Feb 4, 2008

Iran's security options in the current situation


Obviously Iran is under pressure from the USA, and Israel. I can't see that scenario changing for the foreseeable future. The new President in January 2009, who ever that may be in the USA, will be just as belligerent, if not more.

So what is Iran to do. Iran is a Third World country, and not a great military power. Nor an aspiring great military power by the looks of things--beyond fantasy narratives by some in the West.


Its armed forces number approximately 420,000, or there about: 350,000 army; 50,000 air force and below 20,000 for the navy. Its arms inventory is a mixed bag of obsolete weapons from the USA, China and Russia. What is amazing is that Iran spends annually 3% on defence. Something is not quite right here. The mullahs were brought into power by the USA/UK in 1979 (aka Brzezinski/Rothschild) to weaken Iran as a modern cohesive society. The mullahs don't trust the military, so they don't provide it with a lot of resources, as the present situation would most certainly require them to do logically.

Since senior political and security elements in Russia have clearly stated that an attack on Iran would be viewed as an attack on Russia-----quite rightly, as it is another step towards the domination of Eurasia by Israel/USA, and thus the destruction of Russia ultimately (per Brzezinski/Rothschild doctrine), so why not put the Russian statement to the test, and clarify matters.

Iran should give Russia a permanent naval base in the Persian Gulf, with a considerable presence. One that counter balances the presence of the Americans, the British and the French in the Gulf. The Iranians should allow the Russians to bring in SAMs, and AA batteries in addition. This action will make Iran more secure on its southern coastline.

Come to think of it Iran should sign a security pact with Russia, if they already haven't done so. Then Iran has the protection of the second most powerful country in the world, and an unlimited access to its arsenal, which can be used at a time of conflict, without signing expensive arms transfer contracts, which the mullahs are reluctant to do.

Iran's current security position in relation to the blatant threats from the Israelis and America are:

  • We will teach the aggressor a great lesson, rather like they taught Iraq, another Third World country a great lesson! It is a hollow bluster by the Iranians. Its not the strength of the Iranian military that is holding the Israelis back, but the consequences of action, and what Russia and China might do if the conflict escalates.
  • International law and right is on our side.

Whilst the second preposition is more correct than the first, it is not a basis on which to base ones defence policy solely as the Israelis do not consider international law relevant or applicable to them. When your main adversary disregards international law, then continuing to rely on international law as a justification solely is dangerously foolish; one should seek security guarantees from more reliable sources--------such as a comprehensive security guarantees and cooperation with Russia.

3% expenditure on defence is incredibly low in the circumstances, and would be better if the Iranian security establishment kept their mouths shut, and took some real initiatives to develop their defences comprehensively. Since the mullahs are so scared and suspicious about developing a credible conventional military, then they should allow Russia, as the second most powerful nation on earth to provide part of the defence and security of Iran. The security interests of the two countries are mutual, and both countries face identical enemies----international Jews and Zionists who wish to create an empire, at their countries expense.