CDR Salamander - The Missiles to Diego Garcia Subtext

As a member in good standing of the diaspora from the Provisional People’s Democratic Republic of Diego Garcia, the news, four days ago. that the Islamic Republic of Iran attempted to strike our homeland got my attention.

I’ve been waiting a bit to see if this was just a misunderstanding or one of those things that come from the fog of war. Of course, Iran states they did no such thing. But the general understanding, as I write this, is—well—Iran did something we thought they could do, but had not demonstrated in public.

As the weekend closed, it was confirmed by otherwise reliable sources.

Iran fired two missiles at the joint British-American Diego Garcia military base in the Indian Ocean but they failed to reach their target, a U.K. minister said Sunday, confirming earlier reports of the number of projectiles.

“Our assessment is that the Iranians certainly targeted Diego Garcia. As we understand it, one missile fell short, failed. The other was intercepted and prevented,” U.K. Housing Secretary Steve Reed told BBC television.

…

Iran targeted Diego Garcia with a two-stage intercontinental ballistic missile, Israel’s military said Saturday. This refers to missiles with at least two rocket engines, one allowing the missile to reach space, and the other propels it to its target, at a range of up to 4,000 kilometers (2,500 miles).

“These missiles are not intended to strike Israel. Their range extends to the capitals of Europe — Berlin, Paris, and Rome are all within direct threat range,” Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir said.

…

The reported attack marked Iran’s first operational use of intermediate-range ballistic missiles and a significant attempt to reach far beyond the Middle East and threaten U.S. interests, the Wall Street Journal said.

“Iran’s reckless attacks, lashing out across the region and holding hostage the Strait of Hormuz, are a threat to British interests and British allies,” the U.K.’s Ministry of Defence said in a statement sent to CNBC on Saturday. ”[Royal Air Force] jets and other U.K. military assets are continuing to defend our people and personnel in the region.”

The MoD said Iran’s unsuccessful targeting of the base happened before the U.K. approved, a day earlier, the use of its bases by U.S. forces for defensive operations.

The U.K. has given the U.S. permission to use its bases at RAF Fairford in England and at Diego Garcia in the Chagos Islands for “specific and limited defensive operations,” the MoD said.

This is where I’d like to refer you to the graphic at the top of the post. There are three rings. From the center of Iran to Diego Garcia (or Dodge to its friends) is roughly 2,500 nautical miles (NM). Let’s assume that is its maximum range +/-. That is the center ring.

There is another ring centered in the NW of Iran, and a third ring to the southeast, all with 2,500 NM rings.

What does this tell us?

A long-held theory—that Iran wanted to have the ability to use threats of attack as a leverage point against Europe with its ballistic missile program like it could against its Arab and Israeli neighbors with its shorter-range ballistic missiles.

Once it developed intermediate-range ballistic missiles, then it would be just a few years away from having an intercontinental ballistic missile that could hit the Great Satan, the USA. That way, they could strike Europe and North America with the same ease as they do today against the Little Satan, Israel.

As an extra bonus, once they successfully prove they have nuclear weapons…then the lever is even more powerful.

It is no longer a theory.

Best case scenario right now for Europe is that only Warsaw, Berlin, Rome, and Paris are under the long-range fires of Iran. Worst case is, if the launchers are mobile, you can throw London and Madrid into the threat envelope.

Let’s be clear here, this is a long-known threat and yet, well over a decade later, no European power has the ability to defend itself or its alliance partners from an Iranian ballistic missile, conventional or nuclear: any ballistic missile from anyone.

Yes, Germany a bit over two years ago decided to purchase Israeli Arrow-3 batteries, but that is a limited capability that only reached initial operational capability at the end of 2025. With the number of Arrow missiles expended recently, I would think that Israel will be looking to replenish their own stocks before exporting very many.

The only significant theater-wide European defense against the ballistic missile threat is brought to them from the red-white-and-blue.

The US has been defending Europe from this threat we knew was coming for almost two decades. Here is Sam’s article from 2016 on it when it was a mature system.

It started in the first year of the first Obama Administration.

From its birth in 2009,

The EPAA (European Phased Adaptive Approach) was designed to be a cost-effective method for the creation of a layered missile defense network in Europe that would protect U.S. partners, allies, and assets in the region from the growing Iranian ballistic missile threat.

Two years ago, Defense Express reminded everyone of what was, by now, a well-established framework to address a known threat.

The United States has two key components of anti-missile defense in Europe, the Aegis Ashore … in two locations: one in Deveselu, Romania fully operational since 2016, and another one in Redzikowo, Poland…

The shore-based defenses were augmented in 2011, again during the first Obama administration, with USN Aegis Destroyers to be homeported in Rota, Spain.

On October 5, 2011, U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta announced that the U.S. Navy will station four Aegis warships at Rota to strengthen its presence in the Mediterranean Sea and bolster the missile defense of NATO as part of the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA).

Yes, this is nothing new.

Nothing.

New.

The architecture is rather straightforward, and relatively unchanged since the below graphic from 2015.

Just as the U.S. supplies NATO’s dedicated nuclear deterrent, it also provides its only significant theater-wide ballistic missile defense.

Regardless of whether we declare victory tomorrow and go home with the hostile Islamic Republic intact, or the Iranian people birth a Jeffersonian Democracy in the heart of Persia—or something in between—the Europeans must develop an anti-ballistic missile capability. Most likely, the best route would be for Aegis-equipped European navies (ESP and NOR) to upgrade their software and adopt SM-3 capability as the Japanese have. The others will have to find some way to get a comparable capability.

They are naked without an American shield.

As I warned, again, over four years ago.

I have warned even longer IRL until it has become tiresome that they do not realize that the American public is just one election away from shrugging being Europe’s security blanket. Everything regresses to the mean, and at our heart we are a mercantile republic, not an empire. WWII and the Cold War warped the nature of our relationship with Europe, and the force of regressing back to our natural state will bring us back across the Atlantic and looking to our West for the future unless the Europeans take concrete steps to encourage us not to.

Many in Europe, especially their natsec “elite” who think they know the USA because they read WaPo, NYT, and The Economist - have visited DC and lived a semester in Boston, etc, delude themselves to think Trump was an outlier. He was a warning, not a temporary PITA.

Few things will wear an American’s patience thinner than a repeated refusal by someone to do their fair share of the work; to pay their fair share of the cost; to bear their fair share of the burden.

It isn’t just a political threat. Early last year, I repeated again,

As I’ve been reminding all my European friends for over two decades: the USA is just one election, natural disaster, or Great Pacific War away from simply walking away from our primary role in defense of Europe. Any of these “white swans” could come with little to no warning. Europe need to be ready to stand on their own at worst, or more likely, with Europe being an “economy of force” concern for the USA. Best case, a stronger Europe will make for a stronger NATO which will make for a more peaceful future.

Doesn’t seem like a radical position anymore, does it?

Aegis Ashore and our Spain-based DDGs aren’t there to protect American bases…though they do that. They are there because there was an alliance defense requirement to be met and the U.S. was the only nation able to do it and it was in our national interest.

We did it because it was our pleasure.

It may not be one day.

Leave a comment

Share

View the full article