Russian Expert Outlines Iran’s Military Strengths Against US and Israeli Threats

According to the International Desk of Webangah News Agency, a report by Russian media outlet RT, quoting Russian Academy of Military Sciences expert Vladimir Prokhatilov, expresses confidence that the war being instigated by the United States and the Zionist regime against Iran will not be a mere pastime or a lightning-fast military operation. The military and strategic expert cited several objective reasons that would transform this confrontation into a high-risk adventure with exorbitant costs for these regimes.

Prokhatilov dismissed the possibility of overthrowing Iran’s system or achieving decisive strategic objectives, adding that Tehran is far from defeat or collapse. The Russian military analyst emphasized that according to US National Intelligence assessments, Iran possesses the “largest reserve of ballistic missiles in the Middle East,” with some missiles having a range of up to 2,000 kilometers.

Data from the Center for Strategic and International Studies indicates that this extensive arsenal includes numerous long-range missiles capable of reaching Israel and posing a genuine threat. Prominent among these missiles are the Sejjil with a 2,000 km range, Emad with 1,700 km, Qadr with 2,000 km, Shahab-3 with 1,300 km, Khorramshahr with 2,000 km, and Hoveizeh with 1,350 km.

The Russian expert further highlighted one of Iran’s most significant advantages: the “Khorramshahr-4” hypersonic missile. He noted its extraordinary capability to cover a distance of 2,000 kilometers in just 12 minutes, making it a potential threat to Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system, which would find itself incapable of countering such incredible speed and maneuverability.

Prokhatilov added that independent international analysts have expressed doubts about the veracity of media claims regarding serious damage to Iran’s missile capabilities. He also stated that the ability of the US and Israel to sustain bombing of the Islamic Republic for an extended period is highly limited, primarily due to a severe and concerning shortage of air defense missiles and precision munitions.

Citing the British newspaper Financial Times and quoting Western officials and analysts, the Russian expert indicated that limited reserves of vital defensive ammunition for the United States would likely determine the scale of any US or Israeli military attack on Iran. The report suggested this concern stems from the unprecedented scale of US and Israeli expenditure of their air defense missile reserves during a recent 12-day conflict.

Prokhatilov mentioned that during the 12-day war, the US fired approximately 150 missiles from the THAAD missile defense system solely for the defense of Israel. This intensive usage led to significant depletion of a system that had requested fewer than 650 interceptor missiles since becoming fully operational around 2010. This implies Washington consumed nearly a quarter of its accumulated stockpile of these costly missiles in a matter of days.

The Financial Times also pointed to another challenge for the Americans in this hypothetical conflict: the necessity for US guided-missile destroyers to return to ports for re-ammunition, as at-sea loading is technically and logistically impossible. This operational constraint limits the US Navy’s ability to provide continuous fire support.

The English newspaper revealed more precise Israeli intelligence estimates concluding that even with the arrival of the aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford in the region, existing US military capabilities would only suffice for supporting an intense air attack for four to five days, or a week with lower intensity and density. These assessments impose strict time limitations on any potential military operation.

The Russian expert complemented this analysis with a quote from a reputable academic study, stating that while fighter jets might destroy fortified facilities and weaken military capabilities, they cannot alter internal politics. Quoting Kelly Grieco, a prominent analyst at the Stimson Center, he noted that strategic bombing, as observed over the past century of empirical studies, does not necessarily lead to popular revolt; on the contrary, it may foster national solidarity in the face of foreign aggression.

The Russian expert ultimately predicted that US President Donald Trump would suffer significant electoral damage domestically as a result of the failure of his military adventure, and would fail in presenting an image of a peacemaker.