Sunday, May 11, 2014

IRGC-ASF 'Exhibition of Achievement'

High-profile attendee Supreme Leader of Iran Ali Khamenei makes forceful impression against inclusion of IRGC-ASF ballistic missiles into nuclear deal with West.

"They expect us to limit our missile program while they constantly threaten Iran with military action," Khamenei was quoted as telling the IRNA news agency while using a well publicized IRGC-ASF "Exhibition of Achievement" as backdrop.

He added "So this is a doltish expectation ... The revolutionary guards should definitely carry out their program and not be satisfied with the present level. They should mass produce This is a main duty of all military officials."

Below are Iranian media photos of weapon types and military equipment put on display at the IRGC-ASF "Exhibition of Achievement," including Iranian renderings of the captured American RQ-170 Sentinel UAV:

Left, back to front:
- Hormuz ballistic missile launcher
- Zelzal short-range ballistic missile fitted with "Rainy" type cluster warhead
- Hormuz 2 anti-ship ballistic missile
- Fajr-5 ballistic missile
- "Raad 301" JDAM equivalent
- "Ya Ali" cruise missile (at bottom right)

Left, back to front:
- Hormuz ballistic missile launcher
- Zelzal short-range ballistic missile fitted with "Rainy" type cluster warhead
- Hormuz 2 anti-ship ballistic missile
- Fajr-5 ballistic missile
- "Raad 301" JDAM equivalent

Right, back to front
- Aerospace Industries Organization (AIO) ballistic missile display
- "Ya Ali" land-attack cruise missile 

Foreground: Detail of "Ya Ali" land-attack cruise missile

Hormuz 1/2 ballistic missile mobile launcher

Hormuz 1/2 ballistic missile mobile launcher

Left: Iranian rendering of Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel unmanned aerial vehicle
Right: captured Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel unmanned aerial vehicle
Note smaller flying wing type model at center

Iranian rendering of Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel unmanned aerial vehicle

"3rd of Khordad" air defence system with Taer-2B missiles

Tabas air defense system with Taer-2A missiles

Raad air defense system

Left: newly adapted wheeled-type transporter erector launcher (TEL) for Raad air defense system 

Background, center: outdoor exhibit of modified 2K12 Kub mobile surface-to-air missile system

Shahid 129 unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV)

Shahid 129 unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV) armament display

IRGC-AF HESA Shahed 285 light attack/reconnaissance helicopter

Iranian manufactured Wankel rotary engine types for UAV applications

Outdoor display of radar and electro-optical equipment

Video, IRINN:

Photo credits:, and Fars News Agency


Anonymous said...

Do western demands, regarding Iranian missiles, envision limitations or cancellation Iranian space research too ??


Nader Uskowi said...

I’ve been following the issue of sanctions against Iran since they began after Ahmadinejad came to power. After UN Security Council, which includes Russia and China, passed the sanctions resolutions, Ahmadinejad called them “torn pieces of paper.” Khamenei supported Ahmadinejad wholeheartedly during those “revolutionary” years. This lowly blogger always worried about that cavalier attitude and argued that the sanctions by the UN will come back and haunt the country.

Now Iran and P5+1 are at a stage to draft a final agreement, hopefully before the 20 July deadline. The agreement must include the lifting of all UN resolutions, those “ torn pieces of paper” as Ahmadinejad put it, and they include UNSC Resolution 1929, which prohibits Iran from developing specific types of ballistic missiles. That resolution is in force now, it's not a torn piece of paper, and needs to be handled, one way or another.

This blogger believes that the best way of handling the ballistic missile issue is an agreement to discuss and resolve the issue outside the current nuclear talks. But absence such agreement, the two sides need to address it within the current talks. Khamenei is wrong in giving the impression that the issue is non-relevant. Let’s hope that cooler heads prevail and we will have a comprehensive final agreement by 20 July.

Mark Pyruz said...

Most direct signal to date of Iran's position on IRGC-ASF ballistic missiles, and the ongoing nuclear negotiations.

The Iranian perspective is readily discerned. The deterrence from attack provided by these weapon systems is just too vital and sensitive for SL branch of IRIG and IRGC to potentially degrade.

Also, it appears the Iranian position as put forward by executive branch of IRIG is a nuclear deal that allays West's concerns on potential weaponization of Iran's nuclear program renders moot the possibility of nuclear weaponization on Iran's ballistic missile systems.

I agree, Nader, hopefully the diplomats can get through this.

Anonymous said...

they are doing this to undermine the nuclear negotiations which are to start this week after the defeat of delvapasim campaign which left the basiji and payedari forces humiliated the house of Khamenei and pasdaran who are making billions from sanction busting illegal activities made a provocative move to get a reaction from the US.
Who in their right mind would reveal the capability to sink us aircraft carrier (assuming they have this capability). In asymmetric warfare the weaker side has only got the element of surprise.

Anonymous said...

as Ayatollah khamenire said
you should make a mass-production
prot-type is not enough

Nader Uskowi said...

Mark, the solution could be found in your comments: Iran's option not to pursue nuclear weapons renders moot the need to develop long-range and intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Piruz Mollazadeh said...

But Uskowi, how else would Iran be able to retaliate in case hostilities start? You know Iran doesn't have good jet fighters and that ballistic missiles are much more economical in addition to the fact that they are much faster (about 10 times faster than an F-16) and thus more formidable (in case they're accurate, of course, which we know they are).

Khamenei is right, so far the main thing that has deterred an Israeli-U.S strike against Iranian nuclear facilities is the fact that Iran possesses a huge arsenal of ballistic missiles that can target strategic military and economic infrastructure. Now Iran has to give that up too?

Forget the legal issues at the U.N or the ongoing negotiations. Do you think Iran CAN limit its main retaliatory capability? I think those who wish for the negotiations to fail will try very hard to press this issue because they know it's an IRGC red line.

Nader Uskowi said...

The discussion here was on LRBM and ICBMs. No country builds an ICBM to deliver non-nuclear explosives, that's not what they are used for. As long Iran says it has opted out of nuclear weapons, there shouldn't be any practical needs for long-range and intercontinental ballistic missiles. What they have now are short and medium range missiles.

Anonymous said...

Agree with Nader, ending development or at least intentions of doing so on the part of the Iranian defense ministry provides the country with a much-needed dual advantage that will bring it breathing room in further negotiations of any sort with regards to WMD proliferation in the Middle-East

Indeed, officially ratifying all relevant protocols in revoking such dimension of its weapons program unquestionably alleviates concerns for all parties present at the P5+1 and beyond, allies and adversaries alike vis-a-vis Iran's perceived aggressiveness embedded into its military doctrine and makes clear of the lines surrounding its defense arsenal between deterrence and offensive capabilities.

Such decision would certainly give credit and subsequently fortify and encourage Chinese & specially Russian efforts in opposing anyone's attempts to manipulate the language and tone of a final agreement in order to extend limitations beyond the ICBM range of Iran's missile, testimony to that was their recent opposition to repeated US initiatives in trying to call for UN Resolutions condemning every single Iranian missile tests so far no matter the range of the assets fielded, and will circumvent future efforts in doing so for Iran's future generations of MRBMs and SRBMs which are for now a critical requirement for its defense doctrine and a pillar of its deterrent force until they can gradually replace it with a locally developed fighter jet that would grant them viable replenishment possibilities for their upgraded though aging air-force fleet.

Further, it strips any potential regional adversary of its main argument currently making the case for maintaining their own WMD program and arsenal, countries such as Israel and their several hundred strong nuclear arsenal supported by a robust ICBM inventory regularly tested in the Mediterranean, and de-facto voiding its never ending rhetorical speeches against its Iranian foe, eventually paving the way for the international community to create the necessary conditions in bringing every single military power of the region to the table in Nuclear-Free ME discussions, initiatives so far supported by Arab States and Iran, but systematically resisted and rejected by the US and Israel opting for the empty chair policy at every conference when they cannot outright cancel it.

In order for any agreement to remain in force and keep credibility in regards to International Law, such double-standards will necessarily have to be addressed, and Iran's best bet would be to call precisely for that, considering the Syrian have relinquished their whole strategic arsenal of Chemical Weapons, it would only be a logical next step for just another good news for non-proliferation in such as hot and unstable, troubled zone.


(not to be confused with another participant posting under the name "+A")

Anonymous said...

The stuff they are showing off (air defence capability, missiles, radar evading drones, etc,...) providing that they exist, would have been top secret information during the cold war. The conflict is not (and has never been) between Iran and the world. It is and has been between factions within Iran. The Outcome of hostage taking, Iran-Iraq war and relations with America/nuclear issue should be seen in the same light. Khamenei, Pasdaran, Basiji and Hizbullah prefer limited political and military defeat in the hand of America / Israel that they can blame on treachery of reformers or incapability of Rouhani.
If one reads Basij and Sepah's mission statements you will notice there is no mention of Iran. They are parasitic entities which use the resources of Iran to effect world wide Islamic revolution (the original al-ghaeda)

Anonymous said...

" - A "

You have written lots of words, but can you something say what are the relations between all those Iranian ICBMs and MRBMs' possibilities and rockets (missiles) used for the Iranian space program ??

Are those carriers independent, or they are alltogether restricted by that 1929 UN resolution too ??.

As I remember, US officials including Victoria Nuland, reacted angrily to the Iranian space launches in the past, saying that they violate ....something...


Anonymous said...

Nader UskowiMay 12, 2014 at 10:04 AM
Theres just one problem with that argument,it does not take into account irans rights and needs to develop satellite launchers,in many ways its little different to the policy of "nuclear apartheid" in that it seeks to limit irans right to develop various technologies,we saw the exact same stupid game being played with the dprk over its development of satellite launchers that were deemed by the un to be disguised icbm tests,you are also wrong about icbms being used for the carriage of non nuclear payloads both the soviets and the us seriously considered using them for the carriage of chem/bio and in the case of the us using submarine launched icmbs "prompt global strike" trident missiles carrying either explosive or kinetic warheads.A better argument would be this:since iran possesses no nuclear warheads none of its missiles are therefore nuclear capable and so no limits on range or type need be applied.I guess it all comes down to how badly the us wants a deal,it can have one on nukes but not nukes and missiles or it could have no deal and face an iran armed with an increasingly credible japan option and the delivery systems to go along with it,its their choice.The other option is simply agree to disagree and leave the missile/launcher matter unresolved,so long as the sanctions are lifted as part of any nuclear deal then the rest really just is "torn pieces of paper"

Nader Uskowi said...

There are ways to distinguish LRBM and ICBM production from civilian space program-related launchers. If that was the only concern, it could be resolved. Chemical/bio payload, as referenced in your comments, are also considered WMD, along with nuclear.

The best way to reach an agreement is to examine the needs of the country. If it has decided not to build nuclear weapons, by definition it would not need long-range and intercontinental ballistic missile. This is not a matter of apartheid, but needs-basis requirements, or lack of, during these negotiations.

Anonymous said...


As I said in the post you're referring to, taking official, concrete and verifiable steps by the Iranian government in order to curtail exclusively military R&D and associated applications to ICBMs possesses by itself the quality of nullifying such voluntarily abusive amalgams by the likes of typical Iran haters such as Mrs. Nuland within the American political apparatus, and leaves them with no other option than to openly oppose progress within Iran's scientific community, a stance that of course would be impossible to sustain in an official quality, and this by demonstrating and an undeniable and unquestionable way that all infrastructures, technologies and institutions linked to the Iranian Space program are limited to their civilian space program. Without entering into detail, and as Nader said above, there are ways to discriminate positively between the two.

The very same hostile strategy was adopted again the USSR itself during the old days of the (first) Cold War back in the 50s, and every Soviet Space Program achievement was angrily labelled as a front cover for military development and dismissed by the State Department as yet another proof of Russian viciousness in trying to prepare for a nuclear holocaust on the US mainland, in all classical fashion of American inability to either acknowledge or accept competition from geopolitical foes. With a little political cunning, deflating such attacks can indeed prove to be a relatively easy task provided the victim of those allegations genuinely has no intentions to make dual-use of their civilian aerospace tech( which was neither the case of the USSR or the US itself by then).

SO long as a final agreement isn't inked by the negotiating parties and the Iranian space and defense program have no official status in regards to international bodies, there will be space left for the likes of Nulland and other "let's bomb Iran" hawks to cry in anger at Iran's advancements and try to impede that every step of the way.

Hope that helps addressing your question based on my personal opinion.


Anonymous said...

Mr. Uskowi: Respectfully disagree with your assessment on ICBMs value as a military tool. If LOng range ballistic missiles can be accurate enough, then it's value as a precision target vehicle is enormous in any conflict. C&C centers, and other high value targets can be destroyed and removed. As a matter of fact their value is even higher than WMDs as those are meant to be more of weapon of Terror.

Anonymous said...

If gen. Hajizadegh (commander of the IRGC - ASF) has smile on his face, it means that things and matters go well ..............for the Iranian military.