Politics
US/ISRAEL-IRAN ESCALATION SITREP
Mike Tyson, the world-famous American boxer is on record as having said:
“…everyone has a plan until he gets hit”
This poetic statement is going to be the basis upon which this SITREP is going to be anchored on. The correspondence is going to analyze activities and strategies deployed within the following war-fighting domains by both protagonists:
Land, Air, Maritime, Space, Cognitive and Cyber
Analysis of the requisite generations being employed by these protagonists is also going to be given due impetus. The generations and what they depict are highlighted below:
- 1st Generation Warfare-Line and Column
- 2nd Generation Warfare-Attrition/trench Warfar
- 3rd Generation Warfare-Maneuver Warfare/Blitzkrieg-modern-day ‘shock and awe’
- 4th Generation Warfare-Asymmetric Warfar
- 5th Generation Warfare-Hybrid Warfare
- 6th Generation Warfare-‘Non-Contact’ Warfare
One thing that is manifestly clear is that the US and their Israeli allies have, for decades, been waging hybrid warfare (5th generation warfare) against Iran in this conflict that is punctuated by many wars.
On the other hand, the Iranians, and their proxies, specifically Hamas, Houthi Rebels and Hezbollah were focusing on 4th Generation Asymmetric warfare tactics.
In episodes where hostilities escalated to the utilization of conventional military instruments, both parties, as is the case today, have resorted to 6th Generation ‘Non-Contact’ warfare as exemplified by the usages of drones, air sorties, cruise missiles and Tomahawk missiles. The only difference being that:
1. At present, Iran is using ‘Non-Contact’ warfare to induce terror to neighbors and associates of the US/Israel. This clearly is a political objective
2. The US/Israel have consistently been waging ‘Non-contact warfare’ to downgrade and destroy identified targets in tandem with the objectives of the mission, which, due to the fact that I have referred to them in prior submissions, will choose not to regurgitate here. This objective is military
3. Israel is seen to be adopting more of 3rd Generation Warfare in Lebanon as it engages Hezbollah
Having said the above, it is crucial and pertinent to make an emphasis that this episode of hybrid warfare has escalated to the conventional theatre where the two protagonists are pursuing different objectives: Military v Political Objectives. These objectives are playing out in the domains as shall be analysed below:
The US and Israel are waging this escalation primarily within the maritime, air and cyber domains. The two allies have absolute domination and total control of the Air domain whilst whatever is happening within the cyber domain will only come to manifest with the passage of time.
The contested domain, widely covered by the media has been the maritime domain. The highlight of this domain was the sinking of the Iranian ship off the coast of Sri Lanka which episode left tens of sailors dead. Attention has now shifted to the cliff-hanger-Straits of Hormuz. The activities happening within the strait are not synonymous with being a ‘Black Swan’ Event.
On the other hand, Iran is seeking a ‘war of narratives’ and has pivoted its defence strategy around conducting activities within Cognitive Domain. The objective behind the utilization of this domain being to ‘control what people think and how they act.’
This thrust is in tandem with the political objective referenced to earlier on. Beyond any reasonable doubt, Iran has managed to win the ‘hearts and minds’ of many social media Brigadier Generals that it is not surprising to come across comments that ‘Iran has won.’ Within the maritime domain, the Iranians have now prioritized making the Strait of Hormuz, as hugely anticipated, a potential Achilles Tendon of its adversaries.
Through the sophisticated deployment of information disorder and timely propaganda, the Iranians have been able to:
1. Spread terror by making tactical attacks and giving them maximum publicity
2. Exploit weaknesses in messaging from the White House to cast aspersions at every interventions aimed at assuring the ‘international community’ that all is OK
3. Crucially, pivot regime survival around the contested waters.
What is obvious from the above is that the protagonists are using different domains to achieve their objectives, which have been identified as Military v Political Objectives.
WHAT IS HAPPENING? THE REAL STORY OUTSIDE OF THE FOG OF WAR
The Iranian actions are that of survival. The provocations of neighbors and the attacks of ships from different countries, Thailand included, justifies the logic of ‘looting from a house on fire.’ The idea behind the Iranian approach:
1. Cause strategic damage to US/Israeli assets within the region. This is aimed at the watching audience-Americans at home: The Vietnam Model
2. Hit Israeli assets and, for psychological impact, strike a mortal blow by hitting one of the two aircraft carriers
3. Hope for a diplomatic endgame out of the conundrum.
The diplomatic pressure valve was given the ‘middle finger’ by Russia and China when the opted to abstain from a UNSC vote (13-0 + 2 abstentions). Naturally, this means Iran is on its own. They still retain their Fatah 2 Hypersonic missiles. It is going to be interesting to note when these lethal weapons of war are going to be used.
Enter the Shaheed Drones.
These low-cost; high impact flying bombs have been the game changer. They are the core reason behind the terror being induced on the GCC.
Their cost implications, which can be analysed within the realms of asymmetric cost of warfare, are making it difficult for the expensive high-tech missile defence systems to be used to counter them. This Iranian innovation has indeed been a game changer.
The political plan for Iran is driven by the aim at applying economic pressure through making asymmetric attacks on neighbors. These attacks, focusing on oil infrastructure, terroristic in scope, are not at all interest in what happens ‘the day after.’
This plan can obviously not be pursued by someone who cares to what happens after the escalation is over. Lebanon has announced that Hezbollah is no longer welcome in that country; the Qataris, who used to host Hamas, are not impressed either. There is no need even to mention Oman. However, it is important to observe that:
1. As the US/Israeli and Arab allies are running out of interceptors, they have the combined capabilities to replenish them
2. The Iranians, on the other hand, do not enjoy such privilege. Their military-industrial complex, which is being destroyed back to Timbuktu, cannot afford to churn out more of these amidst the relentless bombing campaign
Iran depends on the Strait of Hormuz for the movement of its oil to its primary consumers. The assumption that the effects of the closure are felt by Iranian enemies alone is short-term in scope. The country has created a lot of angry neighbours.
The escalation has induced a crisis, induced by Iranian response whilst the regime decapitation strategy, part of the military objectives of the protagonists of Iran, has so far materialized.
A recently appointed heir, the son to the slain Ali Khamenei himself, is yet to appear in public, with his well-publicized appearance having been through a cardboard cut-out. The other publicized appearance of him was through a speech read on his behalf, which he reportedly wrote. Proof of life is still yet to be established.
