Skip to content
Briefings are running a touch slower this week while we rebuild the foundations.See roadmap
Russia-Ukraine War 2026
1JUN

Iran's salvos shrink from hundreds to 40

3 min read
10:39UTC

Wave 17 of Operation True Promise 4 carried more than 40 missiles. The opening barrages ran to hundreds. Three explanations compete, and the answer determines how this war ends.

ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

Wave 17 at 40 missiles signals Iran has either consumed its mass-salvo inventory or is transitioning to precision targeting of high-value strategic assets — and the two possibilities imply opposite threat trajectories.

The IRGC launched waves 16 and 17 of Operation True Promise 4 on Wednesday. Wave 17 comprised "more than 40 missiles" — down from early-conflict salvos that overwhelmed Gulf air defences with hundreds of projectiles per wave. The IRGC has maintained its numbered wave system throughout the conflict, averaging roughly two named waves per day, which indicates organisational continuity even as volume has collapsed.

Three explanations are consistent with the data. attrition: US and Israeli forces have struck more than 2,000 targets since operations began, and B-2 bombers have specifically targeted hardened underground missile facilities . Physical destruction of launchers and stockpiles would produce exactly this curve. Conservation: Iran's foreign minister acknowledged earlier this week that military units are operating outside central government direction , but the persistence of the numbered wave structure suggests the IRGC's own command chain — distinct from the civilian government — retains coordination. A force aware of its finite inventory may be rationing for maximum political leverage rather than firing to exhaustion. Degraded confidence: if Gulf state and Coalition interception rates are high enough — the UAE alone intercepted 165 ballistic missiles in the opening days — large salvos become expensive theatre rather than effective military action, and smaller, more targeted strikes may reflect adaptation rather than weakness.

The distinction carries operational weight. Iran entered this conflict with its conventional missile force as the primary deterrent against regime-threatening attack — the "conventional shield" Defence Secretary Hegseth referenced at his first Pentagon briefing . If that shield is being physically dismantled, Iran's remaining options narrow to asymmetric warfare through proxies and allied militias, acceptance of terms, or escalation into domains it has so far avoided. The declining salvo rate is a fact. What it means is the central analytical question of the war's next phase.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Iran has been firing missiles in organised waves — think of them as successive rounds of an attack. Early waves were enormous: hundreds of missiles at a time, designed to overwhelm Israeli and US missile defences by sheer volume. By wave 17, that number has dropped to around 40. This could mean Iran is simply running low on missiles. Or it could mean Iran has switched strategies — saving its most capable remaining weapons for one carefully chosen, high-value target. A declining number is not the same as a declining threat, and these two possibilities require completely different responses.

Deep Analysis
Synthesis

The 'Operation True Promise' naming sequence — this being TP4 — signals Iran framed this conflict as the continuation of a campaign that began in April 2024, not a new war. This framing has a significant implication for ceasefire terms: Iran is not resolving a discrete crisis but concluding a multi-year campaign with defined political objectives (deterrence restoration after the Soleimani killing, Hamas war, and Nasrallah assassination). The bar for a negotiated exit is therefore higher than a simple ceasefire — Iran needs something it can frame as achieving the campaign's original purpose.

Root Causes

Iran's pre-war ballistic missile stockpile was estimated by multiple Western intelligence assessments at 2,000–3,000 units. At 17 waves with early salvos of hundreds and later salvos declining to tens, conservative arithmetic places total expenditure at 1,500–2,500 missiles. Independent of any infrastructure attrition, simple stockpile depletion creates genuine launch-rate pressure. This structural constraint is invisible in the body's analysis and is consistent with all three of the explanations the body presents.

Escalation

The transition to smaller salvos creates a qualitatively different risk profile. High-volume attacks are somewhat predictable in targeting logic — they aim at broad area denial and interception exhaustion. A single precise strike on a critical node — a desalination plant, a financial data centre, or a nuclear-adjacent facility — could be more consequential than 200 intercepted ballistic missiles. Declining salvo volume should not be read as declining threat severity.

What could happen next?
  • Risk

    Transition to low-volume precision salvos increases the probability of a single high-consequence strike on critical infrastructure that mass interception rates cannot prevent.

    Immediate · Assessed
  • Meaning

    Wave 17's composition suggests Iran has moved past its mass-saturation phase; the remaining inventory is likely weighted toward higher-capability, harder-to-intercept systems.

    Immediate · Suggested
  • Consequence

    If remaining Iranian salvos include advanced hypersonic or cruise components held back from earlier waves, the interception success rates that shaped US and Israeli public confidence may not hold.

    Short term · Suggested
  • Precedent

    This is the first large-scale operational test of echelonment-style saturation doctrine against a US-integrated multi-layer missile defence architecture, generating lessons for all future adversaries and for US missile defence procurement.

    Long term · Assessed
First Reported In

Update #19 · First US torpedo kill since 1945

GlobalSecurity· 4 Mar 2026
Read original
Causes and effects
This Event
Iran's salvos shrink from hundreds to 40
The wave-by-wave data is the most granular publicly available measure of Iran's remaining conventional deterrent. The rate of decline — and its cause — determines whether Iran retains the capacity to impose costs that alter Washington's calculus, or whether the second US assault will face a functionally disarmed adversary.
Different Perspectives
China
China
Beijing has not publicly commented on the dual Oreshnik launch. China's declared position of urging restraint and dialogue sits awkwardly alongside its continued economic ties with Russia; the weapons escalation tests whether Beijing's neutrality framing can survive a European IRBM normalisation event.
IAEA
IAEA
Director General Grossi condemned the ZNPP reactor-6 turbine building strike and stated "there should be no attack of any kind from or against the plant." The agency confirmed normal radiation levels but has not resolved attribution; Rosatom CEO Likachev warned the region is "one step closer to an incident."
Turkey
Turkey
Ankara hosted Istanbul Round 2 at Ciragan Palace on 2 June and secured a 1,200-for-1,200 prisoner exchange, consolidating Turkey as the war's sole diplomatic venue after Rubio confirmed US mediation has ended. Erdogan's leverage over both parties grows with each round.
European Union
European Union
EU Ambassador Mathernova answered Lavrov's evacuation demand with "We stay in Kyiv. We stay with Ukraine." The Verkhovna Rada approved the EUR 90bn EU loan on 28 May; the EUR 9.1bn first tranche, the EU's first explicit defence-procurement financing, arrives mid-June.
United States
United States
Rubio declared US mediation stagnated on 22 May and confirmed no talks were occurring, then received Lavrov's evacuation demand three days later without ordering embassy drawdown. Washington's leverage now runs through the GL 134C sanctions cliff on 17 June rather than any active diplomatic channel.
Ukraine
Ukraine
Zelenskyy called Russia's 2-3 day ceasefire counter-offer at Istanbul Round 2 "shortsighted" and submitted a full peace memorandum covering EU membership, international guarantees, phased sanctions relief and frozen-asset reparations. Kyiv's position is that a partial ceasefire freeze aids Russian reconstitution; only an all-domain 30-day pause is acceptable.