Without regime change, a rebuilt Iran could wield advanced Russian and Chinese weaponry, potentially escalating regional threats despite military losses.
by Kris Osborn, Warrior
If hardline members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps remain in charge of Iran, and there is not any kind of clear “regime change,” then thousands of hopeful Iranians are likely to be massively disappointed. While much of Iran’s military has been destroyed, one might be inclined to question if the war accomplished the necessary longer-term objective of helping to encourage a more U.S.-friendly regime less repressive to its own people. Ending the war without regime change would, in a long term sense, potentially “increase” and not “decrease” the Iranian threat. Iran could quickly rebuild and, with Russian and Chinese help, potentially acquire new generations of weaponry and high-tech platforms.
What if Iran operated hundreds of Chinese-built J-20 5th-Gen fighters or Russian built hypersonic weapons? How quickly could these be “scaled?”
Iranian Ground Force
There is also the key question of Iran’s ground forces, as much of it may remain somewhat intact. Iran has more than one million soldiers and thousands of tanks and armored vehicles, some of which could be combat ready. Perhaps they are hidden underground as well. It is possible this force could be reconstituted, modernized and upgraded with new weapons, technologies and platforms.
Iran operates nearly 400,000 more military personnel than Israel, as Iran’s total force of 1,015,000 is significantly larger than Israel’s reported force of 646,000. While Iran does, at least on paper, appear to have a larger ground force, particularly when it comes to tanks and armored vehicles, that does not in any way mean that its land force would in any way be equivalent to Israel or the U.S.. Globalfirepower’s 2023 military assessments for instance, list Iran as having 4,071 tanks compared to Israel’s 2,200 tanks. However, having 2,000 more tanks than Israeli does not by any stretch ensure military overmatch, as sheer numbers of tanks may prove to be much less of an advantage should a smaller tank force be equipped with vastly superior sensors, weapons, computing and targeting. This may well appear to be the case with even a cursory look at how Israel’s well known and highly regarded Merkava tanks would compare against Iranian upgraded Soviet-era T-72s.
Iran has 8,500 Armored Vehicles
Iran is reported to operate about 1,000 more armored vehicles than Israel. Iran is listed in the Globalfirepower 2021 assessment as having 8,500 armored vehicles, compared with Israel’s 7,000. Again, any size deficit is likely to be less consequential, unless the technological capacity were in any way comparable. While a lot of details regarding any kind of particular technical comparison may not be available, the advanced technologies built into the Israeli Merkava might make it seem unlikely that Iran has vastly superior infantry carriers and armored vehicles. Furthermore, without superior tanks able to break through the proactive barriers or defensive configurations of an Israeli or U.S. force, any Iranian advance might be less likely to succeed.
U.S. & Israeli Tanks vs. Iranian Tanks
An interesting report in “21st Century Asian Arms Race,” states Iran has German-built Leopard tanks as well as Russian T-90s and even some Abrams. Iran’s first widely reported indigenous tank called the Farrar has emerged in recent years, a platform said to be based upon an upgraded Iranian T-72S chassis. The Iranian tank, reported to operate with an electro-optical fire control system, laser rangefinder and ballistic computer, would at least on the surface appear to most likely be vastly inferior to the Israeli Merkava. The Israeli Merkava is among the most advanced armored vehicles in the world. It can carry infantry or injured soldiers, leverage a rear exit hatch for dismounted operations or safety escape and, perhaps of greatest significance, its main gun tube can itself fire anti-tank missiles, according to a report in The National Interest. The Merkava also has top-attack missiles potentially useful for attacking helicopters and other targets potentially out of range for a standard tank shell.
What much of this amounts to is simply that even if it operates as many as 2,000 fewer main battle tanks compared to Iran, Israel and the U.S. may indeed operate a vastly superior land force. During the Gulf War’s famous tank battles, for example, U.S. Abrams advanced thermal sights were able to detect, find and then help destroy Iraqi T-72 before they were in range to even be detected or seen by Iraqi tanks. Therefore, large numbers of Iraqi tanks were disproportionately destroyed by far fewer Abrams armed with long-range, high-fidelity targeting sensors.
How much of Iran’s Ballistic Missile Arsenal is Left?
Despite the massive U.S. and IDF aerial bombardment, it does appear that Iran still operates some unknown amount of ballistic missiles. Perhaps they are lodged deep in tunnels beneath mountainous terrain or have simply remained undetected by U.S. surveillance. The Pentagon says massive amounts of Iran’s weapons have been destroyed, yet the IRGC is believed to operate an extremely large arsenal.
An interesting and quite significant research paper from Iran Watch shows that indeed Iran does possess a massive arsenal of ballistic missiles, at least five of which can reportedly travel distances of 1,300km or more. The famous Shahab-3, for instance, is listed by Iran Watch as capable of traveling 1,300km with a 1,000kg warhead. The liquid fuel, single stage Shahab-3 rocket is now deployed and exists in large numbers. The longest range ballistic missile listed by Iran Watch is the Khorramshahr 1,2, and 4 .. weapons cited as able to travel as far as 2,000 to 3,000km. The latest available information on this suggested that it may or may not be operational, yet the long range attack on Diego Garcia suggests that perhaps that was the longer-range weapon used.
Long Range Iranian Missiles?
This means the missile could hit anywhere in Israel and U.S. interests throughout the Middle East from Tehran or most places throughout Central and Western Iran. Other Iranian Medium Range Ballistic Missiles capable of traveling 1,600km or more are the now-deployed Ghadr, Emad and Paveh missiles, according to Iran Watch.
The Iranian Sejjil MRBM can travel 2,000km as well. Iran does, however, have much more artillery and Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (MLRS) when compared to Israel, yet both traditional artillery and 70-to-80km-reaching MLRS would not be in position to strike Israel unless they were moved close to its borders through forward deployment. At the same time, Iran is reported to operate a large number of Short, Medium and Long-Range Ballistic missiles in position to hit Israel.
An examination of Iran’s large ballistic missile arsenal with a mind to guidance and range raises a serious threat possibility to Israel, as Iran appears to now operate at least five different long-range ballistic missiles capable of hitting Israel from Iran. Maps of the Middle East show Iranian missiles are easily able to hit Jerusalem and other parts of Israel from locations throughout Iran, as Jerusalem is less than 2,000km from Tehran. This means some ballistic missiles launched from Iran’s capital can hit Israel and an even higher number of long-range weapons can easily hit Israel or U.S. interests from other locations within Western Iran.
Kris Osborn is the President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a highly qualified expert in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University