|
|
Why don’t Iran’s missiles pose a threat to Europe?
Posted By Adam Robertson
Washington’s plans to deploy a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe prompted Russian President Vladimir Putin to warn that Moscow would respond to any U.S. “threat” and threaten to quit an arms deal with Europe.
The Bush administration justifies the deployment of interceptor missiles in Poland and a corresponding X-band radar system in the Czech Republic as a response to an Iranian missile threat to Europe.
In an attempt to ease Russian concerns over the missile shield, the U.S. President George W. Bush said countering threats from "rogue states" like Iran would benefit Russian security. "It's in your interests to have a system that could prevent a future Iranian regime, for example, from launching a weapon. It's in Russia's security interests," Bush said earlier this month at a U.S.-EU summit at the White House.
Iran dismissed Bush’s claims as “fake and untrue propaganda.”
"Russia and Europe have well understood that the U.S. in the line of its own benefits and interests has challenged their independence and security. They have understood that the U.S. through such hollow claims is trying to enlarge its image in the world," Iran’s foreign minister spokesman Mohammad Ali Husseini said.
Stepping up the rhetoric against Iran, the U.S. Special Envoy for Nuclear Non-Proliferation, Robert Joseph, recently claimed that Tehran is capable of developing long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles by 2015.
It’s well known that the Islamic Republic has an active missile program. Iranian military leaders publicly boast of steady progress in the range, precision and sophistication of their missiles. Tehran’s missile arsenal consists of artillery rockets and short-and medium-range missiles with a range of up to 1,300 kilometers, too short to reach middle Europe, according to military experts.
Yet, the U.S. claims that Europe is at risk of a missile attack from Iran!
There are a number of reasons why Iranian missiles won’t reach Europe.
First, Iran's determination to produce ballistic missiles grew out of its war with Iraq in the 1980s. During the war, Iran couldn’t retaliate against Iraq's missile attacks on Iranian cities. A UN study found that Iraq fired 516 Scud-B missiles against Tehran, which retaliated with 88 to 100 missiles. Since then, Iran has been building a relatively cheap alternative of missiles that could serve as an important deterrent in the event of confrontation with U.S. forces based in Iraq and other parts of the Persian Gulf. The development of Tehran’s missile program was also triggered by a regional arms race, with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states' acquisition of sophisticated jet fighters from the U.S. and Europe.
Second, Iran's medium-range Shahab-3 missiles are modeled after the North Korean Nodong missiles which are based on an old Soviet model. Most military experts say that Iran’s missile system has reached its maximum capacity and cannot be developed to produce longer range missiles. In order to build such missiles, the Islamic Republic must acquire the extremely complex "multistage" missile technology, which has been mastered by only a few countries, including India and Israel, who have had significant difficulty in producing reliable long-range missiles.
Third, Iran cannot import long-range missiles from abroad due to UN sanctions that ban the export of missile technology to Tehran. There is no evidence of missile cooperation between Iran and India or Pakistan.
Fourth, Iranian missiles wouldn’t pose a serious threat until they carry nuclear warheads. So far, the International Atomic Energy Agency has been unable to confirm Western allegations that Tehran is working on a nuclear weapons program. Some analysts say that Washington’s plan to install the anti-missile system in parts of Europe could be a precautious measure in case the European carrot and stick policy against Iran fails.
Fifth, even if Iran succeeded in building a few nuclear bombs, this doesn’t mean that Tehran possesses the advanced technology to develop nuclear warheads.
Sixth, the strong economic relations between Iran and Europe, underscored by the multibillion dollar gas deal Austria signed with Tehran last month, undermines the U.S.’s projection of a Europe-unfriendly Iran. Last week, Iran’s permanent mission to the UN released a statement that stressed the importance of European-Iranian relations. Tehran’s foreign policy over the past 250 years has never included military aggression, the statement said, adding that the Islamic Republic has never attacked any of its neighboring states and that there is no need for an explanation why it would not attack countries outside the region.
Finally, the United States must not underestimate Europe's own deterrent capability, e.g., France and England's nuclear arsenal that would likely destroy Iran if it ever attacked any part of the European Union.
All these reasons make Iran’s missile threat to Europe a remote possibility and the Bush administration's defense shield in Eastern Europe an unnecessary overreaction that could only be justified as necessary preparation for attacking the Islamic Republic.
|
|
