Throughout history the most common reasons for Iranian military defeats have come from playing the game of the enemy. Whether it was Greece or the Mongol, both we tried to fight their game, their strengths and lost and paid a deep price for it. In the case of the Greeks who had better equipment than us, utilizing bronze for their shields while Persians largely had wicker shields, or the Mongols, leaving the fortified cities and fighting them in the open. Terrible.
Therefore the thought process is not to play the game of the enemy, but to force them to play our game. This is the IRGC thought process. The basis of Iran's naval strategy is A2AD (Anti-access , area denial) and using every available means of technology to enhance it.
You can't expect Pakistan or Iran to go head-to-head with their opponents in the same game. They will always have more tanks, more tech, more ships, it's just something that has to be accepted at this moment. Aligning your priorities and weapons together is the key rather than just building things that everyone else has or what is "traditional".
View attachment 838953
For Iran, we can never compete with NATO or USA with a surface fleet, and I reckon especially in the future, the same will be true with Pakistan and India. The most important part for both countries is to force each respective nation away from it's ports and seas. In the case of Pakistan, you must never ever allow the Indian navy the capacity to blockade all of Pakistan ports. This is extremely detrimental during war time. Just observe Ukraine. The zone of which you want to expand your A2AD is important. In order to protect shipping, Pakistan must develop the capability for land-based anti-shipping at very long ranges.
View attachment 838956 View attachment 838957
Forcing them to dedicate naval assets to protect their oil/gas imports which leaves their navy at risk of missile salvos.
You want them to fear coming within 700km of your shores. The result of this is 10s of billions of dollars of Indian investment, rendered useless in their role because of their fear of being targeted forcing them to stay back. This range is also strategically important as it cuts of India's oil imports. In the case of Iran; Iran is so adamant about this, they are working on 2000km anti-shipping missiles, we haven't seen videos of it, but its something that is either successfully complete or seriously perused. For instance after the assassination of Soleimani, the US evacuated its surface fleets into the Arabian sea. Why would a superpower do such things when dealing with a country like Iran. Similar strategy employed by China. Forcing the US away from Taiwan and Japan with 2000km range missiles. Even with Chinas expansive blue water capabilities they still invest in this capability of anti-shipping missiles.
Their are other strategies that fall under the A2AD umbrella. Extensive production and investment into UAVs and both UAV swarms and waves that is being employed by Iran. Use of UAVs to monitor shipping and collecting visual details about the ships and using large quantities of loitering munitions' to once again, in both physical and psychological generate fear and concern about an impending UAS swarm. One of Iran's commander after unveiling a drone base, said they can launch 60 loitering munitions in a swarm simultaneously from the base, before reloading for the next round. In this day and age, Pakistan should be looking for lethal but low-cost strategies to counter their opponents. A small loitering munition with a weak warhead is very dangerous for a ships sensitive electronics. Communication is not required at all time as image recognition software can allow it to act completely passively. The details of which, you collect when monitoring their ships in peacetime.
View attachment 838958 View attachment 838959
Durability and survivability of inventory cannot be overstated against a superior enemy (on paper). The one thing people fail to consider is both logistics and inventory. Most countries have a very thin inventory of premium weapons before fighting like its the 1914s again. Iran intelligently recognizes the danger of enemy airpower and has buried it's stockpiles in tunnel networks and mountains. Tunnel networks will never bee fully known but the entrances may be found. They would also be vehicle capable and can be safely reloaded underground. The stockpile in one location may be disabled for a period of time, but never destroyed. The launchers are also protected as the network is presumably deep enough to protect from earth penetrators,
Part of survivability is condensing firepower into a normal truck that can be masked as a civilian truck. Iran has through magic achieved a tri-launch TEL that looks like a normal civilian truck. Short of killing every truck, it will not be possible for the opponent to know if this truck is civilian or military unless it fires. Losing equipment is not like the old days, you cannot just make more anti-shipping missiles and launchers, therefore if your airspace if vulnerable, your main option is to harden to avoid a first-strike catastrophe where your inventory is destroyed. The US no longer confronts Iran inside the PG, because even with their incredible ISR capability, the danger of 10, road-mobile, civilian masked tri-launcher anti-shipping BMs -> 30 missiles salvo, is much too high... among other problems. Taiwan also employs this strategy. Using stationary or mobile civilian shipping containers for anti-shipping. You want to deny India from doing what China wants to do to Taiwan. Full naval blockade. That is their main focus, and they will relentlessly attack your anti-shipping capabilities to do so.
View attachment 838960View attachment 838962View attachment 838963
Note how everything vehicle based is derived under disguise, deception.
Some of the other strategies are specific to Iran's situations like speed boats these are not really useful for Pakistan and I am no longer sure they are useful for Iran as well. Iran has added suicide UAS on top of the boats to enhance it's swarm capability but this is best utilized in the PG, not in blue waters. Strategies also involved loitering torpedo's and mines but that is again useful for the PG and not for blue waters.
One of the interesting things the IRGC is doing is building a surface fleet. They are building 3 large catamarans simultaneously, low RCS design, fast and low footprint. Very smooth body structure. It's not clear exactly how they will use them, but it does indicate they are very confident in their A2AD strategy that they can safely operate a fleet of missile-slinging ships with the firepower of a modern corvette instead of several large and thus more vulnerable ones. At the end of the day you still need a Navy, but larger number of smaller ships under the missile umbrella should deny any country from using the sea to their advantage without paying a high price. The PNS Tabuk I see is a good idea and more should be built. Pakistan doesn't need to fight wars 5000km away, it needs power in the Arabian sea to protect its own shipping and it's surrounding areas, and the corvettes should be sufficient in range to do that while also avoiding a blue-water fight as you've pressured their fleet to withdraw far from your borders..
) که تقصیر نداره. اما آگاهه و به صحبتها عمق میده. دست از سرش برذار.
