War Against ISIS

[A.V. Berg]

Though interestingly enough Iran will spend quite a bit of their oil money in Russia. They're already sniffing around the Sukhoi SuperJet, and there's rumors of a 21 billion dollar mega-package for various high-tech goods and services for Iran, from another nuclear powerplant to passenger jets, helos, etc. Details, of course, are lacking.

Exactly. Ship-borne trade across the Caspian between Iran and Russia has been growing steadily since 2000 despite sanctions. One tell-tale sign of that is a spike in the production of river/sea class container ships by ship-yards on the Volga and modernisation of Iran's Caspian ports. So, once Iranian economy improves, already existing trade nomenclature will grow even more. Plus, with the lifting of sanctions, Iran will be able to buy things it previously could not, hence the purported 21 billion dollar deal.

I've also heard that, once production increases, some of the oil for European markets might be sold via Russia potentially resulting in considerable profits for Russian logistics companies.

Feanor, do you think helicopters in Latakia already have Russian engines? I know that some that were previously made by Motor-Sich are now made by Klimov. I thought it would be too early to send helicopters out with essentially unproven engines. Or rather, proven designs as manufactured by Ukrainians.

 

[Feanor]

Some people here consider the current Russian recession to be debilitating. But I disagree.

This recession is actually atypical. It is not characterized by rising unemployment, falling labor participation, and declining production like typical western recessions. This quazi recession is due to two primary factors: sanctions/trade barriers and decline in oil prices/falling terms of trade. The trade barriers aka sanctions are a temporary shock to GDP, they will cause/are causing trade diversion to neutral countries. These trade barriers are also greatly stimulating domestic industries, and with gov't financial assistance, things are actually looking very good for domestic producers. Sanctions are actually causing future economic gain from rapid domestic investment.

Oil price decline is translating into deteriorating terms of trade for Russia. That is probably the biggest source of GDP decline. Lower oil revenues however do not imply lower production. In reality this is not a true recession. Russians are forced to consume fewer western goods while the market for domestic producers and neutral-foreign producers has/is accelerating. The only real downsides are problems with private debt management and sanctioned dual purpose electronics purchases, but Russia seems to be making progress in solving these issues.

The problem begins when you look at a lot of the economic development that went on in Russia in the past 15 years. There's a lot of state-driven investment into infrastructure and even directly into industrial projects. This in turn encourages private economic activity, and even revitalizes Soviet-era factories that were previously in bad shape. With a decrease of spending on these things there will be marked medium term effects. So while you're right in the short term, in the longer term it will still begin to translate into problems throughout the economy. The question of course remains, how long can the Saudis keep the taps open.

 

[Feanor]

Update.

Russia air strikes continue, and are causing the rebels to move their supplies and training facilities into cities, and next to mosques, likely to avoid Russian air strikes.

Two command posts near Deyr-Ez-Zor were hit, a training camp and two field camps in Idlib, the first air strike near Damascus took place hitting a rebel position. Kafer-Avayd, Idlib province, was hit housing allegedly an international training camp for fighters. An ISIS strong point in Gmam was hit, and a munitions factory in Guta (also near Damascus).

In at least one incident they used guided cluster munitions, where each individual bomblet finds its own target. This would be consistent with claims that they've been targeting vehicle parks that include tanks and IFVs. It's most likely the RBK-500 SPBE.

They also suggest that provocations are being planned by the rebels, to demolish a mosque and blame it on air strikes. They also deny bombing Palmyra, though air strikes took place north east of it.

Продолжение операции ВКС РоÑÑии в Сирии 6 октÑÐ±Ñ€Ñ - bmpd
Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: "Àáñîëþòíàÿ ëîæü": Ìèíîáîðîíû îïðîâåðãëî èíôîðìàöèþ îá àâèàóäàðàõ â Ïàëüìèðå
Применение боеприпаÑов Ñ ÑамоприцеливающимиÑÑ Ð±Ð¾ÐµÐ²Ñ‹Ð¼Ð¸ Ñлементами в Сирии - Юрий ЛÑмин

Russian MoD expresses willingness to work with the Pentagon on air strikes in Syria.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Â Ìèíîáîðîíû ÐÔ çàÿâèëè î ãîòîâíîñòè êîîðäèíèðîâàòü îïåðàöèþ â Ñèðèè ñ Ïåíòàãîíîì

Photos and material on Russian Mi-24Ps in Syria. The article speculates that they used Mi-24s because spares are already in country.

СирийÑкие "крокодилы" - Берлога Бронемедведа

Western sources claim Iranian military officials convinced Russia to get involved in Syria.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Reuters: èðàíñêèé ãåíåðàë Ñóëåéìàíè óáåäèë Ðîññèþ íà÷àòü áîìáàðäèðîâêè Ñèðèè

NATO sources claim additional air space violations of Turkish air spaces have occurred. Turkey specifically claims a MiG-29 was involved in one of the violations. Which would likely make it Syria, there haven't been any Russian MiG-29s reported (though it would have made sense to deploy the MiG-29SMTs there).

Erdogan says Russia has a lot to lose in a friend like Turkey. Personally I have to wonder if he's referring to the air space violations, or to the operation in Syria as a whole.

Тем временем оÑманы... - Вахтенный журнал Ñтареющего пирата
Больше! УжаÑнее! Круче! - Берлога БронеÐедведа
Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Ïðåçèäåíò Òóðöèè ïðèãðîçèë Ðîññèè "ïîòåðåé ìíîãîãî" â ñëó÷àå ññîðû ñ Àíêàðîé

Turkey has dropped over 2000 PGMs on targets in Turkey and Syria, hitting 1200 targets, mainly ISIS in Syria and the PKK in Turkey.

Турецкие новоÑти - Военный Блог

The US calls Russian involvement in Syria a strategic mistake.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Âëàñòè ÑØÀ îöåíèëè âîåííóþ îïåðàöèþ Ðîññèè â Ñèðèè êàê "ñòðàòåãè÷åñêóþ îøèáêó"

 

[gazzzwp]

Some people here consider the current Russian recession to be debilitating. But I disagree.

This recession is actually atypical. It is not characterized by rising unemployment, falling labor participation, and declining production like typical western recessions. This quazi recession is due to two primary factors: sanctions/trade barriers and decline in oil prices/falling terms of trade. The trade barriers aka sanctions are a temporary shock to GDP, they will cause/are causing trade diversion to neutral countries. These trade barriers are also greatly stimulating domestic industries, and with gov't financial assistance, things are actually looking very good for domestic producers. Sanctions are actually causing future economic gain from rapid domestic investment.

Iran claimed similar benefits after years of recession but in the end they came back to the table to do a deal with the US. Something must have caused them to do that. Sanctions may therefore not be capable of bringing a nation down economically but what they do is arrest growth which hurts just as much.

On the media:

In typical style the media looks as if it already getting bored with the new developments and less commenting and reports are occurring.

 

[Toblerone]

Western media? I guess it's because US failure is plain for all to see. If the russians slip up they will be all over that. For example if a russian plane is lost they will throw an article spam out for a few days.

Or the new mosque-as-a-shield tactics (also human shields maybe?) could give them more material if/when a bombing happens.

You can only get so far with USA complaining that the "good" rebels are being hit instead of the baddies, reports about the high cost of operations for the "bad" russian economy, Turkey whining about not being able to bomb those poor Kurds that fought IS to the nail, Assad helicopters dropping fragmentation bombs instead of pillow stuffing bombs etc.

Also what about the Afghanistan civil war and the Yemen free for all scuffle? Are those being reported?

 

[A.V. Berg]

Western media? I guess it's because US failure is plain for all to see. If the russians slip up they will be all over that. For example if a russian plane is lost they will throw an article spam out for a few days.

Or the new mosque-as-a-shield tactics (also human shields maybe?) could give them more material if/when a bombing happens.

You can only get so far with USA complaining that the "good" rebels are being hit instead of the baddies, reports about the high cost of operations for the "bad" russian economy, Turkey whining about not being able to bomb those poor Kurds that fought IS to the nail, Assad helicopters dropping fragmentation bombs instead of pillow stuffing bombs etc.

Also what about the Afghanistan civil war and the Yemen free for all scuffle? Are those being reported?

There is some truth in this, I think. The examples that come to mind is the near-silence on Iraqi use of barrel bombs. Granted that Assad's forces used more of them and for a longer period, it is still the case that potentially thousands of civilians could have been killed or wounded by Iraqi indiscriminate bombing. Neither is Saudi meddling in the region, its export of extremist ideology or indeed its war against internal dissent, get much reportage.

 

[A.V. Berg]

Guys, I am not sure which thread to post this in but I thought it might warrant some commentary. Russian media, followed by Reuters, is reporting a deployment of Mi 24P attack helicopters and Mi 8MTV transports to a base near Dushanbe in Tajikistan. There have been Russian troops in that country since Soviet times, but this seems to be a new development.

Geography would suggest that this has nothing to do with Syria. However, could it be the case that the Russians are planning a more general campaign against Islamic extremism by striking Taliban?

Perhaps there could be a more prosaic explanation. Namely, deployment was planned a while ago in preparation for NATO pullout from Afghanistan. After all, it was only resently that Moscow ratified an agreement with Dushanbe for long-term presence of its troops on Tajik soil.

 

[SolarWind]

The problem begins when you look at a lot of the economic development that went on in Russia in the past 15 years. There's a lot of state-driven investment into infrastructure and even directly into industrial projects. This in turn encourages private economic activity, and even revitalizes Soviet-era factories that were previously in bad shape. With a decrease of spending on these things there will be marked medium term effects. So while you're right in the short term, in the longer term it will still begin to translate into problems throughout the economy. The question of course remains, how long can the Saudis keep the taps open.

There is room for improvement in infrastructure, but it is mostly a short term budgeting decision and a question of priorites. Russia cannot easily finance infrastructure development through sovereign debt issue due to its sovereign ratings being artificially low (biased western market rating companies). The price of oil hovewer is expected to go to $60+ in 2016, as high production cost American oil producers eventually run out of money and credit options and go bankrupt.

 

[gazzzwp]

Two more snippets from various media.

Apparently missiles were fired from a Russian vessel in the Black Sea which travelled 932 miles and hit it's 'ISIL' target. Feanor what type of weapon would this be?

If indeed it happened that way it's impressive and shows off some advanced guidance capability. Is this one of the reasons why the US are reticent to engage Russia?

Another news article tells that Russia have made 3 intercepts on Predator drones. Not shoot downs just warning tracking.

Correction: Caspian Sea

 

[A.V. Berg]

Caspian Flotilla strikes ISIS

RIA Novosti reports that four Caspian Flotilla vessels have launched 26 Kalibr (Klub in NATO classification) cruise missiles against ISIS in Syria.

I presume that given the numbers of vessels involved, this would have been a combination of one Gepard class frigate and three Buyan class corvettes.

This would have to be the first use of the Kalibr in anger. I dare say, this is the first Russian use of long-range strike in anger.

 

[Ranger25]

RIA Novosti reports that four Caspian Flotilla vessels have launched 26 Kalibr (Klub in NATO classification) cruise missiles against ISIS in Syria.

I presume that given the numbers of vessels involved, this would have been a combination of one Gepard class frigate and three Buyan class corvettes.

This would have to be the first use of the Kalibr in anger. I dare say, this is the first Russian use of long-range strike in anger.

Agreed Shoigu announced a total of 26 from multiple warships were launched

A page right out of the US playbook


Russian missiles 'hit IS in Syria from Caspian' - BBC News

 

[SolarWind]

Iran claimed similar benefits after years of recession but in the end they came back to the table to do a deal with the US. Something must have caused them to do that. Sanctions may therefore not be capable of bringing a nation down economically but what they do is arrest growth which hurts just as much.

On the media:

In typical style the media looks as if it already getting bored with the new developments and less commenting and reports are occurring.

It remains to be seen if the sanctions on Russia will affect growth long term. So far growth issues are result of oil price decline, and to a lesser extent borrowing and debt issuea. Oil prices are a short term issue, and borrowing/debt problem could be compensated for with improving environment for small and medium businesses.

On other question, Russian economy is more diversofied than Iran's, and the sanctions are much less severe than were Iran's. This trade/economic mishap should motivate Russia to diversify their economy further.

 

[Ranger25]

IHS Janes reports Syria arms Hizballah armored brigade

This would be an interesting twist once verified, but reports are surfacing that the Syrian Army has offered 75 armored vehicles including T55 and T72 tanks to Hizballah to establish their own armored brigade to work allied with the Syrian Army

Wonder what reaction/action the IDF would consider....




OSINT Summary: Reports of Hizbullah armoured brigade underline its combat evolution in Syria - IHS Jane's 360

 

[A.V. Berg]

It remains to be seen if the sanctions on Russia will affect growth long term. So far growth issues are result of oil price decline, and to a lesser extent borrowing and debt issuea. Oil prices are a short term issue, and borrowing/debt problem could be compensated for with improving environment for small and medium businesses.

On other question, Russian economy is more diversofied than Iran's, and the sanctions are much less severe than were Iran's. This trade/economic mishap should motivate Russia to diversify their economy further.

Yes, comparison with Iran can only go so far. Not only is Russian economy more diversified, but it also, has sectors which even most of the first-world economies do not have to the same extent. In terms of aerospace, metallurgy and nuclear industries, Russia punches far above its weight if judged solely in terms of the size of its economy.

This is why, Russian economy is such a nightmare to reform. Namely, it combines aspects of third and first world patterns of development in ways which defy conventional attempts at rational economic planning.

 

[wild_Willie2]

Hmm, my first thought when I heard about this attack from the Caspian sea was "The countries that where overflown by these cruise missiles will not be amused by this".

If the attack has indeed taken place, these cruise missiles must have flown through Iranian and Iraqi airspace and I somehow doubt that the Iranians would agree to this.

W.

 

[A.V. Berg]

ilya-kramnik.livejournal.com

Above blog has video of the missile strike. I was, I think right in determining the ships involved. One Gepard class and three Buyan m class.

Willie, Iran is on the same side as Russia. Russian planes have been flying through Iran dozens of times now.

 

[gazzzwp]

I just listened to a military commentator discussing the technicalities of these cruise missiles.

Huge range, capable of both nuclear and conventional warheads, highly accurate, low flying, very difficult to intercept........

If anyone had any doubt about Russian capability then this surely helps to put the record straight:

The US/NATO will not engage Russia because their capabilities are too advanced. The gap has more or less closed and the outcome of an engagement would be uncertain.

That's why the US are keeping their distance. Whatever Russia wants to do it can do; unless the West are prepared to pay a very heavy price.

 

[Toblerone]

Let's not get too carried away, these capabilities are known. The russians have even had MIRV ICBMs with nuclear warheads for decades, haha. And newer ones on the way.

A thought. Was this cruise missile barrage a show of force on Putin's birthday?

 

[A.V. Berg]

I just listened to a military commentator discussing the technicalities of these cruise missiles.

Huge range, capable of both nuclear and conventional warheads, highly accurate, low flying, very difficult to intercept........

If anyone had any doubt about Russian capability then this surely helps to put the record straight:

The US/NATO will not engage Russia because their capabilities are too advanced. The gap has more or less closed and the outcome of an engagement would be uncertain.

That's why the US are keeping their distance. Whatever Russia wants to do it can do; unless the West are prepared to pay a very heavy price.

Well, NATO still holds technological, numerical and doctrinal advantage in most areas.

Some capability gaps have been closed and you are right, even in a conventional all-out war, Russia can inflict horrendous damage. In terms of capacity for localised conflicts however, probably some kind of parity has been reached.

Western media and even commentators lived under a delusion that only the US and few other states possess long-range strike ability. This of course is simply false because Soviets had SS 21 Sampson cruise missile which Russia inherited.

The absolutely new feature of Klub - which must cause some anxiety - is not only its improved capability but its universality. The Soviets were not too interested in conventional cruise missiles, whereas now, the Russians try and stick their Klubs into every type of vessel in all variants. There is even a version which is hidden in a shipping container and is offered for export.

I dare say we now have to revise, albeit mildly, our earlier assumption that the Syrian campaign does not cost much. Cruise missiles are very expensive and they rarely get launched in exercises. Plus, deployment of four ships is not cheap either, especially considering that the Caspian Flotilla has already finished its major exercises for the year.

 

[Feanor]

Well, NATO still holds technological, numerical and doctrinal advantage in most areas.

Some capability gaps have been closed and you are right, even in a conventional all-out war, Russia can inflict horrendous damage. In terms of capacity for localised conflicts however, probably some kind of parity has been reached.

Western media and even commentators lived under a delusion that only the US and few other states possess long-range strike ability. This of course is simply false because Soviets had SS 21 Sampson cruise missile which Russia inherited.

The absolutely new feature of Klub - which must cause some anxiety - is not only its improved capability but its universality. The Soviets were not too interested in conventional cruise missiles, whereas now, the Russians try and stick their Klubs into every type of vessel in all variants. There is even a version which is hidden in a shipping container and is offered for export.

I dare say we now have to revise, albeit mildly, our earlier assumption that the Syrian campaign does not cost much. Cruise missiles are very expensive and they rarely get launched in exercises. Plus, deployment of four ships is not cheap either, especially considering that the Caspian Flotilla has already finished its major exercises for the year.

Deployment? Which part of the Caspian were these missiles fired from? When you consider their ~2600km range.

But you're right on the price tag. They're quite expensive. If they continue using cruise missile strikes, the bill will go up fast. Then again this might have been a show force as much as an attempt to strike major military targets. The Syrians are launching a major offensive right now. I'll make a big update post later.