A new study indicating that Iran’s missile arsenal is much less threatening than previously thought could calm fears in Europe and across the Mideast — but should it?

The study, by the California-based James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, was leaked to the Associated Press prior to publishing. Iranian missiles are “no longer as valuable for conducting conventional military operations,” the center’s Sam Lair told the AP. “They may be more valuable simply as terror weapons.”

Such a determination may not calm anyone who is suffering terror attacks from Iran’s proxies. Yet, it might give solace to strategists who have long considered the Iranian arsenal an existential threat to countries in the Islamic Republic’s crosshairs.

A 2015 United Nations Security Council resolution that endorsed that year’s nuclear deal with the Islamic Republic set up a number of “sunsets.” Those included the expiration, by last October, of a global ban on Iranian imports and exports of ballistic missiles. American and European diplomats declined to trigger a “snap-back” mechanism that could have reinstated all sanctions imposed on Iran prior to the nuclear deal.

Western policy-makers might have underestimated the danger posed by Iran’s growing missile arsenal. Now, “European officials expect Iran to deliver ballistic missiles to Russia imminently,” Bloomberg reported Monday, adding that this may trigger “swift response from Ukraine’s allies.”

According to the analysis made public by the AP, though, Iranian missiles might be less accurate than Tehran claims, and less even than Western analysts previously assessed them to be. 

Iran’s April 14 multi-projectile attack on Israel is widely considered to have been unsuccessful. According to some reports, half of all missiles used either failed to take off or landed well short of Israel. Most drones were intercepted by the Israelis and American-led regional and Western allies.

According to James Martin, the few ballistic missiles that penetrated Israel’s multi-layered air defense systems landed far from their intended targets. 

In targeting the Nevatim air base in southern Israel, Iran hoped to obliterate a fleet of Israel’s most advanced F-35 fighter jets. According to the James Martin analysis, as reported by the AP, the average Emad missile miss, or “circular error probable,” was by 0.75 miles. That is far off the 1,640 feet circle that Westerners previously thought was the Emad missile’s accuracy.   

The 0.75-mile figure is also far off Iran’s sales pitch to potential buyers of the Emad missiles, including Russia and other anti-American players. Iran boasts of high accuracy, claiming the Emad could hit within 164 feet of a target. 

The James Martin inaccuracy analysis “doesn’t seem credible,” a widely cited independent Israeli missile researcher, Tal Inbar, tells the Sun. Other observers warn that even if the assessment is near-accurate, it means little for strategists hoping to address Iran’s missile threat. 

“It would be a mistake to treat Iranian technical failures as a call to rest on our laurels, and to merely rely on integrated air and missile defense alone,” an Iran watcher at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Behnam Ben Taleblu, tells the Sun. While Iran is studying the April attack to improve its performance, Mr. Ben Taleblu adds, “we cannot forget about the forward deployed threats posed by the ‘ring of fire’ that Israel faces today.” 

A missile launched from Iran, which at the shortest distance is 620 miles away from Israel, might miss a target that its Lebanon-based top proxy, Hezbollah, could hit more accurately from just across the Israeli border. Hezbollah’s arsenal is estimated at more than 150,000 Iranian-supplied rockets and missiles of various ranges and accuracy, as well as an ever-growing drone fleet.    

Last month, the Israeli Air Force destroyed a large number of rocket launchers at Hezbollah’s stronghold in southern Lebanon. The preemptive attack sent an important message to Iran’s proxies. As two researchers at the northern Israel-based Alma think tank, Yaakov Lappin and Tal Beeri, write, it showed that Israel “has the capability to repeat the action in varying scales, depending on the operational and intelligence context.” 

Yet, Iran is different. While Israel has good intelligence on the Islamic Republic, Messrs. Lappin and Beeri write, “the vast size of Iran and its distance from Israel mean that even if a target is identified and about to be struck, it could continue moving. Israeli fighter jets may have to seek updated target locations during the flight.”

American and European policies have so far failed to address the danger that Iran’s missile industry poses globally. Adherence to the letter of the 2015 nuclear deal prevented toughening sanctions. Analyses that diminish the Iranian missile menace could encourage more such failed policies.