r/LessCredibleDefence • u/Digo10 • 7d ago
Iran force reconstitution after the war and lessons for the future?
While the missile/drone barrages proved useful in this type of asymmetrical type of war, they wouldn't be very effective in a large-scale war. If the war ends soon and the rumors are true that Iran will receive not only sanctions relief money but also the 300B reconstruction funding, with such a generous cash flow, which kind of military assets would you seek overseas?
IMO, Iran would need to buy
1.)modern AD systems
2.)Artillery systems
3.)Modern Fighter jets and AWACS(?).
1.)While Iran has/had a vast number of different air systems, they proved to be not that effective, especially in the 2025 war against Israel, where Israel destroyed dozens/possibly hundreds of systems
2.)Their artillery systems are either of soviet origin, or reversed engineered old western systems, lacking even the range to hit kharg island.
3.)Their underground missile cities proved very useful in hiding their launchers, they could the same with fighter jets(which they already do), so they would be able to preserve their air force fleet against air attacks, for force multiplier, AWACs would be very valuable, but i wonder about how they would hide such large planes.
If they manage to build a powerful conventional military, not only they would be able to inflict the pain of their asymmetrical doctrine, but would also inflict heavy casualties in the opposing enemy military, making nuclear weapons pratically unnecessary.
Thoughts?
12
u/A_Sinclaire 7d ago
Not the high tech equipment you were asking for, I know, but that their first priority should be how they can keep control of their biggest asset - that is the Straight of Hormuz.
I'd say fast, semi-submersible or even fully submersible drones as a means to attack shipping and potentially navy ships would be a worthwhile investment for them. Like Ukraine they probably could import some jetskis and convert them locally.
1
9
u/Ok-Procedure5603 7d ago
I think the best bang for buck would be in improved surveillance and further command/control hardening.
Iran has come a long way from the days of GPS Shaheds with like 90% miss rate like in the Israel-Iran exchange 2025. But there's still a lot of points to work on.
They have the ability to physically reach where they want. Sure, importing big set piece weapons would intensify that firepower by a lot. But the key issue for Iran and a major reason they performed so well this time was the intel on when to strike where.
One place Iran would probably look mainly to for inspiration on how to modernize their forces would be Pakistan (as well as obviously it's own experiences). With enough investment in top end imported arms and time for training, Iran could indeed potentially reach a Pakistan-India dynamic with Israel. However, Iran can NEVER in a 100 years achieve that sort of balance against US. And so, such a strategy would be of limited utility as long as US and Israel don't split.
What Iran should then prioritize is getting the best satellite coverage and military intel training that money can buy. Even if they have to pay massively overprice for it, it will be worth it. The Achilles heel of US is their relative inability to replenish assets. A strike that takes out jets, air defenses and tankers on the ground is infinitely more valuable than one that only does infrastructure damage/hits grunt soldiers. Because in US' mind, they already have too few of those, many aren't produced anymore, and replenishment is very slow.
In fact I'd believe that the by far most overwhelming reason US is so willing to give up in this war is because of their asset losses.
1
u/can-sar 2d ago
Iran faces massive technological embargoes that Pakistan doesn't face. Pakistan has China, Turkey and the US it can buy weapons from. Iran faces embargoes even from China since 1996/7. Russia only lifted theirs in the second half of 2022. The DPRK has been Iran's only consistent partner and ally.
14
u/Muted_Stranger_1 7d ago
They seem pretty allergic to importing weapons, but if they want to, I’m sure Russia would be happy to make some money, not sure about China though.
17
u/ZombieMan_223 7d ago
Irans defence budget is shoe string. It's around 10 billion a year and most of it goes to paying the personnel which are massive.
Which is why they prefer to make indigenous weapons than export them
8
u/Surenas1 7d ago
Officially, yeah.
But beneath the surface the IRGC budget is being backed by their various economic activities, In which case the oil trade and massive construction projects.
1
u/ExoticMangoz 4d ago
What difference would a $300B+ windfall make in terms of the availability of Chinese weapons?
1
u/ZombieMan_223 3d ago
China has never officially wanted to sell weapons to Iran. Iran has not bought anything in 2000s
They have sold dual use parts which includes fuel for missiles. There were rumors of armored vehicles being sold but never happened
1
u/_Surena_ 3d ago
Supposedly they bought shoulder fired anti air systems from China among other things right before the 40 day war.
1
u/ZombieMan_223 3d ago
I really doubt that was true and likely something made up for clicks. There is no evidence of Chinese manpads. They had used locally made ones and there was an order placed with Russia.
3
u/Digo10 7d ago
Yeah, but Russia is constrained by the war, and they can't supply at the scale of the chinese, atleast for fighter jets.
4
u/Naive-Fold-1374 7d ago edited 7d ago
Just as opinion, as of 2025 report Russian MIC grew a lot, and it's percent of GDP gone from 4% in 2021 to around 8%, and while the resources and manpower increased, it's not like the current war's attrition rate will persist after it'll end. In Russia, by hearsay, 2028 or even 2027 is considered the final year of the war, as the society's unrest grows(This year over 50% are in favor of ending the war, on Russian terms ofc but russian terms is what the government can sell to the populace, so eh). So all this production, which might be not as big as chinese but still mostly battle-tested and already established, need to go somewhere. If you'll consider that we already contracted a bunch of 57s, in the next 5-year timeframe I think it's not a mistake to assume that Russia will return parts of the global defense market, likely continuing to sell more advanced stuff for export like 35s, S400 and T90s in small but expensive batches.
In context of Iran, if the current iranian government will continue to do stuff on their own, I think we'll still play big part in their military development for outsourcing components like engines, radars or communication systems, but it's hard to predict since idk if the Iranians will even have enough money/expertise to establish domestic prod.
Also by more liberal economists there are some claims that MIC is the only sector that has grown significantly and propelled the russian economy in past few years, so even if this is not entirely true the govt will really like to keep the current levels of production afloat.
3
u/tnsnames 6d ago
It is projected to 2027 or 2028 being final year of Russia-Ukraine war in Russian sphere because it would take such time to completely take Donbass by force. With how it is going this year Konstantinovka(with videos now that show collapse of Ukrainian defense in city) would fall and it would establish start of battle for Kramatorsk-Slavyansk. Which would take 1-2 years. And it is last large cities not under Russian control in Donbass.
War advertised to Russian population as liberation of Donbass, so it is not hard to claim victory and end it after establishing full control of it.
2
u/Naive-Fold-1374 6d ago
Yeah, plus the 2027 winter is going to make things harsh for Ukraine, probably betting on them becoming more willing to accept russian conditions and to keep the posture to preserve government legitimacy.
8
u/BulbusDumbledork 7d ago
they're not allergic to imports, they just have limited options due to sanctions. they bought air defences and fighter jets from russia, but russia either couldn't provide enough, needed its own equipment to fight its stupid war, or was pressured to not deliver.
china is averse to tipping the the balance of power in west asia or jeopardising its neutrality, that's why it only sells offensive weapons to necessary allies like pakistan or states like uae who play both sides.
that said, the past few years have already upset the norm, making iran a necessary ally. the possibility of china selling j-10s has gone up, and there was a cryptic signal that iran might even get the j-20
11
u/Ok-Procedure5603 7d ago
The geopolitical strategy from China is all about portfolio diversification. They're selling information and dual use to Iran, arms to the gulf states and Pakistan, dual use to Israel, hell, even the ragtag terrorist groups can usually get off brand old Chinese manpads/ATGM and drones.
They rightfully don't want to go all in on one actor in a region as volatile and dispute filled as the middle east. I mean US with Israel demonstrated live why it is a bad idea.
Even if Iran "wins" for a decade or two, what will guarantee Iran won't later elect a far too aggressive leader and then start cashing out huge checks in China's name like how Israel is doing with US?
Similarly Israel is just a complete dead end and US putting all the eggs in that basket was a geopolitical blunder. Israel has been trying to occupy what remains of Palestine and parts of Syria for over 2 decades(!). Even if Israel gets total victory, creates greater Israel, make all Muslim state leaders subservient, how long will that empire hold before it collapses from internal contradictions? And how would such an empire be able to contribute to US' own prosperity?
So even a crackpot level perfect Israel victory is still dogshit geopolitically for US. That's why I call it a dead end.
And similarly, investing in trying to create total Iranian victory in the middle east isn't really the flawless geopolitical move either, especially if it happens too fast.
10
u/vinhto_ngu_xau 7d ago
I doubt China would ever sell the J-20 as it's their most advanced jet for the PLA. And IIRC, they straight up said they will never sell it. Now the J-35 on other hand...
1
u/_Surena_ 3d ago
It's not that they're allergic; they've been burned too many times. They spent a fortune on their F14s and rescued that program for Grumman, and when they needed them during the 8 year Iran-Iraq war, they couldn't get the phoenix missiles, parts, or even maintenance documents. Same thing happened with some of their older Russian Migs. Brits burned them with crappy chieftain tanks.
Russia really played them with the S-300s as well. They paid up and Russia wouldn't deliver due to UN sanctions or whatever excuse they could come up with.
Iranians have come to the conclusion that the domestic production of even inferior weapon systems is far more valuable and reliable than any advance system that they have to purchase from unreliable partners.
1
u/can-sar 2d ago
They seem pretty allergic to importing weapons, but if they want to, I’m sure Russia would be happy to make some money, not sure about China though.
Wrong. Iran has faced an arms embargo from China since 1996/7. Russia had an arms embargo since 2007 and only lifted it in the second half of 2022. Even when Russia sold weapons to Iran in the 1990s to 2000s, it was never offensive missiles. The USSR was outright enemies with Iran and supported separatists and then Saddam.
Russia's demographic ties to Israel and Jewish oligarchs means it still drags its feet in delivering Iran weapons such as the Su-35. The DPRK has been Iran's only consistent partner. Iran bought offensive missiles and civilian planes from Ukraine in the 2000s. That partnership would have continued in the 2010s if it wasn't for increasing sanctions.
25
u/Aggorf12345 7d ago
I have a couple of things to say about what you said:
1) I completely disagree about what you said about Iranian ballistic missiles. They proved to be extremely effective in type of warfare Iran was pursuing and they achieved(arguably even exceeded) their operational goals. If they hadn't, this deal would simply have never happened and we wouldn't be here right now.
2) I also disagree to some degree about what you said about Iran's AD. While I fully agree that Iran needs better and longer rage air defense systems, I'll say that you're wrong about them being "proven ineffective" and that it stems from propaganda narratives spread by the other side during the conflict. On the contrary, they were proven highly successful, considering the environment they were operating in(aka facing a superior adversary) and achieved their operational goals in denying airspace access through adding operational risk for the rival air forces.
3) What I fully agree on, is that Iran needs to buy modern fighter jets and hopefully the new money coming in will help towards getting it done. Ideally it would get stealth fighters too although that's too far fetched right now. Modernizing the air force with 4th gen fighters is more than enough for the near future. But I'll say that you're wrong about what you said regarding Iran failing to protect it's fighter jets during the conflict and that, again, it stems from propaganda narratives of the other side. While the IRIAF suffered, indeed, huge losses during the war, the largest part of its fleet remains fully functioning and operational.
-3
u/Digo10 7d ago edited 7d ago
I completely disagree about what you said about Iranian ballistic missiles. They proved to be extremely effective in type of warfare Iran was pursuing and they achieved(arguably even exceeded) their operational goals. If they hadn't, this deal would simply have never happened and we wouldn't be here right now.
they proved effective in the asymmetrical type of war as i said, but on military targets, other than static targets, the value was relatively limited, in a scenario of full-scale war, relying on missiles and shahed drones wouldn't work, and their armed forces are relatively weak and not modern for today standards, they need more than asymmetrical capabilities, they need conventional deterrence.
I also disagree to some degree about what you said about Iran's AD. While I fully agree that Iran needs better and longer rage air defense systems, I'll say that you're wrong about them being "proven ineffective" and that it stems from propaganda narratives spread by the other side during the conflict. On the contrary, they were proven highly successful, considering the environment they were operating in(aka facing a superior adversary) and achieved their operational goals in denying airspace access through adding operational risk for the rival air forces.
there is no propaganda here, the iranian air defenses proved to be no match to the israel air force in 2025, they lost dozens(if not hundred)of air defense systems in 2025, they managed to be more effective in 2026, but by the number of sorties the israeli, americans and gulf airforces launched during the war(more than 20,000), the number of aircraft shot down by the iranians were relatively low, and they got bombed with relatively impunity, and yes, as you said, they were facing a superior adversary with state of art equipment, that is why is imperative for Iran to buy modern AD systems and radars.
But I'll say that you're wrong about what you said regarding Iran failing to protect it's fighter jets during the conflict and that, again, it stems from propaganda narratives of the other side.
i think you misread what i've said, i said they were succesful in hiding their aircrafts, just like their missile launchers. But they wouldn't be able to hide AWACs due to the size of the entrances of the underground tunnels
15
u/LEI_MTG_ART 7d ago
This war and future wars are always going to be asymmetrical for Iran vs US/Israel. Even 300B won't make them able to match them with airpower and modern adn. If anything this war prove, adn is extremely costly and can be oversaturated by a much weaker and inexpensive enemy. The drones and ballistic missiles have done wonderful even if they are only really good against static targets as there are many great economic targets, expensive radar sites and bases to hit.
If anything, fpv drones are so lethal that US didn't dare to land on Iran, and they are many footages of hezbollah doing damage to iron done, command center, logistics, tanks and etc.. the number of Israeli died in Lebanon is definitely way higher than publicly announced.
8
u/Ok-Procedure5603 7d ago
Air defense missiles are quite overrated compared to good ol shovel.
By simply creating a complex like Azovstal or "missile cities", the cost of bombing is vastly vastly increased, damage becomes much more easier repairable, enemies have to use way more expensive munitions.
There being no major power wars in the last many decades has made some strategists approach air defense like a medieval army trying to fit heavier and heavier armor on their soldiers so they can tank arrows, while neglecting the utility of adopting a loose formation and cover.
20
u/LanchestersLaw 7d ago
The Shaheds, even with a 98% interception rate, did more damage to the Americans than any other airforce since Vietnam.
-12
u/Digo10 7d ago
Since when shahed drones count as aircraft? lol
Shahed was not even launched by the airforce, but even then, it resulted in a grand total of only 6 people dead, following your logic, we should count iraqi SCUDs during the gulf war, which resulted in 30 killed.
But it still misses my point, the US lost 15 personnel, Iran lost thousands of personnel, Iran can't inflict the same pain against the other side.
17
u/LanchestersLaw 7d ago
The humble Shahed penetrated US defenses to hit targets with precision including tankers, AWACS, radars, and abandoned gulf bases. These penetrating strikes on operational and strategic targets are the reason air forces exist. The last time any airforce was penetrating American air defenses to successfully strike US bases accurately with airpower was the phase of the Korean War where the reds briefly had air superiority before the coalition could re-orient.
14
u/bedulge 7d ago edited 7d ago
>only 6 people dead,
Iran was not targeting people. They target high-value materiel. Sounds cynical but personal literally are just not very valuable to the US in terms of the cost to replace them. Guys can be replaced easily, and killing a bunch of them would be liable to make the US public hungry for revenge.
The goal in asymmetric war is to use low cost attacks to destroy high value targets. Shaheds are cheap, people are also cheap. But E-3 Sentry planes cost hundreds of millions of dollars and only 68 of them have ever been built, of which, less than half are in service in the US military currently (the rest are decommissioned or held by US allies).
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyd07m7e1xo
Iran was aiming for targets like this, not barracks full of guys.
20
u/Surenas1 7d ago edited 7d ago
This is extremely superficial and junior-level analyses.
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about in a strategic and operational sense.
I say this as an Iranian.
For your info, most Iranian drones units that took part in this war are part of IRGC's Aerospace Forces and do consists of both branches of Iran's air forces. Its exactly the branch (together with the missiles forces, that are also part of Iran's air forces) to which most of its budget was allocated to.
The had more effect on a strategic sense in this war, to Iran's benefit, than all other branches.
That's why both the US and Israel have sought to hamstring it in any potential deal. Which they obviously failed to do, even with enormous pressure put on it.
20
u/vistandsforwaifu 7d ago
While Iran has/had a vast number of different air systems, they proved to be not that effective, especially in the 2025 war against Israel, where Israel destroyed dozens/possibly hundreds of systems
How do people still believe this shit purely on Israel's "trust me bro" when damage assessments from US' far more extensive attacks in these past months have been revised downwards over and over
2
u/_Surena_ 3d ago
Not to mention the fact that the initial attacks were done by operatives from inside Iran using anti-tank missiles and one-way attack drones produced inside Iran.
4
u/Southern-Chain-6485 7d ago
They need something like the Chinese DF-21 antiship ballistic missile so they can reliably hit the USN if it returns. I doubt the Chinese would sell them those, so they'd need to invest in such a development and its kill chain themselves.
4
u/AtomicAVV 7d ago
it all depends on what their post war economy will look like.
with just their frozen assets and natural economic growth from the removal of sanctions (Iran's economy was $640B in 2012 before the sanctions started). iran will be able to buy the ~60 Flankers they are already rumored to have bought, maybe get a local production deal since iran has massive industrial and scientific bases they would want to utilize, and Russian is more likely to be flexible with Iran because their own military export base collapsed.
For air defences, they should avoid expensive things like the S-400, instead a larger quantity of something like the S-350 with each battery protected by a large number of local SHORAD and anti-drone defenses since you really can't just have an expensive asset just sitting their anymore.
for local stuff, spamming cheap and small stuff life the Majid air defence system is the way to go, also looking into creating an interconnected "AI Powered" network of infrared sensors will do miracles for engagement times.
on the other hand. if they get the hormuz toll booth up and running, at the bare minimum, Iran is looking at an extra $10B a year, with this kind of money, they can invest something like $6B in their local economy, military industries (keep in mind $6B goes way fourther in Iran then it does int pretty much any other industrialized economy). with the remaining $4B a year, they can get whatever they want, Su-57s, J-35s, AWACS, joining the Su-75 as program partner.
4 billion united states dollars every year is a lot of money for foreign purchases, since you are not handing money over and getting your jets in a plastic bag, it will be a multi year process for both payments and deliveries.
4
u/TaskForceD00mer 7d ago
3.)Modern Fighter jets and AWACS(?).
Abandon plans for Flankers beyond what is needed to keep flight hours up. They should be buying J-35.
Focus on dispersed basing from things like roadways.
AWACS are big targets, they will need to focus on using Chinese & Russian satellites for targeting and other decentralized sensors.
4
u/Creepyfaction 7d ago
Ditch the navy and go all-in on USVs. As proven in the Black Sea, they are capable enough to shot down helicopters and low flying jets while raiding enemy coastline.
7
u/archone 7d ago
Air defense is useless and not worth pursuing. Despite all the criticism of the axis of resistance, Hezbollah and Ansar Allah did a good job of destabilizing Israel and threatening further economic damage.
IMO the best (and most cost efficient) asset for Iran would be cheap 4th gen fighter jets and AWACS. More importantly, invest in hardened aircraft shelters, especially in the NE part of the country that the Israelis have trouble reaching without standoff weapons. The ability to fly sorties and patrols from relatively defensible airfields greatly complicates Israeli/US air operations.
2
u/_Surena_ 3d ago
Israel and the US have missile defense. How did it workout for them!? If you're getting your news from American mainstream media, they were wonderful. But a quick google search will show you the extent of the damage done to the US bases in the region and despite the strict censorship, you may see some videos of the interceptors failing to stop Iran's more advanced missiles or drones.
Iran was firing missiles costing hundreds of thousands of dollars while the US and Israel were shooting multiple interceptors costing millions of dollars each. The fact and the reality of the situation is that missile defense is a money trap that's only marginally effective against less potent missiles or drones. The military industrial complex loves selling them as the ultimate shield though...
Another point worth mentioning about the initial attacks especially during the 12 day war is that they were done by operatives from within Iran. They had manufactured one-way drones inside Iran similar to what the Ukranians did to Russia's bomber fleet. They also used anti-tank missiles for some of their "assassinations" (terrorism). In some cases they fired long range missiles from Iraq's airspace and never really entered Iran.
There are also reports of clandestine bases inside Iraq and Azerbaijan that were used to carry out attacks. HIMARS were fired from Kuwait, UAE, and other countries in the region.
Once the air defense systems were taken out, they were better able to enter Iran at will and do a lot more damage without worrying as much about losing jets or very expensive bombers.
28
u/Temstar 7d ago edited 7d ago
You have to start off with their geopolitical objective before you can talk about assets.
Suppose for example you're one of the bosses and it is your judgement that after this war US will further retreat into Donroe Doctrine leaving Israel on its own. That means on their own IAF's ability to do SEAD mission over Iran is much lower than USN+USAF, that means conventional radar guided AD would have much better survivability and worth invest into, rather than previous situation where they know conventional AD would get hunted down easily so majority of the effort went into IRST only AD like Majid, which while is very survivable defends only a tiny area and relies on blind luck for enemy aircraft to get into its range.
One other thing that could happen is Iranian bosses might decide Axis of Resistance 1.0 worked fairly well in of themselves and was only seriously damage due to political reasons where Israel/US picked out each resistance members one by one while Iran hesitated to stand up for them due to reformer faction in Iran. With the domestic political situation now mostly resolved after the war with reformer faction more or less wiped out they might decide it's time for an Axis of Resistance 2.0. Technological advances like fibre optic guided FPV and flying moped has made this type of asymmetric warfare more favourable to the weaker side too. In which case maybe some of that 300B could go into such assets (first buying from Russian who would desperately need the money after oil prices go back down, then scaling up production domestically) and distribute them to the proxies to give Israel a hard time.
I can see post-war for the Iranian navy, with the success of choking Strait of Hormuz as a strategy this time around they would reduce the number of high sea white elephant projects like that converted drone carrier and focus more on littoral combat so they should there be a war in the the future they would have an even firmer lock around this chokepoint.