- Home
- About Us
- Contributors
- Departments
- Topics
- Back Issues
- Weekly Archives
- AmSpecBlog
- Subscribe
- Newsletter
- Advertise
- Donate
- Contact Us
- Daily Digest
- Templeton Essays
search
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
At Large
What Happens If…
The first reaction that occurs when the issue of an Israeli and/or American attack on Iran's nuclear weapon development program is discussed is a possible counterstrike by Tehran. Aside from missiles being launched at Tel Aviv, interdiction of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz rushes to mind.
A successful effort in this regard cuts off a large portion of the world's crude oil supply, including Iran's own exports. The Russians would gain from their increased oil supply role, but it's unclear how that act would aid Iran's military situation. At least it would give Tehran the satisfaction of being able to strike back against the United States. Obviously closing down the Strait harms the Israelis not at all other than getting Middle East oil consumers mad at them. The Arab producers already are.
Iran's dependence on imported refined petroleum is an obstacle to their seeking to close waterway traffic in the Strait and a key argument against their use of that tactic. Granting that Tehran might believe it can develop alternate sources via land if necessary, the feasibility of closing down the Strait of Hormuz is certainly open to question.
This subject has long been a subject of defense studies. One of the most knowledgeable individuals in this field is Chester "Chet" Nagle, author of the critically acclaimed Iran Covenant. A graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy and Georgetown Law School, Dr. Nagle was formerly the military advisor to the National Security Advisor of Oman and as such participated in a joint U.S./UK/Oman assessment of risks relative to any Iranian effort to close the Strait. In appropriately salty yet definitive language. Nagle has characterized any Iranian blockade effort as "…a hell of a lot easier said than done."
It's clear that Iran does not have the naval resources for a classic blockade of the Strait. For a short while, however, before being eliminated, its land to sea missile defense systems might cause some difficulties. Beyond that Iran would have to physically obstruct the passage. One idea that has been posed is to sink ships -- preferably VLCC size -- to block the channel. Nagle points out that this is just not feasible as the Iranians would have to stack them several ships high and wide. A quick look at the sea charts proves that out.
Mining is the priority weapon. But that would have to be done in Omani waters, for large vessel navigation must go through their deep channels rather than the Iranian lanes. This adds another international wrinkle, but the Iranians might not care much about such niceties. Iran can choose to lay the mines several ways. Aircraft can do the job, but there is no intelligence that shows the Iranian Air Force has the experience and capability to drop the appropriate mines.
Chet Nagle has indicated that perhaps the best way to clandestinely place mines would be by submarine. The U.S. did this in Haiphong harbor and it would work in a narrow waterway such as Hormuz. But to use this option the Iranians must have subs that have practiced the technique and, preferably, self-propelled mines. Nagle doesn't believe the Iranian Navy is capable of this op.
What the Iranians do have is many types of boats and ships capable of introducing mines into the water. It is generally agreed that the traditional moored mine is difficult to lay expertly, and easy to sweep. Nagle points out that bottom mines are easy to lay, hard to find, and, given their magnetic, acoustic and pressure sensors, very hard to sweep. But he notes these are "bottom" mines and thus will not threaten a ship far above. There are very effective classified mobile mines, he says, but Iran would have to have become proficient in their use and deployment.
The counter measures to all these mines are minesweepers and minesweeping helicopters, of course. Chet Nagle is very direct in his comments on this. "The best counter measure is to heavily bomb the bases from which the minelayers might come as well as sinking the minelayers en route. That takes planning and resolve."
Perhaps the most "Persian" of tactics would be if Tehran's propaganda machine churned out statements that they had mined the Strait without actually doing so. This would move the big insurers to declare the waterway a war zone with its predictable effect on prices and the world economy. The counter to that move would be for the U.S. and UK navies (along with NATO and Gulf forces desirous of participating) to deploy in full battle mode to interdict by force if necessary any and all Iranian navy and air assets.
Yes, blocking the Strait of Hormuz is far easier said than done. But it takes something more than the threat of sanctions to make Tehran aware of that fact.
Comments
Leave a Comment
Related Articles
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Feeding the Beast
- Tex Mess
- Obama's Foreign Policy Problems, Personified
ADVERTISEMENT
Martin Owens| 8.28.09 @ 6:51AM
Ah, but just think- the mere announcement that the Strait was mined, or even under some unspecified interdiction, would be enough to send the price of oil skyrocketing. With all the speculative consequences.
Deploy battle groups? don't look now, but ships, planes and especially the resolve to confront our enemies are all in short supply.
Darin| 8.28.09 @ 7:15AM
If we had a leader as president, I wouldn't be concerned. We could tell Iran to cease and desist or we take out their gasoline production capabilities. I believe there's only one factory in Iran which produces gasoline - the rest is imported.
However, with Obama and his apparent disdain for America, I'm not sure how it would pan out.
Tenn Slim| 8.28.09 @ 8:45AM
All
Just a moment for a comment.
1. Mines, blocks, interdictions, Psyschological blocks, etal are minutae. The Big Deck Carriers of the USA would impose severy punishment on the sources of the Hormuz ants.
bt
The REAL problem here is Misslle delivery systems to the Big Decks. Any Aviator knows full well that a set of standoffs delivered to the Big Decks = NO PLACE TO COME HOME TO.....
The Iranians could do serious damage to our forces in this manner. Blocking the Straits would be possible, but at one large cost to both sides.
end
JP| 8.28.09 @ 9:35AM
If the Iranians got ahold of surface to surface missles we could be in trouble. The question is, how would Obama react?
MSB| 8.28.09 @ 10:05AM
"The best counter measure is to heavily bomb the bases from which the minelayers might come as well as sinking the minelayers en route. That takes planning and resolve."
We're doomed.
Mike| 8.28.09 @ 10:16AM
Here is a radical idea - considering the fact that Israel is not the 51st state and that Iranian nukes don't pose a threat to the U.S., we don't bomb Iran and cause the problem in the first place.
I am sick and tired of my tax dollars going to fight pointless wars. All you keyboard heroes need to remember that the American empire is done.
Dustoff| 8.28.09 @ 10:19AM
JP| 8.28.09 @ 9:35AM
If the Iranians got ahold of surface to surface missles we could be in trouble. The question is, how would Obama react?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
They already have them. RUSSIAN made.
Saddam had them too, but we do have systems to take them down. Not all, but many.
Al Adab| 8.28.09 @ 11:10AM
Were the US to help the cause of world peace by taking down Iran's nuclear plants, that would be good. If Iran closed the straits,we could open them, however it might be best just to find our own source of oil. Less dependance on foreign supplies as the left is so fond of saying.
The US has the capability to patrol the seas and keep the oceans and trade routes open. All it takes is the will. Whether the current administration of engagement with dictators would choose that course is, however, problematic.
THREEPRONG| 8.28.09 @ 11:17AM
SO the attackers need to do a three prong attack, bomb the nukes and the missile sites and sink Iran's navy.
Alex| 8.28.09 @ 2:34PM
The first reaction to a discussion about an attack on Iran ought to be how the world will cope with the nuclear fallout of multiple Chernobyls. Those downwind will suffer horribly. Should the jetstream pick up the fallout, it could end N. Hemispheric agriculture for a few years, or at least livestock production. So don't exclude famine for the US, Japan, India, and China as among the unintended consequences. Just the one reactor at Chernobyl put out 400 times the radiation of Hiroshima. Longer-lived isotopes as well. Think about it.
Ken (Old Texican| 8.28.09 @ 2:39PM
Ah "peace in our time don't you know."
Just a thought here...
What if it truly is a HOLY WAR that we just have not acknowledged yet?
What if it truly is a battle between "a culture of life and liberty and a culture of death and slavery?"
What if the slavers truly do now inhabit our Whitehouse west wing?
Oh my!
Ken (Old Texican)| 8.28.09 @ 3:25PM
Alex
Excuuuuuuuse me. I am sorry about the fallout.
Fallout has been grossly overestimated, nevertheless, read my post above.
I am an American...second. First, I am a Christian.
You are bringing up the same old tired "we are all gonna' die........ disarm and kneel down."
Screw you all.
Al Adab| 8.28.09 @ 3:36PM
Alex, Alex, Alex: How many people live in Hiroshima today? Remember your lessons from childhood, "Do not take counsel of your fears."
Actually, would the Iranian reactors be hit or simply the centrifuge plant? You might want to give a thought or two to the options.
Had we not spent too much time in Iraq, we could have dealt with Iran several years ago. Now the threat is immediate and options are more limite. With a little luck actions and reactions could spell the end of the unstable theocratic autocracy currently ruling Persia and it could rejoin the nations of the civilized world.
And by the way, at what point would you accept military action in any contingency? Ever? Solely responsive? Prophylactic? Explain to us all your criteria please.
L. Ross| 8.28.09 @ 5:49PM
Alex:
Let's start out with a few facts. The sun is an unshielded nuclear reactor lobbing broad spectrum radiation at us. The longer the half life of an isotope, the less radioactive it is. They are inversely porportional. The notion that the northern hemisphere will be polluted is balderdash. Learn something before you post. You make your side look ridiculous.
CrimsonSunsetfire| 8.28.09 @ 7:12PM
Why not develop our offshore oil resources, our tar sands, mine our coal, and let the Islamofascists choke on their damn oil!
cheap supra shoes| 8.28.09 @ 9:12PM
Great piece. You're one of the lucky few who gets to put on a resume' that you were a graduate of the University of Robert Novak. If you're a reporter it doesn't get any better than that.
chen| 8.29.09 @ 1:36AM
http://www.theaf1shoes.com/ nike af1 shoes
http://www.dunksbsite.com/ nike dunk sb shoes
Great piece. You're one of the lucky few who gets to put on a resume' that you were a graduate of the University of Robert Novak. If you're a reporter it doesn't get any better than that.
JAMES STONE,| 8.29.09 @ 1:54AM
THE AFGHANISTAN is not for USA, UK, NATO, or ISRAEL. Its only for them, ( AFGHANs ). NOT for USSR, PAKISTAN, INDIA, THE AFGHANISTAN is not for CNINA, IRAN or OTHER Countries. ( 250 countries) of THE WORLD. Its only for" BRAVE AFGHANIs." Who can fight MORE THEN 1000 years. The Time will be prue them. THE WORLD MAFIA CANT COONTROL THEM. ( CIA, FBI, MOSSAD, MI5, MI6, TALIBAN, AL-QAEDA,ISI, RAW,). These" DRUG MAFIA WAR" CANT CONTROLL AFGHANISTAN. OR NOT PAKISTAN. They are killing the" MONEY', & killing the' TIME" only. The ECONOMIC WAR CERISIS is gift for USA, UK, NATO, & ISRAEL. Its enuf for theme.Its only TOUGH of war.
JAMES STONE,| 8.29.09 @ 1:55AM
THE AFGHANISTAN is not for USA, UK, NATO, or ISRAEL. Its only for them, ( AFGHANs ). NOT for USSR, PAKISTAN, INDIA, THE AFGHANISTAN is not for CNINA, IRAN or OTHER Countries. ( 250 countries) of THE WORLD. Its only for" BRAVE AFGHANIs." Who can fight MORE THEN 1000 years. The Time will be prue them. THE WORLD MAFIA CANT COONTROL THEM. ( CIA, FBI, MOSSAD, MI5, MI6, TALIBAN, AL-QAEDA,ISI, RAW,). These" DRUG MAFIA WAR" CANT CONTROLL AFGHANISTAN. OR NOT PAKISTAN. They are killing the" MONEY', & killing the' TIME" only. The ECONOMIC WAR CERISIS is gift for USA, UK, NATO, & ISRAEL. Its enuf for theme.Its only TOUGH of war.
Bydand76| 8.29.09 @ 8:58AM
I have no clue what Mr. James Stone is trying to say.
What the Hell does that even mean?
Bydand76| 8.29.09 @ 9:11AM
Ok,
I have some experience in this field so please trust me when I say that the Iranians are not really capable of fielding a serious threat. Their navy is a joke and their army while numericaly intimidating is very similar to what we faced in Iraq. (both Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom)
With that being said it would be a matter of Air power at first with us hitting in multiple waves and targets. Refineries being a priority and military targets as secondary targets. Nuclear facilities would possibly be a tertiary target however the collateral damage would be catastrophic and hitting the infrastructure of the country would be a viable option after the primary target of incapacitating the defensive schemes of the Persians was eliminated.
Iran would not be able to keep up it defense because quite frankly it just isnt there.
A land war would be similar to the current conflicts within Iraq and Afghanistan and a robust insurgency should be expected. However, if we were to use the Petraues strategy the insurgency could be minimized by using the lessons learned from the current GWOT.
Iran would be wise to realize that we currently have to land masses to operate off of and we DO have the capability to enact such a scenario however we would be very vulnerable due to the fact that we would have to draw heavily on both the reserves and national guard. Not to mention the divisions in Korea as well. It could be done though.
As far as the question of do we have the resolve to get into another protracted nation building conflict right now. Well the answer to that is fairly obvious now isnt it?
Bud| 8.29.09 @ 10:47AM
One is tempted to speculate that Mr. Stone is a long-time user of "recreational drugs".
ACynic| 8.29.09 @ 1:04PM
As long as Obama is president, Iran will do what it wants and Obama will respond by making another one of his idiotic campaign speeches.
If Iran close the straits, the USA - under Obama - will do nothing at all.
Of course, oil prices will spike like crazy , providing an opportunity for Obama to take advantage of another "crisis" and expand his tyranny over the USA.
No point speculating how the USA will destroy the Iranian navy. The USA will do nothing at all.
The Iranians, N.Koreans, the Russians, the Chinese, Chavez, Ortega and most significantly, the ISRAELIS, know that Obama is a joke.
Father Zosimma| 8.29.09 @ 2:44PM
From everything I've read above, it looks as if the boys in Tel Aviv are working over time. But psy-ops doesn't work once people are on to you. As a previous poster said, "Israel is not the 51st state."
If they want to advance the American-Israeli co-empire, let Netanyahu and the other neo-con/likudniki or their own children personally take up arms. Stop demanding that the blood of treasure of everyone else be spent to satisfy their wide-eyed, psychotic dreams of hegemony.
20/20| 8.30.09 @ 8:44AM
Ah yes, disruption of the oil supply and the attendant difficulties. I know this may sound harsh but I wish to raise the N-word. No, not that one...Nuclear. A goodly percentage of our energy needs can be cared for with electricity, leaving fossil fuels for more specialized needs (aircraft, etc.).
The French have demonstrated real technological leadership in this area and, if one is to judge by the number of nuclear-powered warships the US has deployed without serious incident, some of our own lads know a thing or two about the technology. Some technologies are small enough to be installed as neighborhood power plants.
The only downside to nuclear is public perception stoked by those who profit mightily from the ongoing unrest. If the need for oil dropped only 50%, imagine what that would do to the political landscape and the attendant reduction of thugocracies around the world. In essence, it would remove an impediment to true democracy by no longer funding thugs and dictators.
While not nearly as much fun as bombing far-away places and watching spectatcular explosions on TV, adopting this almost limitless supply of power could have very positive benefits to the world.
Richard Baker| 8.30.09 @ 10:50AM
Darin:
I agree with your message. Can you imagine the confusion in the Kenyan as he had to decide?
George| 8.30.09 @ 9:29PM
You the funny thing to me is that I have sailed through the Strait of Hormuz, several times actually on one of those "big decks" while working below the water line. I hope Barry would take the gloves off and let us at em if they tried. I am still active shipboard duty, so I am putting my ass on the line here. And as to fallout, I have visited the hypocenter in Nagaski. It's a lovely park and kind of sobering, but not dangerously radioactive.
evisu jeans| 8.30.09 @ 10:15PM
Thank you very much. I am wonderring if I can share your article in the bookmarks of society,Then more friends can talk about this problem.
cheap jordan shoes| 8.30.09 @ 10:22PM
If they want to advance the American-Israeli co-empire, let Netanyahu and the other neo-con/likudniki or their own children personally take up arms.
Bruce| 8.31.09 @ 2:35AM
The U.S.is very capable of keeping the straights open if Isreal bombs Iran.We could bomb Iran back to the stone age in a matter of days.The problem is the leader of the U.S.Do we really know where his loyalties are???
chi flat iron| 8.31.09 @ 3:26AM
THE SCHOOL HEALTH formS had been distributed to the students with an error---the word "Sex"had been spelled with an "o". One mother, filling out the form for her son, wrote in the
blank next to "Sox": "Usually brown."
Skip MacLure| 8.31.09 @ 8:18PM
I hope somebody noticed that Somali Pirates fired on a US military aircraft WITHOUT response...Does any one seriously believe that this spineless rabble organizer excuse for a chief executive has the juevos to do anything more than grovel at the feet of every Arab he can find?
This non-leader will do absolutely nothing unless or until circumstance or the IDF force him to...I'm betting on the IDF.
Semper Fi
Skip M.
tiffany jewellery| 9.4.09 @ 5:38AM
tiffany
tiffany jewellery
tiffany jewellery| 9.4.09 @ 5:38AM
tiffany
tiffany jewellery
replica jersey| 9.7.09 @ 5:39AM
I stumbled upon your blog a while ago and come back occassionally since I find it a good read. Awesome article,feel free to take a tour on my website tooUgg Shoes ,
href="http://www.jerseys-union.com" title="replica jersey">replica jersey ,air jordan shoesYou articulate your thoughts so eloquently on very personal matters on this site, and I find your perspectives helpful in my own life. I believe true lasting happiness comes from having a sense of purpose in life. It'll differ for everyone, but I wish you luck in finding yours.
Wedding Dresses| 9.9.09 @ 10:46PM
I have read through this article, Wedding Dresses
Designer Wedding Gowns
I do not understand what it meant ah