West and Arab monarchies lozhut main hopes on Assad's enemies
Recognizable English military and political "think tank» Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) issued a bulletin "Syria: The controversial policy of intervention." It is necessary from the name, discusses the possibility of the role of NATO and the Arab monarchies in the Syrian civilian war to its end and the overthrow of the Assad regime.
One of the founders of the study, the colonel and the last commander of British troops in Afghanistan, Richard Camp notes that "the Western political leaders have no such appetites … But, as history shows, we do not elect, in which war to fight — from time to time the war itself chooses us ".
The usual explanation
With all of this in the bulletin stated: Syrian opposition is fragmented, its factions are fighting among themselves, it is rapidly growing role of Islamic radicals, which are supported by Qatar and Saudi Arabia. The creators are well aware that in postasadovskoy Syria is very great possibility of complete chaos and increase the impact of the upcoming Muslim extremists.
British analysts are considering various options for intervention in Syria. However, in the Bulletin reported that Western special forces already in the country, where exploration and training the rebels. But they have become a decisive force will fail. Chance of a cyber attack on the Syrian army command centers, but its effectiveness is limited (in this case, the Syrians have "advantage of backwardness", as the computerization of the sun is low).
Obviously, experts discussions are purely variant of the air operation. But they are turning their attention to the power of the air defense of Syria. Her depression is very expensive, inevitable loss, and the amount (anti-aircraft artillery, MANPADS, many low-altitude systems) still survives. For this same invasion is useful from 300 to 500 thousand soldiers. Creators of the newsletter are very concerned about the fate of the Syrian arsenal of chemical weapons.
Now, from the standpoint of very many external observers, while not only the man in the street, and people have tasted the taste rather, the fact that the West, Turkey and the Arab monarchies to this day have not started an intervention against Syria seem trivial military and political anomaly. Hardly ever allow anyone seriously the idea that the obstacle to intervene in the Syrian civil strife is the Russian-Chinese veto in the UN Security Council. For the attack on Yugoslavia in 1999, the mandate of the Security Council, NATO people are not useful, as the United States that struck Iraq in 2003.
But this is so far not the case in Syria, although the conflict continues there almost 18 months. Clarification of the usual — military power. As the number of personnel and amount of equipment Syrian armed forces (at least the last Army and Air Force) — one of the best not only in the Middle East and in the world as a whole. A significant part of the equipment is outdated, but it is efficient and perfectly mastered the military, having the highest (by Arab standards) level of combat and moral and psychological training. The Syrian army in times superior to his own military potential troops pushed into oblivion Jamahiriya. The main thing is that the sun Libya split immediately after the start of the uprising against Gaddafi, and Syria is not happening. Yes, there are a number of deserters, but so far most of the Syrian military and Assad are correct, as it should, will have a very severe resistance to at least some intervention. What will contribute very last delivery of air defense systems from Russia (SAM "Buk-M2", ZRPK "Armour-C1") and shore SCRC "Bastion". In general, the old system of enemy air defenses, too, will create severe difficulties. In the end, both aircraft lost the U.S. Air Force in 1999 in Yugoslavia (F-117A and F-16C), was hit by an old C-125.
Lessons from the Libyan Pyrrhic victory
Naturally, the armed forces of NATO and the Arab monarchies on all counts repeatedly exceed Syrian aircraft. Although we can not say that these characteristics are prohibitively large. Now the 28-member alliance own approximately 20 tyschami 6 tyschami tanks and combat aircraft (including carrier aviation), but they are scattered in the area from Alaska to Turkish Kurdistan. Syria has about 5 thousand tanks and about 500 combat aircraft, are in a relatively small area.
If you associate the Syrian army with the armies of NATO countries separately, then the number of its military equipment ahead of only the U.S. Army. An advantage in absolute NATO warships fundamentally no value in this case is not, as the war will be air-land. With all this Syrian potential is real, as in the West is largely a "paper". This is very clearly showed the Libyan operation, for which European countries and Canada to work "scraped together" about hundreds of combat aircraft, and yet formally a 2 and a half tyschami. The campaign in Libya showed that some members of NATO can not fight a war, even if they want (just nothing, as, for example, the Baltic republics), whereas others do not want to take part in the fighting in any case (Germany, Greece, Eastern Europe).
More importantly, the Europeans and Arabs in panic fear of loss, without which the intervention in Syria will not do in any way. And they both will fight only in this case, if they are promised victory. Better — very swift and sure — absolutely bloodless (well, except that one or two downed aircraft and less than a pair of 10-s dead soldiers). In Syria, this does not work.
The Europeans have this added to the same economic crisis. Even bloodless, benign and are of the highest bolshennymi pace and scale of the Libyan campaign of strongest dealt a blow to the defense budgets of the states participating in it, first because of the cost of aviation fuel and costly precision-guided munitions. Moreover, the European Air Force actually quite plagued by recent destruction of Libyan armored and artillery metal production 70-80-ies. Demonstrating that in fact the effectiveness of "smart bombs" that are almost praying not only in the West, but now we are very unclear. For now, very often composed entirely absurd situation (at least the last in Libya has been particularly the case), when the projectile is more objective, and the amount of ammunition in the arsenals of Western air force comparable to the number of goals, and even inferior to him.
That is why NATO Libyan victory was a Pyrrhic one indeed and politically and economically, and from a military point of view. And despite the fact that there were losses in combat aircraft. Had such — and the cost of the operation immediately increases by orders of magnitude.
On the Syrian campaign costs in advance will be many times more (about what they write and the creators of the bulletin RUSI), which threatens to turn into a very real collapse of some European aircraft, which, obviously, no one wants. Especially since the clean air campaign in Libya scenario would be useless in Syria can not do without a ground operation. And the participation of Europeans in this simply can not be considered.
Army 6 monarchies of the Persian Gulf on the information available to their military vehicles in total almost as good as the Syrian armed forces quantitatively and qualitatively far exceed (see "Six Arab monarchies against Iran"). But, as the experience of the 1990-1991 (and not just any other), the warriors fighting propertie
s of these armies are very low. The results of their clash with Iraqi forces, typologically very similar to today's Syrian units and were very grim, although the new weapon and then the Gulf OMISSIONS not felt. Confidence within the military itself Arabian armies felt, just being in the 2nd tier — behind the Yankees. There is no evidence that, at this moment, something changed. Without the help of other Arabs in the battle against other Arabs will not go.
And the U.S. apparently lost traction to the rigors of war (as shown in Libya, came out of the campaign a week after it began.) All the more so if it is a war of least than six months before the presidential elections, and the rapid bloodless victory is promised. In addition, and in America there was the problem of budget constraints. In fact, Washington is completely openly stated that up to the people's will in November, the U.S. is not something that wage war themselves, but even military aid to the rebels definitely do not want.
The exact message
Accordingly, virtually all of the loss in the event of war will fall on Turkey. Military capabilities of Turkey and Syria in general are approximately equal (as thoroughly described in the article "If Ankara is angry …"). But since the loss of Turkey in the art and ammunition consumption immediately reimburse NATO (out of supplies, and not from plants), and Syria some help (Moscow will only loudly indignant, but nothing really will not be able to do), the final war is obvious. But the damage to the Turks suffer a very significant advance. And not the fact that they are ready for it (vpribavok when watching from the confrontation between the allies).
Turkey — a democratic country and quite westernized, the fate of the ruling party is directly depending on the view of voters who apparently did not rejoice when Syria will flow coffins. Probably many Turks will wonder why you need to win the enemies breathe Assad, they are better than his followers? And whether the Republic of Turkey from this war real political gain? Completely may turn out that it would "pull the chestnuts out of the fire" of the West and Arabs, that she did not need it.
In the end, it must be understood and that of the time. The harsh campaign to crush Syria so exhausted its potential enemies (in whatever configuration they had no intervention), which is at least a couple of years will make an impossible war with Iran. Even the United States to wage war would have nothing. Were Iran to stand up for its own sole Arab ally, the opposition will accept quite unpredictable temper.
In fact the situation very well clarified the action on June 22. Settlement of the Syrian air defense of Turkey's "Phantom" would be for NATO, if it is in fact planning to invade Syria, a real godsend. In-1's, it allowed the alliance to declare himself a "victim" and do without the consent of the UN Security Council, almost starting a war legally in accordance with Article 5 of the North Atlantic contract. In-2, which took place guaranteed to provide an active role in the War of Turkey, without whose intervention in Syria impossible in principle. In fact, one could expect that the Republic of Turkey, which has a second after the U.S. military might of NATO will respond herself.
But Ankara to Damascus quarreled loudly and ran to complain to NATO. A "aggressive imperialist bloc" said that it supports the Turks, but only mentally. NATO Secretary General Rasmussen stressed that the possibility of tapping of Article 5 (collective defense) at the NATO Council, dedicated to the downed aircraft incident, did not even open a discussion.
There is not the smallest hesitation that "Phantom" Syrians shot down deliberately. Here it should be emphasized that in this country any initiative commander of anti-aircraft missile unit completely ruled out, the order for winding up the aircraft was sent from Damascus. It was the exact message: «You have not started to bombard us, and we will bring down already. If you take the risk — would be even worse. " Perhaps, in Damascus, there were ordinary people who are able to look at NATO's real. Namely, there have made adequate findings and of the Libyan delusion and suffering of the Afghan alliance, realizing that the military might of the West — such as "bubble" as its economy. And a preventive measure showed him his power.
Because the possibility of intervention against Syria does not seem very highest. For NATO is better to lose face than people and technology. A Russian-Chinese veto — very comfortable "excuse": it allows you to clarify your own "non-resistance to evil" and look for "guilty" in this violence. Syria will continue to harass sanctions and increasingly open and large-scale supplies of weapons to the rebels in the hope that they are all the same, or will be able to crush al-Assad, or fall apart, did the Syrian army, and then will be available to the Libyan scenario. It is not ruled out, the Syrian army is very exhausted mentally and physically. But the story of "The Phantom", the defeat of the rebels in Damascus showed that asadovsky regime, and his troops until fully capable (as I write these lines, yet it is unclear what the outcome of the struggle for Aleppo).
And bulletin RUSI essentially just explained why no intervention will not follow. This is evidenced by at least above the necessities of the number of troops for the occupation of Syria: from 300 to 500 thousand. Subject is not ending the Afghan campaign, you can dial 300 thousand only in this case more than 250 of them make up the Turks and Arabs. As the Red Army Sukhov, "it is unlikely". 500 thousand figure is unattainable in principle in any ways.
So while the army controlled by the al-Assad of Syria, an intervention can not think straight.