Russian S300 anti-aircraft missiles 'delivered to Syria'
Last edited Thu May 30, 2013, 05:32 AM - Edit history (1)
Source: BBC News
Syria has already received the first shipment of an advanced Russian air defence system, Syria's President Bashar al-Assad is reported to have said in a Lebanese TV interview.
Russia vowed to go ahead with sending the weapons soon after an EU decision not to renew an arms embargo on Syria
>
"Syria has received the first shipment of Russian anti-aircraft S-300 rockets," Al Manar quoted Mr Assad as saying in an interview due to be broadcast later on Thursday.
"The rest of the shipment will arrive soon."
Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22713119
Assad says Syria received Russian missile shipment - Lebanese media.
(Reuters) - Syria has received the first shipment of an air defence system from Russia, President Bashar al-Assad was quoted as saying, sending a signal of military strength days before an EU arms embargo on the war-torn country lapses.
"Syria has received the first shipment of Russian anti-aircraft S-300 rockets," Lebanese newspaper al-Akhbar newspaper quoted Assad as saying in an interview due to be broadcast later on Thursday.
More of the missiles would arrive soon, he was quoted as saying.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/05/30/uk-syria-russia-missiles-idUKBRE94T05Q20130530
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Sand Wind
(1,573 posts)John2
(2,730 posts)he is lying? You think he is lying about them winning? You also probably think he is lying about the opposition cooperating with Israeli intelligence for future air raids. You also think he is lying they have video evidence of the opposition terrorizing people to support them and committing mass murder if they don't. You also probably think the Syrian President is lying about these terrorists using chemical weapons to manufacture evidence for those who want to attack Syria. You don't think he has hard evidence to support the one U.N. investigator's claims? You probably also don't think he is sharing this evidence with the Russians in support of his claims? I think the truth always comes out when a Party is lying. I think Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar are lying as usual. And not only that, the side that has a secret nuclear program, has been shipping weapons and Foreign fighters to support their illegal War. If Hezbullah is to leave Syria, then all Foreign fighters must leave Syria. All foreign intervention must stop. I think the Syrian Government has every right to ascertain John McCain and prosecute him for sabotage. He is a War criminal by my definition when he facilitates and enable Terrorists.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Well said, my friend! Well said indeed.
IthinkThereforeIAM
(3,076 posts)...eom.
Sand Wind
(1,573 posts)Dont have time, got to work.
pampango
(24,692 posts)shipments to Assad and has been quite public about the idea of sending these particular missiles.
I don't see why Assad would lie about this. There is no immediate threat of a no-fly-zone, even less of the rebels suddenly acquiring an air force itself. If there was an immediate threat, Assad might have a good reason to 'exaggerate' his military capabilities since this would give his enemies something to think about. Absent this there is little reason for him to lie about these missiles.
Everyone is preparing for this conference in Geneva and wants to look as strong as possible to improve their negotiating position. As with any diplomatic negotiations during a war, the stronger (or weaker) your military looks and the better (or worse) the war seems to be going for your side affects the strength of your negotiating position. To lie about these missiles and be found out would make him look weak and desperate. He is smart enough to know this.
karynnj
(59,501 posts)It is interesting seeing advocates for both sides take extreme positions here. In their own way, they are likely trying to influence the outside world. For me, it would be a lot more interesting if some very new posters explained enough of who they are (without losing their privacy) so we would have context to their posts.
I agree that there is no reason to doubt that Russia delivered the missiles that they were under contract to provide and said they were providing. As you said, if it is not true, it weakens Assad - especially if it angers the Russians.
Adsos Letter
(19,459 posts)
hack89
(39,171 posts)it is a complex system that requires a lot of training. The US military usually plans on two years between when a new weapon system is issued to units and when it is considered combat ready.
You can bet Israel will not give them the necessary time to train.
The Magistrate
(95,244 posts)About the only question is will they be in a ware-house or a training establishment when they are bombed.
Adsos Letter
(19,459 posts)Try to avoid killing/wounding Russian advisers/trainers/operators.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)To judge from how they normally operate in foreign countries, the Russians will likely send crews to man their anti aircraft weapons while the training of Syrian crews goes slowly forward. I think this will be even more likely in the case of a Civil War in which an important Russian naval base is threatened.
hack89
(39,171 posts)they cannot rail against foreign intervention in Syria and then turn around and send military troops.
Secondly, they expose themselves to serious embarrassment if the Israelis smoke those missile systems even when manned by Russians. It would seriously hurt further sales.
These missiles are symbolic. There are many other types of weapons Russia could provide Syria if they wanted to immediately shift the military balance.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)We had better assume they likely will. They did in Cuba, Vietnam, Egypt, Serbia and numerous other client States, including when they sent earlier weapons systems to Syria.
hack89
(39,171 posts)if they are going to actively involve themselves in a war then you have to assume they have decided that losing men is worth it.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)One thing is certain, you had better hope that if Russians are killed it is not Americans or American weapons which do the killing.
hack89
(39,171 posts)if they ever show up.
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)At least, better the Israelis than the U.S. Navy.
pampango
(24,692 posts)anyone else - had better decide that it is worth people getting killed. Hardly anyone is safe in Syria, certainly no one who is firing a weapon of any sort on any side. Only a fool would think that their fighters will be protected by the color of their passport.
hack89
(39,171 posts)
David__77
(23,367 posts)There have been during the last two years. Russia is meeting its contractual obligations by providing them. Some staff have been pared down, but there are still trainers there. Russia does not see this as "intervention," or certainly not as illegal intervention since the government is the legal government per the UN.
True that Russia isn't providing much material support compared to what they could. That's why I hope that the government and opposition meet in Geneva and come to a political solution.
hack89
(39,171 posts)they are not providing training on S-300 missiles. I doubt they are doing nothing more than staying out of harms way and protecting the naval base at Tartus.
David__77
(23,367 posts)There are thousands of Russian nationals in Syria. Most are normal residents, but some provide services per contractual agreement. Tartus is a very safe city, so I imagine they're pretty calm there.
hack89
(39,171 posts)they are not that foolish.
David__77
(23,367 posts)Israel will hold its powder, realizing that an al Qaeda victory would do it no good. The insurgents have no reason to try to provoke the Russians by attacking them. I think the Russians in Syria are pretty safe.
hack89
(39,171 posts)so getting back to the original topic, if the Russians ever do decide to actually deliver the S-300, they will not be manning them with Russian crews.
pampango
(24,692 posts)I agree that Russia is much more likely to do this than the US or Europe would be. Putin likes a very 'muscular' foreign policy and 'boots on the ground' would certainly prove that he means business.
It also raises the ante if the West or Israel ever attacks those anti-aircraft missiles. The risk of killing Russians would factor into any decision to attack them. The same would have been true if the US had sent crews to man anti-aircraft weapons in Afghanistan during the soviet invasion and ended up being killed by Russian jets. Putting 'boots on the ground' certainly shows that you mean business but it cares with it a lot of risk.
pampango
(24,692 posts)As hack89 posted that requires a lot of training or the use of already-experienced (Russian?) crews to man them.
hack89
(39,171 posts)another_liberal
(8,821 posts)We had better assume they will. They did in Cuba, Vietnam, Egypt, Serbia and numerous other client States, including when they sent earlier weapons systems to Syria.
aristocles
(594 posts)With all else going on, the U.S. and Russian each a little bit closer to war.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)MOSCOW, May 30 (RIA Novosti) – Reports that Syria’s president had confirmed receiving a consignment of Russian-manufactured S-300 air defense systems emerged Thursday, but were quickly brought into question.
In comments widely reported across the world, Lebanese newspaper Al Akhbar quoted Syrian President Bashar Assad as saying Damascus had received initial deliveries of the S-300 system.
Assad's remarks were allegedly made during a pre-recorded interview to be aired on Hezbollah-controlled Almanar television channel on Thursday evening at 10:00 p.m. Moscow time.
But a high-level source at Lebanon-based Almanar, who said he had been present throughout the interview, told RIA Novosti by telephone that at no point did Assad explicitly confirm any S-300 deliveries.
When Assad was asked about the delivery of the anti-missile systems, the source – who requested that his name not be printed – said, the Syrian president replied that “everything we have agreed with Russia will be implemented, and a part of it has been implemented already.”
more...
http://en.rian.ru/world/20130530/181422107/Doubts-Cast-Over-Reported-S-300-Deliveries-to-Syria.html
aristocles
(594 posts)Sand Wind
(1,573 posts)President Bashar Assad is lying if he says he has taken delivery of a first shipment of Russian-manufactured state-of-the-art anti-aircraft missiles, Israeli military sources said Thursday.
According to a Channel 2 report, the officials said that Russia has yet to transfer any S-300 missile shipments to Syria and that, public statements notwithstanding, Moscow might not do so. Other Hebrew media outlets quoted unnamed Israeli officials echoing the same assertion, and describing Assad as “bluffing.
“It is not clear to me that the Russians are interested in transferring the weapons. Right now, it’s more of a threat,” said Ehud Ya’ari, Channel 2?s veteran, well-connected commentator.
Israeli media reports said Netanyahu had warned Putin of a descent into war should Russia make the delivery. Netanyahu said that if acquired by Assad, the S-300 “is likely to draw us into a response, and could send the region deteriorating into war,” Channel 2 reported.
The Times of Israël.
DonViejo
(60,536 posts)
bananas
(27,509 posts)Here it is:
‘Assad is lying about possessing S-300 missiles’
Military officials say Syria does not yet have its hands on Russia’s advanced anti-aircraft system, hasn’t even paid for most of the contract
By STUART WINER May 30, 2013, 5:23 pm 6
President Bashar Assad is lying if he says he has taken delivery of a first shipment of Russian-manufactured state-of-the-art anti-aircraft missiles, Israeli military sources said Thursday.
They were responding to reports that the Syrian leader had claimed in a TV interview that the first such missiles were now in his possession. It later turned out that Assad’s actual comments differed from excerpts the TV station conducting the interview had sent in a text message on Thursday morning, and were vaguer than reported.
According to a Channel 2 report, the officials said that Russia has yet to transfer any S-300 missile shipments to Syria and that, public statements notwithstanding, Moscow might not do so. Other Hebrew media outlets quoted unnamed Israeli officials echoing the same assertion, and describing Assad as “bluffing.”
American officials quoted by AP said they had no evidence that the Assad regime had received a shipment of S-300s.
<snip lots more!>
It's actually a fairly long article.
bananas
(27,509 posts)Moscow suggests missiles have yet to reach Assad
By Mariam Karouny and Erika Solomon
BEIRUT | Fri May 31, 2013 1:26am BST
(Reuters) - Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said on Thursday Moscow was still committed to sending him advanced anti-aircraft weapons, although a source close to the Russian defence ministry said the missiles had yet to arrive.
<snip>
Russia, which has supported Assad's family since the Cold War, says it will send the S-300 missiles in part to help prevent the West from imposing a no-fly zone. A source close to the Defence Ministry in Moscow said the "hardware itself" had not yet arrived, although the contract was being implemented.
A Lebanese newspaper earlier quoted Assad as saying in his al-Manar interview that Moscow had already sent a first shipment of missiles, although when the actual interview was broadcast Assad appeared to stop short of saying the missiles had arrived.
"Everything we have agreed on with Russia will take place, and part of it has already taken place," he said, without giving further details.
<snip>
roamer65
(36,745 posts)I don't trust the Syrians, Russians or Israelis on this one.
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)It is possible that this sale/transfer is a ruse not rooted in reality to "scare" the U.S. and the rebel fighters.
Or it is true and the systems have been sent and are being set to the ready. What difference does it make strategically?
We are in a difficult situation where there is an essential standstill in the conflict. The number of refugees and innocent bystanders killed or wounded continues to climb. What to do?
jessie04
(1,528 posts)They need anti-missles for the rebels?.... I dont think so.
I think they are offensive missles.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)Setting up SA-10s around Syria isn't about pushing back the FSA; it's about telling Israel, Turkey and the United States to stop thinking about getting involved.
MjolnirTime
(1,800 posts)cqo_000
(313 posts)Source: The Guardian
Syria's new anti-aircraft missile system will have a "game-changing" effect on the regime's defence capabilities, and pose a serious military threat to any hostile aircraft, defence analysts say.
The S-300s supplied by Russia are designed to shoot down planes and ballistic missiles. They have a range of up to 125 miles. Once up and running, this will enable them to destroy not only civilian and military aircraft in Syrian airspace, but also inside Israel. The S-300s can also track and strike multiple targets simultaneously.
Robert Hewson, editor of IHS Jane's Air-Launched Weapons, said it was plausible that some parts of the S-300s had already arrived in Syria, as the president, Bashar al-Assad, claimed on Thursday. "The whole thing is a collection of vehicles. You have a launcher, radar and a command and control vehicle. You need all of that working together." He described the system as formidable and respected by western military planners: "If your plan is to waltz into Syrian airspace and start bombing things this is a big wrinkle."
Hewson said he expected the Russians to supply military advisers who would work closely with their Syrian counterparts and train them how to use the system: "There is a big danger that if you blow the SA-300 up you will kill a lot of Russians. I don't think the Israelis want to do that. This is Russia operating at a big international level and saying: 'Assad is still our guy and we stand beside him.'"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/30/syria-anti-aircraft-missile-system
pampango
(24,692 posts)The timeline for the anticipated Syrian deployment of the S-300 remains hazy. Hewson said it could be "up and running within a minimum of a few weeks" once all components were in, and provided qualified Syrian personnel were available.
But a source in Russia's defence ministry told Reuters he knew of no Syrians who had already been trained by Moscow, and put the completion of the S-300 delivery at "six to 12 months from now".
Assuming Assad survives in power, such a delay could allow Israel ample opportunity to destroy the S-300s – an option Israel's defence minister said earlier this week was very real.
Hewson said the truck-towed S-300 would be physically hard to conceal. Its "distinctive radar signal" makes it relatively easy to identify and target, he added.
It sounds like these missiles (described as similar to US Patriot missiles in the article) are quite effective but not a 'magic bullet' (any more than our Patriot missiles are). They are easy to locate and target but they can defend against anything launched at them.
Their range is about 120 kilometers (75 miles or so). Cruise missiles have a much greater range than that, but the S-300 can shoot them down. It may come down to how many cruise missiles does it take to overwhelm a given number of S-300 batteries.
Perhaps someone with knowledge of these things can comment on how or where do you try to hide an S-300 missile battery - in a valley or in some trees or in a city (this at least raises the 'collateral damage' factor caused by an attack on them). How effective are Patriot missiles at shooting down cruise missiles? Will enough get through to accomplish the task of destroying the anti-aircraft battery at an 'acceptable' cost?
If this sale and delivery goes through Putin is certainly showing that he is willing to play 'hard ball' when it comes to supporting his 'friends'. Assad will probably survive as Syria's ruler, but even if he does not, Putin has shown the world (and potential future 'friends') that he can be counted when the going gets tough.
I imagine that Mubarak and supporters of Gaddafi wish they had had Putin to rely on when the going got tough. Mubarak had Obama, which did him no good at all, and Gaddafi had no one in his corner.
hack89
(39,171 posts)these are complex systems - it would take months before Syrian crews would gain a rudimentary combat capability. And such training means setting up the systems and operating them - impossible to hide considering their size, the need to operate radars, and the need to fly aircraft around as training targets.
They would be smoking rubble very quickly.
