Mediterranean 'Ballistic Targets' Were Part of Israeli Test – Defense Ministry© RIA Novosti. Mikhail Fomitchev
MOSCOW, September 3 (RIA Novosti) – Two “ballistic targets” detected Tuesday in the Mediterranean by the Russian military were launched by the Israeli military as part of a joint US-Israeli test of its missile defense system, an official in Tel Aviv said.
“The launches we’re talking about were a test of the Anchor target missile that is used for testing our missile defense system,” an Israeli Defense Ministry representative told RIA Novosti.
The launch was part of joint tests with the US military and were successfully tracked by radars in Israel, the official added.
The Russian Defense Ministry said earlier Tuesday its ballistic missile early warning system had detected the launch of the two "ballistic targets" in the Mediterranean.
The launch was detected at 10:16 Moscow time (06:16 GMT) by a radar in the southern Russian city of Armavir, a Defense Ministry spokesman said. The targets’ trajectories ran from the central to the eastern Mediterranean, the spokesman said.
A diplomatic source in the Syrian capital, Damascus, told RIA Novosti that the targets fell in the sea.
The Russian Embassy in Damascus said it did not have any information about the launch. The streets and residents of the Syrian capital appeared calm, a RIA Novosti correspondent reported.
Russia's Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu reported the launch to President Vladimir Putin, the spokesman told Russian journalists.
Add to blog
You may place this material on your blog by copying the link.
- bielecWhat were they testing?21:29, 03/09/2013Isn't there a customary or legal obligation on the part of countries testing their ballistic missiles to notify other countries ahead of time - in order to avoid miscalculated escalation?
It looks more like a surprise test of Syrian / Russian defensive capabilities than a test of Israeli missiles.
Now, Israel can scrap the project - these missiles were not good, they were detected.
- LocoIvanWelcome to…05:37, 04/09/2013Bielec’s amateur hour!
‘Isn't there a customary or legal obligation on the part of countries testing their ballistic missiles to notify other countries ahead of time - in order to avoid miscalculated escalation?’
You see, this is what I’m talking about. Having whipped yourself into hysterics about a simple ‘missile test’ clouded your ABILITY to perform simple research.
Now, to answer your ignorant musing above. In short, the Arrow ANTI-BALLISTIC missile system is DEFENSIVE, as in theater missile defense that stays within Earth’s atmoshere. A true sub-orbital ‘Ballistic missile’ would be known as an Inter-continental Ballistic Missile and Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missile; ICBM/SLBM.
The Americans and Russians have an agreement called: Agreement Between The United States of America and The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on Notifications of Launches of Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles and Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missiles (Ballistic Missile Launch Notification Agreement). Which was, BTW, signed in Moscow 31May88.
I am going to post the whole ‘Narrative’, so if the format becomes awry, read it slowly, and pronounce each syllable individually, you should be able to grasp it mentally:
‘The Agreement on Notifications of ICBM and SLBM Launches, signed during the 1988 Moscow Summit, reflects the continuing interest of the United States and the Soviet Union in reducing the risk of nuclear war as a result of misinterpretation, miscalculation, or accident.
A number of earlier U.S.-Soviet agreements address advance notification of some, but not all, strategic ballistic missile launches.
-- The 1972 "Incidents at Sea" Agreement provides for advance notice, through Notices to Airmen and Mariners of actions on the high seas which represent a hazard to navigation or aircraft in flight. Planned ballistic missile launches which will take place in international waters represent such a hazard, and, under the "Incidents at Sea" Agreement, notification must be provided. The Notices to Airmen and Mariners, however, consist of warnings which announce "closure areas" due to a hazard to navigation or aircraft in flight; they need not identify the nature of the hazard.
-- Article XVI of the SALT II Treaty, which was never ratified, would have obligated each Party to notify the other well in advance before conducting multiple ICBM launches, or single ICBM launches planned to extend beyond its national territory. There was no obligation, however, to notify single launches not intended to extend beyond national territory. There were also no provisions in the SALT II Treaty for the notification of SLBM launches.
-- The 1971 "Accidents Measures" Agreement requires each Party to notify the other in advance of any planned missile launches if such launches will extend beyond its national territory in the direction of the other Party.
None of these earlier agreements, therefore, provided total coverage of all strategic ballistic missile (ICBM and SLBM) launches. In 1982, President Reagan proposed a number of new confidence-building measures for discussion at the U.S.-Soviet Strategic Arms Reductions Talks (START). Among these was a proposal for prior notification of all launches of ICBMs and SLBMs. During the course of the START negotiations, both sides drafted similar launch notification procedures which were incorporated into the joint draft of the START agreement text.
In May 1988, the United States proposed to the Soviets that, as a confidence-building measure, the sides conclude a separate agreement calling for advance notification of ICBM and SLBM launches. The Soviets agreed, and on May 31, 1988, in Moscow, U.S. Secretary of State Shultz and Soviet Foreign Minister Shevardnadze signed the Agreement on Notifications of ICBM and SLBM Launches. The Agreement provides for notification, no less than 24 hours in advance, of the planned date, launch area, and area of impact for any launch of an ICBM or SLBM. The Agreement also provides that these notifications be provided through the Nuclear Risk Reduction Centers. The Agreement entered into force on the date it was signed.
The U.S.-Soviet Joint Statement issued following the Moscow Summit included the following statement:
The agreement between the United States and the USSR on notifications of launches of Inter-continental Ballistic Missiles and Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missiles, signed during the Moscow summit, is a practical new step, reflecting the desire of the sides to reduce the risk of outbreak of nuclear war, in particular as a result of misinterpretation, miscalculation, or accident.
Afterwards, the START I Treaty was signed in 1991. This Treaty contains an obligation to notify any flight test of an ICBM or SLBM, including those used to launch objects into the upper atmosphere or space. In addition to the requirements under the Ballistic Missile Launch Notification Agreement (i.e., that the notifying Party provide planned launch date, launch area, and reentry impact area), the START I Treaty requires that the notifying Party must also specify the telemetry broadcast frequencies to be used, modulation types and information as to whether the flight test is to employ encapsulation or encryption.’
Therefore, if your critical thinking is not fogged by hysteria and apophenia, you should correctly deduce that the Americans and Israelis were not obligated to inform RUSSIA or anyone else of a DAM THING.
Why? Because this anti-ballistic missile test was not an ICBM’s OR SLBM’s. I don’t recall if any of the articles mentioned that the test was not performed outside international waters; therefore, it is presumed within.
The ‘coat-tail’ FRENZY, whipped up by the Russian Defense Ministry, and that to which you latched yourself, bielec, was for propaganda’s sake soley due to the locale of the test, plain and simple.
‘It looks more like a surprise test of Syrian / Russian defensive capabilities than a test of Israeli missiles.’
Well, Like usual, you are WRONG!
LOL, Did the military staff located at the Radar site near Armavir leave fecal material in their PANTIES when this test illuminated their screens, most likely and rightly so.
‘Now, Israel can scrap the project - these missiles were not good, they were detected.’
Once again, due tremendously to your self-absorbed obsessive apophenia, you compulsively project asinine conclusions to subjects, like this, you absolutely KNOW NOTHING ABOUT. Missiles of this nature will be ‘detected’ and are not meant to be stealth. My God, are you that…
Image Galleries: Track-and -Field Athlete of the Year Yelena Isinbaeva
Infographics: Russia – Ukraine Gas Dispute
Violent suppression of protests can lead not to stabilization but just the opposite. It forces Yanukovych to seek solidarity only in Moscow. It puts Russia in a position where it will again be involved in Ukrainian politics. And in this murky swamp, we have repeatedly gotten bogged down.