Iran's ballistic missiles 

By: Aleena Saif Ullah

The ongoing US-Israeli military campaign against Iran has elevated the role of Tehran's ballistic missile arsenal in shaping the conflict's direction. In response to the attacks, Iran has carried out several rounds of ballistic missile strikes against Israel, US military bases in the Gulf, and energy facilities across multiple Gulf states. The cases studied indicate that the missile forces of Iran have both their strong points and weak spots, which have an impact on the general development of the war.

Iran possesses one of the region's largest ballistic missile inventories. Key systems include the Shahab-3 (range approximately 1,300 km), Ghadr (up to 2,000 km), Emad (1,700 km with enhanced accuracy), Sejjil (solid-fuel, 2,000 km), Khorramshahr (2,000 km), and advanced variants such as the Kheibar Shekan (solid-fuel, manoeuvrable re-entry vehicle, around 1,450 km). Iran has also fielded missiles it designates as hypersonic, including the Fattah series (claimed terminal speeds exceeding Mach 13 with manoeuvrability to evade interception) and related derivatives. The focus is still on the use of mobile launchers, solid fuel for quick launch capability, and better guidance via satellite navigation and re-entry vehicle manoeuvring.

In the conflict's initial phase, In the opening stage of the war, Iran fired several hundred ballistic missiles, the total number is thought to exceed 500, in waves at Israel (some of the attacks resulted in casualties, including deaths in Beit Shemesh and near Jerusalem), US military bases in Kuwait (there were American service member casualties), and locations in the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia. The missile assaults also caused a lot of damage to infrastructure such as airports and energy facilities. In addition, the attacks have raised tensions in the Strait of Hormuz to a very high level.

Defensive measures have been comprehensive. Israel's multi-layered systems (Arrow, David's Sling, and Iron Dome, with an Iron Beam laser reportedly now operational) were able to intercept a large number of the threats. US troops, together with their Gulf partners, operated Patriot, THAAD, and Aegis systems. Qatar and the UAE claimed very high interception rates. However, penetrations have occurred, with some missiles reaching targets and inflicting casualties and structural damage. Interceptor stocks— particularly THAAD and Patriot— face depletion due to sustained barrages, raising concerns about long-term sustainability.

Iran's strategy centres on saturation: overwhelming the defences with large numbers to find and exploit the gaps, and inflicting damage, that is, making the other side pay, even if the interception rate is high. The use of manoeuvrable warheads and the claim of the missiles being able to go hypersonic make the final stage of the interception even more difficult. While many missiles have been neutralised, confirmed hits demonstrate the difficulties of defending against diverse, massed threats.

These missile operations have meaningfully affected the war's trajectory. By targeting Gulf states and energy infrastructure, Iran has broadened the conflict geographically, pressuring regional actors and raising global economic stakes through Strait of Hormuz disruptions. Tanker traffic has declined sharply, with partial restrictions contributing to oil price surges (Brent crude exceeding $79 per barrel, with intraday peaks approaching $83–85). Such ramping up of the situation has made energy volatility one of the major concerns over a longer period of time and has also enticed more parties into the situation, thus making it harder for the conflict to be contained.

Conversely, US-Israeli strikes have targeted missile production, storage, and launch infrastructure— destroying hundreds of launchers and degrading coordination. Satellite imagery confirms damage to key bases (like Imam Ali in Khorramabad, Bid Ganeh near Tehran). The sizes of salvos and their hitting the target have generally been going down, and thus reflects the success of the degradation. This situation has turned the game on the ground: while Iran's ability to respond is gradually running out of steam, the coalition's air supremacy is being re-established and strengthened, thereby allowing them to make deeper assaults on the remaining threats.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has responded to the missile exchanges by proposing defence cooperation with Gulf states. He drew on Ukraine's experience in fighting Iranian-supplied Shahed drones, which Russia has heavily used, and proposed a "swap": the Gulf countries could send Ukraine the very crucial PAC-3 interceptors for Ukraine's defence in exchange for Ukraine's tested battle drone interceptors and know-how. In some statements, Zelenskyy has also conditioned his offer to send Ukrainian experts for missile and drone interception on progress in diplomacy towards a ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia. These suggestions reveal their common vulnerability to the Iranian systems and the potential for sharing capabilities across regions. 

As for Pakistan, the ramifications are still quite serious. Proximity amplifies spillover risks, including energy disruptions via the Strait of Hormuz and border instability in Balochistan. Iran's missile performance underscores asymmetric deterrence's role in regional security, influencing calculations in West Asia and multilateral forums.

The exchanges illustrate a core principle: ballistic missiles enable states facing conventional asymmetries to impose costs and deter escalation. Iran's arsenal has inflicted measurable damage and widened the conflict despite robust defences, reinforcing deterrence value. Simultaneously, progressive degradation exposes vulnerabilities under sustained precision operations. The war's path will depend on whether missile barrages sustain pressure long enough to force concessions or yield to diplomatic channels amid declining capacity. The outcome of the conflict will be determined by whether the missile attacks keep up the pressure for such a long time that the other side has to give in, or they will end up going the diplomatic way when their capability is gradually decreasing.

A balanced view recognises both the demonstrated impact of Iran's systems and the constraints from superior air power. For regional actors, including Pakistan, these developments emphasise the necessity of cautious diplomacy, energy resilience, and efforts to prevent further polarisation.