Unfortunately, the source has impeached himself by repeating the same tired old rumors about Iran getting S-300s.  I remain unconvinced; I'll believe it when I see it.  Also, while I would expect nothing different, the Russian First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov has categorically denied Syria has discussed any transfers to Iran. 

 

What is interesting is how Iran has been spreading its largesse to Syria, bankrolling various weapons upgrades.  Syria is also reported to be buying the latest Russian anti-tank missiles and a variety of other weaponry (from Russia and Iran in particular).  It's widely reported that the Syrians and Hizballah are preparing for what they assume will be a renewed Israeli offensive into Lebanon.  It seems the Axis of Evil in the middle-east remains Iran/Syria/Hizballah, and we very possibly may see them up close and personal this year. 
 

U think Russia would let people re-export Air to air missiles, especially S-300 from Syria to Iran?? When u read reports like that wait 30days before posting, they are usually baloney, like u.

Iran set to obtain Pantsyr via Syria

 

By Robin Hughes

 

Iran is set to acquire at least 10 96K6 Pantsyr-S1E self-propelled short-range gun and missile air-defence systems as a derivative of a major deal struck between Syria and Russia earlier this year.

 

A source close to the deal told Jane's that Russia has agreed to sell Damascus "some 50 Pantsyr-S1E systems", with initial deliveries set to begin later in 2007. Syria is understood to be receiving the Pantsyr-S1E equipped with the latest Roman I-Band fire control radar.

 

While the source noted that most of the Pantsyrs are earmarked for the Syrian Air Defence Command, "the end user for 10 of the systems is Tehran". These should reach Iran, via Syria, in late 2008, the source told Jane's.

 

According to the source, Iran will part finance the Syrian acquisition along with payment for its own 10 systems to recompense Damascus for its compliance in the deal.

 

Syria is understood to have signed a contract with Russia, with an estimated value of USD730 million, for the supply of the Pantsyr-S1E. While Tehran has indicated to Damascus the urgency of the requirement, the source said that the 10 systems to be transferred will not be taken from the first ones supplied to Syria but from later deliveries. The source added Iran has also disclosed plans to acquire at least 50 Pantsyr-S1E systems and is currently now exploring potential options to realise this. He additionally confirmed that Iran has now acquired at least two longer-range S-300PMU-1/2 Favorit (SA-10c/d 'Grumble') air-defence systems.

 

Syrian consent to enable Iran to procure the Pantsyr-S1E systems through Syria is an implementation of the military and technological co-operation mechanism stipulated in a strategic accord signed by both countries in November 2005.

I'd rather quote Janes than (as you have) Pravda or Xinhua. 

 

      Hopefully American warplanners won't wait for F-18's to get greased before acknowledging the presence of S-300s in Iran.  In reality we already know they are there.  But let's say you're an average Joe without a government job, like some of us.  Let's follow the logic.

 

 

   If you are even going to begin to defend your territory against the United States, what is the one thing you need more than anything else?  Answer:  advanced air defenses.  Iran already has an excellent point-defense SAM system for taking down US cruise missiles and precision-guided munitions, the Tor M-1.  They need even more such systems, which is why they have angled for the Pantsyrs, which are more capable in some areas than the Tor.  What is missing from this picture?  Answer:  a good systems to engage American platforms, not just their weaponry.  Better to take out one plane before it drops eight bombs.

 

   So is there any doubt in any serious analysis of the situation that Iran wants the S-300?  So what is needed to acquire them?  Two things - money, and diplomatic inclincation.  The money is a given.  So the question is this:  has Russia been inclined to sell Iran the S-300?  Now another observation - what is the current state of US-Russian relations?  It may have taken the press and president bush 5 years to wake up to reality, but Russia has set its face dead against the US, bush's previous statements about "Pootie-poot's" eyes and soul notwithstanding.  Stay with me.

 

   So the Russians clearly would like to make money, have no reservations about facilitating Iran's nuclear and missile ambitions, and maintain a vigorous dislike of the US and its power-projection into the ME.  Now the question is have American efforts to pressure the Russians not to sell the S-300 to Iran been successful?  Since we can't know this for sure, we should assess all that has been considered thus far and proceed to the next logical question:   What does Russia have to gain / lose from providing the S-300 to Iran from a geopolitical standpoint?

 

   The answer is likely to be surprising to some, but students of Russia will nod with respect for the shrewdness of it all.  What would be more satisfying for the Russians than to see the US take heavy losses at the hands of Russian technology, meanwhile the price of oil jumps over the moon and exports from the ME are put in peril, leaving only one alternate supplier with enough oil to help fill the gap - RUSSIA.  And the more advanced weaponry they sell in the region the more effective the Iranian/Syrian resistance and counterattacks - thus prolonging the limited conflict and adding great anxiety to it, which will translate into market volatility.

 

   So for anyone without priveledged information, but with a little application of logic and some prior knowledge of the range of issues involved,   I'd say the chances that Iran possesses S-300s are BETTER THAN AVERAGE. 

 

Darth, as usual on this one I can't argue with you because I agree with your logic.  It does make perfect sense.  Like I've said before, I continue to be amazed that it hasn't happened yet.  Since I do fully expect Russia to consent some year soon and sell S-300 to Iran, I think I will need to back off on my denials of any occurance--not because it has happened already, but because I fully expect it will soon and thus I probably ought to shut up about it before it does so that falling silent sometime in the future is not so revealing (i.e., I need to protect my butt).  I will merely continue to request open source evidence of the completion of the sale.  :-) 

 

Thankfully, even though Iran is picking up bits and pieces of new equipment (primarily Chinese and Russian) and integrating them into their IADS, their air defense network is still a patchwork quilt of point defenses that are primarily low-medium altitude with plenty of gaps in-between the defended sites.  Even iif they get some PANTsIR battalions in a couple years, that's really just more of the same.  It is not nearly as challenging an environment as Syria's, for example.  Adding several S-300 battalions in Iran is not going to change that fact much. 

 

As for the possiblity of first discovering their presence when they shoot some of our jets down, the odds of importing, garrisoning, training, and deploying battalions of S-300 without us detecting them are extremely remote.  Iran is probably the most scrutinized of any Mid-East country.  Whether we've worked out some effective EW techniques is more problematical, I'd say.  However, we've had many years to study the associated S-300 radar waveforms, so I suspect we're getting a handle on that problem.  If we have to resort to destructive attacks (DEAD), certainly F-22 would be excellent for taking them out, but we still have plenty of other useful options, too.

 

Hang in there, buddy.  An air campaign against Iran would be one-sided and dramatically successful.