By Jonathan Marcus
BBC defence correspondent
With
every indication that the US - along with a small number of its allies -
may be readying a punitive strike against Syrian government forces, an
obvious question is what could Syria do to respond?
How far could it defend itself against the sort of attack
that is being planned? And what steps might it take to retaliate in some
way?
1. Syria's defences
All of the indications suggest that
the sort of strike that is being planned
by the US, Britain and perhaps France will involve weapons launched
from long-range - Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles fired from
warships or submarines.
Fixed-wing aircraft may also be used, but if so they will
probably employ stand-off weapons that again can be fired from well
outside Syrian airspace. This will make it much harder for Syria to use
its defensive systems to counter any attack.
Syria's air defences used to be highly capable, based upon
older Soviet-supplied systems like the S-200/SA-5 Gammon, together with
some more recently acquired Russian weapons, like the SA-22 and SA-17.
Syria also deploys a variety of sophisticated Chinese-supplied radar
systems.
The integrity of the system may have been damaged due to the loss of territory and some missile and radar sites to the rebels.
But Syria's air defences remain credible. That is one of the reasons why any attack would use stand-off weapons.
It should be remembered that Israeli jets have attacked
Syrian targets over recent years with relative impunity. Sophisticated
Western air forces are well versed in the sorts of weaponry at Syria's
disposal.
Yes these missiles could shoot down aircraft, but equally the
pilots have a range of defensive tactics and technology at their
disposal. Uncertainty surrounds the much more capable S-300 system -
ordered by Syria from Moscow - but thought not yet to be delivered or
operational.
As well as air defences, Syria might seek to counter US and
Western naval forces by using its own arsenal of shore-based
anti-shipping missiles. For example, Syria deploys the Russian-supplied
Yakhont - a supersonic anti-shipping missile known in Nato circles as
the SS-N-26. But here too the Tomahawk firing vessels may be out of
range of Syria's defensive weaponry.
Continue reading the main story
Models for possible intervention
- Iraq 1991: US-led global military coalition,
anchored in international law; explicit mandate from UN Security Council
to evict Iraqi forces from Kuwait
- Balkans 1990s: US arms supplied to anti-Serb
resistance in Croatia and Bosnia in defiance of UN-mandated embargo;
later US-led air campaign against Serb paramilitaries. In 1999, US jets
provided bulk of 38,000 Nato sorties against Serbia to prevent massacres
in Kosovo - legally controversial with UN Security Council resolutions
linked to "enforcement measures"
- Somalia 1992-93: UN Security Council
authorised creation of international force with aim of facilitating
humanitarian supplies as Somali state failed. Gradual US military
involvement without clear objective culminated in Black Hawk Down
disaster in 1993. US troops pulled out
- Libya 2011: France and UK sought UN Security
Council authorisation for humanitarian operation in Benghazi in 2011.
Russia and China abstained but did not veto resolution. Air offensive
continued until fall of Gaddafi
2. Syria's retaliatory options
So if Syria cannot do much to counter the attacks themselves, how might it seek to respond or retaliate ?
- Step up the anti-rebel offensive
One option would be to intensify attacks against rebel
forces to seek some localised and spectacular victory to bolster the
morale of the regime's forces and to signal to the US and its allies
that the Assad regime remains undeterred.
An alternative approach would be to seek to broaden the
conflict by striking at Turkey, US forces in Jordan or perhaps even to
fire ballistic missiles against Israel. The risks here for the Syrian
regime are huge. Turkey is well capable of defending itself, as are US
forces in Jordan. In both countries there are Patriot anti-missile
defences.
An attack on Israel is also unlikely. The Syrian military is heavily committed in the civil war.
Lashing out against Israel might provoke a massive
retaliation - opening up the possibility of a wider regional war
involving Syria's ally, Hezbollah in Lebanon. Israel too deploys capable
anti-missile systems. Provoking a wider conflict may not be in the
interests of either Damascus, or importantly Tehran.
Syria could seek to use a group like Hezbollah to carry
out attacks against US or Western interests abroad. Here too though, the
Iranian authorities may well have a view and with Iran seemingly intent
on exploring a new opening with the West on its nuclear dossier, Tehran
may be cautious about encouraging Hezbollah in this direction.
Hezbollah is also itself in a difficult position, having
allied itself with President Assad. It may determine it has enough
problems at the moment and that it is better to keep its powder dry.
More on This Story
How Western forces might strike
No comments:
Post a Comment