Week One of the Russian Military Intervention in Syria

 

 

The Saker, for Unz Review, 10 October 2015

 

The speed at which the Russian military operation in Syria was conducted
what a
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/08/us-mideast-crisis-intelligence-ex
clusive-idUSKCN0S20CZ20151008> big surprise for the US intelligence
community (which I can hardly blame as I was just as surprised myself). Make
no mistake here, the Russian force in Syria is a small one, at least for the
time being, and it does not even remotely resemble what the rumours had
predicted, but it is especially the manner in which it is being used which
is very original: as a type of "
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_multiplication> force multiplier" for
the Syrian military and a likely cover for the Iranian one. This is a very
elegant solution in which a small force achieves a disproportionately big
result. This is also a rather dangerous strategy, because it leaves the
force very vulnerable, but one which, at least so far, Putin very
successfully explained to the Russian people.

 



SU-34 bombing in Raqqah or Aleppo Provinces, RIA-Novosti
<https://www.rt.com/news/318193-russian-military-syria-isis/> 

 

 
<http://dni24.com/politics-of-ukraine/54323-bolshinstvo-rossiyan-soglasny-s-
resheniem-putina-bombit-terroristov-v-sirii.html> According to the most
recent poll, 66% of Russian support the airstrikes in Syria while 19% oppose
them. Considering the risks involved, these are extremely good numbers.
Putin's personal popularity, by the way, is still at a phenomenal 85% (all
these figures have an margin of error of 3.4%). Still, these figures
indicate to me that the potential for concern and, possibly, disappointment
is present. The big advantage that Putin has over any US President is that
Russians understand that wars, all wars, have a cost, and they are therefore
nowhere as casualty-averse as the people in the USA or Europe. Still, while
combat footage taken from UAV is a good start, Putin will have to be able to
show something more tangible soon. Hence, probably, the current Syrian army
counter-offensive. Still, the current way of triumphalism in Russia makes me
nervous.

 

The reaction in the West, however, has been very negative, especially after
the Russian cruise missile attacks (which mark the first time ever that the
Russians have used their non-nuclear but strategic forces in a show of force
aimed less as Daesh than at the USA).

 

On October 8th, the US Secretary of Defence Ashton Carter, declared:

 

"We have not and will not agree to cooperate with Russia so long as they
continue to pursue this misguided strategy. We've seen increasingly
unprofessional behavior from Russian forces. They violated Turkish airspace,
which as all of us here made clear earlier this week, and strongly affirmed
today here in Brussels, is NATO airspace. They've shot cruise missiles from
a ship in the Caspian Sea without warning. They've come within just a few
miles of one of our unmanned aerial vehicles. They have initiated a joint
ground offensive with the Syrian regime, shattering the facade that they're
there to fight ISIL.

 

"This will have consequences for Russia itself, which is rightfully fearful
of attack upon Russia. And I also expect that in coming days, the Russians
will begin to suffer casualties in Syria"

 

(Source:
<http://www.defense.gov/News/News-Transcripts/Transcript-View/Article/622454
/press-conference-by-secretary-carter-at-nato-headquarters-brussels-belgium>
http://www.defense.gov/News/News-Transcripts/Transcript-View/Article/622454/
press-conference-by-secretary-carter-at-nato-headquarters-brussels-belgium)

 



US Secretary of Defence Ashton Carter

 

Does that not remind you of something? Does that not sound like a repeat of
the threat made by Saudi Arabia's intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin
Sultan's threat to unleash 'Chechen' terror attacks against Russia? At the
very least, this is, yet again, a sign that the US controls or, rather,
thinks that it controls the Wahabi crazies and can unleash them against any
opponent.

 

On the next day, the Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor
Konashenkov replied by saying:

 

"Representatives of the Russian Defense Ministry, in their evaluation of the
actions of the US military and the various operations they are engaged
worldwide, have never sunk down to the level to publicly express the hope
for the death of US servicemen or, even less so, of ordinary Americans.
Today's announcement by Pentagon chief Ashton Carter, unfortunately clearly
illustrates the current level of political culture of some representatives
of the US government or, should I say, their level of cynicism towards the
rest of the world. I am sure that no US general would ever have allowed
himself to express such feelings."

 

(Source: <http://tass.ru/politika/2331242> http://tass.ru/politika/2331242)

 



Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov

 

Typically, there are two basic ways the West handles any Russian military
operation: they are either presented as mass murder and butchery or as
gross, primitive and ineffective.
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/08/politics/russian-missiles-syria-landed-iran/i
ndex.html> CNN chose the second option
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/08/politics/russian-missiles-syria-landed-iran/i
ndex.html> and reported that "A number of cruise missiles launched from a
Russian ship and aimed at targets in Syria have crashed in Iran, two U.S.
officials told CNN Thursday". Both Russia and Iran immediately denied that,
as for the State Department and the Pentagon, they have refused to confirm
or deny these reports.

 

Maria Zakarova, the spokeswoman for the Russian Foreign Ministry reacted
with disgust to these reports
<https://www.facebook.com/maria.zakharova.167/posts/10208068280734490> on
her FB account and wrote: "I have read the CNN reports claiming that
"Russian cruise missiles fell in Iran." I wonder, do they write that out of
impotent anger, or what? As for the constant references to "sources" they
remind of the channeling of water from the sewer".

 

Clearly, the Russians are rather disgusted with the rather pathetic US
reactions to the Russian military operation. As for US officials, they
appear rather clueless as to what do do next.

 

However, these appearances can be deceiving: this "game" is very far from
being over.

As I have written
<http://www.unz.com/tsaker/size-matters-and-obamas-zugzwang/> in a recent
column, the notion that Russia has established a no-fly zone over Syria is
plain false: four SU-30MS, even if backed by six SU-34s are not enough to
establish any kind of no-fly zone. The real mission of these SU-30MSs is to
protect the Russian Air Force from any overzealous Turkish or Israeli
fighter, not to establish a no-fly zone. In fact, according to the commander
of the USAF operation over Syria, the US flies many more sorties than the
Russians. What he does not add is that most of these US sorties do not
include the release of weapons whereas all the Russian ones do. But, really,
this is comparing apples and oranges. The USAF can fly as many sorties as it
wants, only the Russian aircraft are operating in close coordination with
Syrian and Iranian ground forces.

 

What worries me most is that people on both sides like to engage in cheap
bravado and say things like "the Americans/Russians would never dare to
attack a Russian/American aircraft". This is a very dangerous way of
thinking about what is going on because it ignores all the historical
evidence for decision-makers making very dumb decisions to try to avoid
appearing humiliated by the other side (Ehud Olmert in 2006, immediately
comes to mind). The fact that Obama and the USA look totally out-smarted is
nice, of course, but also potentially very dangerous.

 

The good news is that, at least for the time being, neither Russia nor the
USA are directly threatening each other, at least not on a military level.
The USAF apparently has decided on a 20 miles "avoidance radius" and while
the Russians have not made any statements about this, I am pretty sure that
they also go out of their way not to interfere with the Americans, much less
so threaten them directly. Still, this situation is inherently dangerous.

 

Since this is a real combat zone and not just some peacetime patrol area,
Russian and American aircraft have to use radar modes which are normally
associated with a hostile intent: not just scan the skies for any potential
enemy, but also actively track any detected aircraft. This is a very
delicate situation because once a radar has acquired an aircraft and is
actively tracking it all the pilot has to do to attack is press one button.
For the pilot in the aircraft being tracked, this is similar to having a gun
pointed at you - it makes you very nervous. To make things worse, modern
aircraft can actually engage each other without using these radar modes and
they can try to hide their radar signals, but that only adds to the tension.
It is precisely because the US and Russia are two nuclear powers that it is
crucial that neither side count on the other one to "blink first" or play
any game of chicken.

 

The politicians can indulge in this kind of nonsense, but I hope that the
generals on both sides will do everything in their power to avoid any such
situation. Right now, the situation appears to be under control, but it
could get worse very fast. Hopefully, the Pentagon and the Russian General
Staff will come to a "de-conflicting" agreement soon.

 

There are numerous reports that Iran is preparing a major intervention in
Syria. These reports come from many sources and I consider them credible
simply because there is no way that the very limited Russian intervention
can really change the time of the war, at least not by itself. Yes, I do
insist that the Russian intervention is a very limited one. 12 SU-24M, 12
SU-25SM, 6 SU-34 and 4 SU-30SM are not a big force, not even backed by
helicopters and cruise missiles. Yes, the Russian force has been very
effective to relieve the pressure on the northwestern front and to allow for
a Syrian Army counter-offensive, but that will not, by itself, end the war.
For one thing, should things get really ugly, the Daesh crazies can simply
repeat what they have already done in the past: cross the border into
Turkey, Jordan and Iraq. Furthermore, you cannot hold any ground from the
air. For that, "boots on the ground" are needed and Russian boots are not
coming - Putin has unambiguously stated that (although he did leave a small
door open for a future change of strategy by saying that a ground
intervention was not in the "current plans"). Regardless, anything short of
a minor or very short intervention would be fantastically hard to sell in
Russia and I therefore still don't believe that it will happen. My bet is on
the Iranians. Well, when I say "Iranians" I mean Iranians and their allies,
including Hezbollah, but not necessarily in Iranian uniforms.

 

Chances are, the Iranians and the Syrians will want to keep the magnitude of
the Iranian involvement as hidden from view as possible. But, of course,
they won't be able to fool the USA, Turkey or Israel for very long, at least
not if a large Iranian force is involved.

 

So the big question for me is this: what will the USA do if (when?) Iran
intervenes in Syria?

 

Chances are that the Iraqis will request the Russian help to defeat Daesh
exactly at the moment when the Iranians make their move. If the Russians
agree, and it looks like they might, the Russian Air Force will, in fact, be
providing air cover for the Iranian forces moving across Iraq towards Syria.
My guess is that the Russians will try to get some UNSC Resolution to allow
an international intervention in Syria or that, failing that, they will try
to get some kind of deal with the USA. But that is going to be awfully hard,
as they Neocons will go ballistic if the Iranians actually make a big move
into Syria.

 

Right now the Russian Air Force does not have the resources needed to
support an Iranian move into Syria, and that might be the reason for a
<http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/08/16/425037/Russia-Iraq-Syria-Mikoyan-Mi
G31-Rosoboronexport> reappearance of the rumor about "six MiG-31s" going to
Syria. I personally have seen no evidence for that, at least not form any
halfway dencent source, but if that does really happen, then this will
become a major game-changer because one thing is certain: MiG-31s will never
be used against Daesh or even a few isolated Turkish or Israeli fighters; if
the MiG-31s ever really show up in the Syrian skies, their goal will be to
keep control of the Syrian airspace and that implies a direct and credible
threat against the US and its allies. The same goes for the actual
deployment of S-300s. Thank God,we are not there yet. But unless the Syrian
Army manages an extremely successful offensive against Daesh, a large
Iranian intervention will become very likely. Then things will become very
dangerous indeed.

 

In the meantime, NATO is still busy making big statements about being "
<http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense-news/2015/10/08/nato-secretary-gen
eral-ready-send-troops-turkey/73572460/> ready to defend Turkey" while
McCain declares that the US and Russia are engaged in a "
<http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/04/john-mccain-russia-us-proxy-
war-syria-obama-putin> proxy war". We ought to be grateful for such loud
emissions of hot hair because, hopefully, as long as the western leaders
feel that their empty talk makes them look credible, they will not be
tempted to do something truly stupid and dangerous.

 

These are definitely dangerous times.

 

 

From:
http://www.unz.com/tsaker/week-one-of-the-russian-military-intervention-in-s
yria/ (with 2 Comments at this time)

 

Also at:
http://thesaker.is/week-one-of-the-russian-military-intervention-in-syria/
(with 32 Comments at this time).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-- 
-- 
NEW!!!! SSN FORUM IS ON FACEBOOK!!!!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Swaziland 
Solidarity Network Forum Google Group. 
Visit the group home page at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sa-swaziland-solidarity-eom-forum for more 
options, pages and files.
To post to the group, send email to 
sa-swaziland-solidarity-eom-forum@googlegroups.com or reply to this message.
To unsubscribe, send email to 
sa-swaziland-solidarity-eom-forum-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Swaziland Solidarity Network Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to sa-swaziland-solidarity-eom-forum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to