SyriaPentagon not likely to attack Syria’s chemical weapons depots

Administration officials say that the coming U.S. military strike against Syria – and it may be launched as early as tomorrow, Thursday – will aim not to change the regime, but to punish the Assad regime for using chemical weapons, and “deter and degrade” the ability of the regime to launch chemical weapons in the future.

It should be noted that last Wednesday’s chemical attack on civilians in rebel-held areas was not the first such attack, but the seventh: there were four similar attacks by the Syrian military in March and two in May (and some analysts point to a possible attack back in December).

There are two differences between the latest attack and the previous six: first, the scale of last week’s attack was much larger, with the number of dead and wounded exceeding 1,000. Second, there is no doubt about who carried out the attack: the 155th Brigade of the 4th Armored Division of the Syrian Army, a division under the command of the Syrian president’s brother, Maher Assad.

The administration, in the next day or two, will present incontrovertible evidence pointing to the Assad regime’s responsibility for last week’s attack, possibly including recording of senior regime officials and military commanders discussing the attack, its targets, and its scope.

The New York Times reports that the final decision on the targets to be attacked by cruise missiles, launched from four American Arleigh Burke-class destroyers — the Mahan, Barry, Gravely, and Ramage — already stationed off the coast of Syria, has not yet been made, but that the attack will not be focused on chemical weapons storage sites. American officials fear that such an attack may release clouds of toxic clouds into the air, possibly causing humanitarian and environmental disaster.

Israeli analysts believe Assad’s chemical depots can – and should – be attacked. Israel argues that Western intelligence agencies know the locations of at least 90 percent of the Syrian chemical weapons bases – if, in fact, not even more: during the past year, as rebels have taken control of nearly 70 percent of the territory of Syria, the regime had to move chemical weapons from military bases in area about to be run over by rebels, and consolidate the storage of these weapons in few depot in regime-held areas.

Israel also points out that the components of the chemical weapons are stored separately and assembled when an order is given – meaning that a strike on a chemical weapon storage facility will not trigger a chemical reaction.

Whether or not Israel has been able to persuade the United States on this issue remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: if Assad decides to retaliate against Israel in the wake of an American strike on Syria, Israel will not hesitate to attack these storage facilities.

Sources in the administration say that the United States is likely to target the headquarters of the military units which carried out chemical attacks – especially the 155th Brigade — and the missiles, rockets, and artillery pieces of the unit.

An administration official familiar with the military planning told the Times that the initial target list has fewer than fifty sites, including air bases where Syria’s Russian-made attack helicopters are deployed. The list includes command and control locations as well as a variety of conventional military targets.

The official said that while suspected chemical weapons depots are seductive targets, they are too risky.

“That is a hairy business,” the official said. “Our interest is in keeping the chemical weapons secured. You hit a bunker that holds chemical weapons and all of a sudden you have chemical weapons loose” (as noted above, Israeli military planners dispute this view).

The debate among administration officials since last Wednesday, when the Syrian attack on Sunni civilians made an American response all but inevitable, revolved around the question of whether the strike should be narrowly tailored to destroy the headquarters and assets of the military unit or units responsible for last Wednesday’s attack, or should the U.S. strike be broader, targeting other military units and paramilitary militias commanded by Assad family members and loyalists – perhaps even attacking the presidential compounds.

The Times notes that while there are no voices within the administration calling for no action at all, large military options which would decapitate the regime, or lead to changing the military balance on the ground so it is more favorable to the rebels, have been rejected..