The change comes as Russia says it has stopped using a deconfliction line with Israel.
By ARIE EGOZI JCPA
TEL AVIV: Defense sources say the Israeli military is planning to change its tactics in Syria to revolve around long-range standoff munitions as opposed to air strikes, following a new Russian policy to use its higher-end air defense systems capable of shooting down Israeli jets over Syrian airspace.
The change follows an announcement late last week by Rear Adm. Vadim Kulit, the head of the Russian military reconciliation center in Syria, who said in a TV interview that the Russian forces assisted the Syrians in intercepting four missiles launched by Israeli F-16s — the first time Russian assistance was given to counter Israeli military operations.
Kulit said a Russian BUK 2ME, known in NATO circles as the SA-17 Grizzly, was used; the system is a medium-range advanced defense missile complex (ADMC) designed and manufactured by Almaz-Antey, primarily for the Russian Army. That system, which is operated directly by the Russian military, had not previously been used against Israeli assets; while the Syrians operate older anti-aircraft weapons, they have not been particularly successful in the past.
Israeli sources confirmed that the BUK 2ME was used for the first time against Israeli missiles, raising fears that Israeli pilots could be targeted as well. As a result, military leadership here is planning to shift operations almost entirely to long-range strike weapons.
Israel’s military does not comment on reports of specific strikes in Syria, but according to foreign media, there have been hundreds of strikes against Iran-linked military targets in Syria over the years. Jerusalem fears Iranian entrenchment on its northern frontier, and it has repeatedly struck Iran-linked facilities and weapons convoys destined for Hezbollah. Israel has used standoff weapons in the past, but the majority of the attacks have been performed by weapon systems flown in close to targets.
Compounding the situation is a change in the relationship between Russia and Israel. For the majority of the conflict in Syria, Israel and Russia have maintained a hotline that allowed the Israeli military to alert Russian forces of incoming strikes, which were aimed at Syrian forces backed by Moscow; generally, sources say, Russia was given two to three minutes of warning before an attack in order to remove their personnel in the area, and in some cases missions were aborted over fears of striking Russian forces.
However, Russian officials are now being quoted in regional media as saying that deconfliction line no longer exists, tying the change directly to the electoral loss of former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who had a good working relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin; Israeli sources here are also saying communications through the line have effectively stopped.
Combined, the lack of the active hotline and the activation of Russian anti-aircraft weaponry is sending a message to Jerusalem that Israeli forces are now officially at risk.
Rather than being a cost center or another roadblock, network automation is an enabler that handles mundane, repetitive tasks so that organizations can better embrace digital transformation.
From BARRY ROSENBERG
“Russia has decided to end the Israeli freedom of action over Syria.” Dr. Mordechai Kedar, an Israeli senior expert on Middle Eastern issues told Breaking Defense. He added that Moscow want to portray Syria as a functioning country to start pumping funds in the effort to rebuild the ruined country, which is of strategic and economic use for Moscow.
ISI photography captures the before and after results of a Syrian strike, believed to be by Israeli forces. (ISI)
“The Israeli frequent air strikes on targets in Syria do not help to build the desired image,” Kedar noted. “This is a very [big] warning sign to Israel.”
It is expected that Israeli will use Lebanese air space to launch weapons from its air platforms, while also upping the use of ground-based systems launching from the Golan heights.
Israeli has a number of options for long-range strike capabilities. One, which Russian media claims has been used recently, is the Rampage weapon, developed jointly by Israeli Military Industries Systems (IMI) recently acquired by Elbit systems and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI). The Rampage, at 570 kg and 4.7 meters long, is marketed by the companies as a penetrating system designed for use against infrastructure, such as command and control centers.
(2 of 2)Indeed, it seems that every word that parts Lapid’s lips results in the creation of some new devastating consequence for his rise to power. From his pronounced endorsement for a future return to his thoughts of peace for land to his attempts at re-educating the world on the significance and definition of antisemitism as being a universal condition suffered by all maligned people, rather than the truth that it is a unique feature of our long heritage, alone. Meanwhile, this recent loss of an Israeli-Russian understanding with regards to Iran is to be numbered among these many hurried successes of this master of diplomacy, as he has only now been in office about a month. Of course, such poor policy consequences are the untoward rewards to be expected while empowering the Left.
Referencing your second comment specifically, I could not agree with you more strongly. Indeed, Lapid’s policy to eliminate Israel’s ability to act as an independent member-state, rather than this subjugating role of prior notification to Iran’s good ally in the White House, should be seen as among his most harmful blunders, yet, it should still be of little surprise to any of us as his position of advocating an America First policy was clear since his performance in 2015. Among all the arenas in which the Left might create disasters, and there are many, one of the greater effects that may be generated is their ability to express their views as Israel’s voice to the world – it will be such unkind victories as these listed here which will each have its own significant consequences to bare in the coming years. Indeed, such successes should be the expected consequence to offering such authority to those with such limited judgement and a determined will to demonstrate such a keen intellect.
If this soon to be released budget passes, this recent spate of diplomatic accomplishments may only be the beginning of a long road of set backs. For my own view, it has already been too long a road.
/2
(1 of 2)
@sabasarge
sabasarge, your thoughts that Russia may allow Israel the ability to successfully employ these long distance measures may prove to be true, but I see that is unlikely, but time will tell. I fear that Russia has perceived the America First policy that you referenced in your second thread as being a moment to break with an agreement that was successfully created between Israel and Russia since Russia made its reentry into the region some 6 years back. It has been a long and stable, with few setbacks (only one serious moment comes to mind), arrangement that allowed Israel the ability to act with measured access to our enemies with decisive effects of limiting Iran’s movements in Syria.
This diplomatic break has a consequence of some significance, and if limited, as your comments suggest, prove accurate, the damage may also be limited. Yet, Russia has recently released a joint statement with Iran and Turkey declaring that Israel’s “military attacks in Syria…violate international law”, and this diplomatic change was reinforced a couple weeks later with this recent move to protect Iran from Israel in quite a stated manner. The message which was sent in the form of a missile barrage as opposed to a more diplomatic form, given the frequent notifications that Israel offers Russia, was, I believe, a frank statement of the stark policy change which Russia has adopted.
Such a public statement of disunity with the Jewish State will be seen, if not by Lapid, likely by Israel’s allies as distinct break with a long established status quo. Indeed, Russia’s defense of Iran in Syria was the intended signal of the end of her alliance of sorts with Israel, or so I perceive things. So, these are the contexts with which informed my views that this recent Russian action was more than a setback, and the potential future possibilities are quite concerning, as I see them. Again, we will see how this diplomatic failure plays out, but this failure is among a bluster of diplomatic achievements that no Foreign Minister is likely to achieve in so short a period of time as Lapid has done in these past few weeks.
/1
Btw peloni, much more devastating in my mind is Lapid’s promise to Biden that no Israeli action will be taken without first consulting with America. That is a question of sovereignty and worldwide perception.
@peloni1986…
While it can be considered a setback it is hardly “devastating”. Israel obviously feels she can continue with its stated mandate of keeping Syria/Hezbollah/Iran from changing the status quo with regards to weaponry and production, by other means. It will be a different matter all together should Russia decide to put a stop to this as well, as Israel would then be faced with a true “coming to Jesus” moment, if you’ll pardon the expression.
This is a devastating development.