly used weapons that they received either from Lebanon or Syria."
"The contract is in the implementation stage," news agencies quoted Russian Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov as saying.
Russia initially agreed to send a large shipment of anti-ship Yakhont cruise missiles to Syria in 2007 under the terms of a controversial deal that was only disclosed by Serdyukov in September 2010.
The revelation infuriated both Israel and the United States and there had been speculation that Russia would decide to tear up the contract amid the current turmoil plaguing north Africa and the Middle East.
The disputed sale is believed to be worth at least $300 million and is meant to see Syria receive 72 cruise missiles in all.
Russia has not officially confirmed making any Yakhont deliveries to date.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Hezbullah, Russian weapons, Syria, Yakhont land to sea missile
Russian arms sales to Syria and Lebanon a potential game changer
Yiftah Shapir, director of the military balance project at Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies, warns that Russian arms sales to Syria and Lebanon could shift the balance of power in the Middle East. According to Shapir, Russia's arms sales to those countries are a way of
reasserting itself as a player in the region's struggles.
Moscow is set to sell Syria the Yakhont land to sea missile – a part of the Bastion missile system – which has a range of between 300 kilometers, and would be a “game changer” if it fell into the hands of Syria’s ally, Hizbullah, Shapir told The Jerusalem Post on Thursday.
“These missiles are supersonic, radar guided, and have additional navigational capabilities as they approach their target. They leave little time for response,” Shapir said. “The chances that it will end up in Lebanon are pretty high.
Shapir added that the advanced missile system would curtail the Israeli Navy’s freedom of operation around the Mediterranean, and enable Hizbullah to fire on warships near naval home ports like Haifa.
The Yakhont is pictured at the top of this post.
For its part, Syria is revamping its port in the coastal city of Tartus in order to allow Russian warships to dock there, giving Russia a presence in the area it has not enjoyed in the 20 years since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
But what about Russia's relations with Israel? After all, when Russia was a big supplier to Egypt and Syria in the 1970's, they had no relations with us. But now they do. What happens to that?
But Moscow has not neglected its relationship with Jerusalem – Israel has been the only weapons exporter to sell arms to Russia since World War II, Shapir said, of the sale of Israeli UAVs to Russia in recent years.
At the same time, Shapir said, Russia is not planning on arming its military with Israeli weapons. “They want to copy the UAV technology and reproduce it. This was made clear during the sale,” he said.
“My greatest fear is that in the future, we could see this same UAV technology in the hands of enemies. This could reach Hizbullah, and that would change things. Russia has its own calculations,” Shapir added. “Personally, I think it was a bad idea to sell them the UAVs.”
It was also a bad idea to sell them to Turkey for the same reason. But no one else wanted to hear that at the time. Ouch.
Labels: Russia, Tartus, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, Yakhont land to sea missile
