The US plan to launch a land invasion of Iran to capture the hidden weapons-grade uranium and seize the oil fields after the failure of its airstrikes could well  be as disastrous as the campaigns of Napoleon and Hitler to seize Russia, the British and the Americans to capture Afghanistan, and the American attempt to decimate the Vietnamese communists.   

In all these cases, stiff resistance by the opponents combined with the difficult terrain and adverse climatic conditions resulted in the invader’s humiliating defeat and retreat. 

In 1812, Napoleon’s Grande Armée of over 600,000 was forced to retreat from Russia, suffering a catastrophic loss of over 500,000 troops due to starvation, disease, the harsh winter and relentless attacks by better acclimatised Russian troops.

Commencing on October 19, 1812, the French retreat was characterised by constant harassment from Russian armies and Cossacks. The final death blow was delivered by “General Winter”.  By December 1812, fewer than 100,000 soldiers were able to return to France. The myth of Napoleon’s invincibility lay shattered. 

Thirty years later, in 1842, the British-Indian army retreating from Kabul after the First Anglo-Afghan War (1839-1842) was decimated by the Afghans. The 16,000 soldiers and camp followers, led by General Elphinstone, fell victim to biting cold, rugged terrain, and the sharp shooting Afghans firing from mountain heights. 

Only one man made it to the British base in Jalalabad. When the sole survivor, army surgeon Dr. William Brydon, was asked where the army was, he said: “I am the army”. Indeed, on that date, it was a one-man army. 

Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union in December 1941 had to return to base in disarray, exhausted and ill-equipped for the cruel  Russian winter, the Russians’ scorched earth policy and fierce offensives by the defenders. Given the massive troop losses, the  German army was unable to continue World War II by 1944.

Between the 1960s and early 1970s, the Americans tried to crush the leftists in  Vietnam. But the terrain, the guerrilla tactics and the determination of the defenders blunted the advantages the Americans had, such as sophisticated weaponry and air power. The Americans had to quit Vietnam in 1973 after losing 58,000 lives and wasting a trillion dollars. 

In 1989,  the Soviets had to beat a hasty retreat from Afghanistan. The  Americans followed the Soviets, and when they quit in 2021 after achieving nothing, they had spent 2.3 trillion dollars of their taxpayers’ money.

The initial successes of Napoleon, the British, the Germans, the Soviets and the Americans were indeed impressive, but none of them could hold on to what they seized by raw military power. The terrain, the climate and the resilience, grit and inventiveness of the local militias proved to be more potent than anticipated. In every case, David had prevailed over Goliath.

Such a fate may well be waiting for the Americans and Israelis in Iran, which is why many military experts in the US are asking President Donald Trump to desist from a land invasion and go for a negotiated settlement. 

In his detailed piece in UK’s Daily Mail, Perkin Amalaraj warns that the US may well be repeating the Afghanistan story. As in Afghanistan, US troops will encounter in Iran, natural fortresses in the form of mountains on land and mines in the Strait of Hormuz. 

On the mainland, there will be an estimated 600,000 militia led by hardened Revolutionary Guards. 

Amalaraj says that Iran is home to vast salt flats, dense and swampy marshes, and a series of rocky mountains that create a natural, nationwide fortress, in which countless military and nuclear sites lay hidden. Iran’s dominance over the Strait of Hormuz means that any enemy vessels in either the Gulf of Oman or the Persian Gulf may become sitting ducks. 

He quotes analyst Çagatay Balc who had written in the Turkish newspaper The Daily Sabah, “A comprehensive ground intervention could prove even more strategically costly than Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq combined.” 

Iran is one of the biggest countries in the world, spread over 630,000 square miles. Its total land mass is larger than France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and Portugal combined. It also has one of the largest populations in the world, with more than 93 million. It is four times bigger than Iraq, and nearly three times bigger than Afghanistan. 

The country has an incredibly high elevation. Tehran, Iran’s capital, sits at 3,900ft. According to the US Air Force Medical service, military personnel operating in locations above 4,000ft can get acute mountain sickness. This requires significant training and acclimatisation, something which may not be possible for a full ground invasion of a country, given the time constraint, Amalaraj points out.

Iran has three major mountain ranges, the biggest being the Zagros range. They run for around 990 miles from Iran’s northwest border with Turkey towards Bandar Abbas on the Strait of Hormuz. It towers over the Persian Gulf. 

Tehran is protected by the Alborz Mountains. Along the Caspian Sea is the Alborz Mountain Range, which also protects Tehran’s northern side. The Makran mountain range, stretches across Iran’s portion of the Gulf of Oman. These mountains host much of Iran’s population. The vast majority of Iran’s military and nuclear assets are hidden throughout its three mountain ranges.

Mountains are notoriously difficult to fight in. Amalaraj quotes NATO’s Mountain Warfare Centre of Excellence, to say that mountains block access, and are characterised by extreme weather conditions. Vehicles have to deal with steep inclines, narrow paths and potentially lethal falls. 

NATO recommends that armies should be split up into smaller-than-normal units to allow for flexibility and agility. But that will increase isolation and vulnerability.

Kris Osborn, military affairs editor of defence publication 19FortyFive, warned that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps could easily mobilise large numbers of fighters who are all trained in guerrilla warfare and would know their terrains far better than an invading army. 

“Even if the United States defeated Iran’s conventional army, these irregular forces could continue fighting for years,” Osborn warns.  

Iran is known for its wide marshes. Among the biggest are the Shadegan Ponds, a series of wetlands covering 400,000 hectares. Wetlands are notoriously difficult for invaders to pass through. Heavy vehicles, like tanks, can easily get stuck in saturated soil. And the terrain around marshes is often both too complex for ordinary land vehicles and too shallow for waterborne vehicles.

Any invading troops that walk through marshes will have to follow predictable routes, which makes them easy pickings for Iranian soldiers who know these lands like the back of their palms.

And given that almost all of Iran’s coast has mountain ranges, the rate of coastal elevation is stark, increasing the risk of a sea-borne invasion. For instance, the town of Nikshahr sits at an elevation of 1,673ft 60 miles from the Gulf of Oman. As a result, even if an airborne invasion were successfully executed, the size and geography of Iran would make it incredibly difficult to mount a full invasion from the sea.

Iran is also home to two major salt flats, Dasht-E Kavir and Dasht-E Lut. These cover a total of 50,000 square miles, covering the central and eastern parts of the nation. Salt flats are notoriously hard to operate in. Salt dust is incredibly corrosive, capable of quickly degrading protective material, as well as internal machinery and electronics, and rendering them useless, Amalaraj says.

“Iran’s natural terrain makes it a hardy adversary, and may severely limit what a full invasion could achieve,” he concludes. 

But it does look as if President Trump, egged on by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, will go ahead with the land invasion as he has to show that he is not defeated by Iran. The fact that US and Israeli air power has not dented Iran’s will to fight is difficult to stomach for leaders who have not experienced defeat or negotiated a settlement on the basis of give and take.

President Trump portrays himself as a man of peace and a deal-maker rather than as a war monger. But his actions do not support his claim. On the contrary, they show that he will play the zero-sum game where the winner takes all. That is but a recipe for war, including a perilous land invasion of Iran.

© Eurasia Review