While most American media is currently obsessed over an astronaut‘s love affair, the rest of the world is quite busy doing other things.
Back at the end of 2005, the nation of Iran signed an approximately 700 million dollar deal to purchase Russian-made Tor-M1 missile systems.
You can click here to see the details but essentially they are mobile vehicles with an array of missiles whose sole purpose is to shoot down either aircraft or cruise missiles. They are analogous to (and superior than) the Patriot missile batteries that the United States manufactures.
These missiles are very short range (about 6 miles) and are therefore entirely defensive in purpose.
On January 16 of this year, Russia delivered 29 of these missile batteries. The United States, in particular State Department spokesperson Sean McCormick, threatened Russia with unspecified sanctions because of this. Russia blasted right back and stated the obvious, that the sale of defensive short-range missiles is perfectly legitimate. Despite this, the U.S. government imposed sanctions on Rosoboronexport, the state-run arms exporting division.
Of course it is mighty odd that the United States should have any say-so about any foreign nation that wishes to do business with Iran. The United States doesn’t even have diplomatic relations with Iran yet it has a stupid law that is the supposed “justification” for the sanctions. Even though if you read it, it clearly only references ballistic and/or cruise missiles, not short-range defensive ones.
So why does this matter? Because today Iran conducted a joint naval-land military drill and successfully tested the new Tor-M1 missiles (the naval version is nicknamed the “Hedgehog” in Russian). The drill will continue until tomorrow and is specifically designed to test the interception of aircraft, cruise missiles and UAV (pilot-less drone aircraft).
Last August Iran test-fired its own Thunderbolt, a short-range (30 miles) surface to surface missile. Then they test-fired a submarine launched missile. In November they test-fired the Shahab-3 ballistic missile with a range of 2,000km.
Today’s drills are being conducted near the Strait of Hormuz. This is interesting because the U.S.S. John C. Stennis, an aircraft carrier, as well as its “strike group” (several other vessels and aircraft) have just arrived in the Persian Gulf as well. Already in the Persian Gulf is the Eisenhower aircraft carrier and its strike or battle group.
That’s a lot of heavily armed ships in a very small piece of real estate.
Although the Strait of Hormuz is technically 21 miles wide (at its narrowest point), functionally almost all traffic is conducted via two 1-mile-wide channels. And on the north side of the Strait is Iran. 20% of all the world’s petroleum is shipped daily through this narrow sea lane, including the exports from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq.
For the record, the last time the United States’ military fought the nation of Iran was in the Strait of Hormuz. It was dubbed Operation Praying Mantis and was a one-day battle in 1988. During the Iraq-Iran war, the United States sided with Iraq and U.S. naval vessels escorted Kuwaiti and Iraqi oil tankers through the Persian Gulf. One U.S. vessel hit an Iranian sea mine and was heavily damaged but not one person was killed.
In retaliation, the U.S. launched Praying Mantis and attacked the Iranian navy. Two Iranian ships and up to six armed speedboats were sunk by the U.S. Navy. Furthermore, a number of Iranian oil platforms were blown up. The number of Iranians who were killed is unknown. Two Americans lost their lives but it was due to a single helicopter crashing and it had not been shot down.
The Iran-Iraq war ended just four months later, partly because this battle had given the United States unchallenged naval dominance over the Persian Gulf.
As these two nations get their heavily armed boats bumping up next to one another in a kind of macho showdown, it’s worth looking back briefly at the 1980-1988 Iraq-Iran war.
First of all, in 1975, when Iran was being run by the US-friendly Shah, Henry Kissinger “sanctioned” Iran’s attacking of Iraq’s only port. Later however an agreement was signed and control went back to Iraq. Saddam Hussein was at this time only the vice president of Iraq.
In 1979, the Ayatollah Khomeini led a revolution in Iran and kicked out the dictator Shah.
In 1980, the U.S. National Security Advisor worked with Iraq’s president (Saddam Hussein) to sponsor a coup against (then ruler of Iran) Ayatollah Khomeini. The plan (codenamed Najeh) failed when Soviet spies informed the Ayatollah and he had the plotters rounded up before they could strike.
Since that didn’t work, Iraq went ahead and invaded Iran. Saddam Hussein said he would be in Tehran (Iran’s capital) in three days largely because he felt that the repressed people of Iran would rise up to support the invasion. It didn’t work. Even the ethnic Arab Sunnis of Iran’s bordering province of Khuzestan fought against Iraq for the most part. Within a month, over 100,000 Iranian citizens of all ethnicities and religious stripes had volunteered to fight off the invasion.
Initial Iraqi successes were reversed and Iran got the upper hand. By 1982, the United States was offering weapons, intelligence, money and every other kind of support to Saddam Hussein. Ronald “Saint” Reagan even said the United States would do “whatever was necessary” to prevent Iran from winning.
Iraq (with direct help from the CIA) began using chemical weapons, especially mustard gas, to try to reverse Iranian incursions. Although the Kurds of Halabja have received the bulk of the world’s sympathy for being the victims of Hussein’s chemical madness, it must be remembered that the bulk of the ones dying from these weapons were Iranians – approximately 100,000 people, many of then unarmed civilians.
And last but not least, nearly every senior member of today’s Iranian government, including President Ahmadinejad, is a veteran of that war. We here may not remember, but they sure do.
Let’s hope that someone, somewhere can prevent this new war with Iran before it ever has a chance to start.
Pax
This is a very nice essay, soj. There is, of course, so much more to the story.
This is my number one issue these days. I’m about going out of my mind over it. The damned Bush regime won’t even talk to the Iranians!
I’ve known a lot of Persians. Every one was notably smart and notably proud. The United States has been murdering their people by the hundreds for decades and systematically slandering them and harming their economy. If I was a Persian, I’d be out for blood. And we have an INSANE 13-YEAR-OLD in the White House!!!
Amen. Sound the alarm. Ring all the church bells in America. Every firefighter siren.
The Guardian, UK published today (02/10)
Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring
They really are hell bent on bombing Iran no matter what. I don’t think there is anything Iran can do either to stop it..if they shut down there nuclear plants I’m sure Cheney would be selling us a different reason for bombing Iran.
Iran is also rumored to have purchased Russian Moskit (mosquito) anti-ship missiles. The Moskit was designed specifically to overcome Aegis anti-missile defenses.
So Aegis is another useless but hugely expensive weapons system. No matter: it has served its main purpose—bringing profits to defense contractors.
I think I’ve written about 2 or 3 articles at one time or another about the Sunburn. What would be interesting to know is how many of these are on those islands in the Strait that Iran controls.
What’s also quite interesting is the case of the I-I war when an IRAQI Mirage sank a U.S. Naval vessel with I believe an old French Exocet. Except for the Falklands, I don’t think anyone’s actually fired a live missile at a warship in about 20 years. I have no idea if Aegis can handle what’s out there anymore but I’d sure hate to be a kid on one of those destroyers and find out the hard way.
If this war kicks off, there’s gonna be a lot more moms and dads crying back home pretty quick.
Pax
Sorry I didn’t catch your early posts about the Sunburn: I’m new here.
Here’s something from Technology Review:
I don’t think there’s much doubt that the Moskit can overcome the Aegis defenses. I think the three main uncertainties here are:
It’s ok, I think I wrote those articles a year or more ago.
The link above that you provided is absolutely chilling. Essentially the only reason Argentina stopped stinking British ships was literally because it ran out of missiles and the Brits managed to keep the rest of the world from shipping them new ones.
It’s been about 20 years since there was a battle between two navies of two sovereign nations. I don’t think anyone knows just how different the next one will be, but I hope we never find out!
Pax
It’s long been my impression, based on advances in missile technology over the last quarter century, that surface navies are effectively obsolete against opponents with modern conventional weapons. (They were already obsolete against the Soviets — it only takes one sub-megaton nuclear warhead to destroy an entire carrier group, something that would have happened many times over during the first few minutes of a US-USSR war.) Navies still exist largely because of tradition, and because, for some reason, military leaders throughout history have always been slow to recognize when changes in technology invalidate long-held doctrine.
Could the US be walking into a decisive defeat if it attempts to engage Iran with its naval assets? We aren’t used to thinking in terms of encountering a technologically superior enemy, but sending our navy up against Russian and Chinese technology that is twenty years in advance of our antiquated countermeasures may turn out to be just as disastrous as the collision between the professional armies of Europe and the machine gun in WWI. Unlike those armies, which took two weeks to be completely obliterated, our naval fleets could be annihilated in a matter of hours or even minutes.
The long-term strategic consequences would be staggering. The US has predicated its ability to project power globally on the venerable carrier group for over sixty years. The global dominance that was born in the Pacific theatre of WW2 could easily end abruptly in the Strait of Hormuz at the hands of a Russo-Chinese proxy state.
Yes: the article I quoted from is subtitled “The democratization of cruise missile technology”. Now a small country can have cruise missiles that can sink large navy vessels.
Also, have you noted that we’ve been losing a lot of choppers lately? Kind of reminds you of the Soviets in Afghanistan. The Army claims the’re being downed with small arms fire, but I’m not so sure.
Who knows how the Iranians would respond to a US attack: I’m sure they’re putting a lot of thought into it. Another “known unknown” is whether, in response to an attack on Iran, Iraqi Shiites would rise up against the occupiers. Some have argued that “A US attack on Iran might prompt Muqtada al-Sadr to lead a Shi’a uprising that would sever US supply lines from Kuwait.”
The attrition rate of helicopters is actually a lot lower than I would expect. Compare the rates for the Vietnam conflict, where being a helicopter pilot was so dangerous that, for example, the job of scout pilots was said to be to locate the enemy and mark their position with a burning chopper.
IRAQ: AL-QAEDA ANNOUNCES ‘U.S. HELICOPTER CEMETERY’
This could be propaganda of course, but my guess is that it isn’t since the US has been mum about what’s been bringing these helicopters down.
It’s entirely possible. We’ll just have to wait and see.
reminder, soj. When I saw your name, I had to set time aside to read your diary. Too bad we are so distracted by astronauts and the starting of American Idol to ever look at ourselves in the mirror or examine our very mixed history with the world.
For a long time I felt comfortable with the Constitution as the ultimate guide — even if our forefathers didn’t prevent the war profiteering and propping up of dictators (though I think they tried). As this administration has proven, an uninformed, undereducated and uncaring populace cannot be relied upon to enforce Constitutional limits. I hope our military commanders remember their allegiance to the U.S. Constitution, and to their defense against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Great diary, Soj. The last few weeks I’ve been more depressed than usual because of my strong feeling about a coming conflict. The first thing I check in the morning is not my email, not the blogs, but Google News for the phrase “iran war”. I’m always sad to see a bunch of articles come up, but I also breathe a sigh of relief that it is not (yet) in process.
I’ve come to the conclusion that people in DC really don’t care if there is a war in Iran. I don’t know how they could behave, otherwise. Maybe some feel, as Clinton and Dean and Obama and others have suggested, we should have been at war with Iran in the first place. It just breaks my heart.
I’m trying to take the bus daily. It’s more in my nature to drive, but I’m trying to do my part for Global Warming, and once I’m on the bus, I’m always glad of my choice. But what’s so sad is that about 1/3 of the other people on that particular route are Iranians. They are so kind, so gentle, such nice people. It breaks my heart feeling what we’re about to do to their homeland, where they still have family and friends.
I despair of options. I think the Senate and Congress need to amend the war powers act and reclaim a true division of power such as George Washington originally warned us we should preserve:
Btw – Washington also warned us of the dangers of being too partisan:
Sage advice for an insane world.
I’ll end by noting that when I take the bus and can’t get out in time for my return trip, my company buys me a cab home. On a recent cab ride, my driver was Iranian. I asked him what he thought about recent events, and got a fantastic aria from him re how much the leader of his country is reviled, but they can’t get rid of him. It was like a parallel of our country and Bush. Most of the Iranian people, according to him, want reform, but they want it to come from within, natively. They don’t want America coming in and blowing their despot out. (Personally though, if the shoes were reversed, and someone was threatening to take Bush out, I can see where the offer might be tempting. But the occupation that would follow? Not.)
He was so animated, and so happy I felt to have someone who actually asked and wanted to know. It was like he had all this to say but no one to say it too. I was glad I’d opened my mouth!
Gosh I love the bus. I sold my last car in 1998 and have been loving it ever since. Plus as you said, you get to meet all kinds of interesting folks on there.
Pax
.
The BBC is ‘neutral’ and refers to The Gulf, however the U.S., Great Britain, Arab states and western allies renamed it “The Arabian Gulf.”
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
In French, it’s Golfe Persique
.
Paris as refuge for Ayatollah Khomeini, PM Bakhtiar and President Bani-Sadr
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
I love the BBC but sometimes they are fools. They constantly refer to Myanmar as Burma too 🙂
On the other hand, our dear leaders in the United States changed Kiev to Kyiv. Of all of the things to do on the face of the planet, I can’t think of something less urgent to accomplish.
(The city is spelled slightly differently using the Ukrainian Cyrillic alphabet rather than the Russian one so that Kyiv slightly more closely resembles the Ukrainian spelling than the Russian one even though both are with a completely different alphabet).
Pax
You would think that they would want to keep the old name with its links to the Shah, and old empires, to remind of a pre revolution state. you would have thought that would be an elementary step in the propaganda war.
.
On the Persian Gulf, the USS Vincennes should be mentioned. In July 1988 a missile destroyed an Iranian Airbus killing 290 passengers, US Commander receives a medal. Incident leads to more agression between Iran and the ‘West’ (except France).
On the French exocet missile used by Argentina during the Falklands War, a countermeasure was developed by HSA (now Thales) called the goalkeeper, a last resort rapid fire cannon to destroy the incoming missile.
My other comments/diaries –
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
but when the USS Stark was attacked by an Iraqi Mirage in 1987, the ship was hit with 2 Exocets. Only 1 detonated after impact. Had both fully functioned as designed, the ship would have almost certainly been lost. As it was, it barely saved.
.
Approximately one minute after the first ID request was sent out, the AWACs watched the Mirage sharply turn and head on a north bound vector. Both the AWACs and the USS Stark assumed that upon receiving the Stark’s ID request, the Iraqi pilot had decided to cut and run. What neither the Stark nor the AWACs had detected however was the two Exocet anti-ship missiles that the Mirage had launched prior to its departure. The sophisticated detection equipment on the Stark did not pick up the sea-skimming Exocets, which were first identified by a lookout moments before impact.
I didn’t recall the specifics of this drama … thanks for reminder.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Interesting. I”d forgotten about that. That means Aiwacs isn’t reliable even against subsonic missiles. As I mentioned above, it is a typical DOD boondoggle.
Expect a combination of conventional (anti-air & anti-ship missiles, mines) and unconventional (suicide civilian aircraft & boats, vehicles and individuals) to be employed vs US naval forces and bases in the Gulf region, along the anticipated attempt to block/cut off the shipping lanes at the Straits of Hormuz.
I suspect we’ll see the Iranians do their utmost to isolate US forces in both Iraq and Afghanistan by cutting/reducing lines of supply. Much of the resupply for US forces in Iraq comes overland via Kuwait. It would not require highly sophisticated weapons to significantly slow the flow of overland traffic northward.
Finally, we’d also most likely see a dramatic upturn in attacks aimed at both US and non-US civilians and governmental targets throughout the region (Lebanon, Jordan, etc.).
It would get very ugly, very quickly.
The one event that would solidify the Iranian people behind Ahmadinejad would be preemptive air strikes on Iranian sites by US (or its allies) forces. I wish that the current WH occupant could see the tremendous downside to this action.
Delurking long enough to give praise where it’s due.
Thanks.
This is so off-topic, but I wanted to tell you, Kelly, that my daughter spied WebMage at our local library. It was given a prominant display in the teen room and one teen was totally engrossed in reading a copy!
On topic, I agree that this is another great article by Soj.
I was just reading through her blog. Super stuff!!
Pax
Sorry to seem like an anal “military” expert, but the Tor-M1 system is not a “Patriot” equivalent. The range and altitude envelopes are nowhere similar.
And the aircraft that attacked the Stark wasn’t a Mirage. It was a Soviet Tu-22 Blinder bomber.
Do you have a reference to the use of the Blinder rather than the Mirage commonly attributed to having conducted the Stark attack? That is something I have not heard nor read before.
.
Greetings – glad to have you in the community Commander!
Two sources below report the combination of French Mirage F-1 interceptor with Exocet missiles: Global Security and the U.S. Navy.
The 65 French-built Mirage F-1s and their pilots were the Iraqi Air Force elite. Iraq had acquired a wide range of weapons and electronic warfare gear for the F-1, including laser-guided air-to-surface missiles. French-trained pilots exhibited a high degree of skill and determination when attacking Iranian surface targets, and were more willing to engage in air-to-air combat than their colleagues flying Soviet-built aircraft. It was an Iraqi F-1 that fired two Exocet antiship missiles at the USS Stark (FFG-31) in 1987. During the Iraqi offensives of 1988, F-1s equipped with PGMs attacked Iranian armaments factories, oil refineries and facilities, bridges and causeways, as well as merchant shipping in the Gulf.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Below is a link to the Navy’s formal investigation into the the attack on the USS Stark, dated 12Jun87.
FWIW, on page 9, it identifies the attacking aircraft as a single F-1 Mirage.
http://www.dod.mil/pubs/foi/reading_room/65.pdf
Well I’m definitely not a military expert so I always appreciate the input.
I said they were like Patriot because that’s what people know. It’s a little mobile battery that shoots down other missiles or planes. As opposed to one of those long range things which are used to drop explosive on someone else. It’s the closest well-known equivalent I could find but in my own defense, I did post the link!
Pax
Just providing a link to flesh out the buildup of naval forces in the Persian Gulf/Arabian Sea. Paul Rogers
Interesting this exchange with Bush, as reported by UPI. Does VP Cheney Know?
Theaters of the absurd – Arnaud De Borchgrave
The past 6 years, a big chuckle folks.