I thought that this roundtable at RealClearDefense on the tanker attacks in the Persian Gulf was interesting but ultimately didn’t cast a lot of light on the situation.
My concern about the situation is that Iran is not Afghanistan, Iraq, or Libya. It is much more populous, much wealthier, and much more cohesive. I think that any half measure military actions against Iran are likely to be counter-productive, inducing a “rally ’round” effect, but I don’t think that we’re politically and emotionally prepared for total war against Iran, either.
I strongly oppose going to war without the commitment to win and I don’t believe we have it.
Update
Anthony Cordesman thinks that this is the beginning of a “hybrid war” with Iran:
For all its talk about closing the Gulf at the Strait of Hormuz, Iran can now use such forces anywhere inside the Gulf, in the Gulf of Oman, in the Gulf of Aden, and in wide parts of Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. Iran has also shown great skill in exploiting the tensions and divisions between Arab Gulf states, and between the United States and Europe Union regarding the Iran deal.
Yet, Iranian deniability becomes progressively less credible with time. The United States and Arab Gulf states can retaliate at low levels of conflict and choose higher value targets. The risk of escalation on both sides grows with each new incident, and the patience the Iranian people will show as their lives grow steadily worse is problematic. If Iran has chosen the path to hybrid warfare, it is far from clear that it can win.
IMO trying to wage hybrid war with Iran would be ceding the initiative to the enemy, for no credible reason.
Something really screwy about this situation. The attack on the Japanese owned tanker occurred while Shinzo Abe, Japanese Prime Minister, was visiting Iran. It hints that there might be a serious power struggle. The signals out of North Korea indicate the same.
We are already conducting hybrid war against Iran in the form of sanctions, and they appear to be working. Some sort of reprisal should be expected, and the tanker attacks appear to be it:
https://www.moonofalabama.org/
The problem is one of escalation. If it appears likely that the sanctions will collapse the Iranian economy, open warfare might well ensue. Iran can clearly close the Strait, possibly for months or even a year or more. The consequences would be another Great Depression and maybe WW III.
The real wild card is the maritime insurance companies. If they deem the danger to ships and crews is too large, they will cancel the insurance on all the ships operating in the region. That by itself closes the Strait without a shooting war. The results would be the same, Great Depression maybe WW III.
Iran’ population is about equal to the combined populations of Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria, and it is a nationally-oriented, not a tribally-oriented population. Iran has the social cohesion that is impossible in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. Iran’s GDP is very much larger, and it has a near modern industrial base. Were it not for 40 years of US sanctions, Iran would be on a par with most European countries.
Much of Iran’s terrane is mountainous, which means it is foot-infantry country, no blitzkrieg or combined arms maneuvering. It would require at least a half million ground troops to occupy Iran, and that assume a successful amphibious/air assault.
While an invasion would be difficult, the occupation would be worse, and what would be our goals? When would it end? Is it too much to ask that we plan ahead?
Steve
I’ll address your last question. Judging by past behavior, yes it’s too much to ask.
I’ve come to wonder if there isn’t some kind of “protection racket” being run by the IRG or other group to allow safe passage. Seems like a natural situation for that to develop. What’s a few thousand dollars a trip for guarantee of safe passage of an oil tanker? Maybe someone didn’t pay on time?
What leads me to think this way is the rarity of attacks despite their ease, and that the obvious answer to vandalism is more police on the water, not war between two large nations.