The day before, another message came from Syria about the air attack to which the territory of the country was subjected. The monitoring group of the so-called Observatory for Human Rights (the organization itself, as you know, is based in London) has circulated reports that the strike inflicted aviation Of Israel. The report said that objects were attacked in the province of Homs.
It is noteworthy that the Syrian media claimed "detonation of ammunition on the ground due to errors made by the military during transportation."
Recall that a few days earlier, according to various foreign media reports, Israeli aircraft attacked Syrian territory. In at least one of these cases, the IDF has used Lebanese airspace.
In this connection, the question again arises about the effectiveness of the air defense system built in Syria, including the S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems delivered earlier by Russia. This is not about the effectiveness of the complexes as such, but about how the Syrian calculations operate in conditions where the enemy strikes, often without entering the airspace of the country?
Damascus understands that if Israel strikes, it “hunts” first of all not for the Syrian soldiers, but for Hezbollah.
One of the favorite places to attack is the territory of Damascus Airport, where airplanes from Iran land. In Israel, it is often said that weapons are supplied on such sides for the said group, and this leads to damage to the interests of Israeli security. IDF Air Force targets on Syrian soil attack from the air, and air defense SAR can only try to "catch" missiles launched from Israeli aircraft or strike UAVs. “Catch” comes out with varying success - in any attack, several missiles always reach their goal. But do they really want to intercept, that’s the question ...
If there was a clear desire, the Syrian air defense calculations could receive an order to destroy not rockets, but their carriers (there are possibilities). But, as already noted, carriers (for example, Israeli combat aircraft) attack objects in the ATS often from “non-Syrian” airspace. To use the same S-300s in this case is problematic for Damascus. And not because of the TTX S-300. One of the main reasons is the understanding by the Syrian authorities of the fact that if Israel is now trying to resist the strengthening of Iran in the country, then in the case of an Israeli plane shot down, it can proceed to completely different actions. For example, the total bombardment of the positions and targets of the SAA (the Syrian government army) with all the consequences for the combat effectiveness of the SAA.
Perhaps this explains the statement by the Syrian military that the explosions at a site in the Homs province are not the work of Israeli military pilots, but "accidental detonation due to an error in the transportation of ammunition."
In other words, Damascus itself has no particular reason to shoot down Israeli aircraft.
Well then, I will allow myself another argument in his favor.
The SANA news agency reports that on the night of May 1, Israeli attack helicopters attacked several targets in the Kuneitra region (the Syrian part of the Golan Heights). In total, IDF helicopters fired five missiles. It would seem that no matter what the obvious goal for the air defense systems of the Syrian Arab Republic is? .. As they usually call: "And you shoot one so that the others will continue to think whether to bomb or not to bomb."
But Israeli helicopters, as you know, calmly returned to the airfields. S-300 and other air defense systems of Syria are silent. Okay - S-300 is far from Kuneitra. Well, and other systems in service with the ATS army? ..
And after that, data appeared on the Middle East resources about what goals the Israelis attacked. It turned out that here we are talking about pro-Iranian forces in Syria. According to these publications, the rockets exploded at the positions of the Shiite pro-Iranian police, which Israel is trying to squeeze out of its borders.
By and large, Damascus itself, with all its active cooperation with Tehran, is not particularly beneficial for Iran to strengthen its position in the country. After all, it is one thing to help in the fight against terrorism, and another is a “foreign” war, when Israel and Iran are trying to solve their problems using Syrian territory. Bashar al-Assad understands perfectly well that in this “alien” war he has no interests, and therefore, once again, as they say, he is not ready to be substituted.