The UK's Chief of Defence Staff says Israel's October attack has incapacitated Iran’s ability to produce ballistic missiles for a year, leaving Tehran facing a strategic dilemma in its response.
"In October’s retaliatory strikes again Iran, Israel used more than 100 aircraft, carrying fewer than 100 munitions, and with no aircraft getting within 100 miles of the target in the first wave, and that took down nearly the entirety of Iran’s air defence system," Admiral Sir Tony Radakin said in his annual lecture at the Royal United Services Institute on Wednesday.
"It has destroyed Iran’s ability to produce ballistic missiles for a year, and left Tehran with a strategic dilemma in how it responds," he added, underscoring the significant advantage of modern warfare tactics employed in the Israeli attack.
He said the success was down to the power of 5th generation aircraft, combined with "exquisite targeting and extraordinary intelligence" enabling Israel to achieve vast amounts from a single mission.
Iran has threatened to retaliate against Israel for the airstrikes that, according to Israeli and US officials, destroyed Iran's last three Russian-supplied S-300 air defense missile systems, leaving the country "naked." Meanwhile, Tehran's war rhetoric has significantly decreased since the recent ceasefire between Israel and the Iran-backed Hezbollah.
Radakin also compared Russia's military to Israel's, quipping, "Russia is showing us how not to fight." He contrasted Israel's targeted strike in Iran with Russia's prolonged invasion of Ukraine, which was initially billed as a three-day Special Military Operation.
He pointed to North Korea's deployment of troops to Ukraine, potential tech sharing between Moscow and Pyongyang, and Russia's use of Iranian drones, signaling a global realignment with three distinct blocs emerging.
He highlighted in one group, the increasing collaboration between authoritarian states like Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran that challenge the global order, driven by self-interest, and survival. “In the case of Russia, it is because Putin believes in a historic fiction. In the case of China, it is seeking to reshape the rules around its own interests. And in the case of North Korea and Iran, it is to secure the survival of their regimes at any cost.”
According to him, the second group are democratic nations and responsible actors who seek to uphold stability and international rules. While, a third group of nations, exemplified by the BRICS, seeks to balance between these two blocs for maximum advantage.
