DoD News Briefing
Tuesday, August 17, 1999 - 1:40 p.m.
Presenter: Mr. Kenneth H. Bacon, ASD PA
...............
Q: On Iraq. The Arabic newspaper London Al Hayat is reporting and quoting a military official in Incirlik that Iraq has been firing a new type of surface-to-air missile and there were suggestions that it may have come from France.
What's the status of the Iraqi air defense? Are they firing new missiles? And since we've been bombing on and off for a number of months now, how are they managing to keep this air defense network going?
Q: Those are all good questions, but let me deal with the first ones first.
We are not aware that they are purchasing any missiles from France. They do have some very old Roland missiles that are sort of held together with bandaids and bandannas, but nothing, we're not aware that anything new has been purchased, and frankly, we would be very surprised because there is an embargo and France is a member of the UN Security Council and honors the embargo. So it would be very surprising if that happened, and we have absolutely no indication that there have been any sales by France or other countries at this stage to Iraq.
In terms of Iraq's general air defense system, I've said before that there's an ebb and flow to movements of its air defense system, but on average, we believe that the air defense system is probably 40 to 50 percent less, or 40 to 50 percent weaker today than it was prior to Desert Fox in December. I think there are three reasons for that.
The first is...and that means basically there are 40 to 50 percent fewer missiles on station in the north or south no-fly zone on any given day today than prior to Desert Fox in December, and I think there are three reasons for that.
One is the number of missiles destroyed, missile batteries destroyed during Desert Fox. Two, the number of missile batteries destroyed since Desert Fox. And three, their reluctance to put their missiles at risk in either the north or the southern no-fly zone.
By contrast, there has been very little reduction in the missiles deployed around Baghdad or around Tikrit [ph] which is Saddam Hussein's home area. So they seem to be husbanding their air defense assets around Baghdad and Tikrit, and as a result they have far fewer air defense assets in the northern and southern no-fly zones.
So I would say that's probably the most dramatic response to the patrols over the no-fly zones since Desert Fox.
Q: On China...
Q: Can I follow up? The preponderance of these firings at aircraft in recent months have been anti-aircraft guns and not missiles, is that not right?
Mr. Bacon: That's true, although on Friday they did fire several missiles. They do fire missiles from time to time. Bill referred to a new missile. We have seen some indication that they have fired an SA-2 with enhanced range. In fact the range may be beyond the range of its radars. Most of the missiles they've been firing have been fired ballistically without radar guidance. The reason is that when they turn on their radars we are able to send radar-seeking missiles, HARMS, back down the radar beams to take out their radars.
One of the main targets during Desert Fox was a missile and radar repair facility at Tagi, T-A-G-I. We believe that the elimination of that facility has made it increasingly difficult for them to repair missiles or radars. So we're seeing much slower rehabilitation of their air defense systems than we used to see before Desert Fox. There is some rehabilitation, but it seems to be going much more slowly.
Q: How many missile batteries have been destroyed since Desert Fox?
Mr. Bacon: Well, I can't give you specific numbers, but depending on the types of missiles probably from 10 to 20 or 25 percent of their total missiles since Desert Fox.
Q: And how many were there total?
Mr. Bacon: I don't have the total number. I'd rather stick in--I'm talking about the missiles that are in the no-fly zones rather than their total. I should say the missiles deployed in the no-fly zones. The reason is they do move them back and forth, and they can move them away from Baghdad into the no-fly zones, but they've chosen not to do that. They do have a series of missiles that they tend to keep around the edges or the margins of the no-fly zones that they move in and out.
Q: You're talking about missile batteries or missiles?
Mr. Bacon: Missile batteries.
Q: What is the overall impact or degradation of his overall military force? If he continues to husband most of his resources around Baghdad and Tikrit after seven or eight months of air strikes in the north and south, what is the overall impact on his military capability?
Mr. Bacon: I think you have to disaggregate that question and answer it in several ways.
First of all, it has clearly reduced his air defense capability in both the no-fly zones. As I said, it's down 40 to 50 percent from what it was prior to Desert Fox.
Second, his command and control structure has been degraded to some degree. Because we are striking at the integrated air defense system which involves not only missile batteries but radar and command and control facilities as well, so we have degraded his ability to communicate, to cue his air defense systems, etc.
Clearly, we have scared him to the point where he doesn't want to turn on his radars, and missiles that aren't guided by radars aren't particularly threatening or dangerous. Obviously, any missile that's fired is more dangerous than the missile that's not fired. But they cannot be fired with any degree of accuracy unless the radars are turned on, and he isn't turning on the radars.
So we think that, basically, the responses to the attacks that he's making against our planes are slowly but measurably degrading his air defense system. They are draining resources that he might spend on other parts of his defenses or his military machine. And they are forcing him to keep his head down and to adopt what we can only describe as an extremely low risk opposition to the patrols over the no-fly zones.
He offered a bounty, I believe, of a million dinars to anybody who shot down an allied plane. He continues to try to shoot down allied planes, principally with anti-aircraft fire. But as I said last week, on Friday the 13th he did fire several surface-to-air missiles at coalition aircraft. So he does have the ability and the resolve to fire missiles from time to time, but they're generally not guided by radar.
Q: On this new SA-2, is this a new capability that they haven't had before, or is it a new capability that they've used? And if it's new to their inventory, where did they get it?
Mr. Bacon: Basically it's an extended range, slightly extended range SA-2 as I understand it. It has not been a significant capability in terms of increasing the threat to coalition aircraft.
Q: Did they have that or did they just acquire that?
Mr. Bacon: It seems to be something--I don't know how long they've had it. It's something that we've only seen used recently.
Q: Friday was it in...
Mr. Bacon: No. It's been used over the last couple of months.
Q: Can you modify the extended range, it's gone from what to what?
Mr. Bacon: I can't remember, but it's not huge.
Q: What varieties of SAMs were launched on Friday?
Mr. Bacon: It's generally SA-2s and SA-3s.
Q: But not the extended range one.
Mr. Bacon: No.
Q: Ken, is this extended range model something that could be reached indigenously by just a better motor, better rocket motor that they could slap together?
Mr. Bacon: I think it's mainly fuel capacity. It's increasing the fuel capacity.
Q: There was a recent report which you may have commented on, I haven't been here for a few days, but that there was consideration at some level of the Administration of expanding the target range, the range of targets to be hit by pilots in the no-fly zones. Can you explain that or comment on it?
Mr. Bacon: All I can tell you is that we're always reviewing our targets to make sure that they're appropriate to the threat. This goes on all the time in every military operation. We have made no significant change in our current tactics.
..............
Press: Thank you.
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Aug1999/t08171999_t0817asd.html
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
