Despite a tenuous ceasefire, Iran is making it clear to both the US and Israel that it possesses the capability to inflict serious damage should hostilities escalate. Officials from Tehran claim they can execute missile strikes daily for two consecutive years, raising concerns among military experts and Western intelligence analysts.
Major General Ebrahim Jabari of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps stated, “Our troops are ready.” He emphasized the vastness of their facilities, suggesting that many of their defensive capabilities remain untested. He further asserted that in the event of conflict involving Israel and the US, their ability to launch missiles consistently for two years would persist.
Jabari also noted that certain forces within Iran, including the Navy and Quds forces, have not yet been deployed to the front lines. He mentioned the production of thousands of missiles and drones, asserting their safety in a secure location.
However, some intelligence assessments indicate that Iran’s statements may mask significant losses. Reports from Open Source Intelligence reveal that Iran has issued around 600 missile launchers and approximately 3,000 missiles. Following a recent series of attacks—dubbed the “12-Day War” by some—its arsenal has diminished, with estimates suggesting a loss of about 1,000 to 1,500 missiles and up to 200 launchers.
According to Behnam Ben Taleblu from the Democracy Foundation, there’s a pressing choice for Iran: either utilize its projectiles against Israel or risk losing them. Danny Sitrinowitz of the National Security Institute weighed in, remarking on the challenge Iran faces in replacing missile launchers after Israel targeted key production facilities, stating, “Israel attacked every place where Iranians make missiles.” While Iran boasts capabilities for missile strikes, he argues they are unlikely to execute “hundreds” of attacks at once.
Is Iran a threat to the US mainland?
Iranian rhetoric occasionally suggests a direct attack on the US, but analysts believe the actual threat is more restricted. Citrinowich highlighted that any potential for a direct strike could theoretically stem from Iran’s presence in Venezuela, though he acknowledged the considerable challenges involved. “It’ll be very difficult to do so,” he noted, expressing uncertainty about the Venezuelan government’s willingness to cooperate.
Instead, retaliation from Iran is likely to be directed at US personnel and assets in the Middle East. Kasa Poglu from the Hudson Institute pointed out that Israeli military objectives have evolved to target Iran’s nuclear and advanced weapon facilities. While the full extent of damage to Iran’s nuclear program is unclear, he suggested it has sustained significant setbacks.
Poglu added that Israel’s defenses have mitigated what could have been more extensive destruction. Yet, he emphasized that Iran still boasts the largest ballistic missile force in the region, capable of circumventing Israeli air defenses even during conflicts.
Proxy power and China’s role
The danger posed by Iran extends beyond its own borders, as its regional proxies, particularly the Houthi movement in Yemen, continue to thrive. Poglu expressed concern, referencing reports of Chinese satellite support providing real-time targeting data to the Houthis, which have escalated their maritime attacks recently.
Iran retains several asymmetric capabilities that may destabilize regional situations, but analysts warn that deploying these assets could further exacerbate conflicts. The recent “12-Day War” concluded with a US-mediated ceasefire, yet tensions remain high. Iranian leaders often tout their military strengths, yet experts concur that their battlefield losses and production issues have considerably restricted their options.
So, while Iran still has the means to threaten local US and Israeli assets, its capacity for sustained and mass attacks has been notably diminished. For now, it seems Iran’s threats might be more pronounced than their actual ability to execute them.
