America's defense budget is roughly 90 times bigger than Iran's. But Iran has a well-honed strategy of asymmetric warfare.
In this 2008 file photo, Iranian Revolutionary Guard members march during a parade ceremony marking the 28th anniversary of the onset of the Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988), in front of the mausoleum of the late revolutionary founder Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, just outside Tehran, Iran.
Vahid Salemi/AP/File
Istanbul, Turkey
Tehran has stepped up its bellicose warnings of conflict in the Persian Gulf as potentially crippling new European Union and American sanctions have been approved on Iran's oil exports and central bank.
Skip to next paragraph
Such bluster is not all talk. The US may outspend the Islamic Republic nearly 90-to-1 on defense. But Iran, heir to ancient Persia's naval innovation, has a well-honed asymmetric strategy designed to reverse that advantage.
A 2002 US military exercise simulating such a conflict proved devastating to American warships.
Indeed, Iran can cause immense harm, analysts say, without ever directly facing off against far superior conventional US forces. Even a few incidents – like mines laid in the Gulf, or Iran's small-boat swarming tactics against oil tankers or a US Navy ship – could raise fears of insecurity to unacceptably high levels.
It could also have far-reaching economic consequences, including a spike in oil prices, since roughly a third of all seaborne oil shipments pass through the Strait of Hormuz – making it the single most important choke point for oil tankers in the world.
"[Iran's] final aim is not to physically close [the strait] for too long, but to drive up shipping insurance and other costs to astronomical heights – which is just as good, in terms of economic damage, as the physical closing of the strait," says a former senior European diplomat who recently finished a six-year tour in Tehran.
"If you are not sure whether you will get hit, or if you get hit not by conventional force but some wild boat that might float around in the sea – or a mine or two – that will create far more insecurity than a battle line where the strait is closed," he says.
And Iranian harassing tactics are just the start, he adds. Other layers include artillery and rockets stationed at the Strait of Hormuz, Kilo submarines, and mini-submarines from which divers can be sent out to damage ships.
Iran's strategy of asymmetric warfare recognizes that, since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iran has little chance of winning any face-to-face military contest with powerful enemies like the United States.
Instead, Iran aims to "exploit enemy vulnerabilities through the used of 'swarming' tactics by well-armed small boats and fast-attack craft, to mount surprise attacks at unexpected times and places" which will "ultimately destroy technologically superior enemy forces," writes Iranian military expert Fariborz Haghshenass in a 2008 study based on published doctrines of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
In any future fight, Iran would likely "avoid escalating the conflict in a way that would play to US strengths in waging mid- to high-intensity warfare – by employing discreet tactics such as covert mine-laying, limited submarine options, and occasional mobile shore-based attacks," writes Mr. Haghshenass, in the study for the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
In fact, Iran has many options short of a direct challenge in the Persian Gulf.
"Iran could seek to create perpetual, low-grade instability in the strait, mostly through asymmetric means, with the objective of making it an aquatic 'no-man's land,' " says Reza Sanati, in an analysis published by the Tehran Bureau/PBS Frontline website. "For Iran, the choice is not 'to close' or 'not to close,' but rather to clog. A major global choke point, once considered safe, would no longer be so."
The US "would be drawn into providing the manpower and bearing the exorbitant cost for removing the impediments," adds Mr. Sanati, while the risk of inadvertently sparking a war would "vastly multiply."
During the "Great Prophet V" exercise in April 2010, for example, the IRGC Navy trumpeted the launch of a new "ultra-fast" watercraft that it claimed was less detectable by radar. Across the shimmering Gulf waters, Iran fielded 300 boats in a swarming attack, with commandos landing on one of the target warships.
"The Strait of Hormuz belongs to the region and foreigners must not intervene in it," military spokesman Ali Reza Tangsiri said at the time.
That warning echoed the words of a ranking Iranian cleric in 2008 that the "first shot" fired against Iran would turn the Israeli capital Tel Aviv and the US fleet in the Persian Gulf into "the targets that would be set on fire in Iran's crushing response."
More than a decade earlier, in 1997, then-IRGC commander Mohsen Rezaei said "Iran will never start any war," but if the US attacked first "we will turn the region into a slaughterhouse for them. There is no greater place than the Persian Gulf to destroy America's might."
Could Iran do it?
Skip to next paragraph
The US defied the warning of a top Iranian general this week and sent the USS Abraham Lincoln – flanked by British and French warships – through the Strait of Hormuz at the mouth of the Gulf. A senior Iranian lawmaker scoffed that the US "did not dare" to send its ship alone, because of the danger posed by the Islamic Republic. If Iran were to close the strategic waterway, as it has threatened to do, the American aircraft carriers "will become the war booty of Iran," he declared.
Such bluster is not all talk. The US may outspend the Islamic Republic nearly 90-to-1 on defense. But Iran, heir to ancient Persia's naval innovation, has a well-honed asymmetric strategy designed to reverse that advantage.
A 2002 US military exercise simulating such a conflict proved devastating to American warships.
Indeed, Iran can cause immense harm, analysts say, without ever directly facing off against far superior conventional US forces. Even a few incidents – like mines laid in the Gulf, or Iran's small-boat swarming tactics against oil tankers or a US Navy ship – could raise fears of insecurity to unacceptably high levels.
It could also have far-reaching economic consequences, including a spike in oil prices, since roughly a third of all seaborne oil shipments pass through the Strait of Hormuz – making it the single most important choke point for oil tankers in the world.
"[Iran's] final aim is not to physically close [the strait] for too long, but to drive up shipping insurance and other costs to astronomical heights – which is just as good, in terms of economic damage, as the physical closing of the strait," says a former senior European diplomat who recently finished a six-year tour in Tehran.
"If you are not sure whether you will get hit, or if you get hit not by conventional force but some wild boat that might float around in the sea – or a mine or two – that will create far more insecurity than a battle line where the strait is closed," he says.
And Iranian harassing tactics are just the start, he adds. Other layers include artillery and rockets stationed at the Strait of Hormuz, Kilo submarines, and mini-submarines from which divers can be sent out to damage ships.
Many options short of full-blown war
Iran's conventional military forces are often aging and of limited capability. Iran spent just $7 billion on defense compared to America's $619 billion defense budget in 2008, the latest year for which Iran's data was available, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute's database.Iran's strategy of asymmetric warfare recognizes that, since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iran has little chance of winning any face-to-face military contest with powerful enemies like the United States.
Instead, Iran aims to "exploit enemy vulnerabilities through the used of 'swarming' tactics by well-armed small boats and fast-attack craft, to mount surprise attacks at unexpected times and places" which will "ultimately destroy technologically superior enemy forces," writes Iranian military expert Fariborz Haghshenass in a 2008 study based on published doctrines of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
In any future fight, Iran would likely "avoid escalating the conflict in a way that would play to US strengths in waging mid- to high-intensity warfare – by employing discreet tactics such as covert mine-laying, limited submarine options, and occasional mobile shore-based attacks," writes Mr. Haghshenass, in the study for the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
In fact, Iran has many options short of a direct challenge in the Persian Gulf.
"Iran could seek to create perpetual, low-grade instability in the strait, mostly through asymmetric means, with the objective of making it an aquatic 'no-man's land,' " says Reza Sanati, in an analysis published by the Tehran Bureau/PBS Frontline website. "For Iran, the choice is not 'to close' or 'not to close,' but rather to clog. A major global choke point, once considered safe, would no longer be so."
The US "would be drawn into providing the manpower and bearing the exorbitant cost for removing the impediments," adds Mr. Sanati, while the risk of inadvertently sparking a war would "vastly multiply."
Devastating result for US in war game
Iran's asymmetric focus is no secret. It has sought to enhance deterrence by claiming repeated triumphs during large military exercises, and by fielding new hardware, from super-fast torpedoes and to kamikaze drones.During the "Great Prophet V" exercise in April 2010, for example, the IRGC Navy trumpeted the launch of a new "ultra-fast" watercraft that it claimed was less detectable by radar. Across the shimmering Gulf waters, Iran fielded 300 boats in a swarming attack, with commandos landing on one of the target warships.
IN PICTURES: Iran's military might
That warning echoed the words of a ranking Iranian cleric in 2008 that the "first shot" fired against Iran would turn the Israeli capital Tel Aviv and the US fleet in the Persian Gulf into "the targets that would be set on fire in Iran's crushing response."
More than a decade earlier, in 1997, then-IRGC commander Mohsen Rezaei said "Iran will never start any war," but if the US attacked first "we will turn the region into a slaughterhouse for them. There is no greater place than the Persian Gulf to destroy America's might."
Could Iran do it?
Iran is technologically primitive country and it will fold in less than a month of air war and missile showers.
ReplyDeleteproud Israeli,
farang
You're ignorant of the facts. Go look up sunburn missile and silkworm missile. Iran has both and they both subvert the US Naval missile defense systems. This fact alone could prove to be very ugly for the US fleets trying to fight in the gulf. Russia has sold Iran several state of the art SAM batteries that can actually track "stealth" aircraft through TV signal noise generated in the power plants of US strike and fighter jets. Iran also has a real infantry (unlike Iraq or Afghanistan). US arrogance is going to cost her dearly if she decides to attack Iran. Actually, it will probably cost the entire world dearly by dragging China and Russia into the fight. Wake up GI Joe.
DeleteWhen the US invaded Iraq even the US President figured that in a few months the war would be over. Over Eight years later the US finally half-left Iraq without having achieved victory. In the process, the US lost all of the world's respect. The world knows the US is a crooked power and this is why the world is insuring that the US Dollar is not anymore an international reserve currency like it used to be. The US has lost more than its dignity by invding Iraq. Iran is easily 7 tomes more powerful than Iraq. Besides, if the US attacks Iran, Russia and China will insure that not a single American escapes from the all out nuclear war that will ensue.
Deleteisrael is technically primitive as well, just because everything they have either given to them by EU and USA for FREE or they stole it. this does not make you any more superior to Iran who at least produced most of their stuff by themselves. if you think that you can beat Iran why doesn't israel go for it alone? iran vs israel. israel will be a thing of the past. israel vs hizbollah, israel will be a thing of the past, israel need help and can't fight its wars alone...the cowards
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletehe Iranians buy their weapons unlike israelis like you who steal and parasitize off of other countries like the us and germany. you're proud to be an israeli which means you're proud to be a piece of shit.
ReplyDelete1 Iranian soldier will be able to kill 10 israeli soldiers at any given time.
If Israel is so great, why does it keep kissing America's ass for more money & weapons? Just asking....
ReplyDeleteI was wondering the same thing dear Anonymous..
Deletetheseus unlike you, Israel has a trade surplus. Now who is the parasite?
ReplyDeleteproud Israeli,
farang
so who cares if you have a trade surplus. Iran has no debt at all and has billions of dollars in trade surplus. and they buy their equipments fair and square unlike israel who uses threats to parasatize off germany and the us. israel is the parasite of the world period
Delete@farang. That is only because the US has sent jobs to Israel - at the expense of its own citzens. And it also pays several billions dollars in aid to Israel, again at the expense of its own citizens - many of which sleep in the streets.
DeleteAre you proud to take from the mouths of homeless Americans? Israeli is a parasite that causes trouble world over.
Anonymous said "Iran is technologically primitive country and it will fold in less than a month of air war and missile showers.
ReplyDeleteproud Israeli,
"
May I remind you how the "technologically primitive" Hisballah kicked your butt over and over again in 2006 and all Israel could do was to bomb the civilian areas? May I remind you that your "mighty, technologically advance" military could not go any further than 2 Km in to Lebanon fighting the Hisballah. LOL.
LOL.
DeleteThe Zionist Israelis without their modern weapons are only dog meat......What makes the "Jews" brave is only their weapons and not their soul, as proven in WWII..... Ponce
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, you Obviously you don’t understand the meaning of “Parasite”. Israel has a surplus because of the west. They give soooo much to Israel that allows Israel to keep its head out of the water. Now the west is stupid for putting the interest of Israel ahead of their own but that doesn’t stop Israel from being a parasite.
ReplyDeleteI welcome the day that the US will turn Iran into a sheet of glass... and that day will come.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn’t hold my breath, (on second thought go ahead and hold your breath). Nuking Iran is the same as destroying the world economy and starting a WW3. No what we are witnessing are the last desperate attempts by the Zionist to counter Iran and pretty soon the Western population will wake to the reality that the Zionists and the Zionist Israel is not worth all the wars and destruction. Remember Iran, Russia and China are playing chess while the Zionist can’t even play checkers.
DeleteAnyone who condones the use of nuclear weapons in any way is an ignorant sub-species of modern mans mutated DNA and should be culled from the herd! The arrogance of such an idea is more repugnant than words can say. You are a myopic cretin.
DeleteHate to burst you bubble, but Russia and China will not lift a finger to help Iran (militarily)... you can take that to the bank... it's all posturing. Hey, if you love Iran so much, why not move there...? put your camels where your mouth is...
ReplyDeleteWorld politics is about national interest. There is never a love between countries but national interest. If Iran is lost to the Zionist that means that the Persian Gulf hence the oil going to China is controlled by the Zionist which china will never allow and Russia will lose its access (ally) in that area too.
DeleteAs far as me moving to Iran, No, I am an American will remain in the US to awaken the population against the traitorous Zionist (like you) that would rather destroy the west for the sake of Israel.
Maybe you should tell China that. he he
DeleteMajor General Zhang Zhaozhong, a professor from the Chinese National Defense University, said China will not hesitate to protect Iran even with a third World War... Professor Xia Ming: "Zhang Zhaozhong said that not hesitating to fight a third world war would be entirely for domestic political needs...."
If you think Russia will not defend Iran, you are totally blind and misinformed. Attacking Iran means zero survival humans in all of Canada, the United States and Mexico... And the radioactivity will persist for centuries, making all of North America incapable of supporting even vegetable life.
DeleteIt is not in the US national interest to be so provocative towards Iran. We need to bring our troops home and focus on rebuilding our manufacturing base. Don't fall for the propaganda, Iran is no threat to the United States, nor or they trying to build nuclear weapons. We got fooled once with all the hype about Saddams wmd's, we won't get fooled again. Support Ron Paul-2012
ReplyDeleteIran has thousands of cutting edge missiles including the unstoppable hypersonic Russian Iskander-M , Sunburn, etc. The days of the inaccurate scud missile are long over. Today's missiles are 90% unstoppable.
ReplyDeleteIf they want to sink the agressor NATO navies, and if they want to flatten Tel-Aviv, they can do it in minutes. NATO go home. Get your own houses in order. Have a war on poverty, and end homelessness.
Why are big mouthed americans so ugly in thought?
ReplyDeleteAll Israel needs is one Sunburn missile to take out one of the two US ships in the area, both scheduled for expensive decommissioning soon. (USS Enterprise, oldest metal hulled USN ship, and USS Ponce, scheduled for decommissioning in March 2012 - http://bit.ly/yWCVGg and http://bit.ly/yk1zv2)
ReplyDeleteOr maybe the US will just blow it up for them, killing 5,000 of its own sailors, so the they can initiate the war with Iran that the parasite Zionist masters want.
Persia (Iran) used to have one of the largest and greatest Empires in human history. It took Alexander the Great to bring it down.
ReplyDeleteWe do not have an Alexander the Great.
We have Obama the Lame
And, Netanyahu the Yahoo.