Iran and Saudi Arabia who are stronger. Saudi Arabia and Iran on the brink of war? Strategic Missile Forces
The execution in Saudi Arabia of 47 "terrorists", including the Shiite preacher Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, led to very serious consequences - now the entire region of the Middle East is on the verge of a regional war.
Moreover, what happened looks quite planned: the reaction of Iran and Iranian society was quite predictable, and the chain of breaks in diplomatic relations with the main Shiite country by the states of the "Islamic military coalition" ( Saudi Arabia announced its creation in December 2015) appear to have been agreed in advance. At the moment, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Sudan have already announced the severance of diplomatic relations with Iran, Kuwait recalled the ambassador from Tehran. Saudi Arabia and Bahrain cut off flights to Iran.
In fact, the indirect war between the "Sunni" and "Shia" world is already in full swing - the main battlefields have become Syria, Iraq and Yemen. Now there is a far from zero possibility of a major regional war between the Shiites, led by Iran, and the Sunnis, led by Saudi Arabia. Therefore, it will be interesting to assess the strength of the parties and the scale of what could happen in such an extremely negative scenario.
Saudi Arabia - "colossus with feet of clay"?
The armed forces of Saudi Arabia are equipped with the most modern military equipment and in sufficient quantities. The country's military budget ranks 4th in the world, approaching $60 billion. armed forces is 233 thousand people. The ground forces are armed with up to 450 modern American M1A2 Abrams tanks, about 400 M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, more than 2,000 armored vehicles and armored personnel carriers, a large number of cannon and rocket artillery, including 50 American multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) M270. In addition, the Saudi Arabian Armed Forces are armed with up to 60 Dongfeng-3 ballistic missiles purchased from China. Initially, they are designed to deliver nuclear weapons over distances of up to 2500 km, but in this case they carry high-explosive warheads, and the accuracy of the missile is very low. There are also rumors about the purchase of more modern Dongfeng-21.
As for the Air Force (Air Force), they are armed with 152 american fighter F-15 of various modifications, 81 European Tornado and 32 European Eurofighter Typhoon. Also in service are early warning and control aircraft (AWACS) and a large number of military transport aircraft.
Air defense is strong - 16 batteries of Patriot PAC-2 long-range anti-aircraft missile systems, numerous Hawk and Crotale air defense systems, hundreds of Stinger MANPADS, etc.
The naval forces are divided into 2 parts: the Western Fleet in the Red Sea and the Eastern Fleet in the Persian Gulf. In the Persian Gulf, there are 3 Al Riyadh class frigates (modernization of the French La Fayette) with Exocet MM40 block II anti-ship missiles (ASMs) with a launch range of up to 72 km. In the Red Sea, there are 4 Al Madinah-class frigates with Otomat Mk2 anti-ship missiles with a maximum launch range of up to 180 km, 4 American Badr-class corvettes with Harpoon anti-ship missiles. Missile and patrol boats are evenly distributed across fleets. As for landing ships, there are 8 of them, and the maximum total landing force can be up to 800 people at a time.
As we can see, the armed forces are impressively equipped, but there is one problem: despite such equipment and numbers, Saudi Arabia has not been able to achieve any serious success in neighboring Yemen for 10 months, in which they are opposed by the Houthi rebel army, armed with outdated . This shows how low the actual combat capability of the armed forces of Saudi Arabia and their allies is.
Iranian Armed Forces are the largest in the region
The Iranian Armed Forces have a strength of 550 thousand people - the largest in the region. At the same time, the military budget in 2015 amounted to about $ 10 billion, which is quite small for such a number. There are more than 1,600 tanks in service, of which about 480 are relatively modern T-72Z and 150 Zulfiqar tanks of our own production (presumably based on the T-72 and the American M60). Infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers are represented by hundreds of obsolete and outdated Soviet models, as well as artillery.
The Air Force is represented by a large number of aircraft different class and different countries production. True, there are no new products among them, and the long sanctions period has certainly affected the combat readiness of aviation - hardly more than 50% of them are in flight condition. They are armed with American F-14 supersonic interceptors, long-obsolete F-4 Phantom and F-5 Tiger fighters, French Mirage-F1. Of the Soviet vehicles, there are MiG-29 fighters, Su-24 front-line bombers, and Su-25 attack aircraft. In total, there are about 300 units of the above equipment.
As for the air defense system, fundamental changes are taking place here - a few years ago, Tor-M1 short-range air defense systems were purchased from Russia, and deliveries of S-300PMU-2 long-range air defense systems began. Thus, very soon Iran will not yield to Saudi Arabia in this aspect.
As for the Navy, the diversity here is noticeably greater than that of Saudi Arabia. In addition, most of the ships are concentrated in the Persian Gulf (a small part of the ships are in the Caspian Sea). There are 3 Project 877 Halibut submarines, 26 more locally produced small submarines carrying mines and torpedoes, 5 frigates, 6 corvettes (all of their own production), more than 50 missile boats (Chinese, Iranian and German production). Interestingly, all Iranian missile ships use Chinese-made anti-ship missiles - S-701 (range 35 km, anti-submarine) and YJ-82 (range up to 120 km).
Thus, Iran has an advantage over a potential adversary in terms of the Navy. In addition, as a result of many years of existence under economic sanctions, Iran has its own military-industrial complex - perhaps its products do not differ in any great characteristics, nevertheless, they provide the country with some independence from external supplies. The missile program has achieved quite a lot of success - the country is armed with a number of short and medium-range ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, etc. In total, their number can exceed 200-300 units.
The most likely scenario is a further increase in the intensity of conflicts in Syria, Iraq and Yemen
The geographical position is not very conducive to the start of a direct military clash between the countries - Saudi Arabia and Iran do not border on each other. Therefore, the parties are likely to increase their involvement in the conflicts in Syria, Iraq and Yemen. This will not lead to anything good for these countries, but will only prolong the hybrid wars going on in them even more. True, for Saudi Arabia, Yemen may turn out to be a “weak spot” - despite the 150,000th ground grouping, 185 aviation units (including allies), the operation against the Houthis does not lead to any results. The reason for this is both the very low combat capability of the Saudi Armed Forces and the competent actions of the rebels, who are probably supported by Iranian specialists. If this support increases (technically it is not easy, since Iran can maintain communication with Yemen only by sea), coupled with the presence of Shiites densely residing in Saudi Arabia, this situation could lead to disaster for Riyadh. In any case, this scenario is a further stage of the war of attrition - a war that is also combined with the struggle for oil markets, as a result of which everyone increases the production of "black gold" and knocks down prices on the exchanges. In such a scenario, the side that “breaks” earlier will lose.
Full-scale war - chaos for many years?
If all the same, a full-scale war breaks out, then the main "battlefields" will be the Persian Gulf, and probably the territory of Iraq and Kuwait (they are located between Saudi Arabia and Iran). At the same time, Qatar is clearly an ally of the Saudis, and the current authorities of Iraq are allies of the Iranians. Despite the apparent superiority of Saudi Arabia and its allies, Iran has several trump cards - it controls the Strait of Hormuz and does not have a war in the rear, near its borders (like Yemen for the Saudis). The Iranian Navy quite allows to "slam" the strait for the passage of any enemy ships. Such a move would spell economic disaster for the Gulf countries that are part of the coalition against Iran, while the Iranians themselves would be able to continue exporting oil. In addition to stopping the receipt of money from the sale of oil, which is still one way or another a temporary factor, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and other Gulf countries may lose all their sales markets, which the United States, Russia and all the same Iran.
If the war drags on, it will have absolutely unpredictable outcomes - both sides will strike each other with ballistic missiles (here Iran will inflict more damage), try to "set fire" to local opposition forces, set neighboring countries against each other. All this can finally destroy the Middle East that we know and in a few years lead to the formation of a completely different map of the region.
Most main question that arises - what will Saudi Arabia's big Sunni allies like Egypt, Pakistan and Turkey do. Pakistan's direct involvement in the conflict seems extremely unlikely as the country has a "longtime friend" in India and being distracted by major conflicts with someone else could be suicidal. Turkey can intensify its actions in Syria and Iraq, and, given the rather aggressive policy inherent in this country, intervene in the conflict. This could be of great help to the Saudis, but the Kurdish forces in Turkey may well seize the moment and strike from within. As for Egypt, the country is quite far from a possible theater of operations and is unlikely to interfere more than it does now (at the moment the country is participating in the blockade of the coast of Yemen).
From the moment when a person picked up a stick, he realized that through violence you can dictate your will. Since that time, the development of martial arts began. Thus, after a large number time, one of the main attributes of any state was the army. If we recall the entire human history, then up to the 21st century, constant military conflicts took place on the territory of the entire planet. As a result of them, new territories were conquered, political regimes, new religions appeared, etc. In addition, military operations in themselves are quite profitable for individuals. However, the destructiveness of wars became clear after World War II. People clearly saw what the furious progress of the military craft, as well as its direct use, could lead to. Frightened for the integrity of the entire planet, the world community decides to change military trends.
Of course, it was not possible to get rid of wars completely. Today, military conflicts still occur in different parts of the Earth, but they have a purely local level. In addition, the armies of some states began to be created solely for defense, and not to promote their ideas through war. One of these formations is the army of Saudi Arabia, which will be discussed later in the article.
Saudi Arabia: general information
Air Defense Forces;
Strategic Missile Forces;
National Guard.
Each element of the army of Saudi Arabia has its own characteristics and specific functions.
Ground forces
The army of Saudi Arabia, whose combat effectiveness is due to a greater extent to its ground forces and air defense, has about 80,000 personnel in this sector. In addition, the ground forces are directly subordinate to the General Staff. The structure of this element of the aircraft is rather surprising. Given the fact that the personnel is only 80 thousand, this does not prevent the ground forces from including many brigades, namely: armored, mechanized, airborne, eight divisional, as well as troops protecting the border. The armament of this component of the army is also at the proper level. As part of the ground forces, it has 1055 tanks, 400 mortars, 970 infantry fighting vehicles and about 300 armored vehicles.
Naval Forces
The army in Saudi Arabia also has a navy in its structure. The tasks of this sector include the protection of territorial waters, the coast, the sea shelf, oil infrastructure facilities, etc. Many scientists do not understand why this state needs a Navy. The fact is that the country is washed by water from two sides. To the west is the Red Sea, and to the northeast is the Persian Gulf. Thus, if desired, it is quite possible to attack the state from the water. It should be noted that the main reason why the naval forces were created was the capture of some of the islands belonging to Saudi Arabia by the Iranian Shah. The United States of America took up the modernization of the Navy, in accordance with the agreement signed between the countries. Already in 1991, this element of the armed forces had 9.5 thousand people in its personnel.
To date, the number of Saudi Arabia has about 15.5 thousand people. This also includes 3,000 Marines. Military-technical cooperation has not yet lost its popularity for Saudi Arabia. To date, the state actively maintains relations with Great Britain, Italy, France, and the United States.
Country Air Force
It should be noted that Saudi Arabia has the second largest air fleet after Israel. The army is the strongest, of course, not in this state, however, in terms of aviation, the country does not lag behind, but, on the contrary, surpasses many. First, it is necessary to note the technical potential of the country. The fleet is represented by efficient A-15 aircraft for combat missions. Secondly, the number is 20,000 people. In addition, Saudi Arabia proved its combat effectiveness in the field of air defense in 1984, when there was a conflict with Iran. In addition, the Air Force of the state proved to be excellent in the operation against Iraq, which was called "Desert Storm".
It should be noted that the leadership of the state actively controls the process of replenishing the armed forces with new personnel, especially when it comes to the air force. This is evidenced by the fact that in Saudi Arabia there is a special Aviation Academy named after King Faisal. It is located on air base in El Kharj. Airfields are located throughout the state, especially near the borders with other countries. This allows you to effectively defend yourself in the event of an unforeseen intrusion.
Strategic Missile Forces
Saudi Arabia has the greatest power. Their combat effectiveness is due to some basic factors. First of all, it should be noted that this military group of Saudi Arabia is armed with ballistic missiles of the DF-3 type. In addition, in 2014, a rumor leaked to the press that the state had acquired from the People's Republic of China the new kind ballistic missiles, such as DF-21. The US authorities, represented by the Central Intelligence Agency, confirmed this rumor, indicating that the deal was carried out in 2007. There are also about 5 missile bases throughout Saudi Arabia. The headquarters of this element of the armed forces is located in Riyadh. In 2013, the command of the missile forces was located in a new luxurious building, which was opened in parallel with the Academy of Strategic Missile Forces.
Rumors of nuclear weapons
Today, there are many rumors in the world about the existence of nuclear weapons in Saudi Arabia. There is no confirmation of this information, as well as reports on the exact number of strategic missile forces, which raises a lot of questions. Thus, it cannot be said that the Saudi Arabian army is weak, because there is simply no exact information about it. Nevertheless, according to the statements of the ruling elite, namely King Abdullah and Prince Turki ibn Faisal Al Saud, the state is striving to acquire nuclear weapons with all its might, which will become a countermeasure against the nuclear program of the state of Iran.
There are also many rumors that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan allegedly entered into a secret agreement, according to which the latter side can provide weapons to the state mentioned in the article in the event of a military crisis in the East.
Conclusion
So, in the article, the author examined the structure, armament, characteristic features of the Armed Forces, and also answered the question of what the army of Saudi Arabia is. The rating of this military formation, of course, is not as high as that of the armed forces of Russia or the United States. Nevertheless, the army of this state is quite capable of defending the independence and territorial integrity of its fatherland.
The current crisis in relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran began on Saturday, January 2, when Riyadh executed the influential Shiite cleric Sheikh Nimr Baqir al-Nimr, and in response to this, an angry mob set fire to the Saudi Arabian embassy in Tehran. After that, the Saudis announced the severance of diplomatic relations with Iran, and Bahrain and Sudan followed suit. But the events of this week were the spark that landed on a pile of dry wood. Iran and Saudi Arabia are involved in a number of proxy wars, vying with each other for influence in the Middle East. This is not a full-fledged hot war, or even a war between Sunnis and Shiites, although both sides are trying to use ideological affiliation as a recruiting tool. It's more of a power struggle, very reminiscent of the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union.
Why are Saudi Arabia and Iran fighting each other? First, they believe that they are regional powers and that, since the 19th century, global and regional powers must necessarily have their own spheres of influence and lead smaller states. Secondly, the delicate balance of power between these two states was upset. The first blow came when the Bush administration toppled the Sunni regime in Iraq and was replaced by a pro-Iranian religious Shiite regime that in many important ways alienated Iraq from Saudi Arabia and brought it closer to Iran. The balance of power was further upset by the revolutions in Yemen, Bahrain and Syria that began in 2011. All of these developments have rendered Riyadh and Tehran incapable of maintaining the status quo, and the odds may now be on one side or the other when the smoke clears. Both sides want to be at the top when that day finally comes.
Saudi Arabia and Iran had already severed diplomatic relations - this happened in the 1990s - but they were restored in 1997 after winning the presidential elections in Iran Mohammad Khatami. According to many analysts, the likelihood that these countries will enter into a real war with each other is extremely small. The US provides Saudi Arabia, which produces about 11% of the world's oil every day, with a "security umbrella" and will never put up with an Iranian attack. Even if the US were not involved, such a conflict is a highly unlikely scenario. Iran is a country with a population of 78 million people and an experienced army of 500,000, which also has 800,000 volunteers from the Basij paramilitary organization. However, a significant portion of its military resources are now tied to Syria. Saudi Arabia is a country of 17-20 million people and an inexperienced army of just over 200,000 troops. According to American military doctrine, it makes sense to launch an attack only with a numerical superiority of 3 to 1. In accordance with this principle, Saudi Arabia will most likely not launch a military campaign against Iran. In addition, there is no sign that Iran wants to start a hot war.
These two states have no common borders. They have almost no navy, and while Saudi Arabia has a fairly strong air force, Iran's air force is a joke. As oil-producing countries, Saudi Arabia and Iran will be hit hard economically if fighting get out of control. Even during the war between Iran and Iraq in 1980-1988, these two states rarely attacked each other's oil facilities, but the price of oil still fell from $40 to $10 per barrel.
In fact, Iran and Saudi Arabia want to shape their geopolitical security environment by clearly delineating spheres of influence where the rival is not allowed to enter. Just as, under the Monroe Doctrine, the US wanted to intimidate the Soviet Union over missiles in Cuba in 1962, Saudi Arabia now believes it is under threat from the Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen. The Saudis either misrepresent their motives in Yemen or completely misunderstand their Shia Zaidis (who have no particular attachment to Iran's hierarchical Shiism and who are even closer to the Sunnis in some respects). The Saudis consider the Houthis to be Iran's middlemen, although there is no hard evidence that Iran provides them with any assistance.
Just as last year's political collapse in Yemen and the Houthi takeover of the city of Sana'a prompted Saudi Arabia to intervene, the prospect of the fall of Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria prompted Iran to send aid and troops to Damascus. Tehran has also persuaded the Lebanese Hezbollah to side with Assad by maintaining a land corridor through which Iran supplies weapons to its Lebanese client. Iranian investments in Syria have nothing to do with Syrian Shiism. Iran's allies in Syria are a collection of Christians and Sunni secularists, as well as Alawites, who have a gnostic and mythological approach to religion that is as close to Iranian Shiism as theosophy is close to the episcopal system of church government. Moreover, the Alawites who run the Baathist regime in Syria are atheists.
Saudi Arabia saw a good opportunity to overthrow an Iranian ally in Damascus when the 2011 revolution escalated into a civil war, and Riyadh backs conservative Salafi fundamentalists because they have the most reason to end the Baathist regime and because they are the best. militants and recruiters. But if Saudi Arabia had the opportunity to find more effective secular allies, they would most likely be happy to take advantage of it. The main thing for King Salman is to topple Assad because he massacred Sunni conservatives in small towns and villages and because he is an ally of Iran.
In addition to seeking to delineate exclusive spheres of influence, Iran and Saudi Arabia have internal security problems that they blame each other for. 15% of Saudis are Shiites, and most of them live in the Eastern Province, constantly subjected to humiliation and discrimination. This province is of great strategic importance because there are deposits of Saudi oil. Saudi Shiites are Arabs, not Iranians, and most of them follow the teachings of the Grand Ayatollah of Iraq Ali Sistani. But Riyadh sees any civil disobedience by the kingdom's Shiites as the result of Iranian instigation. Therefore, they considered Sheikh al-Nimr an Iranian secret agent. The Saudis did not provide any evidence of his guilt (that he was involved in inciting a rebellion or preparing terrorist attacks). They failed to prove that an-Nimr killed or wanted to kill anyone. However, riots broke out in the Eastern Province among young Saudi Shiites, who felt that they were living under the yoke of a kind of religious analogue of Jim Crow laws, and al-Nimr became the sacrificial lamb who paid for these riots. Meanwhile, at least 8% of Iranians are Sunnis, and Iran is afraid that Israel or Saudi Arabia could provoke unrest in these communities.
Understandably, foreign observers often view this rivalry as a sectarian struggle until they get to the details and this version begins to fall apart. Saudi Arabia has always had a pragmatic foreign policy and does not always side with Sunni religious movements. Riyadh supported the nationalist Egyptian officer corps in their coup, fueled by massive popular support for the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood religious party in the summer of 2013. Saudi Arabia supports the secular Palestine Liberation Organization, which opposes the Sunni fundamentalist movement Hamas. She supports the nationalists surrounding the president Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi in Yemen. She supports a secular Sunni politician Saad al-Hariri in Lebanon. The notion that Saudi Arabia's foreign policy is always aimed at imposing a religious fundamentalist government on its Sunni neighbors is counterintuitive.
Some time has passed since the majority of Iranian high-ranking officials took seriously the official ideology of their country - the ideology of Khomeinism, which is based on the premise that Shiite society should be governed by Shiite spiritual leaders. However, Iran failed to convince other countries in the region of the correctness of its principles. Most Lebanese Shiites are secular oriented, and if they vote for the pro-Iranian group Hezbollah, it is only because they think it can protect them from Israel and Sunni radicals. Iraqi religious authorities in the southern Iraqi city of Najaf - the Vatican of Arab Shiism - have rejected Khomeinism and support democratic elections. Most Shiites in Pakistan and the Gulf countries follow the teachings of Ayatollah Sistani, not Iranian leader Ali Khamenei. Iran not only does not have ideologically close states in the region, it quite often also supports the Sunnis. Iran has excellent relations with Tajik Sunnis and Uzbeks in Afghanistan, and perhaps even some ties to the Taliban. Although relations between the Sunni fundamentalist Hamas and Shiite Iran have been strained over the past three years, Iran has long supported him and appears ready to do so again.
There are countries in the Middle East that Saudi Arabia and Iran have to share. Oman tries to be an honest broker. Iraq refused to sever ties with Saudi Arabia despite demonstrations against the execution of Sheikh al-Nimr. Dubai supports good relationship with both countries. Lebanon also tries not to quarrel with Iran and Saudi Arabia, although recently it has leaned more towards Iran, because Lebanese Shiites, Christians and secular Sunnis are afraid of those Sunni Salafis who are supported by the Saudis.
Oman and Iraq have declared their readiness to try to reconcile them, and perhaps as a result of a UN Security Council resolution condemning the attack on the Saudi Arabian embassy in Tehran, General Mohsen Kazemeini, commander of the Tehran branch of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, called the attack "fully organized" step, in which, according to him, the officials of the Islamic Republic are not involved at all. The failure of the Iranian authorities to protect the embassy or quickly extinguish the fire led Riyadh to speculate that the attack was orchestrated by the government.
One of the main problems here is excessive ambition. Neither Iran nor Saudi Arabia are now ready to act as regional powers with exclusive spheres of influence. The population of Saudi Arabia is too small for that, and Iran is too poor. In addition, their ideologies are not too close to their neighbors. That is why the Saudi war in Yemen turns into a quagmire, and Iran has to ask Russia to come to the aid of Assad in Syria. The wars in Syria and Yemen will end quickly if a formula for power-sharing between the warring parties is found so that neither Tehran nor Riyadh are completely excluded from the peace process. Neither Iran nor Saudi Arabia may be happy about the absence of a complete victory, but prolonged wars are too destructive and entail excessively large losses.
Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman (left) and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani
Iran and Saudi Arabia have long claimed a leading role in the region, but recently relations between the two countries have become seriously aggravated.
Each of them has its allies and opponents in the Middle East and beyond, what does the alignment of forces look like?
Saudi Arabia
This kingdom with a predominantly Sunni population is considered the birthplace of Islam, and it is there that the main Muslim shrines are located. In addition, it is also one of the world's leading oil exporters and one of the richest countries peace.
Saudi Arabia fears that Iran may take a dominant position in the Middle East, and in every possible way prevents the growing influence of this Shiite country in the region.
Saudi Arabia's belligerent attitude toward Iran appears to be supported by Donald Trump, who has taken an equally tough stance against Tehran.
The young and increasingly powerful Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman is waging war against Houthi rebels in neighboring Yemen. The Saudis claim that Iran is providing material assistance to the rebels, Tehran denies these accusations.
Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Saudi Arabia leads coalition fighting Houthi rebels in YemenSaudi Arabia, in turn, supports the rebels in Syria and seeks the overthrow of President Bashar al-Assad, Iran's main ally.
The armed forces of Saudi Arabia are among the most powerful in the region, and Riyadh is among the world's main importers of weapons. The Saudi army has 227 thousand people.
Iran
Iran became an Islamic republic in 1979 when the Shah's regime was overthrown. political power captured by the clerics, led by the supreme leader Ayatollah Khomeini.
Most of Iran's 80 million people are Shiite Muslims, and the country is considered the leading Shiite power in the region. The final decision in all matters of foreign and domestic policy is taken by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
Over the past 10 years, Iran's influence in the region has greatly increased, especially after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq.
Iran supports Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in the war against opposition groups and the Islamic State extremist group [banned in Russia and other countries]. The fighters of the elite Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps participated in offensive operations against Sunni jihadists in Syria and Iraq.
Iran also believes that Saudi Arabia is trying to destabilize the situation in Lebanon, where the government includes the Shia movement Hezbollah, which enjoys the support of Iran.
Image copyright Getty Images Image caption The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is considered a major military, economic and political force in Iran.Iran sees the United States as its main adversary.
According to some reports, Iran has some of the most advanced missile systems in the region. The armed forces of Iran number 534 thousand people, including the army and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
USA
Relations between the US and Iran remain strained, to put it mildly. There are many reasons for this, including the overthrow of the Iranian prime minister in 1953 with the participation of the CIA, the Islamic revolution in Iran, and the hostage-taking at the American embassy in Tehran in the 80s.
In turn, Saudi Arabia has always remained a US ally, although relations have been very strained under the Obama administration, given Washington's policy of engagement with Iran.
President Trump has pledged to take a tougher stance on Iran and is now threatening to cancel the historic Tehran nuclear deal signed under Obama.
At the same time, the royal house of Saudi Arabia and White House treat each other with great respect.
Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Saudi Arabia has long enjoyed the support of the United StatesTrump and his administration never criticize radical Saudi Islam the way they criticize Iran's ties to terrorism. Nor were Saudis included in the list of foreign nationals subject to the much-controversial ban on entry into the United States.
Donald Trump made his first trip as president to the Middle East, where he met with Saudi and Israeli leaders, who are united by the desire to prevent the growth of Iranian influence in the region.
Saudi Arabia is also a major buyer of US weapons.
Russia
Russia is the only one that manages to remain an ally of both Saudi Arabia and Iran. With each of these countries, she has established close economic ties, in addition, she sells weapons to both countries.
Russia has not taken any side in the current dispute between Tehran and Riyadh, making it clear that it is ready to act as a mediator.
Image copyright Getty Images Image caption According to Vladimir Putin, the Syrian army, with the support of Russian aviation, has already liberated more than 90% of the country's territory from militants.Russia's involvement in the Middle East dates back to the Cold War, when the Soviet Union supplied weapons to Syria and trained its officers.
Moscow's influence on Syria and the region as a whole has noticeably weakened after the collapse of the USSR, but the Kremlin has been carefully building it up lately.
Air support provided to the Syrian army Russian aviation, helped turn the tide of the Syrian war in favor of the Assad regime and the pro-Iranian fighters who fought on its side.
Turkey
Turkey is deftly balancing between Iran and Saudi Arabia, while the military and political situation in the Middle East is rapidly changing.
Ankara began to show more interest in the situation in the region after the often called Islamist Justice and Development Party came to power in 2002.
Sunni-majority Turkey has developed close ties with Saudi Arabia based on religious kinship and shared opposition to the Syrian government.
Despite a deep mistrust of Iran, Turkey has relatively recently formed an alliance with it against the growing influence of the Kurds in the region, which both countries see as a threat.
Image copyright ADEM ALTAN Image caption Turkish President decides to support Qatar in its confrontation with Saudi ArabiaIsrael
Israel, founded in 1948, of all the Arab countries has established diplomatic relations only with Egypt and Jordan.
Iran and Israel are considered irreconcilable enemies. Iran denies Israel's right to exist and calls for the destruction of the state.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has always actively called on the international community to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and to cancel the nuclear deal with Tehran in order to curb its "aggressive" policy in the region.
According to Netanyahu, cooperation has even been established with a number of Arab countries in order to prevent the growth of Iran's influence in the region. In turn, Saudi Arabia denied reports that appeared in the Israeli media that in September one of the Saudi princes secretly came to negotiate with Israel.
Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu congratulated Trump on "bravely speaking out against the Iranian terrorist regime"Egypt
Egypt has often played a key role in Middle East politics, and has historically enjoyed more friendly relations with Saudi Arabia than with Iran, especially since the Islamic Revolution.
The Saudis also supported the Egyptian army when it removed Islamist President Mohammed Morsi from power in 2013.
However, Egypt had cases of rapprochement with Iran. For example, Tehran sponsored an oil deal between Egypt and Iraq after the Saudi company Aramco cut off oil supplies to Egypt in October 2016.
After increased tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi called for "avoiding the escalation of tension in the region, but not at the expense of security and stability in the Persian Gulf."
Image copyright DON EMMERT Image caption "The national security of the Gulf countries is the national security of Egypt. I believe in the wise and firm leadership of Saudi Arabia," the Egyptian President said.Syria
The government of President Bashar al-Assad has firmly taken the side of Iran in the confrontation with Saudi Arabia.
Iran has always supported the Syrian leadership and assisted the Syrian army in the fight against rebels and jihadists.
Iran sees Assad, who belongs to the Alawite branch of Shiism, as its closest Arab ally. Syria is also the main transit point for Iranian weapons to the Shiite group Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Thousands of Hezbollah fighters are fighting on the side of the Syrian government forces. According to experts, due to the level of training and weapons, this group can already be considered a full-fledged army, rather than a militia.
Syrian authorities also often accuse Saudi Arabia of subversive policies in the Middle East.
Image copyright STRINGER Image caption Syrian troops slowly but surely retake territory from IS militantsLebanon
Lebanon's position in the confrontation between Iran and Saudi Arabia can be called ambivalent.
Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri, who announced his resignation from Saudi Arabia a few days ago, has close ties to the Saudis and supports them in their confrontation with Iran.
On the other hand, the Lebanese branch of Hezbollah is an ally of Iran and enjoys its unwavering and substantial support. Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah often attacks the Saudi authorities.
Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Prime Minister Saad Hariri supported the Saudis, but there are staunch supporters of Iran in LebanonGulf states
In the past, Gulf states such as Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait have had closer relations with Saudi Arabia.
Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Saudi Arabia demands greater efforts from Qatar in the fight against extremism and terrorismHowever, Qatar's ties with Saudi Arabia have noticeably weakened after Qatar refused to comply with Riyadh's demand and break off relations with Tehran at the beginning of the year.
After Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Bahrain declared a blockade on Qatar in July, Iran sent five planeloads of groceries there to deal with the shortfall.
In August, Qatar and Iran fully restored diplomatic relations, interrupted after Iranian attacks on two diplomatic missions of Saudi Arabia were carried out.
At the same time, Bahrain and Kuwait continue to lean towards Saudi Arabia.
The main political and military posts in Bahrain are held by members of the Sunni royal family, while 70% of the country's population is Shia.
Bahrain has repeatedly accused Iran of preparing "terror cells" that operate in the country to prepare to overthrow the government. He also accuses the Shia opposition of maintaining ties with Iran.
In October, the Bahraini authorities said that "their country is suffering the most from the expansionist policies of the guards of the Islamic revolution."
Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Emir of Kuwait offered to mediate talks between Doha and RiyadhAlthough Kuwait does not participate in the blockade of Qatar, its authorities have abandoned the alliance with Iran and now side with Saudi Arabia.
In February, Kuwait called for improved Arab-Iranian relations, and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani visited the country for the first time since the 2013 elections.
However, due to the crisis in relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Kuwait expelled 15 Iranian diplomats from the country and closed the military, cultural and trade mission of Iran.
The SouthFront think tank recently released a very interesting video about the possibility of a war involving Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and possibly Syria, Iran, and Israel. This, of course, also means that Russia and the United States will take part in this war.
Now let's move on to what this scenario means.
Context: total failure of the Anglo-Zionist Empire on all fronts
To understand the context of these events, we first need to take a brief look at what has happened in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East in recent years.
The original Anglo-Zionist plan was to overthrow Assad and replace him with mad Takfirists (Daesh/ISIS*, Al-Qaeda**, Al-Nusra***). Thus, it was planned to solve the following tasks:
- Sweep away the strong secular Arab state, along with its political culture, military and security services.
- Generate total chaos and horror in Syria, which would justify the creation by Israel of a "safety zone" not only in the Golan, but also further north.
- Start the mechanism of civil war in Lebanon by inciting the Takfirists against Hezbollah.
- Give the Takfirists and Hezbollah the chance to bleed to death and then create a "safe zone" - this time in Lebanon.
- Prevent the creation of a "Shiite axis" Iran-Iraq-Syria-Lebanon.
- Partition of Syria along ethnic and religious lines.
- Creation of Kurdistan, then to use it against Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran.
- To give Israel the opportunity to become an unquestioned influential player and force Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, Kuwait and everyone else to turn to Israel for permission to implement any oil and gas projects.
- Gradually isolate Iran, threaten it, undermine it and eventually attack it with a broad regional coalition.
- Remove all centers of Shiite power in the Middle East.
It was an ambitious plan, but the Israelis were quite confident that their US vassal state would provide all the resources needed to achieve it. And now that plan has collapsed thanks to the high effectiveness of an informal but nonetheless formidable alliance between Russia, Iran, Syria and Hezbollah.
To say that the Israelis are seething with rage and in a state of total panic would be an understatement. Do you think I'm exaggerating? Then look at it from Israel's point of view:
The Syrian state has survived, and its armed forces and security services are now much more combat-ready than they were before the start of the war. Remember how they "almost" lost the war at first? The Syrians were forced to retreat, they had to learn some very hard lessons, but, by all appearances, they achieved a lot. At a critical moment, Iran and Hezbollah were literally "plugging holes" on the fronts in Syria and "putting out fires" in many places. Now the Syrians are excellent at liberating large territories and cities. Today, not only Syria has become stronger, but Iran and Hezbollah have occupied the entire country. And this plunges the Israelis into a state of panic and rage. Lebanon remains stable. Even the recent attempt by the Saudis to kidnap Prime Minister Hariri failed. Syria will remain a unitary state, and the state of Kurdistan will not appear. Millions of displaced persons and refugees are returning home. Israel and the United States look like absolute idiots and, worse, losers who have no confidence left.
All this is a disaster for the Anglo-Zionists, who, in retreat, resort to their typical tactics: if we cannot control something, then let's destroy it.
Plan: force the US to attack Iraq
I have no way of knowing what the Axis of Good (USA-Israel-Saudi Arabia) has come up with, but I feel I can make an educated guess. First of all, this is nothing new. Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states have spoken out in the past in favor of intervention in Syria, and we know that the Saudis have invaded Bahrain and Yemen. As for the Israelis. Their track record of utterly criminal military interventions is so long that we can confidently say that the Israelis will engage in "any" terrible and evil plan that will reduce this region to rubble.
For the Saudis and Israelis, the problem is that they have a bad military. Dear ones, yes. High tech, yes. But their problem is that their only area of expertise is the slaughter of defenseless civilians. In this they are real experts. But in terms of actual combat, especially against a truly formidable enemy like the Iranians or Hezbollah, the Sio-Wahhabis (what a combination!) have no chance, and they know it, even if they never are not recognized.
Imagine how frustrating this must be - you basically control the US, which you turned into a vassal state, you spent billions and billions of dollars on arming and training your bloated military, and in the end the Shiites just laugh at you in face. And - for some reason you can't fathom - whenever you try to "teach them a lesson," it's you who has to crawl home in complete disgrace to lick your wounds and try to cover up the extent of your defeat. This is both very painful and very humiliating. So, it is simply necessary to invent at least some kind of plan to make the Shiites pay a high price.
And here's what I think the plan will be.
First, the goal will not be to defeat Hezbollah or Iran somewhere. For all their racist rhetoric and arrogance, the Israelis know that neither they nor the Saudis can seriously threaten Iran or even Hezbollah. Their plan, I think, is much cruder - to start a serious conflict and then force the US to intervene.
I have repeatedly explained that the US military does not have the means to win the war against Iran. And therein may be the problem - American commanders know very well this is why they do everything to prove to the neocons “forgive me, but we can’t!” This is the only reason why the US attack on Iran did not take place. From the Israeli point of view, this is completely unacceptable, and the solution is simple - just force the US to take part in a war that they don't really want. After all, who cares how many gentile Americans die? As far as the Iranians are concerned, the purpose of the Israeli-instigated US attack on Iran is not to defeat Iran, but only to damage it. Very, very big damage. This is the real goal.
As for the Israelis, they not only don't care how many non-Jews die, as long as their Master Race benefits from it. Simply put, we are just tools for them; tools capable of thinking, but still tools. And of course, neocons look at us the same way.
In fact, I can imagine the jubilation of Israelis when they see Shiite and Sunni Muslims killing each other. If a few Christians are killed, it's only better.
So, it's simple - let the Saudis attack Lebanon and / or Iran. You watch them fail, then you turn on the propaganda machine at full blast and explain to the average TV-watching goy that Iran is a threat to the entire region, that it is the aggressor here, that the Saudis are only protecting themselves from Iranian aggression. . And if that's not enough, then they in the US Congress squeal " oy gevalt! "**** and prostitutes on Capitol Hill at their behest explain to the American people that the US must 'lead the Free World' to 'defend' the 'only democracy in the Middle East' against Iranian 'aggression', which the US is bringing" responsibility" in preventing the "seizure of Saudi oil fields" by Iran, etc., etc.
For the Israelis, this is a win-win situation on all sides, as long as they are not caught red-handed in their manipulation. But we can count on our beloved Sio-media that no "anti-Semitic" accusations will ever be made, even if Israel's imprints are everywhere.
counterplan
Iranians don't have a good choice. The least bad option for them is to do what Putin is doing in the Donbass - to remain outwardly passive, risking being accused by those who are not very gifted of giving up. But be that as it may - if your opponent plans not to win, but to lose, then it makes sense to refuse to enter into a confrontation with him, at least at a strategic level and for a short time.
I am not suggesting that the Iranians give up resistance on a tactical level. Even the grouping of Russian military forces in Syria has an official order to defend itself in case of an attack. I'm talking about the strategic level. As tempting as it may be, the Iranians should refrain from retaliating against Saudi Arabia. The same is true for Israel. It's ironic that Iran cannot do what Hezbollah did in 2006.***** The reason for this is simple - by the time the first Hezbollah missiles started falling on Israel, the Israelis had already reached top level escalation (as always in such cases, the civilian population pays for everything).
But in the case of Iran, the Anglo-Zionist Empire can raise the level of violence far beyond what the Israelis and Saudis can provide on their own. The combined power of Israel and Saudi Arabia is nothing compared to the firepower that the United States (CENTCOM + NATO) can oppose to Iran. It is therefore critical that the Iranians provide no pretext for the Americans to formally join in the attack. Instead of destroying the regime in Riyadh, the Iranians should allow - or at least help - the regime in Riyadh to destroy itself. I think that the Saudis have much less chance to survive than the US or Israel. Therefore, there is no need to force the outbreak of war between Iran and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Needless to say, if the Anglo-Zionist Empire joins the hostilities against Iran and unleashes all its military power against that country - which I consider a very real possibility - then all bets are off and Iran must, and will, respond with a full range of symmetrical and asymmetric responses, including strikes against Israel and Saudi Arabia, and even against CENTCOM bases across the region. However, such a situation would be disastrous for Iran and should therefore be avoided if at all possible.
In the end, the world's greatest hope is that some American patriot, through the haze of the dog-wags conspiracy, will see the heart of the matter and tell the Sio-Wahhabis "not on my watch" - as the admiral did Fallon in 2007.****** Maybe this worthy person will receive the historical recognition that he deserves, say, in the form Nobel Prize peace?
By themselves, the Israelis and Saudis are just a bunch of medieval bandits that even Hezbollah terrifies and puts to flight. The only real power they have is the power of the US Congress and the Sio-media, the power of corruption, the power of the ability and ability to lie and betray. I know for a fact that at all levels of the US military there are many American officers who clearly see through this Zionist smokescreen. They remain loyal to the United States, not to the Zionist Territorial Entity in Palestine. Together with such patriots I served and worked. Many of them are subscribers of my blog.
I'm not saying that we should count on top US military leaders to refuse to obey the president's orders. Anyone who has served in the military, especially in high command positions (Pentagon, CENTCOM), knows that there are many different creative ways to make sure that this or that order is not carried out. And finally, I have not completely lost hope that Trump, after all, can do the right thing. Yes, he is weak. Yes, now he is cornered and has no allies left. But when he comes face to face terrible consequences attacks on Iran, he can still say no and order his headquarters to come up with another plan. Trump may also realize that not going to war with Iran could be the best view revenge on those who slandered him and who now seem to be trying to impeach him.
Conclusions: Will there be an attack?
In short, probably yes. The simple truth is that the crazy regimes in power in Israel and Saudi Arabia are cornered and in a state of despair. And the inability of the Sio-Wahhabis to force even tiny Qatar to obey speaks to the decay of power within these regimes. I believe that the recent visits to Moscow by Bibi Netanyahu and even the King of Saudi Arabia were part of an effort to measure the likely Russian reaction in the event of an attack on Iran.
It is unlikely that we will know what was said for behind closed doors. But it seems to me that Putin has made it clear to the Sio-Wahhabis that Russia will not stand aside and will not allow them to strike at Iran. In truth, Russia has a very limited set options. Russia cannot simply participate in a war in an open and formal way, unless Russian personnel are directly attacked. It would be too dangerous, especially against the US. But Russia can significantly (and very quickly) bolster Iranian air defenses by deploying its A-50 and MiG-31 aircraft in Iran or sending them on reconnaissance flights from airfields in Russian territory.
Russia can provide the Iranians with intelligence that the Iranians themselves will never be able to obtain. The Russians may covertly place some of their electronic warfare systems at key points within Iranian territory. The Americans will quickly discover this, but at the political level, the Russians will still have the possibility of "plausible deniability". After all, the Russians can do for Iran what they have already done for Syria and integrate all Iranian and Russian air defense systems into a single network. This will significantly enhance the capabilities of Iran's current rather modest, but rapidly improving, air defense systems.
It is now quite clear that an attack on Iran is being prepared. This attack is possible and even probable. But this is not yet a settled issue. Both the Saudis and the Israelis have made empty threats many times. For all their feigned courage, they actually understand that Iran is a formidable and very sophisticated adversary. They may also remember what happened when the Iraqis - with the full cooperation and support of the US, the Soviet Union, France, Britain and everyone else - attacked Iran when Iran was weak. A long and terrible war ensued, but Iran is stronger than ever. Saddam Hussein is dead and the Iranians are more or less in control of Iraq. Iran is simply not the right country to attack, especially in the absence of a clear vision of what "victory" is. To attack Iran, you need to go crazy. The problem, however, is that the Saudis and Israelis have gone mad. And they have proven this many times. So, we can only hope that they have “gone crazy”, but “not so much”. Hope is not great, but it's all we have.
Author(published under the pseudonym The Saker) is a well-known blogger in the West. Born in Zurich (Switzerland). Father is Dutch, mother is Russian. He served as an analyst in the Swiss armed forces and in the research structures of the United Nations. Specializes in the study of post-Soviet states. Lives in Florida (USA).