On July 9, 2008, amid rising tensions concerning its nuclear program, Iran conducted a missile test as part of its “Great Prophet 3” military exercises to boost defensive capabilities. The tests took place while U.S. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, William Burns, was preparing to meet with Iranian representatives as part of the EU’s nuclear negotiations. The tests also followed Israeli air training in the Mediterranean Sea with operations that demonstrated Israeli capability to strike Iran. While Iran hailed the tests as a demonstration of its military prowess, other countries’ reactions ranged from condemnation to blame for using the test for international political purposes. Additionally, after the initial consternation, Western analysts concluded that the tests had limited military significance, and more surprisingly, the footage of the test released by the Iranian government had been partly faked.

Significance of the Missile Test for the Iranians
On July 10, the Kuwait City-based Al Qabas published a report that Iran had tested an upgraded version of its Shahab-3 surface-to-surface ballistic missile. According to Al Qabas, this version has the capability to deliver cluster bomb warheads up to a range of 2000 kilometers. [1] The newspaper added that these highly accurate missiles could adjust their trajectory if needed. [2] In addition, Iran’s official television station announced on its website that Iran had launched a number of missiles, including surface-to-surface, surface-to-sea, and sea-to-air systems. [3] Iran also tested a torpedo dubbed “al Hoot” whose existence was initially revealed in April 2006 and was described by the Iranians as the fastest torpedo in the world, capable of destroying submarines. [4]

In an attempt to put the test into a geopolitical context, the Iranian Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson, Mohammed Ali Husseyni, declared, “the test was a natural response to the continuous maneuvers and threats of the Zionist [sic] regime.”[5] He added that this test was intended to send a strong message in response to the threats of military strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities. [6] In fact, Iranian officials appeared to exploit the involvement of the United States in the region. The London-based, Saudi-owned, independent daily Asharqalawsat quoted the commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), General Mohammed Ali Jaafari, as saying, “The enemies of Iran will not dare threaten Iran directly… Israel and the U.S. are in a weak position; therefore they try to exert pressure on Iran through economic sanctions.” [7]

Iranian officials portrayed the test as a means to bolster the country’s military capabilities. In fact, Mortada Safari, Commander of the IRGC Navy, stated that his forces would prove their ability to counter any attack. [8] Highlighting Iran’s retaliatory capability, the commander of the IRGC Air Force, Colonel Hussayn Salimi, declared that the test aimed to “show the readiness of the IRGC to defend the Iranian nation…Our missiles are ready for launch anytime, from anywhere and with high accuracy.” [9] Furthermore, in an attempt to show Iran’s determination to respond to any future attacks on its territory, the English-language Iranian TV station Pars TV quoted the commander of the Iranian Air Force, General Ahmed Mijani, as saying that Iran would hold air maneuvers in the near future. General Mijani added, “We developed great radar and missile capabilities during the last few years and we are now ready to face any attack.” [10]

Some experts, however, saw little significance for deterrence in Iran’s missile testing or in its missile arsenal in general. Asharqalawsat quoted anonymous experts stating that “the real capability to respond to any attacks would consist of using traditional tactics such as deploying small planes to hit U.S. or Israeli interests in the region rather than missiles.” [11]

Regional Perception of the Missile Test
Regional reactions of Gulf and other Arab neighbors were astonishingly limited, reflecting the ongoing concerns of these countries regarding Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. These reactions also highlighted a perceived link to a prevailing fear among Iranian leadership that the United States or Israel may resort to military actions to stop Iran’s on-going nuclear program. Saleh Al Qalab, a regular contributor to the daily newspaper Al Jareeda, wrote that Iran’s tests are an indicator of Iran’s increasing concern regarding potential military strikes against its nuclear facilities. [12] Other columnists perceived the tests as an attempt to reassure Iran’s citizens. The Kuwaiti Al Qabas wrote that the missile test had domestic objectives and was designed to “show the world and Iranian citizens that Iran is ready to respond to any attack.” [13]

It should be noted that this ballistic missile capability triggers concerns among neighboring countries in light of Iran’s repeated assertions that it has the capacity to strike Israel as well as U.S. military bases in neighboring countries. In order to quell such concerns, Iranian officials were quick to express their assurance that their missiles will not target neighboring countries. Iran’s defense minister, for example, issued a statement saying, “Iran announced more than once that it will use its missile capability solely to defend security and stability in the region. It will target the assailants only and will not threaten any country.” [14] In the same vein, the spokesperson of the National Security and Foreign Affairs Committee in the Iranian parliament, Kadim Jalali, declared that testing such missiles aimed to “strengthen security and stability in the region and bolster Iran’s defensive capabilities.” [15] Yet, it is difficult to overlook the potential destruction that can befall some Gulf States were Iran to respond to an attack by targeting U.S. military facilities in the region. In fact, it is very likely that some Iranian missiles may not hit their presumed target and may strike cities, especially as most Gulf countries, with the exception of Saudi Arabia and Iraq, have very limited territory.

Israel’s reaction to Iran’s missile test was marked by concern and apprehension. Housing Minister Ze’ev Boim stated, “I suggest Israel will not talk, and Israel should prepare itself to do what is needed to do.” [16] Similarly, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak depicted Iran as “a challenge not only for Israel but for the entire world.” [17] He added, “Israel is the strongest country in the region, and it has proven in the past that it is not afraid to act when its vital interests are threatened.” [18]

However, while expressing their concern about Iran’s nuclear program, Israeli officials saw no new technological breakthrough in the Shahab-3 missile, which already has the capability to strike all parts of Israel. In fact, the Ramallah-based Palestinian newspaper Arab 48 wrote on July 10 that the Israeli security services announced they did not notice any technological advancement in the newly tested Shahab-3. [19] Instead, the security services stated that the improvement was made to the launch pad of the Fateh 110 missile. [20]

Also, in an apparent attempt to win the information war, Israel displayed an early warning and command and control plane, a Gulf Stream G 550, hours after Iran announced its missile test. [21]

International Reactions to the Missile Test
International reactions to the missile test ranged from harsh condemnation by the United States to a more moderate Chinese position reiterating the need for a peaceful resolution to the nuclear standoff. Russia tried to link the tests to the U.S. deployment of missile defense systems in the Czech Republic and Poland.

Japan highlighted the negative repercussions of the missile tests. It called on Iran to show more restraint and warned that such tests simply strengthen the voices of those advocating sanctions against Iran. The spokesman of the Japanese government, Nobutaka Mashimura, declared, “Japan strongly urges Iran to show restraint from such acts, which threaten peace and security in the region.” He added, “I do not know what their rationale is in intentionally launching a missile on the last day of the summit [G8 Summit in Japan].” [22]

France, currently holding the EU presidency, expressed the EU’s concern regarding Iran’s missile tests. France announced that, “these missile tests can only raise concerns among the international community while Iran has not implemented Resolutions 1696, 1737, 1747 and 1803 of the UN Security Council and it has not yet halted its sensitive nuclear activities.” [23] French government spokesperson Eric Chevalier stated, “We are concerned about Iran’s missile tests… which would strengthen the fears of the international community at the same time Iran is developing a nuclear program.” [24] Similarly, Germany considered the tests an enticement for war. In fact, German government spokesperson Thomas Sting called on Iran to refrain from beating the drums of war. [25] U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that the missile test proves that the Iranian missile threat is a real one. [26]

Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey
Lavrov linked Iran’s missile test to the missile defense system that the United States is planning to deploy in the Czech Republic. Following a meeting with his Jordanian counterpart, Salah Bashir, he stated that this missile test “confirms that Iran has 2000 km-range missiles, and with these characteristics a missile defense system is not necessary for monitoring or reacting to such threats.” [27] He added, “We are still convinced that the discussions regarding the risks posed by Iranian missiles are a pretext for deploying the missile defense system in Europe.” [28] These statements came as a reaction to the declaration of the director of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, Lieutenant General Henry Obering, who stated that the Iranian tests “emphasize the urgency of what we are doing….They’re increasing the range of these missiles. I believe very strongly that they will have the ability to target most of Europe in the next couple of years with these missiles.” [29]

Adopting a more neutral stance, the Chinese Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson, Lui Jiang Sho, declared, “We are concerned regarding the situation in the Middle East… it is very complicated and we hope that all parties will contribute to peace and stability in the region.” [30]

Other international security analysts provided different interpretations of Iran’s missile tests. Many downplayed the missile’s overall military significance, while others believed that the tests had a political dimension. The French weekly L’Express, for example, quoted Bruno Tertrais, an analyst at the Foundation for Strategic Research, saying that Iran’s missile tests should not be exaggerated. Tertrais stated, “I do not think that we should overestimate the tests… their military significance is to ensure the reliability of the Iranian forces.” [31] In the same vein, British defense analyst Paul Beaver saw Iran’s missiles as having limited value. He stated, “Iran’s missile program is indeed an advanced program. Yet, it still lacks accuracy and long distance guidance systems.” He added, “They are still relatively far from threatening Israeli and American bases.” [32] Finally, Vladimir Sajin, a Russian analyst at the Moscow-based Orient Institute, indicated that the missile test shows that Iran was developing delivery systems for nuclear weapons. However, he pointed out that the missile tested on July 9 is not yet capable of delivering warheads to long-distance targets. [33]

While acknowledging the military dimension of the test, these analysts deemed the test to have a political objective. Tertrais stressed that the message of this test is that “Iran is ready in the event of military confrontation.” [34] Nina Mamedova, an analyst at the Orient Institute, perceived a domestic political dimension to the test, and declared that the test was an Iranian attempt to show national unity in the face of foreign threats. She also argued that the tests were aimed at strengthening Iran’s position in light of future negotiations with major international powers. [35] The argument that the test was intended to boost Iran’s negotiating position was also highlighted by Mehrzad Bouroujerdi, a professor at Syracuse University. He declared, “Iranian calculations indicate that they want to show their power. They are ready to negotiate and they are ready to hold talks. However, they are also saying that it is impossible that they are treated as a third tier weak state.” [36]

Finally, other analysts consider that Iran’s destructive power lies in weapons systems other than ballistic missiles. While acknowledging that Iran could resort to its missiles, Peter Wezeman, a researcher at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, indicated that “its real power lies in other areas.” [37] Iran may use a non-conventional approach to respond to a military strike against its nuclear facilities. It may disrupt the flow of oil to the world market, instigate anti-American actions in Iraq, or target U.S. interests in the world.

Fake or Real Test
Despite the concern that the missile test caused, the Iranians undercut themselves as questions began to be raised about the reliability of the pictures issued by the Iranian state- controlled media and relayed by Western media. The authenticity of the photos were disputed when claims arose that they had been “doctored.”

In fact, the Israeli photographer and image expert Gideon Sella believed that the photos had been modified. Referring to one of the four missiles in the officially released picture, he declared, “This is, beyond a shadow of a doubt, a cloned missile…it is not possible for the smoke trails, both on the ground and in the air, to be identical.” [38] Gerard Issert, a technician at a major Paris-based photo laboratory, provided another indication of photo modification, noting that, “Although the missiles weren’t all equidistant from the camera, they’re the same size in the picture.” [39]

In a similar vein, the Qatar-based Al Jazeera news service announced that Iran had modified the photos of the missile tests. It quoted Mark Fitzpatrick at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, saying, “It very much does appear that Iran doctored the photo to cover up what apparently was a misfiring of one of the missiles.” [40] Mr. Fitzpatrick highlighted the reasons behind resorting to photo modification saying, “the whole purpose of this test was to send a signal… Iran both exaggerated the capabilities of the missile… and apparently doctored the photos as well.” [41]

Not only did Iran provide fake pictures of its test but, according to some analysts, it also wrongly depicted the type of missile tested. Iranian officials claimed that they tested an upgraded version of the Shahab-3 missile. However, independent analysts noticed no difference between the missile used in the July 9 test and one tested in 1998. In fact, the independent national security blog, ArmsControlWonk.com, deemed the missiles to be identical. Pamela Hess, a journalist at Associated Press wrote that ArmscontrolWonk.com “compared the diameter of the missile to its length and found it to be identical to the 1998 version.” [42] As if to confirm the blog’s assertions, Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said, “The test is being taken seriously… [but] they were not testing new technologies or capabilities, but rather firing off old equipment in an attempt to intimidate their neighbors and escalate tension in the region.” [43]

Conclusion
Iran’s continuous claims of new breakthroughs in military technology aim to depict the military prowess of the Islamic Republic. It is a form of psychological warfare that the Iranian leaders have constantly used. Iran has always depicted its armed services as being well-equipped and ready for combat operations. The question that arises is whether or not the Iranian leadership believes its own propaganda. While it is difficult to provide any categorical answer to such a question, one can point to historical precedents in the region (Iraq) where political leaders bet both on their relative military capability and regional political circumstances to avert military confrontation. In addition, one cannot discard the fact that there are some members of the IRGC who, blinded by their fervent belief, look forward to a military confrontation. Still, the Iranian leadership has always shown great pragmatism and will likely refrain from a military confrontation unless the country is directly attacked. As to Iran’s real missile capability, the fact that the nation has announced several new breakthroughs within a very short time span may indicate a weakness that Iran is trying to cover by exaggerating its capability. More than the actual capability of its missiles, the determining factor is the number of operational missiles Iran can launch within a very short time and its ability to sustain such attacks in order to penetrate U.S. and Gulf country targets.

Khalid Hilal, Independent Consultant