U.S. strikes on Syria foiled once-vaunted air defenses

Here’s why allies’ missiles all hit targets unscathed

WASHINGTON – Syria’s once wellregarded air defense system failed to defend against the U.S.-led strike on the country’s chemical weapons facilities last week, highlighting how far the regime’s military has declined, the Pentagon and military analysts said.

The Syrians fired 40 interceptor missiles, but most of them didn’t even get off the ground until allied missiles had already hit their targets, Pentagon officials said.

“Nearly every one was launched after the last of our missiles hit their targets,” Pentagon spokeswoman Dana White said.

The failure highlights how ineffective Syria’s military has become and the degree to which it now depends on Russia and Iran, its principal sponsors, for security, said Christopher Kozak, an analyst at the Institute for the Study of War.

U.S., French and British forces launched 105 missiles from aircraft and ships at three suspected chemical weapons facilities in Syria last weekend in response to what they said was a chemical weapons attack launched by the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Russia said Syrian defenses intercepted many missiles, but the Pentagon said every weapon hit its intended target, dismissing the Russian comments as a disinformation campaign.

The modern S-400 air defense system the Russians have in Syria is principally used for defending its two major bases inside the country.

To defend its airspace, Assad’s military employs the older Russian-built S-200 system, a network of radar and ground-to-air missiles that was designed in the 1960s.

Syria may also have the more modern Pantsir system, which is designed to defend individual bases or facilities and doesn’t have the range to cover the entire country.

Syria’s military has been weakened after seven years of war.

After the U.S. attacked a Syrian airfield last year in response to a similar chemical attack on the Syrian people, Assad complained that his regime couldn’t defend its airspace because half the country’s air defense system had been destroyed by the civil war.

Years before that, the Pentagon had described Syria’s air defense system as a challenge for American forces.

“I’m not saying we couldn’t beat that system, but it would be a greater challenge, take longer and require greater resources.”

When the U.S. was weighing the option of establishing a no-fly zone over Syria, Gen. Martin Dempsey, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Syria’s air defense system was “high-end.”

“I’m not saying we couldn’t beat that system, but it would be a greater challenge, take longer and require greater resources,” he said in 2013.

But even a sophisticated air defense system would have had trouble defending against the type of attack carried out by the U.S.-led coalition, analysts say.

The cruise missiles fly low and emit little heat for interceptor missiles to lock on to. They also can be programmed on a flight path that makes it difficult to predict where they will appear.

The sheer number of incoming missiles also makes them hard to track and hit at the same time.

“Their systems would be overwhelmed by 100 cruise missiles,” said Michael Pregent, an analyst at the Hudson Institute.

Gen. Martin Dempsey Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 2013