Closing the Strait of Hormuz: Assessing the Iranian threat

Last Updated on Wednesday, 9 July 2008 09:17 Written by admin Sunday, 6 July 2008 06:34

In the event of a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities, how likely is Iran to close the Strait of Hormuz? A recent paper by Caitlan Talmadge, a doctoral candidate in Political Science at MIT and a Fellow at the John M. Olin Insitute for Strategic Studies at Harvard University, examines that question indepth. In fact, it might be the first authoritative open source analysis into this question.Some of the questions posed and answered by Talmadge’s research are:

1. Could Iran close the Strait of Hormuz?What might provoke Iran to take an action so contrary to its own economic interests?
2. Does Iran possess the military assets needed to engage in a campaign in the strait, and what might such a campaign look like?
3. What would the U.S. military have to do to defend the strait in the event of Iranian interference there?
4. What would be the likely cost, length, and outcome of such efforts?

Published views by various authorities have been contradictory. Talmadge points out that

“some analysts take the Iranian ability to block the strait as a given, whereas others are equally confident the United States’ military superiority would deter or quickly end any Iranian campaign. One observer agrues that “countering any Iranian blockade would involve only a few days of fighting with major disruption to shipping lasting only slightly longer. Another warns that the United States might have to engage in weeks or months of military operations to open and defend the strait. “

This is wonderful work by Caitlan Talmadge. The paper is well-researched and thoroughly referenced and I hope it finds an audience among the policy makers who may still be laboring under a variety of misconceptions about what is and isn’t  likely to happen in the event of a U.S. or Israeli attack against Iran.

Download Closing Time: Assessing the Iranian Threat to the Strait of Hormuz.

The economic implications of an oil disruption were examined by Standard & Poors two years ago, and summarized by  Business Week. More recently, on July 1, 2008, the head of OPEC blamed rising oil prices on a weak dollar and geopolitical tension between Iran and the West.

“Khelil warned if Iran get attacked, the oil price could rise even further since the oil-rich country’s disrupted production may not be compensated.

“It is obvious that if you curtail 4 million barrels per day from the market, you are going to have a big problem,” he said. “I do not see who can replace that, including OPEC.”

UPDATE: John Robb seems to concur in his “Iran and Asymmetric Warfare” post:

“Offensive Operations
In addition to Passive Defense, the Iranians are also likely planning asymmetric offensive operations aimed at shortening the engagement — a form of strategic barrage designed to limit the duration of the EBO. For example, Hezbollah’s rocket attacks on Israel during the 2006 war were able to inflict strategic economic/political costs on Israel. These costs ensured that the war was short. In Iran’s case, this means a series of attacks (a combination of guerrilla, missile, and small boat attacks) on oil facilities and oil transportation routes with the intent of making the costs to the global economy so great that political pressure will quickly force an end to the engagement.”

Check out the comments section to John’s post for a variety of viewpoints: some informed, some less so.

UPDATE II: Robert Kaplan argues that Israel won’t attack Iran thanks to the U.S. control of airspace at Iran’s entry points, and the influence of SECDEF Gates, who wouldn’t support such an attack.

UPDATE III: Iran test fires 9 missiles today including the 2000 km range ShaHab-3 as a warning to the West:

Hossein Salami, a commander of the Revolutionary Guards, was quoted as saying: “The aim of these war games is to show we are ready to defend the integrity of the Iranian nation.”

“Our missiles are ready for shooting at any place and any time, quickly and with accuracy,” he said. “The enemy must not repeat its mistakes. The enemy targets are under surveillance.”

The missile tests also followed remarks by a senior Iranian official who was quoted Tuesday as warning the United States against attacking Iran.