Assailants Of Iran International Presenter Were Eastern European Mercs - Report
British investigators believe that the three suspects sought in connection with the stabbing of Iran International's presenter are from Eastern Europe.
British investigators believe that the three suspects sought in connection with the stabbing of Iran International's presenter are from Eastern Europe.
According to an exclusive report by the Guardian on Thursday, the investigators are looking into whether one of the suspects has connections to Albania.
The investigators interviewed by The Guardian believe that the assailants were recruited and flown to the UK specifically to execute the assault.
Iran International presenter Pouria Zeraati was stabbed outside his home in Wimbledon, in south London, late in March and sustained leg injuries.
Shortly after the attack, London Metropolitan Police announced that considering previous threats against journalists in Persian-language media outlets, the incident is being handled by specialized officers from the Met's counter-terrorism division. Earlier in the month, London Metropolitan police said the three suspects fled the UK after the attack, triggering an international manhunt.
Guardian further reported that Western sources believe that those likely responsible for the attack, presumed to be acting in the interests of the Iranian regime, utilized connections and insights into criminal networks to recruit the assailants.
Senior British counter-terrorism officials, as per The Guardian's report, believe that employing "criminal proxies provides Tehran with plausible deniability" as those recruited are unlikely to be on terror watchlists which would prevent them from entering the UK.
Last year, federal indictments revealed that three individuals linked to an Eastern European mafia group were charged by the United States for plotting to assassinate Iranian-American journalist and activist Masih Alinejad at the request of the Iranian regime.
The US Justice Department announced that the Eastern European mafia group charged "has ties to Iran and is violent, engaging in murders, kidnappings, assaults, and extortions".
“If the fake Zionist regime wants to use the threat of attacking nuclear sites to put pressure on Iran, it is possible and conceivable for the Islamic Republic to revise its nuclear doctrine and policies, and deviate from its past declared considerations,” said Ahmad Haghtalab, who is in charge of the security of Iran’s nuclear sites.
His remarks came a day after Zohar Palti, the former intelligence director at the Israeli spy agency Mossad, announced that Israel has many options on the table to retaliate Tehran’s recent missile and drone attacks and could even choose to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities.
According to Haghtalab, Israel’s threats to target Iran’s nuclear facilities “are not from today or yesterday” and Israel has already been involved in “sabotage and terrorist acts” to stop Iran’s nuclear program over the past years.
One of the most significant attacks on Iran’s nuclear program occurred in 2010 when the Stuxnet computer virus disrupted the control systems of the country’s most sensitive and tightly watched nuclear facility in Natanz.
The Dutch daily Volkskrant reported in January that the malware, widely believed to be an American-Israeli creation, was delivered by a Dutch engineer working at the enrichment plant.
In 2020 and 2021, two internal explosions hit Iran's highly protected Natanz uranium enrichment facility, inflicting considerable damage. The attacks were attributed to Israel, although Iran's chief adversary never took responsibility. In November 2020, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, known as the father of Iran's nuclear program was assassinated in broad daylight near Tehran.
Further in his remarks, IRGC Commander Haghtalab threatened that the Iranian government can target Israel’s nuclear sites if the Jewish state decides to respond to Iran’s recent offensive on the Israeli territory: “The nuclear sites of the Zionist enemy have been identified and we have the information we need on all targets. In case of their so-called retaliation, our hands are on the trigger to fire powerful missiles to destroy specified targets.”
On Saturday night, Iran launched its first ever direct offensive against Israeli territory with more than 350 drones and cruise and ballistic missiles. The Israeli army announced that 99% of the projectiles were intercepted and downed.
According to IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi, Iran shut down its nuclear facilities last Sunday over “security considerations.” He confirmed that the facilities had reopened within 24 hours, but with no IAEA supervision, as the agency decided to temporarily keep its inspectors away until the situation is “completely calm.”
When asked about the possibility of Israel hitting Iran’s nuclear sites, Grossi said, “We are always concerned about this possibility.” The UN nuclear chief also reiterated the IAEA’s concerns about Iran’s nuclear program.
Iranian officials have always maintained that Tehran’s nuclear program is purely for peaceful purposes. But nuclear experts are almost unanimous in their assessment that enrichment to the levels and in the amounts that Iran has been doing since 2021 cannot be justified in the absence of a weapons program.
In February, Ali-Akbar Salehi, the former head of Iran's nuclear agency, implied that the country has everything it needs for an A-bomb: "We have [crossed] all the thresholds of nuclear science and technology. Here's an example: Imagine what a car needs; it needs a chassis, an engine, a steering wheel, a gearbox. You're asking if we've made the gearbox, I say yes. Have we made the engine? Yes, but each one serves its own purpose."
On Wednesday, an advisor to Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf hinted at Tehran’s military use of its nuclear program. “Iran has a nuclear program in addition to its missile program,” wrote Mehdi Mohammadi on X in what can be construed as a shrouded threat against Israel and its allies.
Meanwhile, Mohammad Marandi, a political analyst close to Iran’s hardliners, claimed that Iran has not yet used “its most advanced weapons” against Israel. When asked if Iran might use nuclear weapons, he said, “Iran is not like the United States which has and uses and has already used nuclear weapons.”
In November, an IAEA confidential report indicated that Iran has enough uranium enriched to up to 60% for three atomic bombs.
The Islamic Republic has remained silent on the type of missiles used in the early Sunday morning attack, leaving the details shrouded in secrecy. However, by analyzing Israeli military reports and combining them with open-source intelligence, analysts suggest that one of the missiles might have been an Emad (Imad) missile. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) spokesperson confirmed that only the fuel tank of the intercepted missile was recovered, as the warhead and engine were destroyed by the long-range Arrow air defense system.
According to the Israeli army, the recovered debris represents 70% of the original projectile's length. Analysis of released photographs and statements aligns with the specifications of Iran's Emad missile. The Emad, according to Iranian Revolutionary Guard-affiliated media, is a 15.5-meter ballistic missile. Ballistic missiles follow a curved trajectory, leveraging gravity to achieve extreme velocities. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) estimate the missile traveled over 1,500 kilometers from Iran to Israel in roughly 12 minutes, reaching a speed of approximately 7,500 km/h, or roughly Mach 6.
Named after Imad Mughniyeh, the second-in-command of Hezbollah who was killed in 2008, the missile is manufactured by the Iranian defence ministry and underwent its first test launch in 2015. Just a few months ago, the IRGC conducted a simulated military operation, demolishing the mock Palmachim Airbase in Israel using Emad missiles.
Which missiles did Iran deploy in its assault on Israel?
IRGC-affiliated media have revealed details about the variety of missiles used in the attack on Israel. This included ballistic missiles such as the Khorramshahr, Sejjil, Ghadr, and Emad, alongside cruise missiles like the Paveh and the hypersonic Fattah. However, inconsistencies arose within official Iranian channels. For example, one newspaper suggested that Iran held back from deploying the Fattah hypersonic missiles, potentially reserving more advanced weapons for a future counter-attack. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the commander of the IRGC Aerospace Forces, claimed on Thursday that the IRGC used its older models in the attack.
Setting the Scene: Exploring the Context
The Islamic Republic of Iran currently boasts the most extensive and varied ballistic missile arsenal in the Middle East. Iran's pursuit of ballistic missiles predates the Islamic revolution in 1979. However, it was during the Iran-Iraq War, fueled by animosity towards the West and their refusal to supply spare parts for Iran's dwindling air force after the monarchy's fall, that Tehran significantly ramped up its missile program.
Chronicles of Iran's Missile Campaign
Since 2017, Iran has launched missiles towards other countries on at least twelve occasions. These attacks involved over 300 ballistic and cruise missiles primarily targeting regional Muslim-majority nations. Iraq, bordering Iran, bore the brunt of these attacks, while Israel received the highest number of missiles.
Many strikes were launched in retaliation for perceived provocations against Iran, but the targeted nations often remained silent. This silence likely stemmed from a lack of military capability or willingness to respond, as seen in Iraq and Syria. Notably, Pakistan stood out for its swift and decisive response to an Iranian missile attack.
What Comes Next?
In its attack on Israel, Iran launched more than 300 killer drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles on Israeli territory. Only four ballistic missiles successfully made it through the defences, with none of the cruise missiles or drones managing to do so, said Israel defence minister Yoav Gallant.
Now with the region in the brink of war, Israel stands at a crossroads. It faces the choice between a military strike on Iranian soil or diplomatic patience for future benefit. The absence of an attack may likely result in a false sense of victory for the Islamic Republic, while a military strike on Iranian soil could potentially drag the region into full-scale conflict. Meanwhile, the Islamic Republic stands on edge, bracing for Israel's next move.