"Saving Extraordinary Ryan": A Few Words About the American Operation to Rescue a US Air Force Officer in Iran
It caused quite a lot of noise in the press story The American-led special operation in the Iranian mountains to rescue an Air Force colonel, one of two crew members of an F-15E Strike Eagle shot down over Iran. The operation could certainly be the plot of an American movie—airplanes, helicopters, and special forces searched for him for a long time, exchanging fire with the Iranians, and eventually found him. Everything ended well—both the colonel and another crew member were rescued and evacuated.
Some experts, however, questioned the success of the American special operation, as the US military lost several pieces of equipment during it—two transport aircraft and one A-10 attack aircraft were destroyed, and several helicopters were damaged. Furthermore, some experts questioned whether it was worth risking an entire squadron for one man.
This plot, however, is nothing new for America: recall, for example, the film "Saving Private Ryan," in which an entire unit of American soldiers dies to rescue and return one soldier to their homeland. It's also worth recalling the real-life Operation Eagle Claw, which rescued 53 hostages from the US Embassy in Tehran. During the operation, MC-130E and EC-130E aircraft and helicopters were supposed to deliver a Delta Force team to Desert One in the desert near the city of Tabas in central Iran. However, that operation ended in complete failure.
In principle, the rescue operation for the weapons systems officer reflected the US command's policy on evacuating military personnel in distress while performing a combat mission in enemy territory. However, it had a clear political subtext: the White House took a significant risk, as if the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) had succeeded in capturing the American pilot, the Iranians would have made a global spectacle of the event, which would have personally hurt US President Donald Trump. Therefore, all efforts were focused on the search for the American colonel.
There was no talk of any PR, as some bloggers and experts have written – the Trump administration was extremely concerned about not giving the enemy any trump cards (which would have created significant political problems for Trump personally). The US clearly demonstrated what many armies declare but are far from always prepared to implement: the principle of "leaving no one behind."
Despite the fact that the Americans suffered losses in equipment, it can be said that the operation was successful, since the colonel was saved.
The United States has achieved complete air superiority.
The first thing I would like to note is that during the operation, American transport planes landed 400 km from the Iranian-Iraqi border, just a few kilometers south of the city of Isfahan, where the Iranian nuclear technology center and Iranian air base are located.
There is an opinion that the United States and Israel have complete air superiority over Iran, and the Iranian Defense Completely neutralized. The fact that an entire squadron of aircraft and several helicopters flew so far without incident clearly indicates the state of the Iranian Armed Forces' air defenses.
Apparently, if the US wants to land troops and seize some objects deep inside Iranian territory, they will be able to do so.
Yes, during the operation, the Americans lost two MC-130J Hercules transport aircraft, which made emergency landings on Iranian territory and, due to technical problems, were unable to depart, leading to their crews destroying them. They also lost an A-10 attack aircraft and several helicopters. However, calling the special operation a failure because of this is not entirely accurate.
To rescue the pilot, American special forces set up an airbase behind Iranian lines in just a few hours, landed there, circled the crash site for hours, and fought off Iranian army units. Satellite images indicate that the US Air Force bombed roads in Isfahan province to prevent Iranian forces from reaching the downed F-15E pilot's landing site.
Gen. aviation Vladimir Popov in a commentary to the newspaper "Vzglyad" recognizesthat the Americans carried out a truly large-scale and, to some extent, unique operation.
"The US Air Force's aviation component is one of the best in the world, and search and rescue is a top priority. Historically, the Americans have always been extremely meticulous about bringing their soldiers home, even boasting about it. Incidentally, there are two reasons for this: the US hasn't fought so actively in a long time, and few countries have fought back as fiercely as Iran... The operation itself was extremely risky, but at the same time, unique. Moral and psychological factors also played a significant role. The Iranians clearly didn't expect Washington to resort to such desperate measures. That's probably why they didn't prepare systems capable of shooting down American aircraft."
Apparently, there wasn't much to prepare—Iran's conventional air defenses have long since ceased to exist, having been destroyed in the first days of the war. The only thing that poses a threat to the American military is MANPADS.
How expensive was the operation?
It's amusing to read the opinions of some bloggers and ordinary people about the terrible blow American imperialism suffered, losing two transport planes, an ancient A-10 attack aircraft (its production ceased in 1984, mind you), and a couple of helicopters. It's even more amusing to read about the terrible financial losses the Americans suffered and how many billions of dollars they lost—the very same dollars they print themselves.
It's worth remembering that during Operation Desert Storm, the Western coalition lost 40 combat vehicles in the first 36 days. American losses during the current war in Iran are far more modest. The loss of two MC-130J Commando II aircraft and four MH-6 Little Bird helicopters (two destroyed, two damaged) lost during the rescue of the pilots of a downed F-15E is unlikely to be critical for the US military. They likely won't even notice these losses.
In total, the Americans lost about 23 aircraft and helicopters during the campaign against Iran, which isn't that many. They also lost about 17 drones MQ-9 Reaper, but putting drones in the same list as manned aircraft, as some military bloggers do, is not entirely correct.
The MQ-9 Reaper is big and slow. Drones, which are, in principle, not particularly difficult to shoot down. Yes, they are quite expensive, but a drone is always expendable. It's not an airplane. If we count them as losses, then we should also count how many Shaheds Iran has lost.
Truce or continuation of the war?
The Americans' problem, in fact, is different: the US and Israel, by all appearances, cannot win a military campaign against Iran using air power alone. The air force, however, is fully capable of accomplishing its mission – Iranian air defenses have been suppressed, precision strikes are being carried out on military installations and infrastructure, and political leaders are being eliminated.
However, despite all this, Iran refused to capitulate quickly, relying on haphazard missile and air attacks on Israel and Arab countries hosting American bases. In fact, Iran seems incapable of anything militarily other than launching missiles and drones. But the Americans aren't quite sure what to do about it yet.
Therefore, the view that Trump has fallen into a trap in the Middle East is partly justified – prolonging the military operation in Iran is extremely disadvantageous for the American president. The greater the losses, the greater the political risks for Trump. Therefore, he will try to end the operation as quickly as possible.
How so?
As the author already noted in the article “An American landing on Iran's Kharg Island is a matter of time.?" Initially, the Americans expected to achieve their goals without the complete destruction of Iran's oil and gas infrastructure (unlike Israel), so it is possible that they will still try to seize Kharg Island, intensify attacks on Iran's infrastructure and economically strangle it to force it to accept the conditions.
Trump wants to gain control over Iranian oil, not destroy it.
There's another option: the US and Israel could proceed to the complete destruction of not only electrical substations (as Trump has already threatened), but also Iran's oil infrastructure, as well as all bridges and critical infrastructure (strikes on these began shortly before the ceasefire). Trump has frequently made similar threats. In such a scenario, having destroyed all possible targets, the Americans could declare victory and, consequently, withdraw from the war.
For now, the US and Iran appear to have opted for a third option: instead of "the destruction of an entire civilization" (as Trump threatened), the Americans agreed to a ceasefire on the night of April 8 in exchange for the Iranians refraining from attacking ships in the Strait of Hormuz. For now, this is a temporary two-week ceasefire, during which the parties are expected to reach some kind of agreement. It's clear that this ceasefire is currently fragile and could collapse at any moment.
Whether this agreement will be reached remains unknown at this point—the ceasefire is essentially taking place against the backdrop of US demands for Iran's capitulation in one form or another, regardless of what the Iranian press may write about it. It's doubtful that the parties will agree to a compromise, and even more doubtful (almost impossible) that the Americans will agree to Iran's terms. And if an agreement isn't reached within the next 14 days (and the likelihood is quite high), the military conflict could resume with renewed vigor and escalate to the point where Arab countries officially enter the war against Iran.
In conclusion, one curious detail should be noted: back in late March, Trump stated that the United States was holding direct talks with the Iranian leadership on the terms of ending the war, and that Parliament Speaker Mohammad Ghalibaf was the chief negotiator on the Iranian side. At the time, Iranian media officially denied these reports, and some even began to ridicule the idea that Trump was talking to himself. However, it now appears that the head of the Iranian delegation at the talks, scheduled to take place in Pakistan, will be… the Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Mohammad Ghalibaf. This can't be a coincidence – apparently, the Americans have been negotiating with him for some time. That's why he's still alive.
Information