Minister of Defence Ehud Barak has had a busy week.
On Wednesday and Thursday he was in the US after a midweek meeting with IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, dealing with ministry of defence routine business and trying to avoid the news media people who wanted him to comment on the accusations made against him by former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in a recently published autobiography. Earlier in the week he flew to Moscow to sign a military cooperation agreement with his Russian counterpart, Anatoly Serdyukov. The agreement, purportedly the first of its kind, calls for increased cooperation in combating terrorism and the proliferation of nuclear weapons. While it’s not clear what the practical implications of this agreement are, observers believe it could lead to the sale of Israeli military hardware to the Russian army.
Russia is particularly interested in acquiring Israeli unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Last year Israel Aerospace Industries sold 12 UAVs to Russia. Before the Russo-Georgian conflict erupted another Israeli company, Elbit Systems sold a number of Hermes 450 UAVs to the Georgian armed forces. At the time George Friedman noted in Stratfor (a private global intelligence company providing analyses, surveys and even predictions) that,
” Israel had publicly announced to end weapons sales to Georgia the week before the Georgians attacked South Ossetia. Clearly the Israelis knew what was coming and wanted no part of it. Afterward, unlike the Americans, the Israelis did everything they could to placate the Russians, including having Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert travel to Moscow to offer reassurances. Whatever the Israelis were doing in Georgia, they did not want a confrontation with the Russians.”
The Russians learnt to value the use of UAV’s and in addition to buying a dozen of them they are interested in a joint venture to manufacture Israeli UAVs in Russia.
While Barak was in Moscow he reiterated the concern expressed earlier by Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu and President Shimon Peres regarding the sale of advanced Russian military technology to Syria and Iran.
The agreement with Syria was approved three years ago and has now been ratified by Minister of Defence Anatoly Serdyuko. Nevertheless, the sale of armaments is a murky business and the minister has ample time to reconsider, review and reassess the topic. Likewise Israel has put the plans to establish the UAV joint venture with Russia on hold. The report of the delay mentioned “concerns regarding the transfer of sensitive technology.” Maybe this is not quite quid pro quo but it might have some bearing on the Russian supply schedule.
The Australian mentioned another knee-jerk response, “Political officials quoted in Israel's media also suggested there could be a reassessment of whether Israel should consider selling arms to some of Russia's enemies, such as Georgia, which Israel has in recent times refused to do due to an understanding with Russia.”
The Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) is an independent academic institute that incorporates the Jaffee Institute for Strategic Studies at the Tel Aviv University. It studies key issues relating to Israel's national security and Middle East affairs. In a recent analysis of the Russian arms sales to Syria it stated, “Russia generally uses the supply of weapons to achieve influence in the international arena, especially as it has few other ways to gain influence. In most cases, refusal to supply, changes in timing, and so on serve as political messages.” Coming directly to the point the authors asked, “ If so, what is the reason for this turnaround in the Russian policy of supplying weapons to Syria?
In recent years, Syria has turned into a key regional player for Russia, whereby Russia is hoping to improve its international standing and become an influential actor in the Middle East. Syria has a similar consideration of exploiting its relations with Russia to promote its interests.”
The item that Russia has agreed to supply Syria, and rightly worries Israel, is the supersonic P-800 Yakhont cruise missile.
A recent issue of Defense Update, an Israeli defence technology and news resources bulletin attempted to answer the question, "How serious is the P800 Yakhont threat? Does it have a destabilising effect on the Middle East?"
Defense Update reasons that the Yakhont’s major advantage is its speed. It is a supersonic missile, with a speed of Mach 2.0-2.5. After launching the P800 climbs steeply to a high altitude where it can fly faster and traverse greater distances. At the last stage of its flight path it dives to a “sea skimming” height just 3-4 metres above the water before crossing the horizon to strike its target 15-25 kilometres away. Due to its great speed, only 20-25 seconds elapse between the time it is detected and the time it explodes on the target.
If the missile is supplied to Syria, it will almost certainly be the land version that serves as a coastal defence system. Ships in the largely obsolete Syrian navy don’t provide suitable platforms for the missile and the outmoded Syrian air force doesn’t have planes capable of carrying it.
If fired from a coastal launcher, the missile can reach the northern coast of Israel as far as the greater Tel Aviv area and also cover a sea-arc up to Cyprus. If stationed in Lebanon, it can cover Israel’s entire coastline as far as the Gaza Strip. Obviously the acquisition of the P800 adversely affects the Israeli navy’s freedom of movement and endangers merchant shipping lanes during wartime.
The timing of the Yakhont announcement suggests that Russia is dissatisfied with what it sees as its lack of appropriate inclusion in the peace process. Russia proposed holding a conference on the peace process in Moscow and serving as a mediator on the Palestinian and Syrian track. It also appears that Russia is worried by the American effort to revive the Syrian track without recourse to Russia’s help. It is possible that its willingness to supply these missiles is a way to entice Syria to favour Russia more. The missiles also indirectly challenge the United States (they are a possible threat to the Sixth Fleet), and thus a message is sent to the US as well. As for Israel, even though there is rather positive progress on the bilateral front, including the reported signing of a security cooperation agreement, the possibility that Russia has additional considerations that affect Israel, both in the overall regional context and the bilateral context, cannot be ruled out.
After the lengthy and depressing survey of the P800’s capabilities Defence Update added a few reassuring remarks regarding extant naval defence systems capable of countering Russia’s piece of sophisticated weaponry.
There are systems, used on U.S. Navy and many NATO vessels, the Royal Navy uses an anti-cruise missile defence system also employed by the French and Italian navies. Israel too has a new system, namely the Barak 8 ship air defence system. In addition Israel’s ‘Magic Wand’ system, employing the Stunner missile interceptor can counter the P800 effectively if employed in a surface/surface or ship/surface role.
While some navies could avoid a confrontation by steering clear of the P800’s range, the Israeli navy doesn’t have that option. Consequently the P800 threatens Israeli naval vessels moored at their main base in Haifa and also at its secondary naval base in Ashdod. Furthermore, when targeting Israeli naval patrols in international waters off the Lebanese coast, the P800 can be vertically launched from inland sites in Syria or Lebanon, fired behind the Lebanon mountain ridge, avoiding be spotted from the sea, thus minimizing early detection. “Therefore,” concludes Defence Update “Israel would do well to install its Barak-8 and Magic Wand systems as soon as possible.”
Just the same if and when the P-800 Yakhont cruise missiles are delivered to Syria it won’t be ready to employ them effectively. Syria currently does not have the means to effectively target the P800 beyond the horizon, lacking maritime patrol aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles or attack aircraft capable of carrying such missiles. They do not have the capability to detect, track and designate targets at distant ranges.
Altogether, in the short term, the arrival of the P800 in the Mediterranean is a serious threat. Over time, as the Israel Navy gets its Barak-8 missiles and Magic Wand systems deployed, the threat could be contained, assuming that the Syrians will not deploy large numbers of these missiles on platforms and constellations that would maximize its capability to launch saturation attacks against Israeli vessels.
Aviation Week also commented on the P800:
“Although its performance looks good on paper, these types of missiles lack sophisticated targeting capability since they need accurate targeting data to be provided from a great distance (hundreds of kilometres away) to operate effectively. While this is more feasible for air-launched operating schemes, the likelihood of the missile acquiring the correct target from this range is questionable, particularly in a complex electronic warfare environment.
When engaging smaller targets, in open sea crowded with commercial shipping, such as the Eastern Med - this missile could be quite a serious threat to civilian vessels but is less likely to defeat protected, prepared and properly responding military vessels. “
Maybe we should be concerned about another potential threat.
An article in The Economist entitled “It’s a big deal,” informed its readers that, “The Obama administration is expected within days to notify Congress of plans to sell Saudi Arabia weaponry and logistics worth as much as $90 billion over the coming decade, in what would amount to America’s biggest-ever weapons sale. The orders reportedly include 84 F-15 long-range combat aircraft and scores of attack helicopters, along with naval vessels, advanced air defence systems, and contracts to refurbish the kingdom’s large existing stocks of American arms.”
If the $300 million Russian arms sale to Syria worries us we should be very alarmed by the $90 billion sale to Saudi Arabia.
Local observers claim that, “It’s no big deal” and The Economist, concurs. “Approval of the sale would also mark a significant change of tack by Israel, which has often swayed American politicians against bolstering Arab arsenals. Its supporters appear mollified, this time, by the prospect of seeing Iran, which Israel now regards as its most pressing threat, squeezed. Israel, which in any case has received $3 billion a year of free American arms for three decades, has reportedly received assurances that, as in the past, the new Saudi weaponry will come stripped of advanced features that might challenge Israel’s technical superiority.”
The Boston Globe advises “The best of many risky options: Arm Saudis to contain Iran”
“Boeing and other defense companies are touting the Saudi arms deal for its potential to create over 70,000 jobs in 44 states. But ultimately the security argument for the sale has to outweigh the economic argument. And it does — if only because other options for coping with Iran’s nuclear program look much more dangerous.”
Some Israeli analysts wonder what the Saudis are going to do with so many sophisticated toys. The Saudi Arabian armed forces will be hard put to accommodate the new weaponry. Nevertheless, it obviously annoys Iran, it’s good for the Saudi royal house’s testosterone level and as more than one US news media source has emphasised it means jobs for the boys. I’m sure there’s more that can be read into the matter than this brief comment.
I wonder what our taxi drivers have to say about it.
As we celebrate Sukkot this week (more universally known as the Feast of Tabernacles) hundreds of young Israelis ignored warnings issued by our security services and crossed the border at Taba to spend the holiday in Sinai. Not to go in the footsteps of their ancestors following Moses in the wilderness but to “hang out “on the beaches oblivious of the P800 threat.
Chag Sameach
Beni 22nd of September, 2010.
. Seeker head repeated activation
and missile homing
No comments:
Post a Comment