A strategic blow from Iran: “Destroying an E-3 Sentry AWACS means affecting the ‘brain’ of the US air war.”

The past March 27an Iranian attack with missiles and drones against the Príncipe Sultan air basen, in Saudi Arabia, destroyed a US Air Force Boeing E-3 Sentry AWACS aircraft Additionally, at least one Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker was damaged in the same attack and about 10 US service members were injured.

SEE ALSO: US ground incursion into Iran: the military plan, the strategic objectives and the duration of the fighting

The destruction of E-3 Sentry It is especially serious because it is a “command center in the air” that detects missiles, planes, drones and coordinates combats. Its loss directly affects the US air situational awareness in the region.

Until before the war it was known that The United States had 16 aircraft E-3 Sentry and The cost of each of them reaches 270 million dollars.

What is an AWACS aircraft, key in modern warfare

The strategic impact: what the US loses after the destruction of the AWACS

The international analyst Francesco Tucciprofessor of Political Science and International Relations at the UPC, warns that The Iranian attack that destroyed the E-3 Sentry in Saudi Arabia not only demonstrates a high-precision operationbut also a possible combination of advanced intelligence, miscalculations by Washington and structural vulnerabilities in US bases in the Middle East.

Tucci emphasizes that achieving a goal of that level within a supposedly protected base “is not a coincidence.” In the same facility, remember, several Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker tanker planes had already been damaged.key pieces for in-flight refueling and, therefore, for the logistics of any sustained air operation. “They are valuable objectives, because logistics is essential,” explains to The Commercehighlighting that the loss of these capabilities directly impacts the operations of the United States Air Force.

About him E-3 Sentrythe analyst is categorical: it is a strategic loss. “It is a fundamental aircraft. “It controls, gives early warning, directs attacks and provides the situation in real time to the fighter-bombers,” he states. In his opinion, the destruction of the aircraft represents significant damage to Washington, not only because of its high value, but because The United States has a limited fleet of these systems.

Tucci also points to a critical factor that allowed the Tehran coup: the underestimation of Iranian capabilities. As he explains, Large aircraft such as the E-3 Sentry cannot be in places that are vulnerable. “They had not thought that they could be within range of the Iranian drones,” he states. This situation, he adds, reveals a greater vulnerability in US bases in the Gulf, especially against an adversary that has opted for an asymmetric war based on drones, ballistic missiles and precision attacks.

Along these lines, Tucci maintains that the conflict has refuted the narrative of rapid American superiority repeatedly expressed by Donald Trump. Despite the blows received, Iran “continues to hold on” and maintains constant attacks against Israel and allies of Washington. This, he explains, responds to a doctrine of resistance and a more solid political structure than was estimated. “There was a serious evaluation error,” states, pointing out that The impact of the initial attacks on Iranian military capabilities was overestimated.

The analyst also warns that the cost of the war for the United States is being higher than expected. In addition to the E-3 Sentrymentions the loss or damage of tanker aircraft, anti-missile system radars and impacted bases. “The damage is much higher than expected,” holds, which would be influencing Washington’s caution to avoid a direct land escalation.

Did Russia help Iran destroy the E-3 Sentry?

The analyst on defense and intelligence issues Andrés Gómez de la Torre maintains that the destruction of AWACS E-3 Sentry constitutes much more than a symbolic blow: ““This is an action with military, media and psychological impact in the midst of the war with Iran.”

According to him, the attack would have been carried out by the air component of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and directly targets one of the United States’ most critical capabilities in the theater of operations. “The E-3 is not just an aircraft, it is a surveillance, early warning and command and control platform”precise. In this sense, it highlights that its main value lies in providing what is known as “situational awareness”: a comprehensive view of the airspace that allows detecting and coordinating the response to planes, missiles, helicopters and drones in real time.

For Gómez de la Torre, the loss of this aircraft implies, in operational terms, an attempt to “blind” the defensive and organizational systems of the adversary. “Some call these platforms the eyes of a conflict,” points out, emphasizing that Its destruction directly affects the ability of US forces to anticipate and coordinate.. However, he warns that The impact, although significant, does not completely nullify Washington’s air power, which still has other assets in the region.

The analyst also points to a possible failure in the security of the base where the plane was located. “Beyond the psychological blow, it has been a failure in its custody”he says, referring to the exposure of a high-value platform in an environment that, in theory, should be heavily protected.

Regarding the possible role of Russia, Gómez de la Torre points out that there are indications, although without definitive confirmation. “Everything indicates that there could be intelligence information from satellite images”he explains, mentioning organizations such as the SVR or the GRU as possible sources. However, he points out that has not yet been conclusively proven that Moscow has provided accurate data for target location, so considers it premature to affirm direct collaboration in the operation.

In his opinion, if this type of support is confirmed, the conflict would escalate to an even more complex level, by indirectly involving a power like Russia in actions against US assets.

For its part, Tucci considers it “very likely” that there has been external intelligence support. In that context, points out as plausible the hypothesis that Russia has provided key informationsuch as satellite or target positioning data. “It doesn’t seem crazy to me,” holds, and draws a parallel with the support that NATO provides to Ukraine. However, he clarifies that There is no conclusive public evidence, although he remembers that versions of cooperation between Moscow, Tehran and even China at different levels have been circulating for weeks.

Gómez de la Torre concludes that The episode reveals both the growing sophistication of Iranian capabilities and the vulnerabilities facing US forces in the region..