Listed below are some details about Iran's military capability. The totals include equipment held by the Revolutionary Guards, which operate on land, at sea and in the air:
ARMED FORCES:
Iran has over 523,000 personnel in active service. Major General Ataollah Salehi is the armed forces chief.
MISSILES:
In a 2007 parade to mark the anniversary of 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, Iran showed its Shahab 3 missile, saying it could travel 2,000 km -- enabling it to hit Israel and U.S. bases in the region. Another missile at the parade, the Ghadr 1, can reach targets 1,800 km away. It was believed to be the first time it has been shown publicly. In November 2008, Iran said it test-fired a Sejjil missile with a range of close to 2,000 km.
ARMY:
The army comprises about 350,000 men, including 220,000 conscripts. 350,000 less 220,000 leaves 130,000 professional cadres. The 220,000 can be dismissed as cannon fodder, which is how they were used in the Iran-Iraq War. The Iranian military as at the bottom of the ayatollahs' trust totem. The ayatollahs used the war to burn off a significant part of the shah-era officers' corps. Add in the ethnic (and language) divisions and the structure becomes even more shaky: Turkic-speaking Azeris make up a quarter of the population. There are significant (but not as large) groups of Arabs, Kurds, and Baluchis.
The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, viewed as the most loyal guardian of the ruling system, has another 125,000 men. IRGC is the ayatollahs' attempt at an "SS," loyal to the regime before the state. To me, they're a seedy-looking lot, given to strutting and posing and making faces. I could be wrong, though.
In 2004 the army was organised in four corps, with four armored divisions and six infantry divisions. I dunno if that's four corps, each with four armored and six infantry divisions, which sounds pretty heavy, or four corps each with an armored division and 1.5 infantry divisions, which'd be more believable. My guess would be the latter.
There are 1,600 tanks including some 100 Zulfiqar locally produced main battle tanks. Zulfiqar's a first-generation effort, if I recall, using bits and pieces of M48, M60 technology for the suspension and the 125mm main gun from the T72. I don't know what kind of armor it has. I doubt if an Abrams would care.
A large number of Iran's tanks are elderly British-made Chieftains and U.S.-made M-60s. These are known among modern armies as "targets"...
Soviet-made T-54 and T-55s, T-59s, T-62s, and T-72s were also part of the inventory, all captured from the Iraqis or acquired from North Korea and China. The T54 was originally introduced in... ummm... 1954. It has an 85mm main gun. The T55 was introduced a year later and has a 100mm main gun, though otherwise pretty much the same tank. The T59 is the Chinese version of the T54A. The T62 was introduced in (wait for it!) 1962. It has a 115mm main gun and the autoejector had the bad habit of missing the slot and sending the shell casing whizzing around the inside of the turret at high speed, occasionally taking off part of the gunner's or loader's head. It was a spectacular flop on Afghan roads. The T72 was the export version of the T64, which the Sovs kept for themselves. It lacked some of the niceties of the T64, particularly the armor, but it was cheaper to build. I think it had the same 125mm main gun.
The Iraqis had lots of Soviet tanks in the First Gulf War (and in the more recent festivities as well). One of the things our guys liked best about them was their active IR: that big-ass infrared searchlight mounted next to the main gun on the turrets. This was supposed to allow the gunners to search out infantry and other targets at night. Our tanks use passive IR, so those nice big searchlights made really neat aiming points at some pretty extreme distances.
A report from the International Institute for Strategic Studies says that some of the tanks' serviceability may be in doubt. Yeah. I hear their trebuchets' serviceability might be in doubt, too. Their caltrops are pretty well kept, though.
There are around 640 armored personnel carriers. There are 8,196 artillery pieces of which 2,010 are towed, and over 310 are self-propelled. 8,196 artillery pieces less 2,010 leaves 6,186, less 310 leaves 5,876 that are neither towed nor self-propelled. I suppose that means they're pack howitzers, like the U.S. army used to pack around on mules in 1944 or thereabouts. Or maybe they're talking about mortars. NAVY:
There are 18,000 naval personnel. The navy has its headquarters at Bandar-e Abbas. Iran's navy has three Russian Kilo class submarines, three frigates and two corvettes.
As of 2001 the regular Iranian navy was in a state of overall obsolescence, and in poor shape because they had not been equipped with modern ships and weapons. The readiness of the three frigates is doubtful, and the two nearly 40-year-old corvettes do not have sophisticated weapons.
In late 2007 Iran launched a new locally made submarine and a navy frigate named as Jamaran. Jane's Defence Weekly has reported that Iran was also building missile-launching frigates copied from 275-tonne Kaman fast attack missile craft originally purchased from France in the late 1970s.
AIR FORCE:
The air force has some 30,000 personnel and 319 combat aircraft. However, serviceability may be as low as around 60 percent for U.S. aircraft types and 80 percent for Russian aircraft. There are F-14 and MiG 29 aircraft. There are also some aircraft impounded from Iraq -- Russian-built Sukhoi Su-24s and 25s. Iran also has transport aircraft and helicopters and one less AWACS plane.
In September 2007, Iran said it had tested two new domestically-produced jet fighters. State television said the Saegheh was a new generation of the Azarakhsh (Lightning) fighter. Iran said it was being built on an industrial scale.
Continued on Page 47
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/29/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11138 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
How high can they shoot?
Posted by: ed ||
09/29/2009 2:09 Comments ||
Top||
#2
1990's NET > ISLAMIST IRAN = RADICLA MULLAHS "ACE" AGZ US or US-ALLIED ATTACK + INVASION is
* IRANIAN NUCBOMB + related STRATWEAPONIZATION.
* Unwillingness of anti-US World Powers to accept US-NATO control or domin of Iran's oil.
#4
Remember, Iraq at one point had the fourth largest army in the world. Then something happened to it ...
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/29/2009 7:47 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Analysts are great at counting tubes and boots, but avoid developing 'combat effectiveness' measures that are subjective. One is simply bean counting and safe from commitment. The other is an art and subject to postmortem judgment. You don't stay employed in the latter without a sustained track record.
#9
Iran fought the Fourth Largest Army in the World® to a standstill over eight years of trench and missile warfare.
Posted by: Fred ||
09/29/2009 14:39 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Smaller by a couple of planes than it used to be....
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/29/2009 16:12 Comments ||
Top||
#11
They have a number of Special operations brigades that operate globally. They have proxy militias, Hammas etc.. that operate as well. This is good, cold war analysis, tank on tank stuff but the way we fight has changed. How many special operations teams in the Navy, how do they employ, what is their specialty, etc... Otherwise we will be counting tanks and they will be killing Americans.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
09/29/2009 17:16 Comments ||
Top||
#12
quibble - not all Azeris are necessarily disloyal to the regime. IIUC many Azeris who live in Teheran are assimilated, strongly fundamendalist, and more loyal than most ethnic farsis. In contrast to the Azeris in Tabriz.
European Foreign Policy Chief Javier Solana said on Monday he was concerned about Iran's test firing of missiles amid growing tensions over the Islamic Republic's nuclear ambitions.
"Everything that is done in that context is a concern," he said on the sidelines of a meeting of EU defense ministers in Sweden, the current holder of the revolving presidency of the bloc.
Solana said last week's disclosure by Tehran that it is building a second uranium enrichment plant was something that had to be resolved "immediately" with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations nuclear watchdog.
When asked what sanctions Iran should face if it failed to comply with Western demands over its nuclear program, Solana said "now is not the time to talk about that."
It never is, is it ...
The EU official added that the aim of Thursday's talks in Geneva was "engagement, engagement."
Meanwhile, a Russian Foreign Ministry source told Interfax news agency on Monday that Russia was urging restraint from the international community in reaction to the Iranian missile launches.
"We should not give way to emotions now," the source said. "We should try to calm down and the main thing is to launch a productive negotiations process [with Iran]."
One that ends up with Iran having the bomb, the source almost added ...
#2
look at todays NYT. French and German (and Israeli) intell is considerably more concerned about reports of an Iranian warhead program than is US intell.
The upcoming visit by Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Fayssal Mekdad is the first in about five years and is part of US efforts to improve strained relations with Damascus.
Mekdad, who is currently in New York as part of the Syrian delegation to the UN General Assembly meetings, was to fly to Washington on Monday for talks with US government officials on "a range of issues," the embassy official said.
Mekdad's visit was part of "a continuing dialogue" with the Syrian government that began in March, the official said, without giving details. The official spoke on condition of anonymity in line with government regulations.
Mekdad's visit comes amid rising tensions between Syria and Iraq after Baghdad accused Damascus of serving as a launching pad for violence in Iraq. Iraq is demanding Syria hand over two members of Saddam Hussein's now-outlawed Baath Party who are blamed by Iraq for the August 19 truck bombings that killed more than 100 people in Baghdad.
Syria rejected Iraq's request, saying it had failed to provide evidence implicating the two suspects.
Continued on Page 47
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
