Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a former colonel in the British army and security expert on nuclear and chemical weapons, speaks to Rudaw's
Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a former colonel in the British army and security expert on chemical biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons, discusses potential targets in Iran for Israel including nuclear, military, and oil facilities in an interview with Rudaw’s Zana Kiyani on Tuesday. Bretton-Gordon’s comments come nearly a week after Iran launched around 200 missiles at Israeli targets and speculation builds for an Israeli response.
As Iran has not enriched uranium to weapons-grade levels, a potential Israeli strike would not create a nuclear explosion, Bretton-Gordon detailed, but there would be nuclear contamination. Such an attack, the retired colonel said, would make it “impossible for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon in the foreseeable future, which I think most people in the world would hope for. What is not known is how Iran would react if that happened.”
Asked how Iran might respond if it were directly attacked, Bretton-Gordon said: “It might well be that Iran will use some of its proxies in Syria and Iraq to attack Israeli and Western facilities. Due to the ineffectiveness of Iran’s barrage, Bretton-Gordon said Tehran has limited options if it wanted to carry out follow-up attacks. Because there is uncertainty of Iran’s nuclear capabilities, he cautioned that Tehran could consider chemical weapon attacks or “an improvised nuclear device, or a dirty bomb.”
Below is the full transcript of the interview.
Rudaw: I have a special guest today. We will discuss this topic together. Chemical and biological expert, Colonel Hamish Gordon. Hi, Colonel. Thanks for being with us. After Iran's attack on Israel, do you expect Israel to respond to Iran, or will Israel avoid escalating the conflict to avoid playing into Hamas's hands?
Hamish de Bretton-Gordon: Well, Israel certainly said it will attack Iran. And when Iran attacked Israel back in April of this year with 320 rockets, Israel did respond a few days later with one missile aimed at Isfahan at some of the military establishments there. So one is expecting Israel will respond - fairly soon, I expect. What targets it will hit is difficult to say. Potentially the nuclear development facilities the Iran government has to try and make a nuclear weapon or other military facilities or possibly also the oil industry; but at the moment, it's not entirely clear.
Mr. Gordon, if Israel targets Iran's nuclear facilities, what might the consequences be?
Well, I think there are a number of issues here. First of all, if Israel did attack the nuclear facilities, there is very unlikely to be some sort of nuclear explosion as relatively small amounts of uranium, which is required to make a nuclear device, is likely to be stored there. And Iran is not yet enriched uranium to the required level - 90 percent pure - in order to make a nuclear device. So there would be some contamination, certainly, but it would not create a nuclear explosion. What it probably would do is make it impossible for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon in the foreseeable future, which I think most people in the world would hope for. What is not known is how Iran would react if that happened. Iran has already fired over 500 missiles at Israel, and most of those have been destroyed before they have hit the ground.
It's difficult to know how Iran could escalate. Their terrorist proxies, Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis have been attacking ostensibly Israel for some time now, but they have been severely damaged in the Israeli counterattacks in the last few months or so. It might well be that Iran will use some of its proxies in Syria and Iraq to attack Israeli and Western facilities. It is a remote possibility, I think, that Iran might try and fire chemical weapons into Israel. But I think because they have seen that their missiles have not been able to strike Israel, there's no reason why a missile with a chemical weapon in it would do that as well. So I think their options are fairly limited and no doubt allies in the region and the US and NATO are trying to de-escalate this as much as possible. And of course, everybody in the world and the region in particular would like to see a ceasefire between Israel and Iran as soon as possible.
You mentioned other countries' role in the region. Why is the US urging Israel not to strike Iran's nuclear facilities?
Well, I think it's both of those reasons. There is a concern that certainly there would be some sort of contamination in the areas where those facilities are. I think people are not fully aware of how advanced Iran's nuclear capability is. And as I said, the desire to prevent Iran escalating with potentially chemical weapons or whatever nuclear capability they have. I think there is also concern about the relationship between Iran and Russia over the last year or so. We know that Iran has given a lot of missiles, ballistic missiles to Russia -
Yes sir, do you think that Iran would use nuclear weapons in response?
There is a possibility, and I think that is what the Americans are concerned about. Yes, Iran could respond possibly with chemical weapons or with some sort of nuclear device, probably not a fully-fledged nuclear weapon, maybe an improvised nuclear device, or a dirty bomb. So that is the issue. And of course, the other thing that the US is saying is not to attack the Iranian oil industry because the Americans are very concerned about the rise in the price of petrol, and the US have an election coming up next month. There is a concern amongst American politicians that a high price of fuels would adversely affect the US election. So there are a whole host of reasons, and I think everybody really is hoping or desiring peace as soon as possible, and attacking nuclear facilities might make that less likely rather than more likely.
As you mentioned, all possibilities are available. What kind of weapons do you anticipate Israel might use if it launches an attack on Iran?
Well, I think the Israelis will use long-range precision ballistic missiles, which they have used before. These are either would be launched directly from Israel or they also in some of their stealth fighters, like their F-35s, have the ability to fire missiles from these aircraft, but it is likely to be precision missiles no doubt supported by electronic warfare and other capabilities to ensure that they strike their targets and Iranian air defense does not take them down. But it is clear that the Iranians do not have similar air defense to the Israeli's Iron Dome. Israel fired one missile in April, which hit its target. And as we've seen, 500 missiles from Iran very few hit their targets. So it will be precision-guided missiles either fired directly from Israel or from Israeli fighter jets, I expect.
Iran claims it will use newer weapons and technology in its next attack on Israel. What are Iran's current capabilities in military technology?
Well, I'm very surprised that they haven't used them already. Iran has been humiliated by the fact that all the missiles it's fired towards Israel have not been hit. So I think there is an amount of bluff and bluster here. I'm not sure that Iran has got any more sophisticated missiles. It may [from] the Russians, President [Vladimir] Putin may have given them more sophisticated missiles, but that seems highly unlikely because the Russians are so focused on missiles themselves in their illegal attack on Ukraine. So I would be very surprised if Iran has anything more sophisticated, and it's hard already. And I'd be very surprised if they had more than a few missiles that actually hit targets in Israel that penetrated the Israeli air defense system.
Mr. Gordon, what role does artificial intelligence (AI) play in the current conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine?
Well, I think it plays a very major role, more particularly in Ukraine which is where I have more experience. But the mass use of drones, miniature drones, the way that they are used is greatly enhanced by AI, enabling them to use thousands of drones at a time, controlled by very few people to attack multiple targets. And this is a new advance. When I was helping the Peshmerga in the fight against ISIS back in 2015 and 2016, ISIS [the Islamic State] had one or two drones that had a small impact but not a huge impact. Now we see tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of drones being used at the same time, but they wouldn't be as effective without AI. So it's fundamental for the current operation, particularly drone warfare at the moment.
What are the environmental and health consequences of using these weapons and explosives in the region and worldwide?
Well, war is never good for the planet and never has been and never will be. I think what we're seeing in Ukraine, a country absolutely devastated by war - not only with the destruction of buildings which of course we've seen over the Middle East in the last few years as well - but also the destruction of the environment. In Ukraine, we've seen dams blown up and thousands and thousands of hectares of land flooded and contaminated. We've seen rivers in Ukraine contaminated deliberately in some cases. So, yeah, war devastates the planet in every way. One only has to look at the state of buildings in Gaza and elsewhere, the state of buildings in Ukraine, to see that war is absolutely devastating.
I think the other element that people potentially forget is the psychological element, the effect on people's mental health. And no doubt all those young children growing up in Ukraine, in Gaza, and in Israel will be mentally scarred by the wars that are going on. So yeah, it's horrific. And somebody like myself who spent 35 years on the battlefield of the world would always advocate peace; war is to be avoided at all costs.
Chemical and biological expert Mr. Hamish Gordon, thanks for being with us, sir.
Don't worry. I'm very fond of Kurdistan. As I said, I spent two years helping the Peshmerga in the fight with ISIS.
Thank you very much, Colonel.
Thank you.
Comments
Rudaw moderates all comments submitted on our website. We welcome comments which are relevant to the article and encourage further discussion about the issues that matter to you. We also welcome constructive criticism about Rudaw.
To be approved for publication, however, your comments must meet our community guidelines.
We will not tolerate the following: profanity, threats, personal attacks, vulgarity, abuse (such as sexism, racism, homophobia or xenophobia), or commercial or personal promotion.
Comments that do not meet our guidelines will be rejected. Comments are not edited – they are either approved or rejected.
Post a comment