Israel blamed for airstrikes at Syrian missile base

Israel was behind the Wednesday night airstrike in Syria, an anonymous US official said. The Israeli government has declined to comment on the accusation.

Khattab Abdulaa/Reuters
A Free Syrian Army fighter carries his weapon as he moves towards his position at the Jabal al-Akrad area in Syria's northwestern Latakia province October 10, 2013.

Editor's note: This story was updated at 9:54 a.m. Friday to incorporate US comments.

Israel was responsible for a large explosion this week at a Syrian missile base near the Mediterranean coast town of Latakia, an anonymous US official told CNN Thursday. The Israeli government has declined to comment on the claims. 

Fingers pointed to Israel almost immediately after the attack, the latest in a string of alleged Israeli airstrikes against advanced weapons systems in Syria possibly intended for Lebanon’s Shiite militant group Hezbollah. Israel has repeatedly said it will take action to prevent the transfer of weapons to Hezbollah, whose raison d'etre is to resist Israel.

The last alleged Israeli air strike in Syria was in early July, when Israeli jets over the Mediterranean fired long-range missiles at a Syrian military base north of Latakia. The alleged target was a consignment of advanced Russian P-800 Yakhont missiles that Israel believed were destined for Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Subsequent reports claimed that the P-800 Yakhonts were not destroyed in the air strike as they had already been moved, raising the prospect of another Israeli attempt to attack the missile consignment.

Hezbollah is a close ally of the Assad regime and Syria is the main conduit for the supply of weapons to the Iran-backed Lebanese group. It has deployed thousands of crack fighters into Syrian battlefronts to aid the Syrian army's fight against rebels.

The explosion reportedly occurred Wednesday evening and targeted an air defense site near the village of Snawbar, 10 miles south of Latakia.

News of the loud blast quickly spread on social media sites. The Latakia News Network, a Facebook page that supports Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, said that the base had been struck by a missile fired from the sea and that it had caused limited casualties and damage.

Satellite images of the facility on Google Earth dated Oct. 5, 2011 show at least three SA-3 anti-aircraft missile launchers armed with a total of 10 missiles. The Soviet-era SA-3 has been in existence since the early 1960s and even with upgrades the system is not as potent as some other air defense missiles in Syria’s arsenal, such as the Russian SA-17.

There are several anti-aircraft sites scattered along Syria’s Mediterranean coast featuring the SA-3 and the older SA-2 systems and it is unclear why the Snawbar site would have been singled out for attack. There are two Syrian military bases nearby, however, one of them containing storage facilities which may mean the target of the alleged attack was misidentified.

Neither the Syrian government nor Israeli authorities gave official comment on the reported attack.

Hezbollah used an Iranian version of a Chinese anti-ship missile to disable an Israeli naval vessel during the month-long war with Israel in 2006.

If it is confirmed that Israel was responsible for Wednesday night’s explosion, it would be the fifth since January. Previous air strikes reportedly targeted SA-17 anti-aircraft missiles, Iranian-manufactured Fateh 110 surface-to-surface missiles, and military bases belonging to the Syrian army’s elite 4th Armored Division.

Israel refuses to claim responsibility for the attacks but has repeatedly warned that it will take action if it believes that “game-changing” weapons, such as air defense systems, are delivered to Hezbollah. Israel has increased the number of flights over Lebanon this year in response to concerns that Hezbollah may seek to acquire additional advanced weapons, according to United Nations diplomatic sources. The forays into Lebanese airspace are breaches of international law and are regularly protested by the UN and the Lebanese government. Israel says they are necessary as long as Hezbollah remains a threat.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.