Iran: A Bridge Too Far?
by Mark Gaffney - Information Clearing House October 26, 2004

Last July, they dubbed it operation Summer Pulse: a simultaneous mustering of US Naval
forces, world wide, that was unprecedented. According to the Navy, it was the first
exercise of its new Fleet Response Plan (FRP), the purpose of which was to enable the
Navy to respond quickly to an international crisis. The Navy wanted to show its
increased force readiness, that is, its capacity to rapidly move combat power to any
global hot spot. Never in the history of the US Navy had so many carrier battle groups
been involved in a single operation. Even the US fleet massed in the Gulf and eastern
Mediterranean during operation Desert Storm in 1991, and in the recent invasion of
Iraq, never exceeded six battle groups. But last July and August there were seven of
them on the move, each battle group consisting of a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier with
its full complement of 7-8 supporting ships, and 70 or more assorted aircraft. Most of
the activity, according to various reports, was in the Pacific, where the fleet
participated in joint exercises with the Taiwanese navy.

But why so much naval power underway at the same time? What potential world crisis
could possibly require more battle groups than were deployed during the recent invasion
of Iraq? In past years, when the US has seen fit to “show the flag” or flex its naval
muscle, one or two carrier groups have sufficed. Why this global show of power?

The news headlines about the joint-maneuvers in the South China Sea read: “Saber
Rattling Unnerves China”, and: “Huge Show of Force Worries Chinese.” But the reality was
quite different, and, as we shall see, has grave ramifications for the continuing US
military presence in the Persian Gulf; because operation Summer Pulse reflected a high-
level Pentagon decision that an unprecedented show of strength was needed to counter
what is viewed as a growing threat ––in the particular case of China, because of Peking’s
newest Sovremenny-class destroyers recently acquired from Russia.

“Nonsense!” you are probably thinking. That’s impossible. How could a few picayune
destroyers threaten the US Pacific fleet?”

Here is where the story thickens: Summer Pulse amounted to a tacit acknowledgement,
obvious to anyone paying attention, that the United States has been eclipsed in an
important area of military technology, and that this qualitative edge is now being
wielded by others, including the Chinese; because those otherwise very ordinary
destroyers were, in fact, launching platforms for Russian-made 3M-82 Moskit anti-ship
cruise missiles (NATO designation: SS-N-22 Sunburn), a weapon for which the US Navy
currently has no defense. Here I am not suggesting that the US status of lone world
Superpower has been surpassed. I am simply saying that a new global balance of power is
emerging, in which other individual states may, on occasion, achieve “an asymmetric
advantage” over the US. And this, in my view, explains the immense scale of Summer
Pulse. The US show last summer of overwhelming strength was calculated to send a
message.

The Sunburn Missile

I was shocked when I learned the facts about these Russian-made cruise missiles. The
problem is that so many of us suffer from two common misperceptions. The first follows
from our assumption that Russia is militarily weak, as a result of the breakup of the
old Soviet system. Actually, this is accurate, but it does not reflect the
complexities. Although the Russian navy continues to rust in port, and the Russian army
is in disarray, in certain key areas Russian technology is actually superior to our
own. And nowhere is this truer than in the vital area of anti-ship cruise missile
technology, where the Russians hold at least a ten-year lead over the US. The second
misperception has to do with our complacency in general about missiles-as-weapons
––probably attributable to the pathetic performance of Saddam Hussein’s Scuds during the
first Gulf war: a dangerous illusion that I will now attempt to rectify.

Many years ago, Soviet planners gave up trying to match the US Navy ship for ship, gun
for gun, and dollar for dollar. The Soviets simply could not compete with the high
levels of US spending required to build up and maintain a huge naval armada. They
shrewdly adopted an alternative approach based on strategic defense. They searched for
weaknesses, and sought relatively inexpensive ways to exploit those weaknesses. The
Soviets succeeded: by developing several supersonic anti-ship missiles, one of which,
the SS-N-22 Sunburn, has been called “the most lethal missile in the world today.”

After the collapse of the Soviet Union the old military establishment fell upon hard
times. But in the late1990s Moscow awakened to the under-utilized potential of its
missile technology to generate desperately needed foreign exchange. A decision was made
to resuscitate selected programs, and, very soon, Russian missile technology became a
hot export commodity. Today, Russian missiles are a growth industry generating much-
needed cash for Russia, with many billions in combined sales to India, China, Viet Nam,
Cuba, and also Iran. In the near future this dissemination of advanced technology is
likely to present serious challenges to the US. Some have even warned that the US NavyÂ’s
largest ships, the massive carriers, have now become floating death traps, and should
for this reason be mothballed.

The Sunburn missile has never seen use in combat, to my knowledge, which probably
explains why its fearsome capabilities are not more widely recognized. Other cruise
missiles have been used, of course, on several occasions, and with devastating results.
During the Falklands War, French-made Exocet missiles, fired from Argentine fighters,
sunk the HMS Sheffield and another ship. And, in 1987, during the Iran-Iraq war, the
USS Stark was nearly cut in half by a pair of Exocets while on patrol in the Persian
Gulf. On that occasion US Aegis radar picked up the incoming Iraqi fighter (a French-
made Mirage), and tracked its approach to within 50 miles. The radar also “saw” the
Iraqi plane turn about and return to its base. But radar never detected the pilot
launch his weapons. The sea-skimming Exocets came smoking in under radar and were only
sighted by human eyes moments before they ripped into the Stark, crippling the ship and
killing 37 US sailors.

The 1987 surprise attack on the Stark exemplifies the dangers posed by anti-ship cruise
missiles. And the dangers are much more serious in the case of the Sunburn, whose specs
leave the sub-sonic Exocet in the dust. Not only is the Sunburn much larger and faster,
it has far greater range and a superior guidance system. Those who have witnessed its
performance trials invariably come away stunned. According to one report, when the
Iranian Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani visited Moscow in October 2001 he requested a
test firing of the Sunburn, which the Russians were only too happy to arrange. So
impressed was Ali Shamkhani that he placed an order for an undisclosed number of the
missiles.

The Sunburn can deliver a 200-kiloton nuclear payload, or: a 750-pound conventional
warhead, within a range of 100 miles, more than twice the range of the Exocet. The
Sunburn combines a Mach 2.1 speed (two times the speed of sound) with a flight pattern
that hugs the deck and includes “violent end maneuvers” to elude enemy defenses. The
missile was specifically designed to defeat the US Aegis radar defense system. Should a
US Navy Phalanx point defense somehow manage to detect an incoming Sunburn missile, the
system has only seconds to calculate a fire solution ––not enough time to take out the
intruding missile. The US Phalanx defense employs a six-barreled gun that fires 3,000
depleted-uranium rounds a minute, but the gun must have precise coordinates to destroy
an intruder “just in time.”

The SunburnÂ’s combined supersonic speed and payload size produce tremendous kinetic
energy on impact, with devastating consequences for ship and crew. A single one of
these missiles can sink a large warship, yet costs considerably less than a fighter
jet. Although the Navy has been phasing out the older Phalanx defense system, its
replacement, known as the Rolling Action Missile (RAM) has never been tested against
the weapon it seems destined to one day face in combat.

Implications For US Forces in the Gulf

The US NavyÂ’s only plausible defense against a robust weapon like the Sunburn missile is
to detect the enemyÂ’s approach well ahead of time, whether destroyers, subs, or fighter-
bombers, and defeat them before they can get in range and launch their deadly cargo.
For this purpose US AWACs radar planes assigned to each naval battle group are kept
aloft on a rotating schedule. The planes “see” everything within two hundred miles of the
fleet, and are complemented with intelligence from orbiting satellites.

But US naval commanders operating in the Persian Gulf face serious challenges that are
unique to the littoral, i.e., coastal, environment. A glance at a map shows why: The
Gulf is nothing but a large lake, with one narrow outlet, and most of its northern
shore, i.e., Iran, consists of mountainous terrain that affords a commanding tactical
advantage over ships operating in Gulf waters. The rugged northern shore makes for easy
concealment of coastal defenses, such as mobile missile launchers, and also makes their
detection problematic. Although it was not widely reported, the US actually lost the
battle of the Scuds in the first Gulf War ––termed “the great Scud hunt” ––and for similar
reasons. Saddam HusseinÂ’s mobile Scud launchers proved so difficult to detect and
destroy ––over and over again the Iraqis fooled allied reconnaissance with decoys ––that
during the course of Desert Storm the US was unable to confirm even a single kill. This
proved such an embarrassment to the Pentagon, afterwards, that the unpleasant stats
were buried in official reports. But the blunt fact is that the US failed to stop the
Scud attacks. The launches continued until the last few days of the conflict. Luckily,
the ScudÂ’s inaccuracy made it an almost useless weapon. At one point General Norman
Schwarzkopf quipped dismissively to the press that his soldiers had a greater chance of
being struck by lightning in Georgia than by a Scud in Kuwait.

But that was then, and it would be a grave error to allow the ScudÂ’s ineffectiveness to
blur the facts concerning this other missile. The SunburnÂ’s amazing accuracy was
demonstrated not long ago in a live test staged at sea by the Chinese ––and observed by
US spy planes. Not only did the Sunburn missile destroy the dummy target ship, it
scored a perfect bull’s eye, hitting the crosshairs of a large “X” mounted on the ship’s
bridge. The only word that does it justice, awesome, has become a cliché, hackneyed
from hyperbolic excess.

The US Navy has never faced anything in combat as formidable as the Sunburn missile.
But this will surely change if the US and Israel decide to wage a so-called preventive
war against Iran to destroy its nuclear infrastructure. Storm clouds have been
darkening over the Gulf for many months. In recent years Israel upgraded its air force
with a new fleet of long-range F-15 fighter-bombers, and even more recently took
delivery of 5,000 bunker-buster bombs from the US ––weapons that many observers think are
intended for use against Iran.

The arming for war has been matched by threats. Israeli officials have declared
repeatedly that they will not allow the Mullahs to develop nuclear power, not even
reactors to generate electricity for peaceful use. Their threats are particularly
worrisome, because Israel has a long history of pre-emptive war. (See my 1989 book
Dimona: the Third Temple? and also my 2003 article Will Iran Be Next? posted at <
www.InformationClearingHouse.info/article3288.htm >)

Never mind that such a determination is not IsraelÂ’s to make, and belongs instead to the
international community, as codified in the Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). With regard
to Iran, the International Atomic Energy AgencyÂ’s (IAEAÂ’s) recent report (September
2004) is well worth a look, as it repudiates facile claims by the US and Israel that
Iran is building bombs. While the report is highly critical of Tehran for its
ambiguities and its grudging release of documents, it affirms that IAEA inspectors have
been admitted to every nuclear site in the country to which they have sought access,
without exception. Last year Iran signed the strengthened IAEA inspection protocol,
which until then had been voluntary. And the IAEA has found no hard evidence, to date,
either that bombs exist or that Iran has made a decision to build them. (The latest
IAEA report can be downloaded at: www.GlobalSecurity.org)

In a talk on October 3, 2004, IAEA Director General Mohamed El Baradei made the
clearest statement yet: "Iran has no nuclear weapons program", he said, and then
repeated himself for emphasis: “Iran has no nuclear weapons program, but I personally
donÂ’t rush to conclusions before all the realities are clarified. So far I see nothing
that could be called an imminent danger. I have seen no nuclear weapons program in
Iran. What I have seen is that Iran is trying to gain access to nuclear enrichment
technology, and so far there is no danger from Iran. Therefore, we should make use of
political and diplomatic means before thinking of resorting to other alternatives.”

( www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_id=505... )

No one disputes that Tehran is pursuing a dangerous path, but with 200 or more Israeli
nukes targeted upon them the IraniansÂ’ insistence on keeping their options open is
understandable. Clearly, the nuclear nonproliferation regime today hangs by the
slenderest of threads. The world has arrived at a fateful crossroads.

A Fearful Symmetry?

If a showdown over Iran develops in the coming months, the man who could hold the
outcome in his hands will be thrust upon the world stage. That man, like him or hate
him, is Russian President Vladimir Putin. He has been castigated severely in recent
months for gathering too much political power to himself. But according to former
Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, who was interviewed on US television recently by
David Brokaw, Putin has not imposed a tyranny upon Russia ––yet. Gorbachev thinks the
jury is still out on Putin.

Perhaps, with this in mind, we should be asking whether Vladimir Putin is a serious
student of history. If he is, then he surely recognizes that the deepening crisis in
the Persian Gulf presents not only manifold dangers, but also opportunities. Be assured
that the Russian leader has not forgotten the humiliating defeat Ronald Reagan inflicted
upon the old Soviet state. (Have we Americans forgotten?) By the mid-1980s the Soviets
were in Kabul, and had all but defeated the Mujahedeen. The Soviet Union appeared
secure in its military occupation of Afghanistan. But then, in 1986, the first US
Stinger missiles reached the hands of the Afghani resistance; and, quite suddenly,
Soviet helicopter gunships and MiGs began dropping out of the skies like flaming
stones. The tide swiftly turned, and by 1989 it was all over but the hand wringing and
gnashing of teeth in the Kremlin. Defeated, the Soviets slunk back across the frontier.
The whole world cheered the American Stingers, which had carried the day.

This very night, as he sips his cognac, what is Vladimir Putin thinking? Is he perhaps
thinking about the perverse symmetries of history? If so, he may also be wondering (and
discussing with his closest aides) how a truly great nation like the United States
could be so blind and so stupid as to allow another state, i.e., Israel, to control
its foreign policy, especially in a region as vital (and volatile) as the Mid-East.
One can almost hear the RussiansÂ’ animated conversation:

“The Americans! What is the matter with them?”
“They simply cannot help themselves.”
“What idiots!”
“A nation as foolish as this deserves to be taught a lesson…”
“Yes! For their own good.”
“It must be a painful lesson, one they will never forget…”
“Are we agreed, then, comrades?”
“Let us teach our American friends a lesson about the limits of military power!”

Does anyone really believe that Vladimir Putin will hesitate to seize a most rare
opportunity to change the course of history and, in the bargain, take his sweet
revenge? Surely Putin understands the terrible dimensions of the trap into which the US
has blundered, thanks to the Israelis and their neo-con supporters in Washington who
lobbied so vociferously for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, against all friendly and expert
advice, and who even now beat the drums of war against Iran. Would Putin be wrong to
conclude that the US will never leave the region unless it is first defeated
militarily? Should we blame him for deciding that Iran is “one bridge too far”?

If the US and Israel overreach, and the Iranians close the net with Russian anti-ship
missiles, it will be a fearful symmetry, indeedÂ…

Springing the Trap

At the battle of Cannae in 216 BC the great Carthaginian general, Hannibal, tempted a
much larger Roman army into a fateful advance, and then enveloped and annihilated it
with a smaller force. Out of a Roman army of 70,000 men, no more than a few thousand
escaped. It was said that after many hours of dispatching the Romans HannibalÂ’s soldiers
grew so tired that the fight went out of them. In their weariness they granted the last
broken and bedraggled Romans their livesÂ…

Let us pray that the US sailors who are unlucky enough to be on duty in the Persian
Gulf when the shooting starts can escape the fate of the Roman army at Cannae. The odds
will be heavily against them, however, because they will face the same type of danger,
tantamount to envelopment. The US ships in the Gulf will already have come within range
of the Sunburn missiles and the even more-advanced SS-NX-26 Yakhonts missiles, also
Russian-made (speed: Mach 2.9; range: 180 miles) deployed by the Iranians along the
GulfÂ’s northern shore. Every US ship will be exposed and vulnerable. When the Iranians
spring the trap, the entire lake will become a killing field.

Anti-ship cruise missiles are not new, as IÂ’ve mentioned. Nor have they yet determined
the outcome in a conflict. But this is probably only because these horrible weapons
have never been deployed in sufficient numbers. At the time of the Falklands war the
Argentine air force possessed only five Exocets, yet managed to sink two ships. With
enough of them, the Argentineans might have sunk the entire British fleet, and won the
war. Although weÂ’ve never seen a massed attack of cruise missiles, this is exactly what
the US Navy could face in the next war in the Gulf. Try and imagine it if you can:
barrage after barrage of Exocet-class missiles, which the Iranians are known to possess
in the hundreds, as well as the unstoppable Sunburn and Yakhonts missiles. The
questions that our purblind government leaders should be asking themselves, today, if
they value what historians will one day write about them, are two: how many of the
Russian anti-ship missiles has Putin already supplied to Iran? And: How many more are
currently in the pipeline? In 2001 JaneÂ’s Defense Weekly reported that Iran was
attempting to acquire anti-ship missiles from Russia. Ominously, the same report also
mentioned that the more advanced Yakhonts missile was “optimized for attacks against
carrier task forces.” Apparently its guidance system is “able to distinguish an aircraft
carrier from its escorts.” The numbers were not disclosed…

The US Navy will come under fire even if the US does not participate in the first so-
called surgical raids on IranÂ’s nuclear sites, that is, even if Israel goes it alone.
IsraelÂ’s brand-new fleet of 25 F-15s (paid for by American taxpayers) has sufficient
range to target Iran, but the Israelis cannot mount an attack without crossing US-
occupied Iraqi air space. It will hardly matter if Washington gives the green light, or
is dragged into the conflict by a recalcitrant Israel. Either way, the result will be
the same. The Iranians will interpret US acquiescence as complicity, and, in any
event, they will understand that the real fight is with the Americans. The Iranians
will be entirely within their rights to counter-attack in self-defense. Most of the
world will see it this way, and will support them, not America. The US and Israel will
be viewed as the aggressors, even as the unfortunate US sailors in harmÂ’s way become
cannon fodder. In the GulfÂ’s shallow and confined waters evasive maneuvers will be
difficult, at best, and escape impossible. Even if US planes control of the skies over
the battlefield, the sailors caught in the net below will be hard-pressed to survive.
The Gulf will run red with American bloodÂ…

From here, it only gets worse. Armed with their Russian-supplied cruise missiles, the
Iranians will close the lakeÂ’s only outlet, the strategic Strait of Hormuz, cutting off
the trapped and dying Americans from help and rescue. The US fleet massing in the
Indian Ocean will stand by helplessly, unable to enter the Gulf to assist the survivors
or bring logistical support to the other US forces on duty in Iraq. Couple this with a
major new ground offensive by the Iraqi insurgents, and, quite suddenly, the tables
could turn against the Americans in Baghdad. As supplies and ammunition begin to run
out, the status of US forces in the region will become precarious. The occupiers will
become the besiegedÂ…

With enough anti-ship missiles, the Iranians can halt tanker traffic through Hormuz for
weeks, even months. With the flow of oil from the Gulf curtailed, the price of a barrel
of crude will skyrocket on the world market. Within days the global economy will begin
to grind to a halt. Tempers at an emergency round-the-clock session of the UN Security
Council will flare and likely explode into shouting and recriminations as French,
German, Chinese and even British ambassadors angrily accuse the US of allowing Israel
to threaten world order. But, as always, because of the US veto the world body will be
powerless to act...

America will stand alone, completely isolated. Yet, despite the increasingly hostile
international mood, elements of the US media will spin the crisis very differently here
at home, in a way that is sympathetic to Israel. Members of Congress will rise to speak
in the House and Senate, and rally to IsraelÂ’s defense, while blaming the victim of the
attack, Iran. Fundamentalist Christian talk show hosts will proclaim the historic
fulfillment of biblical prophecy in our time, and will call upon the Jews of Israel to
accept Jesus into their hearts; meanwhile, urging the president to nuke the evil empire
of Islam. From across America will be heard histrionic cries for fresh reinforcements,
even a military draft. Patriots will demand victory at any cost. Pundits will scream
for an escalation of the conflict.

A war that ostensibly began as an attempt to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons will
teeter on the brink of their useÂ…

Conclusion

Friends, we must work together to prevent such a catastrophe. We must stop the next
Middle East war before it starts. The US government must turn over to the United
Nations the primary responsibility for resolving the deepening crisis in Iraq, and,
immediately thereafter, withdraw US forces from the country. We must also prevail upon
the Israelis to sign the Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and open all of their nuclear
sites to IAEA inspectors. Only then can serious talks begin with Iran and other states
to establish a nuclear weapon free zone (NWFZ) in the Mid East ––so essential to the
regionÂ’s long-term peace and security.

Mark GaffneyÂ’s first book, Dimona the Third Temple? (1989), was a pioneering study of
IsraelÂ’s nuclear weapons program. MarkÂ’s articles about the Mid-East and proliferation
issues have appeared in the Middle East Policy Journal, Washington Report On Middle East
Affairs, the Earth Island Journal, The Oregonian, the Daily Californian, and have been
posted on numerous web sites, especially Counterpunch.org. MarkÂ’s 2003 paper Will Iran
Be Next? can be viewed at < www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iran.htm> MarkÂ’s newest
book, Gnostic Secrets of the Naassenes, was released by Inner Traditions Press in May
2003. Email aol.com> For more information go to www.GnosticSecrets.com