Iran’s rearmament: a radical shift in geopolitics?
An analysis by Serhey Bohdan

ANALYTICS  24 January 2023 - 09:10

Representatives of the Iranian Government confirmed last week the purchase of Russian Su-35 fighter jets, helicopters, missiles and other military equipment. A member of the National Security Commission of the Iranian Parliament, Shahriyyar Heydari, said that fighters from Russia will arrive early next year, according to the Iranian calendar, which starts in the spring.

In its confrontation with the West and its allies and in its regional expansion in recent decades, Iran has relied on military means far from optimal. Besides the deliveries of some volumes of the not most recent modifications on the S-300 in the 2010’s, Tehran for more than two decades has not purchased any serious military equipment and is approaching a conventional military technical autarky. This did not mean that it could replace the import of the full range of equipment - in fact, Iran had to restructure its national security architecture, giving up the use of expensive and not domestically produced equipment, but the problem of updating the Iranian armed forces' military equipment remained.

Russian aviation would allow Tehran to partially solve this. After all, the same Iranian Air Force consists of about 200 more Western aircraft that are over forty-year-old and about 100 Soviet and Chinese aircraft 30 years old. There is nothing more recent in Tehran. The same applies to other types of relatively sophisticated equipment, apart from missile hardware and drones, which the Iranians make themselves.

Iran and Russian weapons: “Waiting for Godot”

Rumours about the Iranian government’s purchase of weapons from Russia have been regularly circulating in the media over the past two decades, but invariably proved groundless. This waiting of the Iranians for Russian weapons has been reminiscent of the well-known play by Samuel Beckett, in which everyone is waiting endlessly and in vain for a certain “Godot”.

This is not surprising. Despite all the disagreements with the West, the Kremlin was not in a hurry (and is still not) to take a “big step” in helping Tehran. Of course, this can be attributed to pressure and persuasion not from the West, but from its allies - Israel, Saudi Arabia and other countries, which have their own issues with the Iranian regime. Indeed, they made some gestures towards the Kremlin that could be judged this way. Israel, for example, has so far refused to supply Ukraine with arms. Last year, the United States accused Saudi Arabia of positioning itself with Russia in the conflict around the deliberate reduction of oil production by the OPEC+ cartel, which was undertaken to raise oil prices, the proceeds of which play a crucial role for Russia. However, it does not explain why Moscow did not risk raising the stakes in this global confrontation where there would be no one besides the West to seriously pressure Moscow - for example, why did the Kremlin never dare to establish ties with the Taliban government of Afghanistan?

Is Putin ready to raise the stakes now by giving the Iranians weapons? Statements by Iranian officials give the impression that Tehran is uncertain about what it will end up receiving and whether it will receive anything at all. The current supply announcement came from far from the most key person in Iran’s national security system - Heydari, of course, chairs the relevant commission, but this is a parliamentary body, not an executive body, which is, in fact, supposed to solve these issues.

By the way, contrary to numerous commentators, this was not “the first official confirmation” of Iran’s purchase of Russian fighters. More interesting is the statement of the Iranian Air Force Commander, Hamid Vahedi, in conversation with the Iranian news agency “Bourne”. In it, we again see the cautious formulation of the acquisition (not delivery!) of the Su-35 being on the agenda. There are many similar statements made by Iranian officials five years ago and ten years ago, and as they say, still there.

There is no Russian explanation for this. On the other hand, the Iranian media hinted in early December about the visit of Russian Deputy Defence Minister, Alexander Fomin, to Tehran, and soon after information regarding a meeting with Russian Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu in Moscow and the First Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces, Aziz Nasirzade. Apart from the existence of these talks, the press knows nothing more about these contacts.

In December, US National Security Council Strategic Communications Coordinator John Kirby officially expressed concern about the “full-scale defence partnership” between Tehran and Moscow, which “harms both neighbours [of Iran] and the entire international community”. Western and Ukrainian officials have repeatedly accused Iran of handing over drones and barrage munitions to Russia, which since last autumn have been used by the Russian army in battles with Ukrainian forces. According to the White House, Moscow and Tehran are discussing the possibility of establishing the assembly of Iranian drones in Russia itself. Moscow and Tehran denied this, although Tehran admitted in November that it had transferred drones to Russia, but stressed that this was before the invasion.

Kirby noted the United States' concern over Iran’s purchase of weapons in Russia, in particular “advanced military components”, including helicopters and air defence systems. According to him, the Iranian military is already learning to operate the new Su-35 in Russia, and Tehran will receive them within 2023. Israeli 12th TV channel immediately speculated that Iran could be given Su-35’s destined for Egypt (a total of 24 planes, whose fate is still unknown, probably blocked by the US). However, in a situation of full-scale war with Ukraine, a large state supported by NATO’s largest military bloc, Moscow is unlikely to be inclined to transfer a large consignment of such equipment abroad - it may be needed for themselves. Moreover, the war is not only being prolonged, but also threatens to expand and transform into a full-fledged war with NATO itself.

Bid stages

The West is acting from all sides to prevent arms from reaching Iran. Tehran, in particular, is also given to understand that it is not necessary to buy weapons from Russia (and sell their weapons to Russia). Last Monday (January 16), the Iranian government confirmed an order for the purchase of Russian fighters and other military equipment, and immediately, on Tuesday (January 17), European Commission President von der Leyen announced that it she, as it turned out, already supported the inclusion of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) in the list of terrorist organizations in response to the “violation of basic human rights” in the country. In an interview with Reuters, Finnish Foreign Minister Pekka Haavisto explained, that “All these elements - human rights, arms deliveries to Russia, and blocking the final nuclear deal agreement - were negative factors, and I think the EU is becoming more and more responsive. It is important that we react firmly”.

In other words, what the Iranian government and IRGC were doing was not so important at all, until the vital interests of the West - the supply of Iranian weapons (more likely their potential rather than their presence) to Russia and the nuclear status of Iran itself. This is the first point worth noting and not forgetting, hearing about the principled position of Western governments and NGOs (the last really serious harassment violators without coordination with the establishment is not satisfied). However, Haavisto immediately hinted at Tehran that we can agree, hastening to add that the debate about sanctions against Iran and the inclusion of the IRGC on the list of terrorist organizations among the EU members is still on. This is the second point illustrating the West’s principled nature - every issue has its price.

Iran understood the hint, and on Thursday (January 19) Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian said in an interview with the Turkish TRT World that Tehran will not recognize the Russian annexation not only of the four Ukrainian regions last year, but also of Crimea in 2014. According to his assurances, despite “excellent relations” with Moscow, Iran recognizes the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. Indeed, Tehran had previously been wary of Russian actions against Ukraine and did not recognize the capture of Ukrainian territories, so it is impossible to say that he changed his position. However, the Taliban government of Afghanistan did recognize the “Anschluss” of Crimea, but as we know, Moscow in return continued to support the anti-Taliban opposition.

In other words, Tehran does not trust Moscow, especially in the military-technical sphere. The Iranian military openly told the media how, during the not-so-long-standing friendship of Putin with the West, the Russian side, under the pretext of repair, tried to withdraw Soviet-made submarines from Iran. But Tehran has no options - Iranian official sources complain that another possible supplier of sophisticated technology - China, is inclined to listen to Iran’s opponents. Tehran has not been able to upgrade its weapons through purchases from China, for example, especially in aviation. Beijing delivered Tehran less than four dozen Chinese version of “MiG-21” sometime back in the early 2000s.

What if they do?

It is important to note, that when analyzing the strategic situation, we may be wrong about the choice of indicators for analysis, for example, which weapons to consider. Expensive modern fighters attract media attention but resemble the situation with super-expensive dreadnought ships in World War I and battleships in World War II. Despite the spectacular technological details, they never played a major role in wars, going down in history as examples of the inefficient use of resources.

A few years ago, fighting the Kremlin’s attempts to establish its airbase in Belarus with modern fighters or to sell Minsk expensive Su-35, President Lukashenko noted, that “the plane is no longer a weapon for us. NATO sees any plane on take-off. Striking a plane today, destroying it is no problem. They can, and we can. We see for a thousand kilometers any plane that rises at the airfield. 50 million [we are talking about the cost] for one plane. [One launch of a] Rocket S-300, and [there is] no plane”. Therefore, Lukashenko stressed that aviation is needed more for routine control of airspace and response to the intrusions of individual aircraft, and for “a real war, we need unmanned aerial vehicles, precision weapons… If anyone wants to fight us, they’ll think they’re going to get that missile out the window. And special operations forces must be equipped so that they can fight on their territory”.

The use of aviation in modern war is possible only if there is at least some control of its own airspace. In the war with the West, very few states can do this - Russia, China, but hardly Iran. Therefore, in a possible current deal between Iran and Russia, some commentators should pay more attention not to fighters, but to air defense systems, namely S-400. Geographically, Iran could, by modernizing its air defense system, control its skies and thus provide at least a minimal opportunity for aviation.

Or will the Iranians make their own weapons?

The Iranian arms industry should not be underestimated in the framework of the Russian-Iranian military-technical cooperation. It should be monitored no less than the purchase of expensive equipment. There are speculations that Russian purchases of Iranian-made weapons will provide additional funding to the Iranian military-industrial complex, allowing it to develop new systems.

But is it true? According to Sky News, in August the Russian side paid € 140 million for Iranian weapons and handed over three samples of Western ammunition - British anti-tank missile NLAW, American anti-tank missile “Justin” and anti-aircraft missile “Stinger”. Tehran received all this in return for supplying 160 “Shahed” kamikaze-drones of various modifications and six “Mohajer-6” drones to Russia. It is also believed that in early November, Tehran and Moscow concluded an additional transaction for an unknown amount of UAVs worth € 200 million. In other words, incomes are low.

They may, of course, grow, and CBS News reported in November that some (US) security sources had found out about the upcoming purchases of ballistic missiles from Iran. This move seems absolutely logical. But... there is not the slightest sign that it was made. Even the White House expressed surprise at the end of the year that this deal was never made.

Let’s emphasize, that it’s hard to blame secrecy here. The West is aware of what is happening between Moscow and Tehran because it has a serious spy network in Iran - illiberal, but the country’s pluralistic political system, even high-ranking officials from certain groups sometimes cooperate with foreign intelligence agencies. An example of this was the execution last Saturday (January 14) in Iran of Alireza Akbari, former Iranian Deputy Minister of Defence (in the 2000s), and then Head of the government-affiliated Institute for Strategic Studies. At some point, this official, close to the reformists who had been defeated in Iranian politics since the mid-2010’s, was given British citizenship - hence the indignation of London and the entire collective West. According to media reports, Akbari may have given the Western intelligence services an enormous amount of classified information, including that on Iran’s key nuclear expert, Mohsen Fakhrizada, who was killed by unknowns in 2020, clearly hoping to slow Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons - and so did Iran’s reformists, because they hoped to cut a deal with the West to limit its nuclear program. Given the West’s level of access to Iranian secrets (and the Akbari case was not the first of its kind), there is every reason to believe that the published accounts of Tehran’s arms deals may be true, but, again, they are not impressive.

Hotbeds of World War

Thus, the supply of Russian weapons to Iran is far from “fait accompli” at this point, i.e. they are possible, but not predetermined. Developments depend largely on one factor and hardly on anything else. This factor - deliveries to Moscow’s opponents, namely the Ukrainian government, a serious amount of qualitatively better Western weapons. These are longer-range missile systems, heavy tanks and fighters.

The situation with regard to these shipments is currently uncertain. Radical pro-American states of Eastern Europe advocate such deliveries - Polish and Lithuanian presidents recently publicly mocked the German chancellor in Davos for not being ready to give Ukrainians heavy “Leopards-2” tanks. These countries have long been betting on a radical course that, in fact, only gives them the chance to build a special relationship with the global hegemon, the US. But the German Chancellor, clearly aware of the consequences for Germany and the world from the transfer of tanks, hinted, that one should let the global hegemon itself first supply Kyiv with its “Abrams”, while Berlin will wait for the time being. In response, at the NATO meeting on Friday (January 20), the head of the Pentagon appealed to the assembled to supply Kyiv weapons: “Now is not the time to delay. The Ukrainian people are watching us. The Kremlin is watching us. History is watching us”. Yet “Abrams” were not promised.

The ally of East European “hawks”, Great Britain, tries to give impetus to new deliveries, offering to hand over to Ukraine its heavy “Challengers-2”. Well, Poland promises to supply Ukraine “Leopards” from the Polish army even despite the objections of Germany.

Parallel uncertainty with Ukraine’s tanks and planes is not a coincidence at all, but a really interrelated political process. The situation in Eastern Europe and the Middle East is intertwined and Iran’s rearmament depends on Ukraine’s rearmament. The logical conclusion is that the escalation of conflicts will also be linked, which will allow for the rapid fusion of these conflicts into a world war.

Security in a globalized world is indivisible. It is also true that once several conflicts are tangled together, it becomes almost impossible to resolve them separately. Therefore, the situation in Eastern Europe should be kept in mind when monitoring the situation in Iran and vice versa. All world wars began with several hotbeds because it is impossible to start a huge fire immediately. Alas, humanity has not understood this and those processes are being repeated.

Caliber.Az