Would Iran block the Strait of Hormuz?
Daniel Korski 2:42pm
With the EU agreeing a new round of sanctions on Iran – outlawing European oil and
gas purchases from Iran in six months, freezing Iran's Central Bank and banning trade in gold and other precious metals with any state-related bodies – tensions between Iran and the West are
increasing. An Iranian MP has – again – warned that Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz and the US administration has – again – said that such an action will be countered.
But what would happen if Iran carried out its threat?
Iran has noteworthy littoral warfare capabilities, including mines, anti-ship cruise missiles, and land-based air defence. If Iran uses these capabilities smartly, it could probably impede traffic in the Strait of Hormuz for some time: maybe days, maybe weeks. This would cut off a quarter of the world's oil and thus send oil prices skyrocketing. Recession would follow. A closure would, however, also hurt Iran – something like 70 per cent of Iran’s budget revenues are generated by oil exports, all of which must transit the Strait.
US-led efforts to reopen the Strait would escalate rapidly into sustained, large-scale air and naval operations during which Iran could impose significant economic and military costs on the US and its forces. Think of a flotilla of Basij-crewed boats heading, kamikaze-style, towards US ships. Think USS Cole-style attacks.
Ultimately, however, Iran would lose the fight. It has neither the capabilities nor the resources to sustain a confrontation with the West. You can’t win a maritime conflict against the US Fifth Fleet using ‘Basij Boats’. Having lost, the Iranian regime would probably face an internal challenge and be vulnerable to attacks on its nuclear facilities by Israel or the US.
For these reasons, Iran is unlikely to push its luck. But there is another reason too. The blockade is Iran's anti-strike deterrent, the threat it brandishes when it thinks an attack on its nuclear facilities is imminent. If Iran closes the Strait now and loses a subsequent naval confrontation with the US, what would it have left as a deterrent? Hezbollah attacks on Israel? Terrorism in Europe? Neither is likely to win Iran any favours or sway the West. Quite the opposite. It would probably broaden the conflict, drawing in more states and leading to calls for the US to target nuclear and military installations on the Iranian mainland and for ‘decapitation strikes’ against the Iranian regime.
Short-term and medium-term, therefore, Iran loses more from closing the Strait of Hormuz than the West, though any conflict will not be easy or casualty-free for either side. Iran's regime is many things but it is not irrational. Or, at least, it hasn't been yet.
Previous
MaxSceptic
January 24th, 2012 3:10pm Report this commentOh that the nutters in Tehran would provide such a straight-forward casus belli.
Frank P
January 24th, 2012 3:41pm Report this comment"Iran has noteworthy littoral warfare capabilities" ...
I think you missed the first consonant off that adjective Danny Boy.
The Muzzies have been waging war on the clitoris for centuries. The straits of her mush are open only for the delectation of jealous husbands and no obstruction by gristly bits is allowed.
Axstane
January 24th, 2012 3:41pm Report this commentThe good old impotent EU. In 6 months or so they may think about discussing something.
Daniel, your faith in the EU institutions is so touching, like Greyfriars Bobby - nothing will lure you away from the death scene.
Rhoda Klapp
January 24th, 2012 3:42pm Report this commentSo you are saying that if they pick a fight with the US et al over freedom of niavigation, it might not ultimately turn out too well? I can see why your words are so eagerly awaited round here.
Ostrich (occasionally)
January 24th, 2012 3:47pm Report this commentFrank P 24th, 3:41pm
Moderators slacking on the job again, eh, Frank?
El Sid
January 24th, 2012 4:17pm Report this commentA bit of background reading for those who are complacent about what a few small boats can do :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
Hexhamgeezer
January 24th, 2012 4:51pm Report this commentIf Iran lost the fight, Hezbollah in Lebanon will be digging very deep holes in the ground - much good it will do them.
There is no chance of the Cole style attacks so devoutly wished by the Islamolefties. In a war Mr K, the armed forces are on alert permanently.
The Iranians know this. The only question is how many bodies are they willing to sacrifice until their 'honour' is satisfied.
How stupid are they going to be and for how long?
The US screwed up on planning after both Iraq invasions. Hormuz is a totally different situation and has been analysed for years. Ask your mate Paddy.
Jon Stack
January 24th, 2012 6:05pm Report this commentSo, given that the EU is prepared to stir up the hornet's nest, are they prepared to commit their member states' military into action if it all goes off as a result. Somehow I suspect the US/UK will have to do their dirty work for them.
ButcombeMan
January 24th, 2012 6:19pm Report this commentDaniel
You wrote about this on 3rd January, I told you then what you are now telling us. I am not the only sneerer in despair at your efforts on this subject.
I suppose, next, you will be claiming responsibility for the joint nation flotilla because you suggested it when the plan was already well advancced?
You are either in front of your audience (and events) or behind.
***********
@Axstane 3.42
Excellent. Because it is so true.
Andy Carpark
January 24th, 2012 7:02pm Report this commentYou have done yourself proud in your penultimate paragraph, Mr Korski.
Q What deterrent against an attack on its nuclear facilities would Iran have if it closed the Straits?
A It could do XY & Z - thus risking an attack on its nuclear facilities.
(Clown music) RAT-tat-taddle-addle AT-tat-ta-ta ...
itsyourself
January 24th, 2012 7:05pm Report this commentCan we cut the wheat supply to Iran if they try to close the strait? How long will Irans food supply last?
Herbert Thornton
January 24th, 2012 7:09pm Report this comment"Iran's regime is many things but it is not irrational."
I think it depends on what's meant by "irrational".
The thing that should concern the entire world is that the more mens' minds are under the influence of Islam, the more they are convinced that the most rational thing of all is to achieve martyrdom.
Hexhamgeezer
January 24th, 2012 11:55pm Report this commentA lovely bit of elite expert surrender monkeying on Iran in the DT today from Peter Jenkins ex-Perm Rep to the IAEA.
He says that‘the West is all but isolated’ on Iran (from whom? Burundi, Laos?). He also whinges that ’most non-westerners would prefer to see Iran treated the same’ as other NPT signatories. He says that there is no written evidence that Iran is seeking to build nuclear weapons and doesn’t accept that past evidence of attempts to acquire the technology equals future intentions.
Hexhamgeezer
January 24th, 2012 11:56pm Report this comment....
Dhimmi Jenkins evidently feels that a country directly responsible for the deaths of many of his own citizens, that sponsors terrorism, and is threatening to wipe a country off the map is equivalent to, say, Brazil, Germany or Japan. On this basis I guess he doesn’t believe that Hitler authorised the Holocaust because there is no signed evidence to that effect either.
Another feeble ‘reason’ for allowing the Iranians to proceed apace is that, ‘ the Iranian character is more inclined to defiance than buckling under pressure’
Unlike, of course, fkg FCO mandarins.
David H
January 25th, 2012 2:55am Report this commentIt's not Iran's irrationality that should worry us, it's our own leaders'. They either stupidly or willfully miss-read Sadam's capabilities and got into a tragic mess there. Are those now in charge any more competent? I'd say watch them a bit more carefully this time.
There's nothing wrong with aggressively protecting our interests when that needs doing. But letting idiots determine strategy based on intelligence fed from countries and persons with other vested interests is asking for trouble. Think Fox and Werrity...
Heartless C.
January 25th, 2012 8:50am Report this commentDanny - you worry too much!
The Baroness and her multitude of jobsworths will save us - that's the idea isn't it?
Vulture
January 25th, 2012 10:28am Report this commentAs per normal, Danny doesn't know what he's sounding off about and has clearly never been near the Straits of Hormuz.
They're about ten miles wider than the Channel and beyond the capacity of Iran's tinpot Navy to block.
Even in its depleted state the Royal Navy could keep them open; the US Navy certainly could. Sabre rattling by the desperate loons in Teheran.
It's going to come to war between us and them sometime : may as well be now.
Ian Walker
January 25th, 2012 1:07pm Report this commentAfter USS Cole, the US Navy rolled out the Phalanx CIWS to the entire fleet, and changed operating procedures regarding it's readiness.
Attempting a small boat suicide attack on a US ship would mean a whole lot of 'suicide' and not much 'attack'
Back to top