What Iran gains, what U.S. loses by downing U.S. drone

By Majid Rafiee

TEHRAN – Last week the US Global Hawk spy drone intruded into Iranian airspace, which was shot down by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps after the drone violated Iranian airspace and ignored Iran’s several warnings.

Although the downing of US military drone by Iranian forces is not unprecedented, but the importance of this matter is double because of special capabilities of the drone and the specific political existing situation between the two countries after the US withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), as well as the beginning of a series of steps taken by Iran to reduce its nuclear commitments under the JCPOA.

Here are some of the most important consequences of this confrontation:

It was a sign of the capability of the Islamic Republic of Iran to defend itself beyond the assessments of military experts in the world, including the Americans. The successful performance of Khordad 3 surface-to-air missile system will surely force the Americans to review their military analysis of Iran's defense capabilities.

Iran's threats in response to US actions were materialized by downing of Global Hawk. As Leader of the Islamic Revolution Seyyed Ali Khamenei had warned the US officials,  Iran's move showed that the time of 'getting away with murder' has come to an end for Americans. On the other hand, US inaction against Iran's actions proved that American threats are hollow which is a major blow to the US military credibility.

Iran accepted the responsibility for downing of Global Hawk indicating that it is serious about public punishment of the aggressors, contrary to US accusations against in respect with oil tanker attacks which Iran rejected any involvement in those events and called for identifying offenders of those incidents.

Iranian action practically has seriously challenged the US policy of maximum pressure on Iran to bring it to the negotiating table. In this regard, some analysts have analyzed the continuation of US economic policy against Iran as a provocative act that may provoke Tehran to behave more dangerously against Western interests.

This incident caused Iran to have the upper hand and be an active player, not a passive one so that now the US has to act in response to Iran's behavior passively.

Iran's action has worried the US’ Arab and Zionist allies in the region. Americans who are present in the region to defend their regional allies' interests now have to be more vigilant about their own troops.

The clear message of this incident to neighboring countries is that Iran's defense readiness is enough to tackle any threats and also that they can be targeted in case of aiding the US to take any measure against Iran. They have two choices. They can take steps to reduce tensions with Iran or continue tension with Iran and fill the pockets of the US with their dollars to defend them!

Finally, although the initiator of this incident was not Iran its outcome ultimately inspired the supporters of the powerful Islamic Iran in the region. This incident may raise questions among the nations of the region about the costs and benefits of their rulers' decisions on their security and military expenditures which are mainly in the pocket of the US.