What's new

What Iran’s Attacks on American Bases Tell Us About China’s Missile Program

Nan Yang

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
May 1, 2010
Messages
5,269
Reaction score
1
Country
Malaysia
Location
Malaysia
What Iran’s Attacks on American Bases Tell Us About China’s Missile Program

For American strategic planners the false belief that Chinese missiles are numerous, but inaccurate, is likely over.

By Christopher K. Colley
February 13, 2020
thediplomat-china-1184107-1920.jpg

Credit: Pixabay
The Iranian missile attack on the American bases in al-Asad and Erbil on January 8 surprised many security experts because of their reported accuracy. Until now, the poor accuracy of Iranian missiles was
considered by some to be a major deficiency in Iran’s conventional arsenal. The missiles’ circular error probable (CEP – the radius within which half of all missiles launched will fall) of most Iranian missiles was believed to be several hundred meters. In other words, these were dangerous weapons, but they lacked the pinpoint precision necessary to hit specific targets on land or at sea. But reports indicate that the latest attacks may have had a CEP as low as 5-10 meters as they succeeded in six direct hits on empty aircraft hangers.

While the advances in Iranian missile accuracy are a worrisome development for the United States and its allies and partners in the Middle East, another key question is what this tells us about the accuracy of China’s ballistic missiles. It is public knowledge that China shared missile technology with Iran for several decades. The Iranian attacks on oil tankers in the late 1980s in the Arabian Gulf during the Iran-Iraq war were attributed to Silkworm missiles that Iran purchased from China. A 2012 Rand report stated that China played a “crucial” role in establishing Iran’s military-industrial sector and is suspected of helping Iran with its ballistic missile technology.

Considering China’s previous assistance to Iran’s missile programs, a reasonable assumption can be made that if Iranian missiles are capable of successfully hitting targets within a few meters, Chinese missiles should be able to equal, if not surpass, Iranian accuracy.

The much-hyped Chinese ballistic missile Dong Fang 26 (DF-26) has been described as a threat to U.S. aircraft carriers and the American base on Guam. Importantly, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ Missile Defense Project, the DF-26 is believed to have a CEP of between 150-450 meters. While this may put bases and population centers at significant risk, it casts doubt on its ability to successfully strike a moving carrier that has an attached battle group designed to protect it.

The reportedly more accurate DF-21D (frequently referred to as the “carrier killer”) is stated to have a CEP of 20 meters. This is a significant upgrade from the older DF-21, which had a CEP of 700 meters, and the DF-21C, which was estimated to have a CEP of 40-50 meters. These low levels of accuracy on the older DF-21s mean that in the event of a shootout, many if not most of them would fail to score a direct impact on their intended moving targets. (This assumes that the missile does not break up into multiple warheads, which can increase the probability of hitting a warship.)

If such levels of precision on the DF-21D are correct, this means that a volley of 10-20 of them fired in tandem with anti-ship cruise missiles launched from ships, fighter-bombers, or submerged Chinese submarines, would have an extremely high chance of scoring several direct hits on an American carrier, or its accompanying warships. This scenario is not new and has been studied by the Pentagon for decades; however, the likely increase in accuracy is new.

Chinese maritime strategists are keen observers of the effects missiles have on naval warfare and on keeping a more powerful force at a safe distance. They have studied in-depth historical cases ranging from the Falklands to the Iran-Iraq War to the 1967 War between Israel and the Arab States, where the Egyptian navy utilized Styx anti-ship missiles to sink an Israeli destroyer. Considering that for several decades Chinese analysts have discussed the possibility of “saturation attacks” of up to 20 missiles at a time, if these missiles are as accurate as Iran’s, the probability of a direct hit on an American carrier is unacceptably high.

The geographical advantage China has over the United States in East Asia compounds the challenges Washington would confront. The Pentagon has reportedly lost 18 of the last 18 simulated war games it played involving conflict with China in the Taiwan Strait. The fact that according to the Pentagon’s most recent assessment of the Chinese military, Beijing has between 980 and 2,110 short-, medium-, and intermediate-range ballistic missiles does not bode well for American surface combatants entering a combat zone with China.
 
. .
China has never provided Iran with a single ballistic missile nor ballistic missile technology. Where is the evidence for such claims? It seems this guy is resorting to fantasies in order to easer the pain Iran caused them by the attack.
north korea and china helped iran with shahab series missiles, after that china heped iran with zelzal rocket engines, in which zelzal itself became bases for fateh missile.
 
. . .
yes that's my point.

i don't know, like any other news i heard it in the past years.

Those are false news. There is zero evidence China ever provided Iran with any ballistic missiles technology. They provided them to the Saudis and even Turks but not Iran. The only missiles the Chinese provided Iran were the C-802 type cruise missile series, but in the end, Iran had to develop its own engines and seekers for those missiles too.

So this article is resorting to misinformation. Fake news is the bread and butter of these Americans these days. Facts mean nothing to them. As long as they can create a narrative, they'll just invent the "facts" to go with it,
 
.
Those are false news. There is zero evidence China ever provided Iran with any ballistic missiles technology. They provided them to the Saudis and even Turks but not Iran. The only missiles the Chinese provided Iran were the C-802 type cruise missile series, but in the end, Iran had to develop its own engines and seekers for those missiles too.

So this article is resorting to misinformation. Fake news is the bread and butter of these Americans these days. Facts mean nothing to them. As long as they can create a narrative, they'll just invent the "facts" to go with it,
That noor missile is said to be C602
 
. . .
I highly doubt Iranian missile program was without any Chinese assistance. It's just hard to believe it.

The question is where is any hard evidence to suggest this? Especially what we're talking about here is the actual transfer of major missiles technology and/or components. The only evidence we have between Iran and another nation regarding ballistic missiles cooperation, is between Iran and the Koreans. Even that is mainly regarding decades ago. I have yet to see anything between Iran and the Chinese. We seen transfer of missiles from China to Saudis and Turkey, but not Iran. What is actually hard to believe is the notion that the Chinese were helping the Iranians and yet we have nothing to show that.
 
.
north korea and china helped iran with shahab series missiles, after that china heped iran with zelzal rocket engines, in which zelzal itself became bases for fateh missile.
there is no problem with starting by Chinese or Korean assistance, but by point was there are several generations of upgrades over previous Korean and Chinese supplied scud or dummy rockets. it's not hard to differentiate between Iranian maded missiles and Chinese or Korean ones. iran was working hard last three decades on it's missile program.
 
.
there is no problem with starting by Chinese or Korean assistance, but by point was there are several generations of upgrades over previous Korean and Chinese supplied scud or dummy rockets. it's not hard to differentiate between Iranian maded missiles and Chinese or Korean ones. iran was working hard last three decades on it's missile program.

I agree, but I will also say, I do not have a problem with it if it was factual. However, If a claim is not backed by any evidence, then it should not just be accepted just on face value.
 
.
As opposed to propaganda mouthpieces, who thinks iran invented everything, reality is that due to sanctions,iran have been unable to import or manufacture crucial missile parts. In this case help was provided by russians and chinese.
Recently americans trying to tie chinese to iran, maybe they are planning some sanctions on china.
 
.
The question is where is any hard evidence to suggest this? Especially what we're talking about here is the actual transfer of major missiles technology and/or components. The only evidence we have between Iran and another nation regarding ballistic missiles cooperation, is between Iran and the Koreans. Even that is mainly regarding decades ago. I have yet to see anything between Iran and the Chinese. We seen transfer of missiles from China to Saudis and Turkey, but not Iran. What is actually hard to believe is the notion that the Chinese were helping the Iranians and yet we have nothing to show that.
https://www.iranwatch.org/our-publi...ound-report/iran-missile-milestones-1985-2019
 
.
or manufacture crucial missile parts.

Where is your source for this claim?
If Iran cannot manufacture them nor import them, then where are they coming from? Teleportation from outer space?

Iran has the largest and most diverse missile program in the middle east but apparently they cannot manufacture the necessary missiles part. You need to utilise logic prior to making statements.

In this case help was provided by russians and chinese.

Proof?


That is not a reliable source. Furthermore, if you actually look into the sources cited, you'd see they're mostly claims and nothing conclusive.
 
Last edited:
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom