What are Iran's military capabilities? | DW Analysis

Israel has repelled a massive Iranian aerial attack but warns the campaign is not over. It's called for vigilance. Iran's first direct attack on Israel, despite decades of hostility, utilized more than 300 missiles and drones. There's been calm over Israel in the wake of the barrage. This is the live view of Tel Aviv. Israel had support in intercepting the weapons from its allies including the US, UK and Jordan. Those that got through had minimal damage. US President Joe Biden has said he wants to coordinate a united diplomatic response to Iran's attack at a meeting of the G7 group of wealthy nations he intends to convene tomorrow. Flashes in the sky of Jerusalem. This footage shows the interception of missiles and drones launched by Iran. Israel says its defense system shot down most of them in the sky. Last night, Iran attacked Israel with more than 300 weapons. But our technological and air superiority meant that we were able to fend off this assault. Together with a strong coalition, we intercepted almost all of these threats. After the first ever direct military attack on Israel from Iranian territory, US President Joe Biden spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Biden reaffirmed what he called America's ironclad commitment to the security of Israel and announced plans to convene G7 leaders for a coordinated diplomatic response. In Tehran, pro-government Iranians took to the streets to celebrate the wave of strikes towards Israel. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps says the overnight assault was a response to a deadly airstrike on an Iranian diplomatic compound in Syria earlier this month, which killed several of its most senior commanders. Iran's mission to the United Nations wrote on social media that its attack on Israel can be deemed concluded. Of course, Israel will react to this attack. But whatever they do, our brave men in the Revolutionary Guard will anticipate it. I do not think Israel will have an answer to the attack. If they respond, Iran will definitely also respond. But Israel says its confrontation with Iran is not over. And the overnight escalation between two long-time foes has once again increased the threat of a full-scale regional war. Let's cross over to Niloufar Ghulami from DW's Farsi department. This is the first time in a long history of confrontation that Iran has directly attacked Israel, as I mentioned before, as opposed to using proxies. Why would Tehran take this step now? Yes, it is unprecedented because so far there has been no direct confrontation with Israel at this level. And one of the reasons for this attack was the regime's need to convince its supporters who asked, when will you respond to the consulate attack? In addition, since the death of Qasem Soleimani, the regime had not taken any harsh revenge that they were talking about, and that caused them to be ridiculed by a large part of the people and many questions from their supporters. So, of course, there was no revenge at all, but the type of the attack was similar to the attack on Einar al-Assad's base. So, that is, they had informed about this attack, and even the White House was informed about it. But the regime wanted to calm down their supporters questioning them. They think the U.S. will not enter the conflict, but I think this is a big gamble due to the current situation and the condition after the October 7th attack by Hamas. Israel must give an aggressive response, and everything depends on this response. And it may also bring the U.S. into the war. Another reason, according to many, was the appeasement of the West with the Islamic Republic. Experts believe that the dispute mechanism must be activated before, and the IRGC must be designated as a terrorist group by the EU. And adding to that with the policy of the Biden administration, the Islamic Republic had an opportunity to sell oil and save financial resources to create more chaos in the region. And we saw, for example, that Iranian drones were used in the war between Russia and Ukraine, and the regime continued its attacks through proxy forces. And now it has attacked the Israel territory in an unprecedented way. So, the West should know that the Islamic Republic will continue to destabilize the region as long as it is allowed. And at the same time, it will suppress anyone opposing their strategy inside the country. And this is why Iranian pro-democracy activists have been warning for years that peace and security in the Middle East will depend on the destruction of the Islamic Republic and establishment of a democratic regime in Iran. Well, Iran's leadership is now saying that any reckless Israeli move will prompt a stronger response. Tell me how prepared Iran is for this conflict to escalate? Yes, Iranian officials, including Ali Khamenei and IRGC commanders, constantly warn Israel in their statements today and days before and threaten the US for any possible interference. And it is certain that Iran is vulnerable to Israel due to the long distance between the two countries. And we have to consider that Iran's internal condition should be also considered that economic and social situation is critical. And the legitimacy of this regime has been questioned for years. So, in addition, the Israeli front will not consist of just one country, but will be an international coalition against Iran. And the Islamic Republic will not have the slightest chance, I would say. But this question is highlighted here. To what extent does the West seek confrontation with Iran? We must remember that Russia is now at war with Ukraine and Israel is also fighting Hamas terrorist group. Niloufar Gholami from DW's Farsi department. Thank you. Thank you for having me. I asked Middle East analyst Tsenya Svetlova what she thinks is behind Iran's attack. Well, I think that it's quite clear that Iran is basically in the same game just like Israel. It wants to project power and it's afraid that if it will not retaliate for this incident in Damascus, where its top generals were killed, then in the eyes of the rest of the Middle East, where it tries to build this proxy and its camp, it will look weak. So while Israel had to act also to achieve, you know, this projection of power, so was the Iranian answer. And we saw that it was, well, you know, massive, but also rather limited in scope. If they wanted to inflict pain on Israel, they could do it through their proxies in Lebanon, Syria and other countries. So a whole lot of military posturing here is what you're saying. You served in the Knesset as opposition until 2019. How far is Netanyahu's government willing to go in a reaction? Well, you have to remember that Netanyahu is not alone right now in his place of decision making. There is a quite popular and rather strong minister of defense, Yoav Galland, who already proved time and again independence. And there is also minister Benny Gantz, who basically is a part of the opposition who joined Netanyahu only after the tragic events of 10-7. So the decision that he will be making, he will be making it along with these people. And therefore, it's not only Netanyahu and his right-wing members of his coalition that will be the scope of reaction, if at all. And I assure you that it seems that coordination between Israel and the US is back on track. And in this regard, we are expecting, of course, negotiation in regards to any form of Israeli reaction in Iran. What about when it comes to Israel's allies' calls for restraint, though? Well, it's natural that now, you know, the whole of the Middle East is very worried. And we know that even sometimes simpler steps, you know, they can bring along major wars. I just have to remind that the killing, the assassination attempt on the Israeli ambassador in London in 1982 caused the war in Lebanon in June 1982. So therefore, I think that the Israeli allies, at the same time, while, you know, they were fighting shoulder to shoulder along with the Israelis, Israeli fighters, Israeli jets, and they proved resilience of this alliance yesterday. At the same time, nobody is interested in this large regional war. Not the Iranians themselves, but of course, not partners of Israel. And I think that Israel, of course, should be attentive to the voices of its close allies that, again, prove that the nature of their relations is much stronger, that it sometimes look through the TV screens. But so far, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has not been listening to his allies. Tell me then, how dependent is Israel on its allies? Can it afford to continue to ignore? Well, I think that, you know, we are entered into a very different territory than until recently. You know, while Netanyahu feels that he is perhaps not obliged to listen to basically anybody, not only Middle Eastern allies, but also strong international allies such as the United States, Germany, and the UK. When, you know, we entered this uncharted territory, the direct blows between Israel and Iran, this is a whole different story. And we know from the past that, you know, while Netanyahu at some point maybe was inclining to some kind of blow against Iran, he knew that it's impossible to be done without strong American support and involvement. So therefore, if we are talking about, you know, further escalation that can bring along, you know, this regional war, I think that even for Netanyahu, and again, he's ready to go very far in many different spheres, such as Gaza, of course, but not, for example, in the north, where Iranian proxy Hezbollah is involved. And we see that for the last six months, there is this very delicate game of the balance act that is going on. And the same, I think, will happen right now also vis-a-vis Iran. Tania, then tell me how worried are you about a possible escalation? Well, as an Israeli, as a mother who spent last night, it was a sleepless night. I was not affected by myself, you know, by the attack in my area, in the center of Israel, there were no sirens going on. But of course, you know, I was following up and we prepared our shelter. And I was thinking how I'm going to drag three of my kids to the shelter in the middle of night. I am very worried. And I am very worried about everything that is happening in our country since the barbaric attack of Hamas of 2007. I am worried about our further relations, you know, with moderate Palestinians, because we should be promoting them and focusing on the relations with moderate Palestinians, moderate Arab countries, and strengthening the alliance between all of them. And for now, it seems as almost impossible task, but we should not give up on that. Tania Tsvetlova, thank you for being here on DW. Thank you. Mark Kantian is senior advisor with the Center for Strategic and International Studies. An unprecedented Iranian attack here, but limited damage to Israel. Is this a major escalation or a symbol of sorts then? Well, it's really both. On the one hand, the fact that Iran has directly struck Israel is unprecedented. It has always in the past acted through proxies. So that's an escalation. That's something quite unusual. On the other hand, of course, there has not been very much damage, so that puts less pressure on the Israelis. This is not a situation like October 7th. I think that the Israelis will feel the need to do something in response, but nothing as dramatic, nothing as large as what they've done in Gaza. So what damage could Iran do? Well, Iran has a lot of missiles, and particularly they have ballistic missiles, which are harder to stop. Now, the Israelis have a complete set of air defense weapons and missile defense weapons. They've been expecting this kind of attack for 20 years. But ballistic missiles are more difficult to intercept. They have maybe a higher probability of getting through and causing damage. So the Iranians do have some capabilities that they could employ. Drones as well? And of course they have drones, yes. But the drones have been shown to be susceptible to air defenses. How isolated would you say Iran is when it comes to its Arab neighbours? Well, Iran is clearly quite isolated. Their Arab neighbours have always been nervous about Iran. This is a tension that goes back centuries between the Persians and the Arabs. The aggressive stance of Iran against Arab countries, they've struck several of them in the past. So this is just increasing their nervousness. Where do you stand on Israel's next response, if there's going to be retaliation or not, or a step back? Well, what we've heard from the previous commentators is two things. One is that the Israelis will probably do something that's very typical of Israel. You hit them, they'll hit you back. On the other hand, the damage has not been very significant. So I think they might go after some targets where there will not be many casualties, certainly not civilian casualties. A military airfield would be a classic one. Maybe the production facility for drones. They might go after some of the Iranian naval capabilities. The Iranians, of course, have captured a ship in the Gulf, and the Israelis might go after some of those naval capabilities. There's also been an Iranian ship in the Red Sea that has been giving targeting information to the Houthis. They might go after that also. And Mark, what sort of response would those options draw? It's hard to say. The hope is that the Israelis make their counter and then both sides step back. The Iranians, as we've heard, don't want a larger war. Before this, they had been talking about de-escalating. They had pulled the Houthis back a bit, for example. So one hopes that whatever the Israelis do, it's limited and the Iranians can sort of walk away. That's certainly what the United States is saying. The United States has been very clear that it will not participate in any attacks on Iran or any counters, but it's likely giving both advice and maybe some intelligence to the Israelis to help shape this response. I'd like to get more on what's happened overnight from Marina Maran from the War Studies Department at King's College London. Welcome back to the show. Israel has said that Iran fired 170 drones. Can you tell us what kind of drones we are dealing with here? Good morning. Well, we can only guess here the fact that some drones came allegedly from Iran, that they would have to fly about 2,000 kilometers. So those could have been the Mohajer 10 drones. And then there were other drones coming from Iraq, coming from southern Lebanon and coming from Yemen. It could have been another type. Maybe some of them could have been the Shahid 136, the drones that the Russians are using in Ukraine. But there is no certainty in terms of whether it was one kind of drones or several kinds of drones and which specific drones Iran has used. Is it possible to say if they had hit their targets, what kind of damage they would have been able to do? Again, here we have to speculate. It depends on the target, how well the target is protected on the one hand. And just to talk about Shahids, we see the kind of damage that they can do in Ukraine, but they don't hit the target by one. Usually they are in pairs. And again, it depends on the target, if it's a civilian building or if it's a military installation, which will be much better protected to withstand such damage. And the Mohajer 10, for instance, has about 300 kilograms of explosive. So that's the payload of that drone. So it would be much more powerful. And in other words, some of the drones coming through might have done just enough damage to military installations. But I don't think that, you know, speculating again, there would have been serious damage given that Israel was prepared and actually managed to neutralize together with its allies most of the drones and missiles shot. Yeah, let's talk more about that. So we understand these were intercepted by Israel and the United States. Can you tell us a little bit about the logistics of how they would have gone about intercepting this attack? Well, the Israeli used obviously their air defense system, the Iron Dome, then RAF, so Royal Air Force from the United Kingdom, was also helping to shoot down drones and missiles from the air. The U.S. has deployed its warships. So one warship was already there. Another warship was rerouted and the warships have the Aegis system in order to intercept targets. So those were used to intercept drones. So the Israeli IDF worked in coordination with the United States and the UK and also allegedly France and some other countries like Jordan were also involved. And some say that Saudi Arabia was also helping to neutralize some of the drones. So it was a joint effort in order to defend against the missiles that came in. And Marina, you mentioned that after these drones were launched, it took several hours for them to reach their targets. Let's take a closer look at this timing. How important do you think it was that we had this time frame in order to provide Israel and its partners enough time to intervene? I think it's a critical point because if you're launching an attack which you want to succeed, you certainly don't give any prior warning and you don't give your adversary that time frame. So the effect of surprise is completely taken out of the equation here. And what I'm thinking is that Israel raised the stakes in a certain way, was the Damascus strike and some U.S. officials indeed confirmed that that was an Israeli strike. And Iran had no choice but to respond. So there was mounting pressure inside Iran itself to respond from its own soil, not to use its proxies or maybe to use its proxies as well, but to demonstrate clearly that Iran is not happy about Israel attacking it on what is considered to be its territory. So what I'm thinking for Iran, Iran doesn't want a regional war and neither does Israel. So you have to raise the stakes just a tiny bit in order to basically do something. So show a response, show a willingness to respond, but in such a way that the other party doesn't have a lot of good options to retaliate. And so now Iran has launched this barrage of drones and missiles along with its proxies, but Israel intercepted them all because they knew well ahead they could prepare and coordinate with the allies. So from both perspectives, everything is satisfied. Israel can claim that they have successfully defended against the Iranian attack, and that makes it very difficult for Israel now to raise the stakes. What will be the next response to Iran? Will Israel actually strike the military sites in Iran? And the U.S. administration is very afraid of this. So it's a very interesting strategic game here, and I think this was more of a show of force, more of kind of a gunboat diplomacy, rather than an actual attack aimed at destroying something. And we can get some analysis now from Mike Martin, war studies senior fellow at King's College London. Welcome back to DW. What do you think last night's attack reveals about Iran's evolving military capabilities? Actually, Claire, it's pretty much what we'd expect. So a large part of the attack was Shahid drones. We've seen lots of those in Ukraine. The Iranians gave loads to the Russians. And then on the ballistic missile front, the cruise missile front, we've got a pretty good idea of what capabilities Iran has from various tests that they've conducted. And so actually, what we saw last night was pretty much exactly what we expected in terms of falling within Iran's technological envelope, if you like, what they're able to do. Now, given the relatively limited damage, do you think that Iran's attack was then calculated to cause relatively limited damage while displaying strength? Or could this force Israel to retaliate? I think you've hit the nail on the head there. As you said in your package, this was in response to the Israeli attack on the Iranian consulate. And Iran had to respond to that. And the question was how it responded. And actually, Iran could have done much more damage to Israel, perhaps by using some of its proxies nearer to Israel. But as it was launching quite slow moving drones that were able to be shot down in Jordanian airspace, and as well signaling the attack for up to a week in advance, this was for the Iranian domestic audience and to its proxy allies in the region to demonstrate that Iran wasn't going to be pushed around. But equally, both Iran and America have signaled that they want to consider the matter closed now. They do not want to escalate this any further. Does this also have to do the successful downing of what an Israeli military spokesperson says was 99% of the drones and missiles fired? Does this also have to do with Israel's capabilities here? Why else would it have been so successful? So it wasn't just the Israelis, right? The Israelis shot down a lot of the missiles once they entered Israeli airspace. And we've seen the photos in your package just then. But actually, a lot of the slower moving drones, and in numerical terms, the drones took up the large part of the attack. They were shot down predominantly by the US Air Force and also other allies, Jordan and potentially the UK as well. The Americans have got the largest and most technologically advanced air force in the world. And the Israelis have the most advanced air defense system in the world. So I actually don't think it's that surprising with an attack that they had a week's notice of, that they were able to plan, prepare, pre-position airframes, get the defenses ready, and then deal with the attack in a fairly comprehensive manner. I think, to be honest, both sides, Iran and America, and Israel as well, really what happened last night was to be expected. I think all sides were expecting to happen what happened, and then it happened. And now I think we're going to go back to something slightly more steady state between the two sides, because nobody wants to escalate beyond really what was a demonstration last night. So, Mike, just briefly before I let you go, what do you think then Israel might be considering in terms of a possible response? What options would be on the table for them? Well, it is the wild card because Netanyahu is more reckless than the US and Iran. But if Israel is being sensible, what it will do is keep its response within the way America sees the region. So perhaps attacking Iran's nuclear facilities, and that will enable Israel to keep its response within how the Americans see the region. Thank you so much. As always, that is Mike Martin, War Studies Senior Fellow at King's College London. Thank you. So let's get into some specifics of what Iran has used in this attack. Arthur Holland-Michel is an expert on drones with the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs. We've just heard there that drones did form a large part of this attack. Could you tell us what kind of drones Iran has in its arsenal and whether it's clear what was used in this particular incident? Sure, good morning. It's great to be here. So Iran actually has a very diverse drone program. They have, I believe, about a dozen different types of drones that can be used in sort of weaponized missiles, suicide-style attacks. Unfortunately, I've been on the road and I haven't been able to look into any of the analysis of the actual attack and the evidence that we have, which is presumably very thin from last night. But keeping in mind the ranges of these attacks, it was probably some of the larger suicide drones. So these are faster-moving, jet-powered, in some cases propeller-powered systems that have a warhead of anywhere between sort of 50 to maybe like 200 pounds. Tell us a little bit more, if you can, about Iran's drone program. Has the threat from it been increasing in recent years? It certainly has. An important thing to know about Iran's drone program is actually it's one of the oldest drone programs in the world. Iran has been making drones since the 1980s. And in that respect, they got a big head start over a lot of other countries, including some of their adversaries. The threat has definitely been increasing in recent years as a result of recent technological advances in things like sensors, miniaturization of power systems. They're able to produce more sophisticated, more precise drones and to produce them in higher quantities. But an important caveat to that is that each time Iran carries out an attack, especially an attack on, say, U.S. forces or in this case on Israel, that gives the defenders information about how to better counter this threat. I think that if we had seen an attack of this scale five years ago, we wouldn't have seen the same numbers of shootdowns that we saw last night, these amazing figures of 99 percent interception rate. And so that is a kind of counterweight to this idea that Iran, the drone threat is sort of going to only grow exponentially in the years ahead. It's always a cat and mouse game. So the attacks themselves revealing its capabilities. I guess my next question would be then how it was possible for Iran to become such a global drone powerhouse despite Western sanctions? Well, again, it's, you know, it was this early bet that they made to get into the, you know, to get into the field of technology really before people were actually taking it very, very seriously. Also keeping in mind that drones, as compared to, say, missiles, don't necessarily require incredibly sophisticated components. You know, you don't need necessarily like a very expensive rocket system, the kind of system that might be subject to sanctions or trade restrictions. You might just have a propeller, something that is as simple as what you can buy for a hobby plane. And in that regard, they sort of made this very, very prescient bet that going low, going small, you know, going simple could actually be a payoff because a lot of the systems that were developed were for, you know, big rocket powered systems, aircraft and such. And so being able to fly under the radar was a bit of a hole in that. Arthur, thank you so much for joining us today. That is Arthur Holland-Michel, senior fellow at the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs.