Tepid Relations Between Russia, Israel Translate Into Missiles In Syria

Damaged buildings are shown after what Syrian authorities said was an Israeli air strike in the western suburbs of Damascus, Syria in this handout released by state news agency SANA on April 27, 2020. SANA/Handout via REUTERS
Damaged buildings are shown after what Syrian authorities said was an Israeli air strike in the western suburbs of Damascus, Syria in this handout released by state news agency SANA on April 27, 2020. SANA/Handout via REUTERS
TT

Tepid Relations Between Russia, Israel Translate Into Missiles In Syria

Damaged buildings are shown after what Syrian authorities said was an Israeli air strike in the western suburbs of Damascus, Syria in this handout released by state news agency SANA on April 27, 2020. SANA/Handout via REUTERS
Damaged buildings are shown after what Syrian authorities said was an Israeli air strike in the western suburbs of Damascus, Syria in this handout released by state news agency SANA on April 27, 2020. SANA/Handout via REUTERS

The Russian reaction on the new Israeli raids on areas near Damascus, did not carry anything new in tone or content.

The statement, announced by the Deputy Head of the Russian Center for Reconciliation, Vadim Kolet, was short and devoid of any clear stance, almost a literal repetition of similar declarations issued after a series of raids targeting sites in Syria in July.

The statement said that the Syrian forces repelled the Israeli raids, and the country’s air defense destroyed 21 of 24 missiles.

“At approximately 1:30 on Friday, September 3, 4 F-15 tactical fighters were directed to the Israeli Air Force, from within Lebanese airspace, struck 24 missiles directed at targets on Syrian territory,” Kolet stated.

He added: “The Syrian air defense forces shot down 21 missiles using the Russian-made Buk M2A and Pantsir-S1 systems.”

However, this repetition of similar statements over the past two months is not without connotations, because Russia, which sends direct messages to the Israelis that it “monitors” and “helps the Syrians to confront attacks,” does not want to transfer the “military conflict” in Syria into a political confrontation.

Following the July raids, military observers talked about a change in the “rules of the game,” saying that Russia was working to close Syrian airspace to Israel.

Moreover, this development is taking place with the knowledge and tacit approval of the United States, which does not currently favor the explosion of the situation in Syria.

In this context, information was leaked about Moscow providing Damascus with updated versions of the Buk missile systems and Russian military experts helping Syrian forces operate them with maximum effectiveness, which confirms the Russian determination to put an end to the repeated raids.

However, Russian experts said that this development leaves Tel Aviv with no choice: It will have to strike repeatedly in Syria, despite the change in the positions of Moscow and Washington.

The old Russian-Israeli disagreement about the Iranian presence in Syria, and the mechanisms for dealing with it, is not the main factor that prompted change in the Russian position.

Moscow had reached an initial understanding with the Israelis that Tel Aviv had the right to target sites in Syria if it saw in them a danger or threat, which explains why it has been silent for a long time on the Israeli attacks.

But the patience of the Russians began to run out, according to a Russian diplomat, when Israel expanded the scope of its goals, to include sites belonging to the Syrian army.

Asked by Asharq Al-Awsat about the Israeli message behind the recent attack near Damascus, an informed diplomatic source said that the problem lied in the tepid relations between Russia and Israel.

Russian circles have spoken in recent weeks that the formation of the government in Israel has created a new reality in the Russian-Israeli agreements over Syria.

According to the sources, the new Israeli government’s stance diverges from that of the Kremlin and the government of former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“Frigid relations developed rapidly due to a series of steps taken by Israel,” they added.



How Likely Is the Use of Nuclear Weapons by Russia?

This photograph taken at a forensic expert center in an undisclosed location in Ukraine on November 24, 2024, shows parts of a missile that were collected for examination at the impact site in the town of Dnipro following an attack on November 21. (Photo by Roman PILIPEY / AFP)
This photograph taken at a forensic expert center in an undisclosed location in Ukraine on November 24, 2024, shows parts of a missile that were collected for examination at the impact site in the town of Dnipro following an attack on November 21. (Photo by Roman PILIPEY / AFP)
TT

How Likely Is the Use of Nuclear Weapons by Russia?

This photograph taken at a forensic expert center in an undisclosed location in Ukraine on November 24, 2024, shows parts of a missile that were collected for examination at the impact site in the town of Dnipro following an attack on November 21. (Photo by Roman PILIPEY / AFP)
This photograph taken at a forensic expert center in an undisclosed location in Ukraine on November 24, 2024, shows parts of a missile that were collected for examination at the impact site in the town of Dnipro following an attack on November 21. (Photo by Roman PILIPEY / AFP)

On 24 February 2022, in a televised speech heralding the Russian invasion of Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin issued what was interpreted as a threat to use nuclear weapons against NATO countries should they interfere.

“Russia will respond immediately,” he said, “and the consequences will be such as you have never seen in your entire history.”

Then on 27 February 2022, Putin ordered Russia to move nuclear forces to a “special mode of combat duty’, which has a significant meaning in terms of the protocols to launch nuclear weapons from Russia.”

Dr. Patricia Lewis, director of the International Security program at Chatham House, wrote in a report that according to Russian nuclear weapons experts, Russia’s command and control system cannot transmit launch orders in peacetime, so increasing the status to “combat” allows a launch order to go through and be put into effect.

She said Putin made stronger nuclear threats in September 2022, following months of violent conflict and gains made by a Ukrainian counterattack.

“He indicated a stretch in Russian nuclear doctrine, lowering the threshold for nuclear weapons use from an existential threat to Russia to a threat to its territorial integrity,” Lewis wrote.

In November 2022, according to much later reports, the US and allies detected manoeuvres that suggested Russian nuclear forces were being mobilized.

Lewis said that after a flurry of diplomatic activity, China’s President Xi Jinping stepped in to calm the situation and speak against the use of nuclear weapons.

In September 2024, Putin announced an update of the 2020 Russian nuclear doctrine. The update was published on 19 November 2024 and formally reduced the threshold for nuclear weapons use.

According to Lewis, the 2020 doctrine said that Russia could use nuclear weapons “in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and/or its allies, as well as in the event of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is in jeopardy.”

On 21 November 2024, Russia attacked Dnipro in Ukraine using a new ballistic missile for the first time.

She said Putin announced the missile as the ‘Oreshnik’, which is understood to be a nuclear-capable, intermediate-range ballistic missile which has a theoretical range of below 5,500km.

Lewis added that Russia has fired conventionally armed nuclear-capable missiles at Ukraine throughout the war, but the Oreshnik is much faster and harder to defend against, and suggests an escalatory intent by Russia.

Nuclear Response During Cold War

In her report, Lewis said that nuclear weapons deterrence was developed in the Cold War primarily on the basis of what was called ‘mutually assured destruction’ (MAD).

The idea behind MAD is that the horror and destruction from nuclear weapons is enough to deter aggressive action and war, she added.

But the application of deterrence theory to post-cold war realities is far more complicated in the era of cyberattacks and AI, which could interfere with the command and control of nuclear weapons.

In light of these risks, presidents Biden and Xi issued a joint statement from the 2024 G20 summit affirming the need to maintain human control over the decision to use nuclear weapons.

The US and Russia exchange information on their strategic, long-range nuclear missiles under the New START agreement – a treaty to reduce and monitor nuclear weapons between the two countries which is set to expire in February 2026.

But, Lewis said, with the US decision to exit the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 2019, there are no longer any agreements between the US and Russia regulating the number or the deployment of ground-launched nuclear missiles with a range of 500-5,500 km.

She said short-range nuclear weapons were withdrawn and put in storage as a result of the 1991 Presidential Nuclear Initiatives but are not subject to any legal restraints.

The 10th NPT Review Conference was held in 2022 in New York. The issue of nuclear weapons threats and the targeting of nuclear power stations in Ukraine were central to the debate.

Lewis noted that a document was carefully crafted to finely balance concerns about the three pillars of the treaty – non-proliferation, nuclear disarmament and the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. But Russia withdrew its agreement on the last day of the conference, scuppering progress.

“It was believed that if Russia were to use nuclear weapons it would likely be in Ukraine, using short range, lower yield ‘battlefield’ nuclear weapons,” she said, adding that Russia is thought to have more than 1,000 in reserve.

“These would have to be taken from storage and either connected to missiles, placed in bombers, or as shell in artillery,” Lewis wrote.

Increasingly the rhetoric from Russia suggests nuclear threats are a more direct threat to NATO – not only Ukraine – and could refer to longer range, higher yield nuclear weapons.

For example in his 21 September 2022 speech, Putin accused NATO states of nuclear blackmail, referring to alleged “statements made by some high-ranking representatives of the leading NATO countries on the possibility and admissibility of using weapons of mass destruction – nuclear weapons – against Russia.”

Putin added: “In the event of a threat to the territorial integrity of our country and to defend Russia and our people, we will certainly make use of all weapon systems available to us. This is not a bluff.”

There have been no expressed nuclear weapons threats from NATO states.

NATO does rely on nuclear weapons as a form of deterrence and has recently committed to significantly strengthen its longer-term deterrence and defence posture in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The current UK Labor government has repeatedly reiterated its commitment to British nuclear weapons – including before the July 2024 election, according to Lewis.

Therefore, she said, any movement to ready and deploy Russian nuclear weapons would be seen and monitored by US and others’ satellites, which can see through cloud cover and at night – as indeed appears to have happened in late 2022.

Lewis concluded that depending on other intelligence and analysis – and the failure of all diplomatic attempts to dissuade Russia – NATO countries may decide to intervene to prevent launch by bombing storage sites and missile deployment sites in advance.